Geotourism Product as an Indicator for Sustainable Development in Poland
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Concept of a Sustainable Geotourism Product
- Geo-goods—printed and virtual supplies (e.g., geotourism guides and maps, as well as geo-websites and geo-applications); geotourism panels; geological board games; souvenirs and handicrafts inspired by geoheritage; and cosmetics and food products based on abiotic elements of nature, i.e., minerals, mineral waters, specific soils, etc.;
- Geo-objects—museums (e.g., geological, mineralogical, and paleontological); gyrocenters; Jurassic Parks; and open museums, i.e., erratic boulder lapidaries and petrographic parks, as well as mining and industrial heritage sites with geoeducation facilities and geosites open to visitors;
- Geo-services—geotourism guide services, geoeducational services (e.g., workshops and lessons), training services for geotourism, geo-information services, and others;
- Geo-events—cyclical events, in particular picnics and geological and paleontological festivals; and events related to mining and industrial heritage combined with geoeducation, mineral and fossil exchanges, etc.;
- Geo-routes—geotourism trails, geoeducational paths, geostradas, mining routes with geoeducation, etc.;
- Geo-areas—UNESCO geoparks, national geoparks, actively planned geoparks, large geological parks, and other areas with geo-identification and complex services.
- Contribute to the creation of new jobs, particularly in food production, handicrafts, education, and tourist services;
- Provide income for geopark residents and, together with tourism strategies and the green economy, support local, sustainable economic growth;
- Promote good nutrition, improving the health of residents and visitors;
- Increase agricultural productivity and the income of local small-scale producers, contributing to ensuring sustainable food production systems and implementing agricultural practices while protecting ecosystems;
- Are certified by the guidelines of UNESCO geoparks, thanks to which they can recommend best practices in agricultural production, favor sustainable production patterns, and mitigate the effects of climate change;
- Overcome dependence on fossil fuels by promoting the transition towards increased renewable energy;
- Reduce waste production, food loss, and water shortage problems;
- Build awareness about sustainable development and can themselves be educational tools in this area;
- Increase gender equality and empower women by providing direct jobs for them or developing women’s cooperatives;
- Generate academic research and scientific projects and can support innovation to open new markets;
- Contribute to the protection of the world’s cultural and natural heritage, including geodiversity;
- Build a strategy based on a network of cooperation at the local community level and regional collaboration at the international level, contributing to reducing inequalities within and between countries.
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
Name of Geoproduct | Type of Geoproduct | Examples of Geo-Activities | Impact on Sustainability |
---|---|---|---|
Sudetic Educational Farm—Earth Education Centre (the Land of Extinct Volcanoes UNESCO Global Geopark) | Geo-object | Laboratory classes on identifying Sudetes rocks and minerals, workshops in the volcano and earthquake rooms, geoeducational materials, field geoeducation | New jobs for locals, ecological education programs, quality certification of local products, active geopark |
Sudetic Mineral Festival | Geo-event | Mineral and fossil exchange, geological lessons, guides, workshops | Local products and handicrafts |
Sudetic Geostrada | Geo-route | Printed geo-guides, geotourism boards in the field | Cooperation at the Poland and Czech Republic border |
Kaczawa geo-gadgets | Geo-goods | Geological games and souvenirs | Local handicrafts, cooperation network, active geopark |
GECON in Sudetes Foreland geopark project | Geo-service | Study visits, workshops, summer school | Removal of barriers, involvement of the locals at the border—Czech–Polish cooperation |
Czaple—Village of Sand and Stone | Geo-area | Sandstone product workshops, path-walk—along the bottom of the Cretaceous Sea, paleontological workshops | Smart Village project, green transport, healthy lifestyles |
Name of Geoproduct | Type of Geoproduct | Examples of Geo-Activities | Impact on Sustainability |
---|---|---|---|
Lapidarium in Tatra National Park | Geo-object | Open-air museum and geo-guide: a geological spatial map of the Tatras Mts. shows the diversity of rocks and its impact on vegetation | Protection of biotic and abiotic nature, ecological education |
World Water Day in AGH University of Krakow | Geo-event | Educational workshops, lectures, fairs, competitions of mineral waters | Water resources, healthy lifestyles, student involvement |
Geo-Carpathians Trail | Geo-route | Printed geo-guides, trails with geotourism boards in the fields of the Carpathians, oil geoheritage | Polish and Ukrainian cross-border cooperation |
Geo-gadgets from Kozy Quarry | Geo-goods | Geo-guide services, events, and workshops promoting Carpathian flysch sandstone and mining heritage, geo-souvenirs | New jobs for locals, local handicrafts, a cooperation network, promotion of activity and healthy lifestyles |
Geo-guide service in the Bochnia Mine UNESCO site | Geo-service | The trail and guide along the “raw” interior of the mine | New jobs for former miners, post-mining revitalization |
Ciężkowice commune | Geo-area | Nature museum, Petrified City Nature Reserve—rocky sandstone, spa park, geo-guides | Protection of local geoheritage, spas, healthy lifestyles, a bicycle village, new jobs for locals |
Name of Geoproduct | Type of Geoproduct | Examples of Geo-Activities | Impact on Sustainability |
---|---|---|---|
St. Anne’s Mountain National Geopark | Geo-area | Geoeducational workshops and guides about Triassic limestones and Neogene volcanism of the Silesian Uplands | Preservation of geodiversity and biodiversity in landscape parks, revitalization of quarries |
GEOsphere (GEOsfera) Jaworzno | Geo-object | Geoeducation about Triassic carbonate deposits with megariplemarks and remains of Nothosaurus, workshops, services, events, etc. | Ecological education, promotion of activity and healthy lifestyles, conservation of mining heritage |
Jurassic Paleontological Picnic in Łutowiec | Geo-event | Jurassic marine fossils of the Kraków–Częstochowa Uplands | Promotion of local products, ecological education |
Educational materials of Geoeducation Centre in Kielce (the Holy Cross Mountains UNESCO Global Geopark) | Geo-goods | Geoeducational workshops, services, events, etc. about the geoheritage of the Holy Cross Mountains | New jobs for locals, local handicrafts, cooperation network, active geopark |
Geosilesia | Geo-service | Geoheritage website of the Silesian voivodeship (https://geosilesia.eu (accessed on 1 May 2024)) | Dissemination of information about regional heritage via the Internet |
Central Roztocze Geotourism Trail | Geo-trail | Geoheritage promotion of the Roztocze Uplands | Part of the Green Velo cycle trail, promotion of activity and healthy lifestyles |
Name of Geoproduct | Type of Geoproduct | Examples of Geo-Activities | Impact on Sustainability |
---|---|---|---|
Ammonites of “Kra Jurajska” (Jurassic Floe) in Łuków | Geo-goods | Ammonites and glacial geoheritage at competitions, science picnics, virtual museums, carving school | New investments promoting local heritage, improvements to the quality and availability of tourist infrastructure |
Guidance in the Muskau Arch UNESCO Global Geopark | Geo-service | Guided tours in the geopark, organization of geopark events, tourist stamps | Revitalization of the post-mining area, new jobs, social activation, cross-border cooperation |
World Championship in Amber Collecting in Jantar | Geo-event | Popular science conferences, amber route, amber museums, geo-events | Promoting geoheritage of Baltic amber, local products |
The Land of the Glacier on the Oder (Moryń commune) | Geo-area | Exhibitions, models, and boards concerning postglacial geoheritage; petrographic gardens; geopark project | Regional promotion, new investments, cross-border cooperation |
PGE Giganty Mocy (Power Giants) in Bełchatów | Geo-object | Geocenter with multiple activities like events, workshops, meetings, geo-gadgets | New jobs for locals, ecological education programs, promotion of local heritage |
Nature trail in Pruszków | Geo-trail | Geoheritage of erratic boulders | Civic project of city residents, sustainable development of cities |
4.1. The Sudetes Region (A)
- Land of Extinct Volcanoes A-I (including the LAG Kaczawa Partnership, the Land of Extinct Volcanoes UNESCO Global Geopark, the Sudetic Educational Farm geocenter, the Sand and Stone Village, a landscape park, events, and workshops);
- Sudetic Foothills A-II (including an active geopark project, the Sudetic Foothills Association; the LAG Granite Trail; the Strzegom Granite Festival; the Georetum open-air museum; landscape parks; annual geotourism rallies; and other events and workshops);
- Karkonosze Mts. A-III (including the Karkonosze National Park; the Karkonosze National Geopark; geocenters; and museums with geo-information, geo-trails, geo-events, and workshops).
- -
- Jizera geo-region (A1): the geopark project of Krobica and the Jizera Mts, trails and objects of mining heritage (tin and cobalt ore), spa and mineral waters, and events like the Sudetic Mineral Festival;
- -
- Wałbrzych geo-region (A2) [42]: coal museums, underground routes, geopark propositions such as the Central Sudetes geopark, and landscape parks;
- -
- Table Mountains geo-region (A3): national parks, eco-centers, spas, and geo-trails;
- -
- Śnieżnik Kłodzki geo-region (A4): accessible tourist mines (uranium and gold), the Bear Cave, spas, mineralogical museums, geo-festivals in Kletno, geopark propositions, and landscape parks.
4.2. Carpathian Region (B1. Tatra Mts., B2. Spisz and Podhale, B3. Pieniny Mts., B4. Outer Carpathans, B5. Carpathan Foredeep)
- Tatra geo-region (B1): a national park, long traditions of mountain tourism, numerous geoeducation materials, the Tatra Museum with the lapidarium and geology lessons in the Education Centre, caves open to visitors;
- Spisz-Podhale geo-region (B2): geothermal spas, springs, and peat bogs open to visitors; the Peat Bog Museum;
- Pieniny geo-region (B3): national parks; a museum with geo-exposure; the Pieniny geopark project, which consults the local community; numerous geoeducation materials;
- Flysch Carpathian geo-regions (B4), including
- Carpathian balneological geo-region (B4a): spa resorts and springs, a geopark project, landscape parks;
- Carpathian oil geo-region (B4b): oil museums, a geopark project, the LAG Land of Oil, oil routes, a Geo-Carpathians trail, a landscape park;
- Cieszyn-Żywiec geo-region (B4c): a geopark proposition, museums, landscape parks;
- Kozy geo-region (B4d): activities in the Kozy Quarry—geotourism attraction, a landscape park;
- Ciężkowice geo-region (B4e): “Petrified City”—a geotourism attraction, spa park, geotourism services, a landscape park;
- Bieszczady Mts. geo-region (B4f): a geopark proposition, a national park, landscape parks;
- Carpathian salt geo-region (B5): the Wieliczka–Bochnia Salt Mine UNESCO sites, salt routes, salt geo-gadgets.
4.3. The Silesian Region (C)
- St. Anne’s Mountain geo-region C-I (including a national geopark, a landscape park, events, and workshops);
- Jaworzno commune geo-region C-II (the geocenter GEOsphere Jaworzno, Gródek Park, geo-events, and workshops).
- -
- Silesian Coal geo-region no. 1 (C1a): Zabrze–Katowice–Dąbrowa Górnicza—mines and museums open to visitors;
- -
- Silesian Coal geo-region no. 2 (C1b): Rybnik–Jastrzebie–Zdrój area with Carbonarium (coal museum), spas;
- -
- Geo-region of lead–silver–zinc in Tarnowskie Góry (C2)—a UNESCO site;
- -
- Dinosaur geo-region due to its paleontological heritage (C3): Jura Park Krasiejów, Silesian Dinosaur Trail, and LAG Land of Dinosaurs, Lisowice.
4.4. The Polish Jura (Polish Jurassic Highland): Kraków–Częstochowa–Wieluń Uplands (D)
- -
- Jurassic geo-region (D1): a national park, landscape parks, a geopark proposition (first in Poland), geo-events in the region;
- -
- Northern Jura geo-region (D2): a projected geopark, a landscape park;
- -
- Silver geo-region (D3): Olkusz Silver City;
- -
- Kraków and surroundings geo-region (D4): stone in architecture (the Kraków Old Towne UNESCO site), landscape parks, volcanic and Jurassic geoheritage in numerous initiatives.
4.5. The Holy Cross Mountains Region (E)
- Kielce-Chęciny geo-region (E-I), where the Holy Cross Mountains UNESCO Global Geopark is located, can be considered the main active geo-region, while other propositions include the following:
- -
- Kamienna Valey geo-region (E1): a geopark project, an iron ore mining heritage, Jura Park Bałtów, the Krzemionki UNESCO site, the Hellish Trail, landscape parks;
- -
- Tetrapod Land geo-region (E2): a landscape park, LAG;
- -
- Ponidzie geo-region (E3): landscape parks.
4.6. Lublin–Roztocze Region
- Roztocze geo-region (F-I) is the area that can be considered an active geo-region, especially the eastern part of Roztocze: a geopark project (the Petrified Trees geopark), the East Roztocze Geotourism Association, the Geotourism Trails. Promising regions are as follows:
- -
- Vistula River Gorge geopark project (F1);
- -
- Land of Loess Gorges (F2).
4.7. Postglacial Region (G1. Lowland, G2. Lakelands, G3. Baltic Coast)
- Muskau Arch geo-region (G-I): a UNESCO Global Geopark, a landscape park, cross-border cooperation;
- Bełchatów geo-region (G-II): a Giganty Mocy (Power Giants) geocenter, geotouristic activity of the Bełchatów coal mine, the concept of a geopark;
- Moryń geo-region (G-III): a geopark project, a landscape park, a geo-information center, numerous initiatives, cross-border cooperation.
5. Discussion and Conclusions
- Geoproducts can be used as indicators of sustainable development because they are produced following sustainability principles; promote local geoheritage; and thus, enhance protection, education, regional identity, and local economics.
- This is the first comprehensive study about active geoproducts in Poland, and there are no official nationwide databases of this type of goods and services. It should be taken into account that not all geoproducts have been identified yet; therefore, further research is needed.
- The analysis of geoproducts is based on information on websites, the literature, and meetings such as the “GEO-PRODUKT Forum”; therefore, research is needed on the geoproducts themselves, especially according to objects, events, workshops, etc. that attract visitors, where surveys can be conducted.
- According to data from the Polish Tourist Organization (www.pot.gov.pl/en), domestic tourism has not yet returned to its pre-pandemic state and will take one or two years to normalize the situation. The current statistical data on the number of visits are not reliable, so it was decided that the further study would be to determine the number of participants in the geoeducational offer in Poland. However, examples of statistics sent by the main geocenters in Poland give a positive picture of the interest. In the 2023 GEOsphere Jaworzno geocenter (C-II), four events per season were visited by approx. 500 people and approx. 12,000 people attended classes with an educator. The Sudetic Educational Farm in the Land of Extinct Volcanoes UNESCO Global Geopark (A-I) was visited in 2022 by 2362 individuals and 6712 organized groups. The Geoeducation Center was visited by 34,199 people in 2023 and all Geonatura Kielce facilities by 537,229 visitors. Research on this topic will continue.
- Comparing previous analyses of geotourism regions with the research results in this article, it can be concluded that some areas are currently more promising due to the combination of geological and mining potential and good tourist development, e.g., the Karkonosze geo-region and their surroundings (A-III), the Śnieżnik Kłodzki geo-region (A4), the Tatra-Podhale-Pieniny area (B1-B2-B3), the Carpathian balneological geo-region (B4a), and the Postglacial Land geo-region (G2c). Also important are the Silesian region (C); the Jurassic geo-region (D1); and the areas of eastern Poland, i.e., Roztocze (F-I) and Podlasie (G2d-e). The Vistula River Gorge geopark project (F1) has many studies on geoheritage. The entire Sudeten and Holy Cross Mountains regions are the richest in geoproducts and the most promising. Many post-mining geotourism regions do not have active geoproducts; therefore, there is a need to involve local governments in this type of activity. An interesting solution may be the development of urban geotourism in Polish cities and metropolitan areas, i.e., the Wrocław, Katowice, Krakow, Kielce, Poznań, Warsaw, and Tri-City regions (Gdańsk–Gdynia–Spopot). The Kielce region develops best from this type of activity (Geonatura Kielce initiative).
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hose, T. Selling the story of Britain’s stone. Environ. Interpret. 1995, 10, 16–17. [Google Scholar]
- Reynard, E.; Brilha, J. Geoheritage: Assessment, Protection, and Management; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Gray, M. Geodiversity: Valuing and Conserving Abiotic Nature; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Duarte, A.; Braga, V.; Marques, C.; Sá, A.A. Geotourism and Territorial Development: A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda. Geoheritage 2020, 12, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dowling, R.K.; Newsome, D. (Eds.) Geotourism: Definition, characteristics and international perspectives. In Handbook of Geotourism; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2018; pp. 1–22. [Google Scholar]
- UNESCO. What Is a UNESCO Global Geopark? United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: Paris, France, 2017; Available online: http://www.globalgeopark.org/aboutGGN/6398.htm (accessed on 22 March 2024).
- Ferreira, D.R.; Valdati, J. Geoparks and Sustainable Development: Systematic Review. Geoheritage 2023, 15, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farsani, N.T.; Coelho, C.; Costa, C.; Carvalho, C.N. Geoparks and Geotourism: New Approaches to Sustainability for the 21st Century; Brown Walker Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Rodrigues, J.; Neto de Carvalho, C.; Ramos, M.; Ramos, R.; Vinagre, A.; Vinagre, H. Geoproducts—Innovative development strategies in UNESCO Geoparks: Concept, implementation methodology, and case studies from Naturtejo Global Geopark, Portugal. Int. J. Geoheritage Parks 2020, 9, 108–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- PTO, Polish Tourism Organization. 2024. Available online: https://www.pot.gov.pl (accessed on 22 March 2024).
- Alexandrowicz, Z.; Miśkiewicz, K. Geopark—From the concept to implementation, with special reference to Poland. Chrońmy Przyr. Ojczystą 2016, 72, 243–253. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
- Miśkiewicz, K.; Poros, M. Nationwide GEO-PRODUKT Forum: A project to integrate activities in the field of tourist availability and promoting the geological heritage of Poland. Przegląd Geol. 2022, 70, 568–570. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
- Miśkiewicz, K. Geotourism product as a geoeducational tool and a method of promoting geological heritage of Poland. Przegląd Geol. 2023, 71, 314–320. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
- Kapera, I. Sustainable tourism development efforts by local governments in Poland. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 40, 581–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. The European Tourism Indicator System—ETIS Toolkit for Sustainable Destination Management; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Kubalíková, L.; Bajer, A.; Balková, M.; Kirchner, K.; Machar, I. Geodiversity Action Plans as a Tool for Developing Sustainable Tourism and Environmental Education. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Middleton, V.T.C. Marketing in Travel and Tourism; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Medlik, S. Dictionary of Travel, Tourism and Hospitality; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, S. The tourism product. Ann. Tour. Res. 1994, 21, 582–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kotler, P.; Bowen, J.; Makens, J. Marketing for Hospitality & Tourism; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Kaczmarek, J.; Stasiak, A.; Włodarczyk, B. Tourism product. Tur. Hotel. 2002, 1, 33–54. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
- Levitt, T. The Marketing Mode: Pathways to Corporate Growth; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1969. [Google Scholar]
- De Marchi, D.; Becarelli, R.; De Sarli, L. Tourism Sustainability Index: Measuring Tourism Sustainability Based on the ETIS Toolkit, by Exploring Tourist Satisfaction via Sentiment Analysis. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO Digital Library. UNESCO Geoparks Programme: A New Initiative to Promote a Global Network of Geoparks Safeguarding and Developing Selected Areas Having Significant Geological Features; 156 EX/11Rev.; UNESCO: Paris, France, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Dryglas, D.; Miśkiewicz, K. Construction of the geotourism product structure on the example of Poland. In Proceedings of the 14th International Multidisciplinary Scientific Geoconference, Albena, Bulgaria, 17–26 June 2014; pp. 155–162. [Google Scholar]
- Migoń, P. Geoturystyka; PWN: Warszawa, Poland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Newsome, D.; Dowling, R. Geotourism: The Tourism of Geology and Landscape; Goodfellow Publishers: Oxford, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Arouca Declaration 2011—Arouca Geopark, Portugal, 12th November 2011. Available online: https://www.europeangeoparks.org/?p=223 (accessed on 22 March 2024).
- Farsani, N.T.; Coelho, C.O.A.; Costa, C.M.M. Analysis of Network Activities in Geoparks as Geotourism Destinations. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2014, 16, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Falkowski, J. Koncepcja typologii i regionalizacji turystyczno-rekreacyjnej w ujęciu krajowym (Polska) i globalnym (Świat). Geogr. Tour. 2016, 4, 7–21. [Google Scholar]
- Sobotka, S. Próba wyznaczenia obszarów o najwyższym stopniu wykorzystania turystycznego jako przesłanki do regionalizacji turystycznej Polski. Turyzm 2014, 24, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabaj, W.; Kruczek, Z. Podstawy Geografii Turystycznej; Proksenia: Krakow, Poland, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Nita, J.; Myga-Piątek, U. Geotourist Potential of Post-Mining Regions in Poland. Bull. Geogr. Phys. Geogr. Ser. 2014, 7, 139–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sygar, S.; Zgłobicki, W. Geoheritage Resources in Polish Landscape Parks as a Basis for Developing a Network of Geoparks. Land 2022, 11, 2277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogowski, M. The potential of the Sudetes Mountains for the Development of Geotouristic products. Geotourism 2016, 46–47, 59–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brzezińska-Wójcik, T. Produkty geoturystyczne w województwie lebelskim jako przykład działań innowacyjnych, poszerzających dotychczasową ofertę turystyczną regionu. In Wpływ Sektora B + R Na Wzrost Konkurencyjności Polskiej Gospodarki Poprzez Rozwój Innowacji; Jegorow, D., Niedużak, A., Eds.; Chełmskie Stowarzyszenie Rozwoju Społeczno-Gospodarczego CIVIS: Chełm, Poland, 2012; Volume 1, pp. 127–148. [Google Scholar]
- Gałka, E. Geotourism regions—Delimitation, classification, basic concepts. Geogr. Cassoviensis 2019, 13, 180–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miśkiewicz, K. Geotourism Products of Poland. Available online: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=pl&mid=18jHlAhOnKYyD6kJg7LOZnUmhBF8&ll=51.98266140490037%2C17.444732256599647&z=6 (accessed on 22 March 2024).
- Migoń, P. High-mountain Elements in the Geomorphology of the Sudetes, the Bohemian Massif, and Their Significance. Geogr. Pol. 2008, 81, 101–116. [Google Scholar]
- Gawlikowska, E. Ochrona Georóżnorodności Na Dolnym Śląsku; PIG: Warszawa, Poland, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Słomka, T. Geodiversity of Poland. Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 584–587. [Google Scholar]
- Pijet-Migoń, E.; Migoń, P. Promoting and Interpreting Geoheritage at the Local Level—Bottom-up Approach in the Land of Extinct Volcanoes, Sudetes, SW Poland. Geoheritage 2019, 11, 1227–1236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tarka, R. Związki geologii z historią jako podstawa tworzenia geoproduktów na obszarze Geoparku Przedgórze Sudeckie—Fakty i perspektywy. Geotourism 2017, 48–49, 61–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bartuś, T. Geotourist maps of the Sudetic Geostrada Trail as a new form of popularization of geotourism in the Sudety Mts. Geotourism 2015, 40–41, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knapik, R.; Migoń, P.; Szuszkiewicz, A.; Aleksandrowski, P. Geopark Karkonosze—Georóżnorodność i geoturystyka. Przegląd Geol. 2011, 59, 311–322. [Google Scholar]
- Migoń, P. Górne Łużyce jako region geoturystyczny. Geoturystyka 2005, 2, 23–32. [Google Scholar]
- Madziarz, M. Historical ore mining sites in Lower Silesia (Poland) as geo-tourism attraction. Acta Geoturistica 2013, 4, 15–26. [Google Scholar]
- Ihnatowicz, A.; Koźma, J.; Wajsprych, B. Wałbrzyski obszar geoturystyczny—Inwentaryzacja geotopów dla potrzeb promocji geoturystyki. Przegląd Geol. 2011, 59, 722–731. [Google Scholar]
- Gawlikowska, E. Stołowe (Table) Mountains. Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 699–705. [Google Scholar]
- Solecki, A.T. Geoeducational Potential of the Sudety Mts; Univerity of Wroclaw: Wrocław, Poland, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Marek, A. Wybrane kamieniołomy ziemi kłodzkiej i ich wykorzystanie geoturystyczne. Hered. Minariorum 2017, 4, 153–170. [Google Scholar]
- Kryza, R.; Dziedzic, M.; Unterwurzacher, M.; Prell, M.; Pietrzykowska, K.; Strick, D.; Schumacher, V.; Wilhelm, D. Local and exotic building and decorative stones in historical castles of SW Poland: A reconnaissance study. Przegląd Geol. 2015, 63, 332–344. [Google Scholar]
- Lorenc, M.W.; Mazurek, S. Selected, new proposals of geotouristic attractions from Lower Silesia. Geotourism 2010, 22–23, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Welc, E.; Miśkiewicz, K. The Concept of the Geotourism Potential and Its Practical Application: A Case Study of the Prządki (the Spinners) Nature Reserve in the Carpathians, Poland. Resources 2020, 9, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexandrowicz, Z.; Poprawa, D. Ochrona Georóżnorodności w Polskich Karpatach; PIG: Warszawa, Poland, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Krobicki, M.; Golonka, J. Geotouristical values of the Pieniny Klippen Belt and Tatra Mountains regions (Poland). Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 670–679. [Google Scholar]
- Drewnik, M.; Felisiak, I.; Jerzykowska, I.; Magiera, J. The Tatra Mts—rocks, landforms, weathering and soils. Geotourism 2008, 13, 51–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bubniak, M.; Solecki, T. Przewodnik Geoturystyczny po Szlaku Geo-Karpaty; Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa w Krośnie: Krosno, Poland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Chrobak, A. Valorisation and categorization of the geosites in the Podtatrze area. Geotourism 2016, 3–4, 3–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golonka, J.; Doktor, M.; Miśkiewicz, K.; Krobicki, M.; Słomka, T. Selected geosites within a proposed new trans-border Pieniny Geopark (Polish-Slovakian). Acta Geoturistica 2014, 5, 46–63. [Google Scholar]
- Wasiluk, R.; Radwanek-Bąk, B.; Bąk, B.; Kopciowski, R.; Malata, T.; Kochman, A.; Świąder, A. A Conception of a Mountain Geopark in a SPA region; an example of a projected Geopark “Wisłok Valley—The Polish Texas”, in the Krosno region. Geotourism 2016, 3–4, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golonka, J.; Krobicki, M.; Miśkiewicz, K.; Słomka, T.; Waśkowska, A.; Doktor, M. Geopark “Beskid Śląsko-Morawsko-Żywiecki”—Najstarsze utwory Karpat fliszowych. Przegląd Geol. 2013, 61, 277–285. [Google Scholar]
- Alexandrowicz, W.P.; Alexandrowicz, Z. Geosites in Tourist Areas: The Best Method for the Promotion of Geotourism and Geoheritage (an Example from the Polish Flysch Carpathians). Geoheritage 2022, 14, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miśkiewicz, K.; Golonka, J.; Waśkowska, A.; Doktor, M.; Słomka, T. Flysch Carpathians and their mineral waters cross-border geopark. Przegląd Geol. 2011, 59, 611–621. [Google Scholar]
- Gonera, M. Beskidy w oczach geologa, czyli Geopark “Karpaty fliszowe”. Wierchy 2004, 69, 125–142. [Google Scholar]
- Haczewski, G. O celowości utworzenia geoparku w Bieszczadach Wysokich. Probl. Ekol. Kraj. 2011, 29, 61–66. [Google Scholar]
- Chybiorz, R.; Kowalska, M. Inwentaryzacja i ocena atrakcyjności geostanowisk województwa śląskiego. Przegląd Geol. 2017, 65, 365–374. [Google Scholar]
- Badora, K.; Nita, J. Georóżnorodność Opolszczyzny Oraz Jej Znaczenie w Systemie Ochrony Przyrody i Krajobrazu; Studia i Monografie 547; Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Opolskiego: Opole, Poland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Bieniek, B.; Kordysh, A.; Mirosławski, M.; Nowak, K.; Sękowski, K.; Sierka, E. Geoproduct potential analysis based on the example of the GEOsfera Ecological and Geological Education Center in Jaworzno. Geotourism 2019, 3–4, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woźniak, P.; Sikora, R.; Lasoń, K.; Markowiak, M.; Haisig, J.; Szulc, J.; Hagdorn, H. Geopark Góra Św. Anny—“król-tułacz” wrócił na stolicę! Przegląd Geol. 2011, 59, 291–310. [Google Scholar]
- Matyszkiewicz, J. The Cracow-Częstochowa Upland (Southern Poland)—The Land of White Cliffs and Caves. Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 647–652. [Google Scholar]
- Alexandrowicz, S.W.; Alexandrowicz, Z. Selected geosites of the Cracow Upland. In Representative Geosites of Central Europe; Alexandrowicz, Z., Ed.; Polish Geological Institute Special Papers; Polish Geological Institute: Warszawa, Poland, 1999; Volume 2, pp. 53–60. [Google Scholar]
- Rajchel, J. The Stony Cracow: Geological valors of its architecture. Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 653–662. [Google Scholar]
- Nita, J. Quarries in Landscape and Geotourism. Geogr. Pol. 2012, 85, 5–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szczurek, S.; Bąk, M.; Dulemba, P. The Racławka Valley—An example of an educational geosite related to the development of a Paleozoic carbonate platform. Geotourism 2016, 44–45, 45–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexandrowicz, Z.; Alexandrowicz, S.W. Draft project of Jurassic Geopark in the Kraków–Częstochowa Upland (Southern Poland). In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of ProGEO Prague, Prague, Czech Republic, 19–28 September 2000. Abstracts 6–7. [Google Scholar]
- Krzeczyńska, M.; Woźniak, P.; Garecka, M. Przewodnik Geoturystyczny po Geoparku Północnej Jury; PIG: Warszawa, Poland, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Urban, J.; Wróblewski, T. Representative Geosites of the Góry Świętokrzyskie (Holy Cross Mts) and Nida Basin, Central Poland; Polish Geological Institute Special Papers; Polish Geological Institute: Warszawa, Poland, 1999; Volume 2, pp. 61–70. [Google Scholar]
- Urban, J.; Gągol, J. Geological heritage of the Świętokrzyskie (Holy Cross) Mountains (Central Poland). Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 618–628. [Google Scholar]
- Wróblewski, T. Ochrona Georóżnorodności w Regionie Świętokrzyskim; PIG: Warszawa, Poland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Gałka, E. The Development of Geotourism and Geoeducation in the Holy Cross Mountains Region (Central Poland). Quaest. Geogr. 2023, 42, 19–27. [Google Scholar]
- Poros, M.; Wesołowski, W.; Sutowicz-Kwiecińska, M. Holy Cross Mountains Geopark Field Guide; Stowarzyszenie Gmin Geopark Świętokrzyski: Kielce, Poland, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Kamińska, W.; Barcicki, M.; Poros, M.; Sutowicz-Kwiecińska, M. Centrum Geoedukacji w Kielcach-czy jest marką turystyczną? Biul. KPZK PAN Kom. Przestrz. Zagospod. Kraj. Pol. Akad. Nauk. 2018, 269, 157–180. [Google Scholar]
- Harasimiuk, M.; Brzezińska-Wójcik, T.; Dobrowolski, R. Budowa Geologiczna Regionu Lubelskiego i Problemy Ochrony Litosfery; UMCS: Lublin, Poland, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Brzezińska-Wójcik, T.; Skowronek, E. Tangible Heritage of the Historical Stonework Centre in Brusno Stare in the Roztocze Area (SE Poland) as an Opportunity for the Development of Geotourism. Geoheritage 2020, 12, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lezzerini, M.; Brzezíńska-Wójcik, T. Geocultural Heritage as a Basis for Themed GeoTown—The “Józefów StoneTown” Model in the Roztocze Region (SE Poland). Sustainability 2024, 16, 1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dolecki, L. Rzeźba i Osady Czwartorzędowe Jako Element Produktu Geoturystycznego Lubelszczyzny; Wyższa Szkoła Społeczno-Przyrodnicza w Lublinie: Lublin, Poland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Warowna, J.; Zgłobicki, W.; Gajek, G.; Telecka, M.; Kołodyńska-Gawrysiak, R.; Zieliński, P. Geomorphosite Assessment in the Proposed Geopark Vistula River Gap (E Poland). Quaest. Geogr. 2014, 33, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harasimiuk, M.; Domonik, A.; Michalski, M.; Pinińska, J.; Warowna, J.; Szymkowiak, A. Małopolski Przełom Wisły—Projekt geoparku. Przegląd Geol. 2011, 59, 405–416. [Google Scholar]
- Krąpiec, M.; Jankowski, L.; Margielewski, W.; Urban, J.; Krąpiec, P. Geopark “Kamienny Las na Roztoczu” i jego walory geoturystyczne. Przegląd Geol. 2012, 60, 468–479. [Google Scholar]
- Jurys, L.; Kaulbarsz, D.; Koszka-Maroń, D.; Zaleszkiewicz, L. Baltic cliffs and much more. Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 595–603. [Google Scholar]
- Kosmowska-Ceranowicz, B. Glowing stone: Amber in Polish deposits and collections. Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 604–610. [Google Scholar]
- Górska-Zabielska, M.; Nowak, I. The geoheritage potential of the south-east Pałuki (Western Poland) to promote geotourism. GeoJournal Tour. Geosites 2024, 52, 294–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Górska-Zabielska, M. A New Geosite as a Contribution to the Sustainable Development of Urban Geotourism in a Tourist Peripheral Region—Central Poland. Resources 2023, 12, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Górska-Zabielska, M.; Kamieńska, K. Geotourism Potential of the Drawskie Lake District as a Support for the Planned Geopark named Postglacial Land of the Drawa and Dȩbnica Rivers. Quaest. Geogr. 2017, 36, 15–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koźma, J.; Kupetz, M. The transboundary Geopark Muskau Arch (Geopark Łuk Mużakowa, Geopark Muskauer Faltenbogen). Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 692–698. [Google Scholar]
- Duraj, M.; Marschalko, M.; Duda, R.; Sitanyiova, D.; Masarovicova, S. The history of pyrope extraction and processing in the Czech Republic and its significance for geotourism. World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium WMESS 2015. Procedia Earth Planet. Sci. 2015, 15, 663–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miśkiewicz, K.; Waśkowska, A.; Welc, E. Documentation and Assessment of Geosites for Geotourism and Geoparks; AGH University of Science and Technology: Kraków, Poland, 2024. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Miśkiewicz, K. Geotourism Product as an Indicator for Sustainable Development in Poland. Sustainability 2024, 16, 5516. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135516
Miśkiewicz K. Geotourism Product as an Indicator for Sustainable Development in Poland. Sustainability. 2024; 16(13):5516. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135516
Chicago/Turabian StyleMiśkiewicz, Krzysztof. 2024. "Geotourism Product as an Indicator for Sustainable Development in Poland" Sustainability 16, no. 13: 5516. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135516
APA StyleMiśkiewicz, K. (2024). Geotourism Product as an Indicator for Sustainable Development in Poland. Sustainability, 16(13), 5516. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135516