Tourism Management Studies

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Publication Ethics

Memorandum of Understanding

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Article Writing Guide

Fails

Consultants

Consultants

Consultants

Consultants

Consultants

Consultants

Publons

This letter of scientific publications

Methodology for evaluation of scientific publications

آیین نامه اجرایی قانون پیگیری و مقابله با تقلب در تهیه آثار علمی

Evaluation and zoning of the geotourism capabilities of Tarom county

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Professor of Geomorphology, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran.

2 Master of Geomorphology, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor of Geography & Urban Planning, Bozorgmehr University of Qaenat, Qaen, Iran

Abstract

The present research has been written to assess the capabilities and zoning of the geo-tourism capabilities of Tarom. The research method in the current research is mixed (quantitative-qualitative) with a practical purpose and analytical-exploratory nature; in order to analyze the information, Comanescu’s capability measurement method, Fuzzy Network Analysis Model (ANP-FUZZY), and also GIS software. The research results showed that the geo-sites of Tarom County have high geo-tourism values. Meanwhile, the geo-site of the Valider Sheit River has the highest value, the geo-site of the Ghezel Ozan River ranks second, and the Nokian River ranks third. Also, the investigation of the geo-tourism criteria of Tarom shows that 46.49% of the studied area is suitable for the development of geo-tourism. On the other hand, the geo-sites with high value in the Comanescu Model are consistent with the potential geo-tourism zones resulting from zoning in the county and have an acceptable level.
Introduction
Geo-tourism is a sustainable method of tourism that promotes environmental and cultural understanding and conservation of landscapes through the experience of various geological and geomorphological features of this geosphere, and its development can strengthen economic viability, community improvement, and geographic protection of landscape features. In general, geo-tourism can be created in a natural landscape where people are free to enjoy the spectacular views of the geosphere. Also, the attraction point of each landscape for the initial scope of geo-tourism depends on four types of tourism values: scientific, aesthetic, cultural, and economic. In the meantime, geo-morpho-sites are intrinsic and essential geological and geomorphological features of the earth's surface, which have significant scientific, aesthetic, and economic importance and have been discovered by human society. Also, different landscapes of the geosphere have witnessed the development of geo-tourism based on geo-morpho-sites. In a holistic approach toward the development of sustainable tourism, geo-morpho-sites are an essential basis for the development of geo-tourism.
On the other hand, geo-tourism plays a significant role in the protection of geo-morpho-sites. In the meantime, from the geo-cultural point of view, geo-tourism is considered a new way to develop less developed societies due to its economic efficiency. Therefore, in the approach of sustainable development of tourism, geo-tourism plays an essential role, and the development of geo-tourism on geo-morpho-sites can be done in the best way after evaluating geo-morpho-sites in a tourist environment. Considering the importance of geo-tourism as one of the essential species in achieving sustainable tourism, the purpose of this research is to evaluate and zoning the geo-tourism capabilities of Tarom County.
Research Question(s)

At what level are the geo-morpho-sites of Tarom County in terms of management and use, economic, cultural, aesthetic, and scientific values?
In terms of the desirability of geo-tourist capacity criteria, what is the state of Tarom County?

