ArticlePublisher preview availableLiterature Review

Geoconservation at the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

The Royal Society
Philosophical Transactions A
Authors:
  • Urdaibai Biosphere Reserve Service. Basque government
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

This work describes the achievements made towards geoconservation within the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) from the 1990s onwards. The key milestones in the recognition of geoconservation within the IUCN are presented. Initially, the IUCN's geoconservation efforts were focused on refining the criteria for World Heritage (WH) designation. Subsequently, the actions focused on spreading the geoconservation framework within the IUCN World Conservation Congresses (WCCs), the establishment of an expert group on geoconservation within the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (IUCN-WCPA) and the publication of guidelines for geoconservation. We describe how the inclusion within the IUCN membership of three organizations—two of them Spanish: The Geological Society of Spain (SGE) and the Society for the Defence of Geological and Mining Heritage (SEDPGYM); and one international, ProGEO—has been a key factor. These organizations have achieved the adoption of resolutions in which geoconservation, its vision, its principles and its definitions have been taken into account in the IUCN WCC (2008–2020 period), and have promoted the geoconservation conceptual framework among nature conservationists. We also analyse the progress made and offer a series of recommendations to improve geoconservation in the future adopting a more integrated approach to nature conservation within the IUCN. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue ‘Geodiversity for science and society’.
royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsta
Opinion piece
Cite this article: Monge-Ganuzas M,
Guillén-Mondéjar F, Díaz-Martínez E, Herrero
N, Brilha J. 2024 Geoconservation at the
International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN). Phil.Trans.R.Soc.A382: 20230053.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2023.0053
Received: 28 March 2023
Accepted: 28 June 2023
One contribution of 16 to a Theo Murphy
meeting issue ‘Geodiversity for science and
society’.
Subject Areas:
geology
Keywords:
geoconservation, nature conservation
Author for correspondence:
Manu Monge-Ganuzas
e-mail: manu-monge@euskadi.eus
Geoconservation at the
International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
Manu Monge-Ganuzas1,Francisco
Guillén-Mondéjar2, Enrique Díaz-Martínez3, Nadia
Herrero4and José Brilha5
1Geoheritage Commission of the Spanish Geological Society, Society
for the Defence of Geological and Mining Heritage and ProGEO,
Madariaga Dorretxea San Bartolome auzoa 34-34, 48350 Busturia,
Basque Country, Spain
2Geoheritage Commission of the Spanish Geological Society, Society
for the Defence of Geological and Mining Heritage and Geology
Research Group, Faculty of Chemistry, University of Murcia, Campus
de Espinardo, 30100 Murcia, Spain
3Geoheritage Commission of the Spanish Geological Society, Society
for the Defence of Geological and Mining Heritage, ProGEO and
CSIC-IGME, Rios Rosas, 23, 28003 Madrid, Spain
4Geoheritage Commission of the Spanish Geological Society and
Directorate General for the Natural Environment and Biodiversity,
Government of Catalunya, del Foc street, 57, 08038 Barcelona, Spain
5Institute of Earth Sciences and ProGEO, pole of the University of
Minho, Campus of Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal
MM-G, 0000-0001-9766-5698;FG-M,0009-0002-7625-806X;
ED-M, 0000-0003-2280-5320;NH,0009-0008-1204-2925;
JB, 0000-0001-8927-8487
This work describes the achievements made
towards geoconservation within the International
Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
from the 1990s onwards. The key milestones
in the recognition of geoconservation within
the IUCN are presented. Initially, the IUCN’s
geoconservation efforts were focused on refining
the criteria for World Heritage (WH) designation.
Subsequently, the actions focused on spreading
the geoconservation framework within the IUCN
World Conservation Congresses (WCCs), the
establishment of an expert group on geoconservation
within the IUCN World Commission on Protected
Areas (IUCN-WCPA) and the publication of
2024 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.
... The validity of taking a Conserving Nature's Stage approach to biodiversity conservation is assessed by Miller et al. [14], who find that conserving geophysical characteristics as surrogate sites for biodiversity is an effective conservation approach. Elsewhere in a geoheritage and geoconservation context, Monge-Ganuzas et al. [15] describe geoconservation achievements within the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and offer further recommendations. Arid Quaternary geoheritage sites are specifically considered in the context of promoting inclusion and diversity as part of the assessment process [16], while the dilemma faced by many geoheritage sites of balancing protection with geotourism, including valuation of geodiversity, is tackled by Anougmar et al. [17]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Currently, global warming, invasive alien species and tourism development pose major threats to Natural World Heritage sites, and the strengthening of conservation methods and management programs in buffer zones is urgent for the sustainable development of sites. Agroforestry, as a nature-based solution, not only promotes the buffer zone to effectively maintain the Outstanding Universal Value of the heritage site, but also balances the relationship between the conservation of the heritage site and the economic development of the buffer zone, and effectively enhances the protection of the buffer zone in response to various threats. However, there is currently a lack of comprehensive understanding of research trends, research focuses, and recent developments, regarding the conservation of natural heritage sites and buffer zone agroforestry development. Therefore, this study utilized the Scopus database along with Excel and Bibliometrix software to conduct a bibliometric analysis and explore and visualize popular research topics and foreword issues related to Natural World Heritage conservation and buffer zone agroforestry development. We discuss the current publication trends and quantity, keyword and abstract word frequencies, thematic maps and evolutions, journal productivity, national publication outputs, collaboration relationships, and contributing institutions. The research shows that the relationship between biodiversity conservation and agroforestry has been the focus of research in the field since 1992, and the development of agroforestry has contributed to biodiversity conservation in heritage sites. However, there have been fewer studies addressing the geomorphic and aesthetic value of agroforestry conservation, and little attention has been paid to buffer zone development. Based on this, this manuscript suggests that in the future, emphasis should be placed on the linkage between the development of buffer zones and heritage conservation, especially in the Karst World Heritage Sites with ecologically fragile, and that the role of agroforestry development in buffer zones should be strengthened in the promotion of ecological balance and sustainable development of the sites, to provide scientific references for the conservation and development of other geoheritage sites around the globe.
Article
Full-text available
Mining areas can provide important information for interpreting the geodiversity and geological heritage of an area, which also results in the need for special attention to conservation in terms of inventory, impact studies, and recovery plans for degraded areas. The territory of the Seridó UNESCO Global Geopark, northeastern Brazil, has several mining districts linked to the production of scheelite, gold, gemstones, dimensional rocks, and kaolin. Thus, we aimed to assess the impact of mining on the geopark's geodiversity and geoheritage. Through carto-graphic analysis, mineral resources and mining areas were observed, overlapping with geodiversity mapping, geosites' proximity to exploration areas, and abiotic ecosystem services generated or interrupted by mining. The results showed a wide diversity of resources and different relationships between geodiversity hotspots, geosites, and mining areas. The mineral exploitation could be fundamental for sustainable development in the geopark, considering proper conditions of ecosystem services balancing, and adequate use of international geoheritage and geoconservation policies in active mining. Furthermore, the paper presented that abiotic nature should be considered in environmental impact assessments and mining restoration plans. The geopark management should continue to develop initiatives to take advantage of mineral resources to promote sustainability.
Article
Full-text available
Hybridization is a significant approach to breeding that enables the creation of new varieties that enhance genetic diversity. Through fish inter-species hybridization, it is possible to produce hybrids that can be utilized in aquaculture and stocking programs to enhance growth rate, transfer desirable traits between species, and combine the favourable attributes of two parents into a single progeny. The present study revealed the successful hybridization between Clarias microstomus (Ng, 2001) ♂ and Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1822) ♀ for the first time in the aquaculture industry. C. microstomus is a species of Clariid catfish endemic to the island of Borneo and C. gariepinus is an introduced species widely aquacultured throughout the southeast Asian region. The embryonic development of the hybrid offspring is described with the hatching percentage of 58.63% and the early survival rate for the first 72 hours for the larvae of 85.76%. The hybrids showed no signs of deformities and developed normally. The findings of the study provide a new high yield variety of catfish for farmers and aquaculture industry for increasing production and profit margin.
Article
Full-text available
RESUMEN Como contribución a la historia de la geoconservación en España, este trabajo resume los principales hitos de la participación española en el avance de la geoconservación a nivel internacional. En la década de 1990 participamos en las primeras iniciativas de geoconservación, incluyendo las primeras organizaciones científicas dedicadas explícitamente a la geoconservación, la constitución de grupos de trabajo, y la organización de reuniones internacionales sobre el tema. Fuimos el primer país en completar el inventario de lugares geológicos de relevancia internacional (Global Geosites) e incorporarlo en nuestra propia legislación. Con el comienzo de siglo, participamos en el núcleo fundacional de la Red Europea de Geoparques (EGN) y posteriormente en el de la Red Global de Geoparques (GGN), así como en el desarrollo exhaustivo del modelo, siendo actualmente el segundo país del mundo con más geoparques mundiales de la UNESCO (UGG). Como estrategia para promover el desarrollo de acciones de geoconservación y cambiar las políticas a nivel nacional e internacional, participamos en grupos de trabajo de organismos internacionales (IUGS, IUCN, SCAR), hemos conseguido la adopción de resoluciones internacionales para la geoconservación y seguimos trabajando en su desarrollo. Nuestros resultados se publican en revistas científicas internacionales y libros especializados sobre el tema, y todo ello ha sido sin que exista una política nacional explícita de geoconservación, ni una financiación adecuada para ello. El futuro se presenta incierto, pues hemos conseguido una visibilidad y un reconocimiento en el extranjero que no son correspondidos con el apoyo oficial necesario para poder mantenerlos. SUMMARY As a contribution to the history of geoconservation in Spain, this work summarizes the main milestones of Spanish participation in the advancement of geoconservation at the international level. In the 1990s, we participated in the first geoconservation initiatives, including the first explicitly geoconservation-oriented scientific organizations, the constitution of working groups, and the organization of international meetings on the subject. We were the first country to complete the inventory of geological sites of international relevance (Global Geosites) and to later incorporate it into our own legislation. At the beginning of the century, we participated in the founding nucleus of the European Geoparks Network (EGN) and later in that of the Global Geoparks Network (GGN), as well as in the exhaustive development of the geopark model, currently being the second country in the world with more UNESCO Global Geoparks (UGG). As a strategy to promote the development of geoconservation actions and change policies at the national and international level, we participated in working groups of international organizations (IUGS, IUCN, Antarctic Committee), we have achieved the adoption of international resolutions for geoconservation, and we continue working on their development. Our results have been published in international scientific journals and specialized books on the subject, and all this has been without an explicit national geoconservation policy and without adecuate funding for it. The future is uncertain, as we have achieved visibility and recognition abroad that is not compensated with the necessary official support to maintain it.
Book
Full-text available
These Guidelines are intended to help improve the conservation and management of geoheritage and geodiversity in protected and conserved areas and recognition of the interrelationships and interactions with biological features and processes. They are not a textbook on geoconservation management practice, but rather set out the essential background, context and principles; summarise relevant material to make it more readily accessible to users in one volume; and provide links to the key literature and additional sources that include detailed practical guidance. The use of best practice examples from around the world will hopefully give users renewed confidence in looking after geoheritage and in connecting geoconservation with biodiversity conservation. Download available here: https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2020.PAG.31.en
Article
Full-text available
Geoconservation and Geotourism potentially represent two ends on the spectrum of appreciation of abiotic elements. Though it would appear to make sense that practitioners and researchers in both ‘fields’ work together providing a linkage between theory and practice, the barriers encountered, and potential opportunities represented by collaboration or cooperation, have not yet been thoroughly explored. This paper documents the experiences of researchers and practitioners working in protected areas governance and management, geoconservation and geotourism, via semi-structured interviews of 30 geoheritage and Geoparks researchers and practitioners. Using narrative discourse, we identified a number of challenges and barriers in conserving, practicing and managing geoheritage and Geoparks. Divergence in the acceptance of geodiversity as a concept appears most preventative to the discipline in the areas of research/scholarship and assessment criteria, and conversely, a unified interpretation of geodiversity appears to be applied to UNESCO Global Geopark, national geopark and geotouristic assessments. Diverse perspectives of geodiversity were expressed against a backdrop of other constraints, such as lack of funding, inconsistent inventory and criteria, and lack of recognition of geoheritage in general. G There is pleasing evidence that the nature and reach of geoconservation research, practice and training is increasing, which will be pivotal to reducing reported subjectivity in assessment criteria and promoting geoconservation to national bodies. We suggest that until there is consensus as to which unifying terms and themes the discipline should actually encompass and support, there will continue to be fragmentation and scope creep between actors in geoconservation and geotouristic research and practice. The biggest concern that we identified from our research, was that geoconservation professionals appear to be becoming more isolated from the development and ongoing management strategies of popular geotouristic and geodiversity sites, which has the potential to limit quality scientific communication of geoheritage and geoscientific values to the public. Now that there has been such a significant increase in global geoconservation research in the past five years, it is pivotal that geoconservationists and geotouristic professionals work together, recognising a common goal in the appreciation of abiotic landforms and landscapes.
