You are here: Home » Past Issues » Volume 8, 2013 - Number 1 » GLOBAL GEOPARK AND CANDIDATE – COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PAPUK MOUNTAIN GEOPARK (CROATIA) AND FRUŠKA GORA MOUNTAIN (SERBIA) BY USING GAM MODEL
Marko D. PETROVIĆ1, Djordjije A. VASILJEVIĆ1, Miroslav D. VUJIČIĆ1, Thomas A. HOSE2, Slobodan B. MARKOVIĆ1 & Tin LUKIĆ1
1University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Trg Dositeja Obradovića 3, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia; Contact: email@example.com
2University of Bristol, Wills Memorial Building, School of Earth Sciences, Queens Road, Clifton, Bristol BS8, UK
GLOBAL GEOPARK AND CANDIDATE – COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PAPUK MOUNTAIN GEOPARK (CROATIA) AND FRUŠKA GORA MOUNTAIN (SERBIA) BY USING GAM MODEL
We examined the comparison of geoheritage resources of two natural protected areas: National park Fruška Gora in Serbia and Nature Park Papuk in Croatia. The first one has applied for UNESCO geopark recognition in 2007, while the second one was proclaimed as one the same year. The general hypothesis is that these two geologically similar areas possess comparable geo-resources, which should clarify the causes because of which Fruška Gora still has not been included in geopark network. For their comparison, authors applied previously created Geosite Assessment Model (GAM). GAM consists of two key indicators: Main and Additional Values, which are further divided into 12 and 15 indicators respectively, each individually marked from 0 to 1. This division is made due to two general kinds of values: Main - that are mostly generated by geosite’s natural characteristics; and Additional - that are mostly human-induced and generated by modifications for its use by visitors. The study revealed that the Main Values are similar to both, Fruška Gora and Papuk. However, Papuk Mountain, as a well developed global geopark, has higher Additional Values, with significant international recognition. As these two investigated areas are less than 200 km away from each other, one of the development options could be collaboration of these complementary geotourism destinations through an international and mutual offer that could initiate new geo-destinations and further improve and develop conservation and promotion of geoheritage in a much wider region.
Keyword: geopark, geoheritage, geotourism, Papuk Mt., Fruška Gora Mt., GAM Model
|(c) 2006 - 2024 , Publisher-Asociația Carpatică de Mediu și Științele Pământului (Carpathian Association of Environment and Earth Sciences)