 Literature Review
The concept and approach of geo-tourism developed in the late 1980s after the recognition of geologists' schools, universities, and museums in the UK (Hose, 1995; Hose et al., 2011). The term "geo-tourism" was first coined in 1995 by Thomas A. Hughes, a professor of Earth Sciences at the University of Bristol in England (Antic & Tomic, 2017; Grover & Mahanta, 2018). According to Thomas A. Hose (2005), geo-tourism is: "Ensuring the value and social preservation of geological and geomorphological sites and their resources and providing interpretive facilities and services for the use of students, tourists, and other casual recreationists." This definition clearly shows that the main focus of geo-tourism is interpretation, promotion, and conservation, which are all essential elements for the development of geo-tourism. Newsome and Dowling (2010) have stated that geo-tourism is an arrangement of tourism in natural areas that focuses specifically on landscape and geology and their interpretation, promotion, and protection with the help of education (Jonic, 2018).
Methodology
The research method in the current research is mixed (quantitative-qualitative), with a practical purpose and analytical-exploratory nature. In this regard, first, the geo-sites of Tarom County were identified using interviews and field observations. In the second stage, the values of geo-sites were evaluated using the Comanescu capability measurement method. Finally, the geo-tourism capabilities of this county were evaluated using the Fuzzy Network Analysis Model (FUZZY-ANP) and questioning managers and officials, as well as benefiting from They were zoned based on criteria such as height, slope, land use, distance from communication road, distance from county or village, distance from geo-site, distance from river, distance from cultural sites. The statistical population of the research included the managers and officials of Tarom County, and 15 people were determined as the sample size by using a non-random sampling method.
Results
The research results showed that the geo-sites of Tarom County have high geo-tourism values. Meanwhile, the geo-site of the Valider-Shit River has the highest value, the geo-site of the Ghezel Ozan River ranks second, and the Nowkian River ranks third. Also, the investigation of the geo-tourism criteria of Tarom shows that 46.49% of the studied area is suitable for the development of geo-tourism. On the other hand, the geo-sites with high value in the Comanescu model are consistent with the potential geo-tourism zones resulting from zoning in Tarom County and have an acceptable level. In general, the results of this research can be used as a document in planning and environmental management for the sustainable development of tourism in the studied area by officials and planners.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
  1. Antic, A., & Tomic, N. (2017). Geo-heritage and geo-tourism potential of the Homolje area (eastern Serbia). Acta Geo-turistica, 8(2), 67–78.
  2. Banik, S., & Mukhopadhyay, M. (2020). Model-based strategic planning for the development of community-based tourism: A case study of Ayodhya Hills in West Bengal, India. Geo Journal, 87(2), 1349–1365.
  3. Brocx, M., & Semeniuk, V. (2007). Geo-heritage and geo-conservation: History, definition, scope, and scale. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia, 90, 53–87.
  4. Brocx, M., & Semeniuk, V. (2016). Geo-heritage. In M. J. Kennish (Ed.), Encyclopedia of estuaries (pp. 339–344). Netherlands: Springer.
  5. Dowling, R. K. (2011). Geo-tourism’s global growth. Geo-heritage, 3(1), 1–13.
  6. Dowling, R. K. (2013). Global Geo-tourism – An emerging form of sustainable tourism. Czech Journal of Tourism, 2(2), 59–79.
  7. Geneletti, D., & Dawa, D. (2009). Environmental impact assessment of mountain tourism in developing regions: A study in Ladakh, Indian Himalaya. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29(4), 229–242.
  8. Grover, A. K., & Mahanta, B. N. (2018). Geo-tourism potential in Arunachal Pradesh – A preliminary appraisal. Indian Journal of Geosciences, 72(4), 345–360.
  9. Hose, T. A. (1995). Selling the story of Britain’s stone. Environmental Interpretation, 10(2), 16–17.
  10. Hose, T. A. (2005). Geo-Tourism-Appreciating the deep side of landscapes in Novelli. Niche tourism; contemporary issues, trends, and cases. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd, 27–37.
  11. Hose, T. A., & Vasiljevic, D. A. (2012). Defining the nature and purpose of modern geo-tourism with particular reference to the United Kingdom and South-East Europe. Geo-heritage, 4, 25–43.
  12. Hose, T. A., Markovi, S. B., Komac, B., & Zorn, M. (2011). Geo-tourism - A short introduction. Acta Geo-graphica Slovenica, 51(2), 339–342.
  13. Jonic, V. (2018). Comparative analysis of Devil’s Town and Bryce Canyon geo-sites by applying the modified Geo-site assessment model (M-GAM). Researches Review DGTH, 47(2), 113–125.
  14. Kale, V. S. (2010). The Western Ghat: The Great Escarpment of India. In P.Migon (Ed.), Geomorphological landscapes of the world (pp. 257–264). Netherlands: Springer.