Article
Full-text available
Following on from Resolution 5 048 passed by the 2102 IUCN General Assembly (https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/44015). This is a landmark decision in the history of Geoheritage to include geodiversity and geoheritage in IUCN Programmes. Another mandate in the same resolution calls on the WCPA to promote and support proper management of geoheritage in protected areas. It is within his latter mandate that we successfully worked towards geoheritage being included into the program of the IUCN 6th World Parks Congress (WPC), held in Sydney, Australia 12-19 November 2014. This congress is a decadal event organized by the WCPA. If we had missed this opportunity, we would have had to wait 10 years for the next one! The good news is that, in a highly competitive selection process, we succeeded in being allocated a session in the only science-based theme, Reaching Conservation Goals. In addition, we were also successful in securing two (well attended) side sessions, and securing funding for the first Geoheritage stand at a Word Parks Congress where the goal was setting the theme was Reaching Goals for the conservation of biodiversity.
Book
In 2005, IUCN published a report entitled Geological World Heritage: A Global Framework (Dingwall et al., 2005). The aim of that report was to discuss and advise on the role of the World Heritage Convention in recognising and protecting geological and geomorphological heritage. The aim of the present report is to fully revise and update the 2005 report and to look at the potential impact of the new UNESCO Global Geopark designation on future inscriptions to the World Heritage List under criterion (viii). This aim has been achieved through a thorough review of the 2005 report, and in particular the thematic approach to geology that the report used. This has led to the proposal of a rationalised set of 11 themes to guide the application of criterion (viii). This report also examines the processes of comparative analysis and questions of site integrity in relation to properties listed for geological and geomorphological values.
Article
Geology is part of the planet's “natural capital”, the stock of global natural assets. These assets provide many benefits for society, often referred to as “ecosystem services”. However, traditionally these have mainly focused on biotic services and have undervalued the abiotic ones. The latter are known here as “geosystem services” and they all derive from the geodiversity of the planet. This paper outlines how society benefits from three aspect of geodiversity – topographies, geological materials and physical processes. It also particularly argues that society benefits from geoconservation of the planet's geoheritage, citing the criteria for designating UNESCO World Heritage Sites, UNESCO Global Geoparks and national protected areas, the public interest in visiting spectacular geological places and the economic benefits this geotourism brings. Keywords: Geodiversity, Geoheritage, Geoconservation, Natural capital, Ecosystem services
Article
Geodiversity-based ecosystem services are functions provided by elements of geodiversity that benefit society and future generations. Their adequate evaluation is important to assess losses and the value of nature, both qualitatively and quantitatively, and may be the key to the sustainable use of natural abiotic heritage by means of inclusion in land-management programmes. This work first presents an initial contribution to the inclusion of geodiversity in the ecosystem approach in the coastal region of the state of São Paulo, Brazil. The qualitative evaluation presented has identified 56 ecosystem services distributed across four functions—regulation, supporting, provisioning and cultural—that give an overview of the importance of geodiversity in the region. The ecosystem approach is placed as a potentially important influence on public policies for the management of geodiversity and geoheritage, depending on the effectiveness of communication with decision-makers and society. It is also the intention to provide the bases for future works regarding the detailed assessment of ecosystem services in the context of geodiversity in the region.