1. Introduction
There is a diversity and abundance of geological, volcanic, geomorphological, and seismic sites distributed throughout the Caribbean archipelago. For decades, these natural sites have captured the interest and imagination of residents and have captivated the attention and curiosity of visitors to the region. Consequently, although these sites have neither been formally identified as geotourism assets nor marketed and promoted as such by regional tourism authorities, many of these sites currently form the basis of the ‘nature tourism’ thrust in the region. One can therefore logically conclude that in these circumstances some form of ‘geotourism’ has been occurring in the Caribbean for some time under other names, such as ecotourism, sustainable tourism, and nature tourism.
Some of the region’s nature-based tourism assets are vulnerable to the storms, hurricanes and other natural events which annually affect the region. For example, on 18 September 2017, Hurricane Maria ‘navigated’ through and caused extensive damage to the natural resources and infrastructure in many islands of the Caribbean including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of Dominica, hereafter referred to as Puerto Rico and Dominica respectively. A few days earlier, on 6 September, to be exact, Hurricane Irma, which maintained hurricane-strength winds from 31 August until 11 September 2017, had followed a similar destructive path through the Caribbean after impacting at least nine states on the US mainland [
1]. Islands such as Antigua’s sister island of Barbuda, St. Martin/St. Maarten, the US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and the British Virgin Islands suffered the brunt of Hurricane Irma’s furry, one of the strongest Atlantic basin hurricanes ever recorded [
1]. Hurricane Maria was the strongest hurricane to impact Dominica in recent history.
Hurricanes Irma and Maria, both of which were category 5 storms, tore through and mangled the islands’ infrastructure, turned streets into rivers, ripped down power lines, cut off access to some communities, toppled trees and defoliated those left standing, blew away groundcover vegetation, destroyed agricultural crops, and decimated wildlife. Dominica, which was commonly referred to as ‘The Nature Island of the Caribbean’ prior to the passage of Hurricane Maria, was ‘naked’ in the days and weeks immediately following the passage of the hurricane. Fortunately, although natural forces can be very destructive, similarly, nature has a way of healing itself. Whereas the natural restoration process is generally much slower than the destructive phase, the Government, natural resource professionals, and the people of Dominica were very pleased and encouraged when evidence of natural revegetation of the hills and mountains became evident. Six months after Hurricane Maria in September 2017, a fair amount of the vegetation had been restored on the landscape.
The Caribbean region (
Figure 1) not only lost much infrastructure and natural resources as a result of the hurricanes, the region also lost one of its primary socio-economic life lines, the tourism industry. It has been noted that the last global financial crisis created “…an opportunity for innovation in management and the emergence of new tourism products in tourism marketing” [
2]. Similarly, although there is no doubt that the hurricanes of 2017 negatively affected tourism marketing and tourism services of the Caribbean, the destruction may have presented the region with an opportunity for some level of innovation and creativity in the tourism sector. Geotourism, a relatively new concept, could be one such possible option.
The insular Caribbean is the most popular warm-weather tourism destination [
3], with tourism earnings accounting for 25% of the region’s gross domestic product [
4]. Overall, there has been a small annual increase in the number of tourists to the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) sub-region over the five years immediately preceding Hurricanes Irma and Maria (
Table 1).
Many policy makers, tourism officials, tour operators, natural resource professionals, and residents of tourism destinations have accepted the concept of sustainable tourism and actively seek to advance that concept. Sustainable tourism is “Tourism that takes full account of its current and future economic, social and environmental impacts, addressing the needs of visitors, the industry, the environment and host communities” [
6]. The sustainable tourism concept has been pursued through different frameworks, including nature tourism, ecotourism, cultural tourism, indigenous tourism, agri-tourism, heritage tourism, and community tourism. More recently, geotourism has been added to the mix of sustainable tourism approaches. The common principles across these sustainable tourism frameworks are the respect for the resource base and the environment as well as for the host country and local residents, while providing meaningful and rewarding visitor experiences.
Geotourism is a concept for which two slightly different definitions and emphasis areas, namely ‘geological’ or ‘geographical’, have been advanced [
7]. “Geotourism is essentially ‘geological tourism’. The geological element focuses on geology and landscape and includes both ‘form’, such as landforms, rock outcrops, rock types, sediments, soils and crystals, and ‘process’, such as volcanism, erosion, glaciation, etc. The geotourism approach seeks to facilitate tourists visiting, learning from, appreciating and engaging in geosites” [
8]. The National Geographic Society, however, has defined geotourism “…as tourism that sustains or enhances the distinctive geographical character of a place—its environment, heritage, aesthetics, culture, and the well-being of its residents” [
9]. Although these definitions are not mutually exclusive, it is evident that the former definition focuses on the ‘geological assets’, whereas the latter definition emphasizes the ‘geographical assets’. The emphasis areas of both definitions are embraced in this exploratory study. Based on these definitions some of the islands of the Caribbean are obviously blessed with outstanding and unique geotourism assets. However, although the Caribbean “…is increasingly challenged not only to maintain its share of the global tourism market, but also to re-define and diversify its tourist product” [
4], indications are that the regional authorities are yet to formally identify and develop available geoheritage sites. Furthermore, geotourism has not yet been embraced as tourism ‘branding’ or ‘marketing’ approaches by the region.
This paper seeks to identify and briefly describe the OECS sub-region’s primary geotourism assets, presents a framework for a regional geotourism development strategy, discusses the tourism potential of these assets, and proposes marketing and promotional strategies to differentiate these assets and opportunities in the market place. The analysis will be primarily concentrated on the selected states of Dominica and St. Lucia, two of the independent member-states of the OECS. These islands, where in addition to English a French-based creole is spoken, were selected because their topography, geology, historical background, and natural asset-base are very similar. Unlike Migon and Pijet-Migon [
10] who referenced the different classifications of geosites, no attempt has been made in this paper to differentiate among the different geosites found in the region.
4. Discussion and Future Outlook
If we accept the premise that the focus of geotourism is on ‘geological’, ‘geomorphological’, ‘geography’ and ‘overall landscape’ features, there is no doubt that the Caribbean region, and the OECS sub-region in particular, has the resource base to support geotourism. In the two OECS member states—Dominica and St. Lucia—considered in this study, several such resources have been identified (
Table 2). Based on this premise, coupled with the fact that the Caribbean is very dependent on tourism as a development strategy, the Governments of the region would be well advised to consider and initiate steps to capitalize on the full potential and opportunities of these assets.
Successful geotourism development will require some national planning and preparation. As a first step, it would be useful if the governments of the region were to commission a rapid assessment survey to identify and compile an inventory of the geotourism assets in each destination. Formulation of a national policy to lay the foundation for future actions should be actively pursued. This policy should provide for the participation and involvement of all stakeholders and ultimately endorsed at the highest national level. The proposed policy must outline a clear mission and vision, as well as set SMART objectives.
A mix of strategic approaches will have to be undertaken in an effort to accomplish any successful and integrated geotourism program in the region. Discussions, through regional workshops and conferences, as well as at regional political forums, of geotourism initiatives would be helpful in crafting a road-map for the development and promotion of this relatively new tourism concept in the region. In this regard, the appointment of an OECS or CTO Geotourism Working Group and the scheduling of a special session on the subject at the CTO’s Annual Sustainable Conference would help to ensure that the matter receives the regional or sub-regional attention it deserves.
A well-structured and organized research and monitoring program will have to be instituted early in any proposed geotourism program, in order to ensure that the integrity of and respect for the environment and important elements of the sustainable tourism concept are upheld. Research and monitoring programs should not only be directed towards environmental protection and monitoring, but very importantly, the program should seek to gauge and determine the demand for geotourism at the national and sub-regional levels. Such determination will help to inform future strategies and investments in any geotourism sub-sector.
Of course, the proposed research and monitoring program should assess ecological and social impacts and their possible implications. Historically, the Caribbean has lost much coastal vegetation such as mangrove to make way for hotels, marinas and tourism support services. Loss of coastal vegetation contributes to beach erosion. The unmanaged disposal of sewage and solid waste, and the pollution of water bodies negatively impact the health of ecosystems and the quality of the ecosystem services they provide. Every effort should be made to ensure that geotourism does not result in any significant ecological impacts in the region.
Geotourism is a vehicle which can be used to promote geoconservation and an understanding of geological heritage [
7]. The Caribbean’s geotourism strategic mix, therefore, should address the special training needs of tour guides in geology, seismology, geography, related history, and visitor safety, in addition to reinforcement of flora and fauna basics. The need for development of a comprehensive search and rescue plan which provides for clear lines of communication and required partnerships will be necessary in each destination.
Unless the potential geotourism visitor is sensitized to and informed about the opportunities in the sub-region, the anticipated benefits to the sub-region will not be realized. Therefore, a well-organized and funded marketing program will be essential for development of a sustainable geotourism program in the region. Critical to the success of geotourism marketing is branding. Branding “…is one of the most important aspects of any business, large or small. An effective brand strategy can provide a major edge in increasingly competitive markets [
26]. Branding should be considered and factored into the region’s tourism marketing and promotion campaigns.
Dominica’s Morne Trios Pitons National Park and St. Lucia’s Pitons Management Area have been listed as World Heritage Sites [
18]. UNESCO reserves the World Heritage Site—Natural Area category designation for sites which contain resources and landscapes of global significance. UNESCO has adopted a similar approach in advancing its Global Geopark concept. “Global Geoparks are single, unified geographical areas where sites and landscapes of international geological significance are managed with a holistic concept of protection, education and sustainable development” [
27]. A UNESCO Global Geopark uses its geological heritage, in connection with all other aspects of the area’s natural and cultural heritage, to enhance awareness and understanding of key issues facing society, such as using our earth’s resources sustainably, mitigating the effects of climate change and reducing natural disasters-related risks [
27].