  15. Mastika, I. K., Harsono, S. S., Khristianto, W., Oktawirani, P., & Hutama, P. S. (2023). Creative strategies of local resources in managing geo-tourism in the Ijen Geopark Bondowoso, East Java, Indonesia. International Journal of Geo-heritage and Parks, 11, 149-168.
  16. Mastika, I. K., Harsono, S. S., Khristianto, W., Oktawirani, P., & Hutama, P. S. (2023). Creative strategies of local resources in managing geotourism in the Ijen Geopark Bondowoso, East Java, Indonesia. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks, 11(1), 149-168.
  17. Morante-Carballo, F., Dominguez-Cuesta, M. J., Paz-Salas, N., Malave-Hernandrz, J., Duenas-Tavar, J., & Carrion-Mero, P. (2023). Evaluation of the potential of coastal cliffs as geo-sites for the promotion of geo-tourism. Geography and Sustainability, 4(4), 356-371.
  18. Mossa, A., Camunez-Ruiz, J. A., & Morandi, F. (2018). The current state of the first UNESCO global geopark: a case study of the geological and mining park of Sardinia, Italy. Geo-Journal of Tourism and Geo-sites, 22(2), 403-418.
  19. Newsome, D., & Dowling, R. (2006). The scope and nature of geo-tourism. In D. Newsome, & R. Dowling (Eds.), Geo-tourism. London: Routledge.
  20. Newsome, D., & Dowling, R. K. (Eds.). (2010). Geo-tourism: The tourism of geology and landscape. Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers.
  21. Paskova, M. (2012). Tourism Environmentalism. Czech Journal of Tourism, 1(2), 77–113.
  22. Pereira, P., Pereira, D., & Caetano Alves, M. I. (2007). Geomorphosite assessment in Montesinho Natural Park (Portugal). Geographica Helvetica, 62, 159–168.
  23. Reynard, E., & Panizza, M. (2005). Geo-morpho-sites: Definition, assessment, and mapping: An introduction. Géo-morphologie: Relief, Processus, Environment, 11(3), 177–180.
  24. Reynard, E., Coratza, P., & Giusti, C. (2011). Geo-morphosites and geo-tourism. Geo-heritage, 3(3), 129–130.
  25. Singtuen, V., Vivitkul, N., & Junjuer, T. (2022). Geoeducational assessments in Khon Kaen National Geopark, Thailand: implication for geo-conservation and geo-tourism development. Heliyon, 8(12), 1-14.
  26. Sousa de Sena, I., de Azevedo Ruchkys, U., & Eduardo Panisset Travassos, L. (2022). Geo-tourism Potential in Karst Geosystems: An example from the Lund Warming Ramsar Site, Minas Gerais, Brazil. CATENA, 208, 1-13.
  27. Tamang, L., Kumar Mandal, U., Karmakar, M., Banerjee, M., & Ghosh, D. (2023). Geomorphosite evaluation for geo-tourism development using geo-site assessment model (GAM): A study from a Proterozoic terrain in eastern India. International Journal of Geo-heritage and Parks, 11, 82–99.
  28. Tamang, L., Mandal, U. K., Karmakar, M., Banerjee, M., & Ghosh, D. (2023). Geomorphosite evaluation for geo-tourism development using geo-site assessment model (GAM): A study from a Proterozoic terrain in eastern India. International Journal of Geo-heritage and Parks, 11(1), 82-99.
  29. Tomic, N. (2016). Geo-heritage of the middle and lower Danube Region in Serbia: Inventory, geo-conservation, and geo-tourism. Ph. D. thesis Serbia: University of Novi Sad.
  30. Wulung, S. R. P., & Rajoendah, M. I. K. (2019). Sustainable tourism development through geo-tourism route planning: A case study of Natuna Island. Paper presented at the First Sustainable Tourism National Seminar, STP Mataram.
  31. Zgłobicki, W., & Baran-Zgłobicka, B. (2013). Geomorphological heritage as a tourist attraction: A case study in Lubelskie Province, SE Poland. Geo-heritage, 5(2), 137–149.
  32. Ziem A Bidas, L. A., Nguegni, S. M., Ilouga, D. C. I., Kenna, H. S., Moundi, A., & Kamgang, P. (2023). Geomorphological component of volcanic geo-heritage of Kouoptamo, Cameroon Volcanic Line: Geo-conservation and perspectives for geo-tourism industry. International Journal of Geo-heritage and Parks, 11(3), 365-384.
  33. Akbarian, M. (2021). Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Geotourism Development on Hormuz Island, Iran. Quantitative Geomorphological Research, 10(1), 20-39. doi: 22034/GMPJ.2021.266888.1248    [in Persian]
  34. Safari, A., Ganjaian, H., fereidoni, M., & Heidari, Z. (2019). Review capabilities of Geotourism using assessment methods and Zoning (Case study: city of Divandarreh and Saghez). Geographical Planning of Space, 9(31), 141-156. doi: 10.30488/gps.2019.90115, [in Persian]
  35. Abedini, M., aghazadeh, N., & sadeghi, A. (2021). Analysis and evaluation of geo-tourism potential of the Shorso region of Malekan city. Geographical Journal of Tourism Space, 10(37), 25-38.dor: 1001.1.22518827.1399.10.37.2.0,   [in Persian]
  36. Mokhtari, D., rezayi moghadam, M. H., & Esfandiari, M. (2022). Geomorphodiversity index: Quantifying the diversity of landforms and physical landscape of the Mishu Mountains, Northwest of Iran. Quantitative Geomorphological Research, 11(3), 200-219. Doi: 22034/GMPJ.2022.333913.1338, [in Persian]
Tourism Management Studies
Volume 18, Issue 64 - Serial Number 64
January 2024
Pages 33-60
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics