GEOSITE EVALUATION; CAN WE MEASURE INTANGIBLE VALUES?

Abstract

V.M. Bruschi & A. Cendrero, Geosite evaluation; can we measure intangible values? (IT ISSN 0394-3356, 2005).
A discussion on issues to be addressed in the process of cataloguing and assessing geosites is presented. Different stages of the
process are considered: identification, classification, inventory, evaluation, protection and use. Inventories to be elaborated should be
satisfactory from different points of view: scientific quality of sites, definition of protection levels, possibility of educational or recreational use, or potential for generating economic activities.
A problem that permeates all stages of the process is subjectivity. Establishment of ranks of scientific interest for sites in a region,
proposals for protection measures or drafting plans for the use of geosites cannot be based exclusively on scientific, objective criteria.
Subjectivity is an unavoidable (perhaps even desirable) part of all of them. This represents an important difficulty because if protection
and use plans for geosites are to be successful, they should be based on transparent criteria that can be subject to external, independent scrutiny and evaluation. This should include some sort of validation to determine to what extent classifications and proposals presented reflect social values, be they expressed by specific stakeholder groups (earth scientists, decision makers, elected officials, conservationists) or general public. If those values are well reflected plans will be socially acceptable and more likely to be useful.
An approach is presented based on the definition of three groups of criteria, related to: a) intrinsic quality of sites; b) potential threats
and protection needs; c) potential for use. Indicators are presented for each criterion. Particular efforts have been made to propose
indicators that can be expressed by means of continuous variables. When this has not been possible categorical, “objective” variables
are used. Combination of those indicators into different types of indices can be used as a means to “measure” the type of intangible
qualities mentioned above. The advantage of the approach proposed is that numerical classifications of sites obtained using that kind
of “quality models”, can be validated through comparison with independent external opinions or evidences.
Two applications to case studies for cataloguing and assessing are presented. The first one concerns the assessment of geosites
using clearly-stated criteria based on observable characteristics. The methodology is applied to an existing geosites inventory; validation is carried out by comparison with a very much appreciated geomorphic landmark in the same region as well as with expenditure on two sites subject to restoration.
The second case study refers to the identification and ranking of geosites for a new inventory. Ranks obtained directly from surveys
among geomorphologists are compared with those derived from the application of the method. The analyses presented indicate that
the “quality models” used yield results that coincide quite well with independent assessments or evidences for “clearly good quality
sites”. Agreement is less satisfactory for sites lower down in the ranks. Some inconsistencies between direct subjective assessment by
individual experts and systematic assessment based on quality criteria proposed by the same expert have also been found. It is concluded that the method in its present form provides a satisfactory “coarse grain” image of sites’ quality but improvements are needed.