Against this background, some of the Caribbean islands may wish to explore the nomination of some of primary sites such as Dominica’s Boiling Lake and Valley of Desolation and Layou River Gorge and St. Lucia’s famous Pitons, among others, as Geoparks. The fact that Geoparks are normally established with the involvement and participation of all relevant local and regional stakeholders and authorities in the area will ensure that strong partnerships are fostered from the outset. This partnership approach will ultimately provide the environment for the realization of “…communities’ goals while showcasing and protecting the area’s geological heritage” [
27]. The marketing and promotion of ‘tourism products’ such as World Heritage Sites and Geoparks which have been accepted by the international agencies will add credence to the efforts of the sub-region and likely to help attract more nature tourists and geotourists in particular.
For more targeted and effective use of limited funds available for tourism marketing and promotion, it would be advisable that efforts are focused. To accomplish this, it would be important that an analysis of the segmentation of the tourism sector: scuba divers, birders, hikers, cultural tourists, and geotourists be undertaken.
The pursuit of geotourism presents another avenue for building community capital and development of cohesive partnerships at the community level, for establishment of new small business ventures, and stimulation of new areas of skills development and training, and pursuit of the shared vison of protecting and promoting the sub-region’s geological processes, features, historical themes linked to geology, or outstanding landscapes and geological beauty [
27].
The Caribbean has fallen behind the other regions of the world, not only with respect to the development and promotion of geotourism, but also with respect to the establishment of Geoparks and Geopark networks. As Miller et al. [
28] have noted, Geopark networks such as the Asian Geoparks Network and the European Geoparks Network are “providing models for engaging the public in the appreciation of geology that link sustainable economic development with preservation and interpretation of geology”. Developing island-nations apparently have not been actively exploring geotourism assessments of geosites. Newsome et al. [
29] identified the island of Mauritius as one of the few, if not the only, developing island-nation that has developed geotourism products since 2000. Several inlands in the Caribbean have the potential and opportunity to take the lead, embrace and introduce the geotourism concept to the region. Properly planned and managed geotourism is environmentally responsible, culturally responsible and synergistic [
9]. Geotourism has the potential of further diversifying the region’s tourism product and therefore should be embraced.
Product diversification and market segmentation in the tourism sector are critical in the Caribbean, given the fact that both the international tourism market as well as the demographics of the average tourist are changing. Today’s travelers are more affluent, physically active, and better educated. They are more likely to base travel decisions on information obtained via the Internet to compare destinations, products, and costs. The region must therefore ensure that there is diversity in the tourism product and geotourism is one possible option for consideration.
5. Conclusions
Whereas many of the islands of the Caribbean have marketed and promoted their destinations as ‘nature tourism’ and ‘ecotourism’ destinations in combination with the ‘sea’ sun’ and ‘sand’ nostalgia, none of the islands has explicitly promoted geotourism as a component of the region’s tourism products. Clearly, based on this exploratory scoping exercise and analysis, the region does have the basic resources and potential to support a coordinated, well defined, and integrated geotourism thrust.
Success in geotourism will require the building of regional support and coordination. Given the fact that these islands have limited expertise, and scarce marketing and promotion resources, it is strongly recommended that interested destinations should collaborate and coordinate their efforts either under the umbrella of the CTO or that of the OECS. The CTO should include geotourism as a discussion/presentation topic at its annual Sustainable Tourism Conferences in the future to help focus attention on this potentially socio-economically and socially viable sub-sector.
Geotourism assets, like any other component of the ecosystem, are subject to degradation from unmanaged and poorly planned use. Every effort will have to be made, therefore, to minimize ecological impacts and to protect the geotourism capital in the region. To be successful in this regard will call for coordinated regional initiatives and strategies, implemented simultaneously. Legislation and enforcement may be required in some circumstances. Environmental education of the local residents and visitors about the characteristics and fragility of these resources will have to be part of the mix.
Geotourism development in the Eastern Caribbean has received very little attention. It is anticipated that this paper will stimulate interest in geotourism at the sub-regional level as well as help to initiate discussion among Caribbean scientists, natural resource and tourism professionals about the region’s geotourism assets and potential. This exploratory analysis has several limitations, including the fact that the analysis has been based primarily on literature review and personal knowledge. In order to develop a more data-driven approach in the long term, a questionnaire survey and possible face-to-face interviews of relevant Caribbean stakeholders is proposed. Such a survey will, among other things, help to identify the reasons and contributing factors why no destination in the Insular Caribbean has actively identified, developed, marketed and promoted geotourism as a component of the overall tourism product mix. Another activity which is deemed urgent and critical is the need for undertaking a comprehensive sub-regional inventory of potential geotourism sites. This inventory would serve as the initial framework on which to build an integrated regional geotourism destination including the establishment of geoparks in the region. Obviously, an integrated planning approach, the monitoring of environmental impacts and the geo-education of residents and visitors are critical dimensions which must be incorporated into any geotourism strategy and program for the region.