**Protected Areas: Geotourist Attractiveness for Weekend Tourists Based on the Example of Gorcza ´nski National Park in Poland**

### **Krzysztof Widawski 1,\*, Piotr Ole´sniewicz 2, Agnieszka Rozenkiewicz 1, Anna Zar ˛eba <sup>1</sup> and So ˇna Jandová 3,4**


Received: 1 February 2020; Accepted: 23 March 2020; Published: 25 March 2020

**Abstract:** The aim of the publication was to assess the geotourist attractiveness of protected areas in Poland among weekend tourists based on the example of Gorcza ´nski National Park. The park location near urbanized areas makes it an attractive field for research on weekend tourism development. The tourist potential of the park is presented, starting from geological aspects and geotourist values. Then, the tourist potential was analysed, with a focus on geotourist resources, which include tourist trails and didactic routes. The tourist traffic volume was also examined. On the basis of legal documents, such as nature conservation plans, threats related to tourism development in protected areas were presented as indicated by park managers. In accordance with the Act on Nature Conservation, the threats are divided into four groups: internal existing and potential threats and external existing and potential threats. The tourists' opinion on the geotourist attractiveness of the park was investigated with surveys conducted during selected weekends significant in the context of tourist traffic volume. Thus, a profile of people visiting the park for short stays was obtained, as well as their assessment of the tourist resources of the area, with particular emphasis on geotourist values.

**Keywords:** geotourism; protected areas; weekend tourism; tourists' opinion; national parks

#### **1. Introduction**

The very idea of nature conservation appeared in 1872, when the first national park, Yellowstone, was established [1,2]. Since then, protected areas have been exceptionally attractive for tourist penetration. Notably, the first national park in the world's history is still considered a most appealing destination because of its geotourist character [3]. For many decades, tourism and nature conservation have coexisted in the tourist space, as highlighted by the subject literature [4]. The popularity of tourism based on natural resources, both animated and inanimate, increased at the turn of the last century [5–9]. Such an increase can always have, and usually has, a twofold impact on the area itself, its resources, and its environment. On the one hand, it translates into raising environmental awareness of tourism participants. On the other hand, the uncontrolled presence of tourists itself may pose a threat to any kind of natural resources protected by the national park institution, including the inanimate ones [10]. These two aspects are indicated in many literature sources. Together with the growing

tourist awareness of the need to protect inanimate natural resources, the need for geoconservation was pointed at. The main assumption of this idea is the demand for proper management of the geological heritage, substantial for both aesthetic and educational reasons [11,12]. It should be accompanied by appropriate promotion of the values themselves as well as adequate attitudes [13,14]. This standpoint is an essential part of a broader approach to the protection of geoheritage, which should be reflected in properly defined geoconservation strategies [15–18].

However, the role of tourism should not be limited to minimizing the possible losses associated with its presence in a space requiring protection due to the uniqueness of its resources. Tourism can and should contribute to the protection of natural heritage, as pointed out by many authors [1,19–23]. The key to success is proper environmental education, which should bring definite results and give impetus for further actions. One of the basic effects should be an appropriate attitude of the local community when using the natural resources of the region [24]. A sustainable approach is fundamental, so that resources can be utilized in a long perspective [25–27]. To this end, the region should ensure that its tourist infrastructure is properly developed. Correct handling of tourism is often the key to success, as implied by Bushell [28] or Priskin [29]. In their action strategy, regional authorities should take into account the active role of the local community. Only then it is possible to preserve resources in a relatively unchanged form [30,31], especially if the participation of the local community in the protection translates into specific income related to the development of tourism in the protected area, usually located in so-called marginal areas, away from large industrial or service centres [32].

Protected areas are attractive for many contemporary forms of tourism. For years, they have been associated, not without reason, with green tourism, ecotourism, or nature tourism [4,19–23]. This is natural, at least because of the specific tourist resources assigned to these types of tourist spaces. In addition, other forms of active or specialized tourism, characteristic of the natural environment, are also developing. These include skiing, cycling, and horse-riding tourism, as well as mountain climbing and speleological tourism, requiring specialized knowledge and skills. Against this background, the last three decades have seen a relatively new form of tourism, geotourism, also present in protected areas.

The concept was defined in the middle of the last decade of the previous century. Hose [33–37] was among its first investigators. Hose and Vasiljevi´c ([38], p. 27) pointed at geotourism as a form that constitutes "the provision of interpretive and service facilities enabling tourists to acquire knowledge and understanding of the geology and geomorphology of a site (including its contribution to the development of the Earth sciences) beyond the level of mere aesthetic appreciation". The geological aspect in the development of this form of tourism is important [38]. The context of sustainable development, which should accompany this form of tourism, was highlighted by Newsome and Dowling [39] in their understanding of geotourism as drawing its attractiveness from the heritage of the inanimate nature of the tourist region.

A natural place for the development of geotourism seems to be protected areas, by definition offering nature preserved in an unchanged or barely changed form. The subject literature [11,40] indicates nature reserves, landscape parks, natural parks, but above all, national parks. Owing to their resources, their location as usually far from urbanized areas, and their general attractiveness, national parks are visited by a greater number of tourists year after year. Increased tourist traffic can pose a threat to the protected nature in the park area [41–45]. In the case of inanimate nature, usually trampling, collecting, changes in soil structure, and erosion are mentioned [41,46–56]. Therefore, for the proper functioning of the national park and management of its resources, it is crucial to investigate all forms of tourist traffic occurring in its area [15–18,57,58].

The main aim of this article was to present the tourist attractiveness of Gorcza ´nski National Park in the opinion of its weekend visitors. For this purpose, a questionnaire was carried out in three selected periods between 2016 and 2017; responses were collected from 244 properly surveyed tourists who visited the park over a weekend (details are described in the Section 3). Since the publication focuses primarily on the geotourist aspect and its evaluation among the park visitors, geotourist values were chosen to be presented first, starting with a brief introduction to the Gorce Mountains geology. Next, we describe the elements of infrastructure that simultaneously constitute inanimate nature resources in a linear form, such as tourist trails and didactic routes. The analysis of the opinions of weekend tourists visiting the park is preceded by a short presentation of the volume of tourist traffic recorded in the second decade of the 21st century. Its increase in recent years clearly shows the potential of Gorcza ´nski National Park, one of the most interesting mountain national parks of Poland, as a tourist destination. Its location near one of the country's major agglomerations, Kraków, as well as the Silesian conurbation, makes it an almost natural weekend tourism destination in this part of the country, and thus an interesting field of research on the geotourist attractiveness of this protected area in the opinion of both ordinary tourists and those with the "geo-" prefix.

#### **2. Study Area**

#### *2.1. Gorcza ´nski National Park Location*

Gorcza ´nski National Park is entirely located in the Gorce Mts., surrounded by the Beskid Wyspowy Mts. in the north, the Beskid S ˛adecki Mts. in the east, the Orawa-Nowy Targ Basin in the south, and the Orawa-Jordanów Foothills in the west. The park occupies 14% of the range area, which is about 500 km<sup>2</sup> [59].

The Gorce Mts. is a homogeneous mountain range belonging to the intermediate mountains. The landscape of Gorcza ´nski National Park involves primarily forests and glades. Slightly more than half of the range rises above 600 m a.s.l. Relatively few summits exceed 1000 m a.s.l. The highest peaks include Turbacz (1310 m a.s.l.), Jaworzyna Kamienicka (1228 m a.s.l.), and Kiczora (1282 m a.s.l.). The structure of the Gorce Mts. is distinctive. Six ridges, separated by V-shaped river valleys, spread out from Turbacz in different directions. The two longest ridges spread out in opposite directions: south-east and north-west.

The park was founded on 1 January 1981 by the Ordinance of the Council of Ministers of 8 August 1980 on the creation of Gorcza ´nski National Park [60]. In 1988, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry, and Food Economics incorporated 805 ha of farmland forests. The park involves enclaves: the eastern slopes of Bardo; northern slopes of Jaworzyna Ponicka; K ˛edzierski forest; Mechów forest; and Morgi Czajkowskie forests. The area of the park currently covers 7019 ha [61] (Figure 1).

**Figure 1.** Gorcza ´nski National Park.

#### *2.2. Tourist Attractiveness of Gorcza ´nski National Park*

Tourist attractiveness refers to tourist resources, tourist infrastructure, and communication accessibility [62]. The main role in geotourism is undoubtedly played by the related values generating tourist traffic in specific regions. The Polish subject literature divides tourist resources into two main groups: natural and cultural [61–66]. These constitute a group of sightseeing values [67]. For the purposes of this research, the group of natural values is particularly important; they are a natural reservoir of geotourist values. It is worth emphasizing that not all elements of animated or inanimate nature can be regarded a tourist value. Only those that meet certain conditions may be included in this group:


A more detailed division of natural values introduces the following three main groups:


At this point, it is worthwhile to take a brief look at the potential of tourist resources of an inanimate nature in one of the most attractive mountain national parks of Poland: Gorcza ´nski National Park.

#### *2.3. Geology of Gorcza ´nski National Park*

The Gorce Mts. range is a part of the Outer Western Carpathians. The Gorce Mts. are built of flysch rocks of the Magura nappe—sandstones, conglomerates, and shales of the Early and Middle Eocene [68,69]. Structurally, the Magura nappe is the uppermost tectonic element of the Polish Outer Carpathian wedge [70]. Thick-bedded layers of sandstones sedimented in Palaeocene and Eocene (ca. 65–37.5 million years ago) constitute the dominant complex, with a thickness exceeding 2000 m. The central part of the mountain chain is mainly built of Magura sandstones and of conglomerates. These rocks build both the ridge parts of the Gorce Mts. and their highest peak, Turbacz (1310 m a.s.l.), and also form tors of original shapes. The border parts of Gorcza ´nski National Park are built of sandstones and shales, with numerous valleys, passes, and depressions resulting from erosion processes [71].

The unique geological character of the Gorce Mts. is typical, especially for its northern part, where Gorcza ´nski National Park was established. This is determined primarily by the variety and degree of exposure of the Magura nappe rocks occurring in the Gorce Mts. area. The unique geological character of the Gorce Mts. is typical especially for its northern part, where Gorcza ´nski National Park was established [72]. This is determined primarily by the variety and degree of exposure of the Magura nappe rocks occurring in the Gorce Mts. area (Figure 2).

**Figure 2.** Gorcza ´nski National Park geological map. Source: [72].

#### *2.4. Geotourist Values of the Gorce Mts*

On the basis of the description of geological scientific values of Gorcza ´nski National Park and its surroundings, as suggested by many authors [72,73], the geotourist assets of the indicated area can be divided into three main groups, i.e., tors, mineral and thermal waters, and rock exposures (both natural and artificial).

The tors, most common on the ridges or in the upper parts of the slopes, are extremely varied in terms of shape and size. They consist of thick-bedded sandstones and thin conglomerates. The genesis of tors, either single or in groups, often with accompanying chasms and caves, is associated with several types of natural processes, i.e., with landslide movements, weathering, erosion, and denudation. The northern slopes of the Kudło ´n chain are particularly rich in tors, with the most famous attraction being Kudło ´nski Baca. Zbójecka Jama by the Jaworzyna Kamienicka is considered to be the largest cave in the Gorce Mts. Pucułowski Stawek by the Wysznia glade, an example of a pond formed in a recess of a landslide niche, is an interesting geotourist asset.

The second group of geotourist values of the Gorce Mts. are mineral and thermal waters. Rabka and Szczawa are two health resorts proud of their mineral waters. Rabka (Figure 1) is known for its salt waters ([72] after [74]), including sodium chloride, bromide, iodide, and barium waters. Thermal water was found in deep drillings in Por˛eba Wielka and Rabka ([72] after [75]).

The rock exposures (both natural and artificial, e.g., quarries) are the third main type of Gorce Mts. assets significant from the point of view of geotourism. A very good degree of flysch rocks exposure, often in a continuous form, occurring especially in the northern part of the chain, mainly in riverbeds and at the banks of rivers and streams, is a distinctive element of the Gorce Mts.

#### *2.5. Other Natural Sightseeing Values (Figure 3)*

Sightseeing values important from the point of view of geotourism also include scenic viewpoints, as indicated in the literature. It should be stressed that it is not so much the place that is important here as the panorama that can be admired. Thus, it is a point value in the physical sense, but its essence is a fragment of the landscape which can be appreciated. It is a very significant value, especially for lovers of inanimate nature, who can contemplate and learn about the effects of geological and geomorphological processes on the macroscale.

A total of 24 scenic viewpoints were set up in the park. Their spatial distribution is shown in Figure 3. They are evenly arranged, with a slight concentration in the southern part, so that the tourist visiting the park has a full overview of the most attractive panoramas offered by the park.

**Figure 3.** Selected natural and cultural values and tourist infrastructure of Gorcza ´nski National Park.

#### *2.6. Accompanying Infrastructure*

The accompanying infrastructure includes all facilities, both tourist and paratourist, which facilitate or enable tourists to practise specific forms of tourism. In the case of protected areas, these are usually selected forms of active tourism and cognitive tourism. In this group, geotourism plays an increasingly important role year after year. Among the devices that are present in the tourist space of the park, there are resources important for practising educational tourism. The entire teaching and administrative base is listed in Table 1.


**Table 1.** Facilities of the accompanying base of Gorcza ´nski National Park for the needs of educational tourism.

Among other elements of the accompanying base, there are two ski lifts: the Tobołów cableway (a chairlift) and a surface lift at Koninki ski station. In addition, there are 10 forester's lodges in the park, three resting places (Obidowiec and camping fields Oberówka and Trusiówka), a roofed shelter on the route between Tobołczyk and Tobołów, and four car parks (Trusiówka, Potasznia, Koninki–Hucisko, and Parzygnatówka). Moreover, in the area of the park, sanitary facilities, information boards, and waste bins have been placed where tourist traffic is concentrated. There are also two GOPR (Mountain Rescue Service) buildings at Stare Wierchy and Tobołczyk.

#### *2.7. Hiking, Bike, and Horse Tourist Trails*

One of the elements of the accompanying base for transport accessibility within the region is tourist trails. There are hiking, bike, and horse trails (Figure 4). In the first group, there are 10 trails of varying degrees of difficulty, time to be devoted to its passage and qualities that are presented on the route. The time of passing, depending on the trail, is from one hour and a quarter to 7.5 h. The thematic scope of the trails is diverse. The blue trail coincides with the Papal Trail, which imitates the course of the favourite routes of the later Pope John Paul II, who often visited the park. The yellow trail, five hours long, passes through 10 glades, where there are huts associated with the pastoral economy of the region.

**Figure 4.** Hiking, bike, and horse trails in Gorcza ´nski National Park.

It is worth noting the black trail in the southern part of the park. The walk time is two hours and the theme is the value of the animated and inanimate nature of the park.

For those interested in geology and geomorphology, another black trail, in the northern part of the park, is important. The time of the trail is 4.5 h. On the steep slopes, there are numerous exposures of Carpathian flysch with visible layers of shales and sandstones. There are also several rock outcrops.

Another important geotourism point is the blue trail from the Trusiówka glade through the Kamienica valley to the Borek pass in the eastern part of the park. It will take about 3 h to get there. On the route, we can observe exposures of Carpathian flysch with visible layers of shales, sandstones, and conglomerates. They are a result of water erosion. The effects of the destructive activity of mountain streams can be observed here.

This type of trails is the park's specialty. Their characteristic feature is their low level of difficulty. The main recipients of the offer are families with children.

In total, the trails in the park have 74 km. Bike and horse trails are shorter. The total length of bike trails in the park is 53.5 km. The average length of a trail is 7.6 km, with the longest one—R3—being 11.3 km, and the shortest one—R5—being 3.3 km.

The six horse trails are 47.3 km long. The longest ones are K1—11.3 km and K2—11.4 km. The shortest is K6—only 3.3 km. It should be emphasized that almost 90% of tourists move around the park on foot.

#### *2.8. Didactic Routes*

The most important element, also exploited by geotourism, is thematic didactic routes, i.e., hiking trails marked out in a way to include as many objects important from the didactic point of view as possible. Significant components of this kind of routes are stopping points, here referred to as geotourist stops, which expose interesting geological and geomorphological assets. They are accompanied by information boards that present the assets and explain the associated phenomena and processes. There is a total of 10 didactic routes in the park (Figure 5). In almost every case, the leading theme is of an animated and inanimate nature. For two of them, the cultural heritage and history of the region are essential elements. The park authorities put emphasis on developing this offer, as education is one of their priority tasks.

**Figure 5.** Didactic routes of Gorcza ´nski National Park.

Although the educational offer is varied, it is mostly devoted to issues that refer to the animated nature. Despite that, important elements related to the geology and geomorphology of the park are not neglected. Only in the case of two routes, no inanimate nature didactic stop was proposed. In the case of the other routes, there are usually one or two stops, with over 11 learning stops on average (Table 2).


**Table 2.** Geotourist elements of the didactic routes in Gorcza ´nski National Park.

It should be emphasized that each of the didactic routes is equipped with a unified system of visual information and small tourist infrastructure of the park, stop posts, signposts and information boards. As intended by the creator, didactic routes are a tourist product allowing visitors to reach the most interesting places in the park.

#### *2.9. Tourist Tra*ffi*c in Gorcza ´nski National Park*

In the current decade, we can speak of an increase in tourist traffic in Gorcza ´nski National Park that moved from 60,000 visitors in 2010 up to 90,000 visitors in 2017 (Figure 6).

**Figure 6.** Number of tourists in Gorcza ´nski National Park in years 2010–2017. Source: [76–83].

Less than 170 km of trails are traversed by almost 100,000 people [83], which gives 13 people per hectare regarding park area and 533 people per kilometre regarding trails. This puts the park in the 15th place overall when taking into account the number of tourists per kilometre of a trail and the number of tourists per hectare of the park area.

The moderate tourist load of the park paradoxically increases its tourist attractiveness. A relatively small number of tourists (in 2017, the park was the 16th park in the ranking of the volume of tourist

traffic in the country, with the number of tourists 42 times lower than the record-breaking Tatrza ´nski National Park) significantly increases the comfort of a tourist holiday, regardless of its character as active or passive. This is also important because of the quality of the park's tourist attractions. With a few exceptions, national parks in Poland look for a sustainable approach between the duty of nature conservation, including inanimate nature, and opening up to the growing tourist traffic and the associated risks every year.

Each national park, also in Poland, is obliged to prepare and consequently implement a nature conservation plan in its area. The same is true for Gorcza ´nski National Park, which also implements a nature conservation plan, designed in 2018. The first step is to determine the type and nature of threats to inanimate nature resulting from human activity in the park area, including activities related to the growing tourist traffic every year.

#### *2.10. Threats to the Inanimate Nature Resulting from the Tourist Tra*ffi*c in Gorcza ´nski National Park*

The size of tourist traffic in valuable natural areas affects their quality and conservation status. This is a kind of paradox—the more valuable and attractive a natural area is in the opinion of tourists, the greater tourist traffic is observed, which translates into a greater threat to the balance in nature in the protected area. In the literature, a whole set of threats is repeatedly pointed out, of which managers in the protected area are aware. Noise, pollution, or anthropopressure are indicated among them [84]. Partyka [85] draws attention to the excessive attendance of visitors and the thickening of tourist trails in the most popular places, trampling wild paths, damaging root systems, trees, destroying vegetation and soil, noise, disturbing animals, causing fires, littering, changes in the landscape and microclimate, synanthropization of flora and fauna, and changes in the structure of biocenoses. Similarly, Baraniec [86] points to anthropogenic denudation, destruction in vegetation, or littering, which diminishes the aesthetic values of the park and has a negative impact on the animal world. Wieniawska [87] emphasizes the threat related to the development of infrastructure, especially skiing. Hiking, most popular in the summer in mountainous areas, destroys nature on tourist trails. Tourists can destroy the vegetation cover, create shortcuts between paths, destroy the surface within the paths, cause loose material movement, etc. [88].

The overwhelming majority of literature on the subject points to the threats of animated nature, assuming that elements of inanimate nature, as more resistant to the environment, are less threatened [86,88]. It is worth confronting this position with the opinion of institutions that are responsible for the management of protected areas, in this case, national parks.

In accordance with the requirements of the Act on Nature Conservation [89], the threats to the animated and inanimate nature in Gorcza ´nski National Park are defined in the conservation plan for the park, developed by the park management. In addition to the identification of threats, ways of eliminating or significantly reducing them are also indicated. The draft plan of 2018 [90] identifies four groups of threats:


The first group includes 17 types of risks. Erosion of internal roads, routes, and trails as a result of tourist traffic and log-rolling is the most important for inanimate nature in the light of the analysed document. Among the most endangered resources, the authors of the document include inanimate nature, namely soil and bedrock. The way to remedy the problem is, among other things, renovation of roads, trails, and routes, as well as educating tourists and local residents on how to move around the park, combined with tourist traffic control. Other problems are vandalism (littering the ground, burning bonfires, devastation of huts, etc.), forest damage, and poaching. Among the endangered park resources, there are forest ecosystems, selected animal species, cultural assets, and also inanimate

nature. One way to prevent potential harm is to educate the local community and tourists accordingly. Another internal threat is tourist traffic, gathering. Inanimate nature is less at risk, and appropriate channelling of this traffic (correction of trails in order to keep the tourists away from the immediate vicinity of assets) combined with education of the traffic participants is indicated as a means to achieve the goal. The last-named threat to inanimate nature, and especially to soils and rock exposures, is inappropriate repairs of internal roads (slope and valley roads), including bridges, culverts, and tourist infrastructure. The answer to the problem is to carry out anti-erosion protection, conduct road repairs with consultation with hydrologists and geomorphologists, and reduce the work in the vicinity of the stream beds to the necessary minimum.

Among the internal threats that are potentially dangerous to inanimate nature are illegal climbing onto rock outcrops, unauthorized cave penetration, and collecting rocks and minerals. As a remedy, it is suggested that the ban on both activities should be maintained, reinforced by an appropriate educational campaign. In the third group, the most important threat to inanimate nature is the loss of ecological connectivity of the park with the neighbouring areas through such activities as development of banks and regulation of water courses, and development of sports and recreation infrastructure. The way to remedy the problem is to monitor investment plans in the buffer zone of the park and to cooperate with local authorities, organizations, and tourist businesses on solutions limiting the unfavourable influence of sport and tourism on nature. No external potential threats are seen.

Thanks to proper management, the natural resources of Gorcza ´nski National Park, including geotourist ones, can be an important factor in attracting tourist traffic. The park authorities, trying to protect these resources in accordance with legal requirements, also by ensuring their proper accessibility, have an influence on how tourists assess the attractiveness of the park. It is important to see how the tourist potential of Gorcza ´nski National Park is evaluated by tourists who visit this mountain range as part of their weekend tourism and what the function is of the geotourist potential in this group of visitors.

#### **3. Materials and Methods**

The study on the tourist attractiveness of the park as an area conserving and presenting valuable natural resources, including those of inanimate nature, was carried out among 252 tourists visiting the park. The survey was conducted in three rounds in the 2016 and 2017 tourist season. In 2016, the survey was held during a so-called long weekend, when a weekend is accompanied by additional days off due to national holidays, as it was in the period of 29 April–3 May 2016; 104 questionnaires were then collected, 5 of which were rejected. At the turn of September and October (30 September–2 October) of 2016, despite good weather conditions, only 39 questionnaires were collected, with only 1 rejected. In 2017, tourists were surveyed in mid-April (12–14 April 2017), when the tourist season practically begins, traditionally marked by the appearance of the park's characteristic crocuses. At that time, 101 questionnaires were collected, while 2 were filled in incorrectly. In total, 252 questionnaires were collected (8 were rejected), so the survey was based on 244 correctly filled-in questionnaires. The main assumption was to determine the attractiveness of Gorcza ´nski National Park as a potentially important tourist destination for weekend tourism. This is due to the specific location of the park, about 70 km from the centre of Poland's second largest urban agglomeration, Kraków. It can therefore be assumed that because of the distance and relatively good communication—with national road No. 7, S7 express road, and voivodship road 986—the park is an attractive destination for tourists who wish to actively spend their weekend free time. That is why it was decided to conduct the research in a period traditionally referred to as a long weekend in Poland, when there is an accumulation of holidays: 1 and 3 May are public holidays. In 2016, it was Sunday and Tuesday. Practically then, the weekend tourists had time off from Friday evening 29 April 2016. It is already the full weekend season in the park. The next two research periods were the beginning of the park season, which coincided with the Easter period of 2017, and the end of the season—the weekend at the turn of September and October—when the weekend tourists can still count on good weather, as it was in 2017.

The questionnaire, as in other studies on the tourist attractiveness of protected areas, consisted of three main parts. The first one referred to the characteristics of the group of respondents and included standard questions relating to gender, age, education, and place of residence. It resulted in establishing a socio-demographic profile of tourists visiting Gorcza ´nski National Park. Then, the purpose of the visit was determined. In addition to the three most popular objectives proposed in the question, the participants could also indicate another objective if they did not declare any of those contained in the question. The next part focused on the evaluation of the park's tourist offer, which is one of the important ways of presenting natural resources, including geotourist ones, of the protected area. The third, final part was devoted to the general assessment of the tourist attractiveness of Gorcza ´nski National Park.

The group of the surveyed respondents comprised all the tourists who appeared on the trail, at the place where the survey was conducted, at the indicated time. The difficulty in determining a representative study sample was highlighted by many authors [10,91,92]. Therefore, we adopted the principle of surveying all tourists who appeared in the park at the time specified in the survey. We also decided to analyse all the questionnaires collected during holiday periods crucial for weekend tourism. The sample size does not differ considerably from that examined during similar studies devoted to the analysis of tourist traffic preferences and assessments of tourists visiting protected areas [10,93–97].

Answers to the survey questions were obtained with the face-to-face interview technique, which ensures a high level of correct replies [94].

The questions were designed carefully, to avoid potential inaccuracies and reduce the number of ambiguous answers. Some of them were closed questions, where the respondent could choose, depending on the question, one or two answers—as in the case of the question about the most attractive of the proposed values located on the tourist trails in the park. In the next group of questions, a 5-point Likert scale was applied. They concerned the respondents' opinion on particular trail elements. The tourists indicated their assessment ranging from "I strongly disagree" to "I strongly agree". The question summarizing the third part of the survey was an open one, so that the respondents could freely express their opinion on the attractiveness of the visited park.

#### **4. Results and Discussion**

#### *4.1. The Tourist Attractiveness of Gorcza ´nski National Park from the Opinion of Tourists*

One of the main objectives to establish national parks was nature conservation, intended to interact with the sustainable use of their natural resources for education, research, and recreation [98,99]. Recreational use of national parks is increasing all over the world [47,100–102]. It is therefore not surprising that the issue of tourism in protected areas, including parks, is an important research subject also in the context of tourist traffic [11,103,104]. The perception of protected areas attractiveness has been explored in many studies [8,92,105–108]. This is all the more significant as the vast majority of environmentally attractive areas are exposed to pressure from tourist traffic [47,109,110], which also impacts on the operation of national parks.

First, it is worth it to present a profile of the tourists visiting Gorcza ´nski National Park as it emerges from the information provided by the respondents themselves.

#### 4.1.1. Tourist Profile

Numerous publications list a number of different factors influencing tourism in protected areas. They point at the level of education, place of residence [8,108], satisfaction with the products or services offered [8,92], as well as specific values. The choice of destination is influenced by socio-demographic variables such as age, gender, place of residence, and level of education [21,24,111], as well as other aspects related to recreation [21,112–116].

This applies especially to tourists visiting protected areas [117,118]. Relationships between the examined factors are also indicated. Investigators sometimes demonstrate the correlation between the respondents' age and landscape perception: younger people turn out more sensitive to this element [113]. Other studies emphasize that young and well-educated tourists usually present more ecological attitudes [119–123]. Similar results were obtained in our study on the profile of tourists visiting Gorcza ´nski National Park.

The majority of the surveyed visitors to Gorcza ´nski National Park were young people aged 15–45 years. Children and visitors over 60 years of age were the least numerous (Figure 7).

Consequently, the park, located relatively close to a large Polish urban agglomeration (Kraków), is an important weekend destination for people of an age that favours an active form of recreation, and the distribution in the three age groups between 16 and 60 was relatively even (Figure 7). The attractiveness of a park as a place of active recreation is also commented on in other studies, which, besides parks' attractiveness resulting from accumulation of valuable natural assets, imply their perfect suitability to practise numerous activities [124,125].

**Figure 7.** Age structure of respondents.

As far as gender is concerned, the group of women was slightly more populous. Women prevailed in groups up to 25 years of age and in retirement age, preferring the walking trails offer. In the case of men, the park was most popular for weekends in the age groups of 26–45 and 46–60 years. Women show greater interest in understanding nature conservation [23,117] than the surveyed men visiting protected areas. Thus, the potentially greater representation of women among the visitors to Gorcza ´nski National Park may translate into a greater understanding of the activities aimed at protecting the park resources, also the ones that may to some extent limit the resources availability to visitors.

It is worth noting that the vast majority of tourists active in the park area were people with higher education. These were 137 people, or 56% of the surveyed population. Every third person had secondary education. Only 11.5% declared vocational education, while only 2.5% had primary education—six girls under 15 years of age. In the group of people with higher and secondary education, women prevailed (55%), while men more often had vocational education (60%) (Figure 8).

**Figure 8.** Education structure of respondents.

The results relating to the age or education of visitors to protected areas are in line with a broader trend observed in many national parks with reference to demographic factors [117,118]. Some investigators imply a higher sensitivity to landscape assets among younger tourists [113]; others observe more ecological attitudes in young and well-educated tourists [23,119–123]. Taking these relationships into account and analysing the data from Gorcza ´nski National Park, one can risk a thesis that with such a group of tourists, all actions aimed at the sustainable, pro-protective development of the region will be easier, as they will encounter a higher understanding among visitors.

#### 4.1.2. Region of Origin of the Respondents

In the context of the character of weekend tourist trips, the spatial distribution of places from where tourists came to visit Gorcza ´nski National Park appears interesting (Figure 9). Not surprisingly, the biggest share was held by people from the Lesser Poland province—the region where the park is located. Almost every third person came from this province (mainly from Kraków and smaller cities in the vicinity). Every fifth tourist arrived from the Silesia province, bordering on the Lesser Poland province. The distribution of the tourists' origin combined with their count indicates that the park, from the tourist's point of view, is a destination of regional importance.

**Figure 9.** Provinces of origin of respondents visiting Gorcza ´nski National Park.

The park attractiveness in the region in which it is located seems to be a common issue for many protected areas studied and described in the literature. Peripheral location together with the attractiveness of the natural values themselves, including geotourist ones, is regarded as an important factor inviting tourist traffic [126]. The relatively close location of the park also increases its attractiveness for weekend tourists and same-day visitors [125].

#### 4.1.3. Purpose of a Visit to Gorcza ´nski National Park

Motivations driving tourists to visit areas of natural attractiveness are an important subject of research [127–132]. Butler and Boyd [133] or McCool [134] are not the only ones to stress that the knowledge of tourists' preferences and the purpose of their visits is the foundation to create the tourist offer in protected areas. Wide knowledge of the opinions and preferences of tourists visiting protected areas translates significantly into efficient and coherent management of resources in these areas [135,136]. The research results that refer to the goals and motivations of tourists visiting Gorcza ´nski National Park seem interesting.

When asked about the purpose of the trip (Figure 10), the tourists indicated four main answers: a trip to the mountains, recreation, visiting family or friends, a different aim. For 66% of those surveyed, Gorcza ´nski National Park was the main tourist destination, while for the remaining 34% it was a secondary one.

**Figure 10.** Purpose of a visit to Gorcza ´nski National Park.

Although many reasons influence tourists' decisions to visit a protected area, some common points can be identified with other areas described in the literature. Tourists visiting protected areas, including national parks, arrive there to experience positive emotions [137–139]. When analysing the experience of a tourist visiting a park in more detail, one can indicate the categories of tourist experience proposed by Pine and Gilmore [140]. There is an "education" category among them, which includes tourists looking for new experiences by learning based on active participation [141]. This is perfectly suited by the linear tourist product, which will be mentioned below: didactic routes. In the case of protected areas, the "escapism" category is especially significant, referring to the tourist's escape from his daily routine combined with an attempt to learn a new self [130,142–145]. These experiences are usually associated with an active form of space exploration, such as cycling, horse-riding, etc., which is also emphasized by Gorcza ´nski National Park visitors. Another important fact is worth

noting: The experience of positive memories translates into a positive attitude of the tourist towards the visited region [137,146]. This also refers to protected areas.

The specificity of weekend tourism in Gorcza ´nski National Park is rather an individual formula of the trip. This is also true for research on a group of tourists visiting the park. Almost 9 out of 10 people (89%) came here alone (20%) or accompanied by their close family or friends (69%). This is a feature common to national parks visited by weekend tourists [25]. It is important to highlight the declarations of individual visitors, who stressed that they visited the park at any time of year.

4.1.4. Evaluation of Trails and Educational Offer of Gorcza ´nski National Park

Tourism should not be assumed to oppose nature conservation. It is worth emphasizing that the broadly understood development of tourism may translate into proper implementation of the area protection goals, including a very important educational goal [147,148].

Research on tourist traffic also affects the management of natural resources in protected areas, including national parks. The knowledge of tourists' preferences, motivations, and behaviours may influence the activities of the managing authorities when creating marketing strategies and specific tourist products offered in protected areas [130,145,149,150]. Examples include the didactic routes of Gorcza ´nski National Park.

A well-developed tourist product translates into increased attractiveness of the national park, especially among tourists interested in exploring the natural resources of the region [27,151].

The assessment is all the more important because it shows the natural resources in the park, including geotourist ones, as perceived by the surveyed tourists. The majority of tourists had no objections to the accessibility, safety, or comfort of the trails and presented a positive attitude toward the difficulty of the park trails, finding them rather easy. The tourists were not so unanimous in assessing the cleanliness of the trails: The majority thought that they were clean or rather clean, but almost every third tourist considered them not clean (Figure 11).

**Figure 11.** Evaluation of trails in Gorcza ´nski National Park.

The respondents were also asked about the attractiveness of particular trail elements. During the preliminary research, the most popular set of elements was determined. These were views/panoramas; water facilities, including streams and ponds; rocks and other geological features; as well as glades with elements of pastoral culture, i.e., huts. Tourists had the opportunity to indicate two of the proposed items that they considered the most attractive. A total of 352 responses were collected out of the possible 488. The panoramas received the biggest number of indications: 54%. The landscape of the protected area with its surroundings was important for tourists. It is not much of a surprise. Many publications point to the decisive role of landscape in the tourism of protected areas [152]. It is therefore not astonishing that knowledge of its reception is important for the proper management of this type of resources and plans for their maintenance and promotion [153]. The quality of the landscape is one of the most important assets of areas of high natural value [154]. This is important for many reasons. The landscape attractiveness can translate into the quality-of-life of the local community and income for the region as it contributes to the quality of the tourist experience [155]. It is important in this context to propose a linear product that would integrate the attractive points of the area visited [156]. One of the ideas are all trails based on a specific type of value, as in the case of didactic routes, discussed below.

Thanks to its location, Gorcza ´nski National Park offers one of the most beautiful panoramas, especially the view of the Tatra Mountains—the highest mountain range in Poland. Ranked next in terms of the number of indications were elements of landscape of inanimate nature connected with local culture: glades with huts, which are a hallmark of the park. The third place was taken by other elements of inanimate nature, directly related to the geotourist offer of the park—rocks and rock clusters (Figure 12). The importance of the park's geotourist resources for visitors is worth emphasizing at this point. Although the main protected element in the park is animated nature, the geotourist qualities that constitute inanimate nature resources are considered to be the most attractive to visitors.

**Figure 12.** The most attractive elements of trails of Gorcza ´nski National Park.

#### 4.1.5. Didactic Routes in the Opinion of Tourists

An important tool for the proper use of a national park values, including geotourist ones, is interpretation. It not only has an educational function, but also supports the protection and maintenance of park resources. After all, it is an important tool for managing the resources. A well applied interpretation may contribute to reducing the negative impact of tourist traffic on the park resources. One of the important channels of interpretation are markings, educational centres, or, which is important in the case of the examined Gorcza ´nski National Park, trails, as well as didactic routes [157]. Such an interpretation of a linear nature may help properly distribute the tourist traffic in the park area. It is also worth noting that interpretation facilitates tourists' involvement in the active exploration of the area [158]. Thanks to interpretation, apart from the very knowledge of resources, an understanding arises of the need for nature protection and appropriate behaviour in the natural environment. It also increases the level of tourist satisfaction with visiting the particular region and its resources. The same is true for Gorcza ´nski National Park. The type of interpretation that lies behind the didactic routes has been very positively evaluated.

A separate part of the survey was devoted to the evaluation of the educational offer of the park, with geotourist topics prominently present. The offer of didactic routes is the most popular form of education. When asked if they knew about it, the majority of the respondents gave negative answers, despite the park management efforts to promote this kind of education. The surveyed weekend tourists may not be familiar with the offer because it is addressed primarily to organized school groups at different levels of education. Those who knew the educational offer were most frequently familiar

with the route Park dworski hrabiów Wodzickich—Chabówka, where one of the 16 stops is dedicated to geotourism (geological structure: tectonic window), then Dolina potoku Turbacz (two geotourist stops), Wokół doliny Por˛eby, and Dolina Gorcowego Potoku (one geotourist stop).

The majority of people using the offer of the didactic routes had a positive attitude towards the infrastructure accompanying the routes and were satisfied with the number of information boards and their distribution within the park (Figure 13).

**Figure 13.** Didactic routes of Gorcza ´nski National Park in the opinion of tourists.

#### 4.1.6. General Assessment of Gorcza ´nski National Park

Finally, it is worthwhile to look at the problem of tourist satisfaction, which affects the overall assessment of the resources used by the tourist. This is an important issue: customer's satisfaction, its level, as well as knowledge about it are important for tourism management [159,160]. This applies, for example, to the loyalty of the tourist to the destination or the income derived from tourism in the region [161]. After all, it depends on the level of satisfaction whether a given region or product will be recommended to others [160]. Therefore, tourists' satisfaction related to the visited region is crucial for the tourism industry and its economic development [162,163]. The satisfaction level is a derivative of the level of the region tourist development [164]. This is important for protected areas, increasingly dependent on the development of sustainable tourism. A high level of satisfaction translates into a higher probability that the tourist will be more likely to return to a region that brings positive associations [165]. It is interesting to look at the evaluation of Gorcza ´nski National Park in this context.

The vast majority of respondents confirmed the validity of the authorities' decision to create a national park and the need for the conservation of animated and inanimate nature in the Gorce Mts., which would emphasize its uniqueness at the same time. The general impression about the tourist attractiveness of the park was very positive among the respondents (Figure 14).

**Figure 14.** Tourist attractiveness of the park in the opinion of tourists.

Usually, attractiveness results from the possibility to practise active recreation, from attractive landscapes, specific natural values, or a widely understood authentic nature, which can be found in protected areas [111,166]. The opportunity to relax is also important [167]. It is also emphasized that the tourists' perception of park attractiveness is typically affected by more than one factor. It is not different for Gorcza ´nski National Park.

Among the positive opinions indicated in the survey, the following advantages appeared most often: sights, panoramas, varied trails, tranquillity, low traffic, favourable density of the trails, and interesting cultural and natural assets. Among the negative ones there were mud, lack of signposting and land development, insufficient care for tidiness on trails, and little variety of views as compared with the respondents' previous experiences from other national parks.

In an open question, the surveyed tourists had the opportunity to freely express their opinion about the park. Not surprisingly, this part contained more negative opinions. People paid attention to the garbage left by tourists on the trails and suggested that the number of trash bins be increased. It is worth reminding that too many trash bins contradict the idea of the park. The management are trying to foster a conscious tourist who takes back with them whatever they brought to the park. People complained about cars and quads running around the park and the buffer zone. Many tourists pointed out the development of the park and its growing popularity. They regretted it because they valued peace and quiet away from a crowd of tourists, which is so characteristic of the most popular parks in Poland.

The above opinions may indicate many of the park's deficiencies, so it is worth emphasizing the answers to the question related to recommending the park to others. The majority would strongly recommend a visit to Gorcza ´nski National Park to their friends. Positive perceptions of the visited national park or protected area generally prevail over neutral or negative ones. This is still an indirect evaluation of the park by visitors.

#### **5. Conclusions**

Owing to its specificity, Gorcza ´nski National Park is particularly attractive for weekend tourists, with all the consequences. First of all, its location—in the vicinity of larger urban areas—makes it a natural destination for their residents who are looking for a place for active recreation. The area of the Gorce Mts. is exactly such a place. Just over 70 km away, there is a region with almost no urbanization, with tranquillity undisturbed by civilization, clean air, and a beautiful landscape. Moreover, described in the literature as a set of features necessary for recreation [65], the analysed region offers favourable recreation conditions, such as special scenic qualities of the landscape, favourable bio-climatic conditions, or convenient amenities for active recreation [67]. An additional advantage, whose importance cannot be overestimated, is that this is a protected area. It is very important for tourism. As a result, visitors may rest assured that the resource they use (the main attraction, which is well preserved nature) will remain unchanged for many years and decades. The sustainability of the assets significantly increases the attractiveness of a protected area, and a higher form of protection in a region makes it more attractive. In this case, it is a national park, which is the highest form of conservation, regulated by a separate legal act. As a result, the park is a natural destination for many tourists interested in various forms of enjoying nature, ranging from active forms of recreation, such as trekking, cycling, and horse riding, to geotourism, a form of educational and cognitive tourism popular for the previous three decades. In recent years, the park has gained attention owing to its geotourist potential. Currently, 70% of the didactic routes present important geotourist features of the mountains. As part of the accompanying infrastructure, the number of facilities has increased where didactic activities related to animated and inanimate nature characteristic of the park are performed. A large number of scenic viewpoints perfectly introduce the geological and geomorphological context of the area to park visitors. All this translates into a strongly positive opinion on the park's attractiveness. The vast majority of tourists expressed a positive opinion about the park as a place of excellent active recreation. They understood the need for nature conservation in this place and supported activities aimed at promoting nature resources and the ways in which the park management tried to achieve the goals. The geotourist aspect is important for weekend tourists. Those who came here for a short time appreciated the peace, quiet, and adequate distribution of tourist traffic, so there was no issue of a large number of tourists on trails. This is often mentioned as one of the main attractiveness factors. It is coupled with a reduction in the number of investments—the respondents preferred nature preserved in an unchanged form to the development of, for example, ski infrastructure, destroying the attractive inanimate nature. Only 2% of the study subjects regretted the lack of development of this type of infrastructure.

It is also worth pointing at the applicability of the conducted research. It can serve as a reference point for the activities of the authorities managing the park, responsible also for preparing an attractive offer for the tourist traffic.

Generally, the study results confirm the correct direction of development of the tourist offer proposed by the park: The offer of trails and didactic routes was positively received. However, attention was drawn to important details that should be taken into account in order to increase the comfort of tourists visiting the examined protected area. It is worth considering the voices of older participants in the tourist traffic; in their opinion, the trails are difficult. Among other things, mud and stones make it problematic for this group to move. Considering the opinion of the senior group when preparing the offer may increase the overall attractiveness of the park. This is all the more important because the elderly tourist market is becoming an increasingly important segment every year, which should be recognized by all creators of tourist products or managers of regional tourist resources. It is worth emphasizing the importance of inanimate nature for tourists visiting the park. Values of this type were assessed as very attractive, so they can and should constitute a foundation for extending the tourist offer of the park.

On the other hand, significant participation of young people is important and consistent with a wider trend. Young tourists seem natural allies of the park managers in shaping the tourist offer, where conservation of natural resources is a priority. They understand the need of nature conservation even at the expense of their own comfort.

An important conclusion of the research is the educational attractiveness of the geotourist assets of the park, expressed by the high evaluation of the didactic routes set out in its area. As indicated by weekend tourists, geotourism, in addition to its sightseeing advantages, has also a significant educational value.

In conclusion, Gorcza ´nski National Park turned out to be an area attractive for weekend tourists. It is an interesting destination in terms of natural resources, but also because of the form of nature conservation, which hopefully makes the resources, including geotourist ones, remain unchanged in their character for many more decades to come.

Finally, one should mention that the study limitations include the sample size. Although three different periods were chosen, which are generally popular among weekend tourists in Poland, the number of correct answers could have been higher. This is a recurring problem in field research. However, considering the fact that the study was survey-based, and that account was taken of the period during which the data were collected, one can assume that the results are representative. Weather conditions constituted another limitation: The timing of the surveys was set relatively early. The research was carried out in spite of the fact that weather conditions were not always favourable for weekend trips, which probably influenced the size of the studied group.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, K.W.; methodology, K.W., S.J.; validation, K.W.; formal analysis, K.W.; investigation, P.O., A.R.; resources, P.O., A.Z., S.J.; data curation, P.O., A.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, K.W.; writing—review and editing, P.O., A.R., S.J.; supervision, K.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors would like to thank Sabina Łanocha for her contribution to the research and article development.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**


© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

### *Article* **Regional Geotourist Resources—Assessment and Management (A Case Study in SE Poland)**

### **Wojciech Zgłobicki 1,\*, Sylwia Kukiełka <sup>1</sup> and Bogusława Baran-Zgłobicka <sup>2</sup>**


Received: 20 January 2020; Accepted: 17 February 2020; Published: 19 February 2020

**Abstract:** The appropriate identification of the geoheritage resources of a specific area is the sine qua non of the development of geotourism. The identification of tourists' perception of abiotic nature sites of high scientific value is also particularly important because it determines the possibility of using the potential of geosites. In the study, a detailed analysis was carried out of the assets of geological, geomorphological and hydrologic sites in the Central Roztocze region (SE Poland) comprising the central part of the proposed Geopark "Stone Forest in Roztocze". Data from the Polish Central Register of Geosites, the results of a geotourist assessment and questionnaire surveys were used in the analysis. These data indicate a high potential for geotourism development and consistency between scientific assessments and ratings from tourists. However, this potential is not used to a sufficient degree, while actions aimed at developing geotourism and establishing the Geopark are not appreciated by local authorities and institutions responsible for tourism development. The idea of geoparks and geotourism development is not supported by the State either, whether institutionally or financially. Based on the studies conducted, we propose practical measures that should be implemented to increase the use of the region's geotourist assets.

**Keywords:** geoheritage; geopark; geosites; regional development

#### **1. Introduction**

Geotourism is a form of on-site cognitive tourism focused on geological and geomorphological (landscape) assets [1,2]. It promotes visits to geosites and preservation of geodiversity [3]. Geoparks have a special role in the development of geotourism—"*geographical areas where geological heritage sites are part of a holistic concept of protection, education, and sustainable development*" [4]. The appropriate use of geoheritage resources of a particular area and the development of the geotourist function should be preceded by a diagnosis of the current state in this respect [5–7]. This enables the planning of the kind of measures aimed at transforming geoheritage resources into geotourist attractions. Such studies constitute an indispensable element of establishing geosites and geoparks. An assessment of geotourist assets can be carried out by means of an expert evaluation [8–12] or questionnaire surveys among tourists and residents [13–17]. Both methods of assessing geoheritage resources have their advantages and limitations. Questionnaire surveys seem to be particularly interesting, owing to the possibility of obtaining information directly from persons who are the actual recipients of a specific geotourist offer. Understanding the profiles, motivation and preferences of tourists is indicated as one of the most significant directions of geotourism studies [6].

The problem of Poland's geotourist assets attracts more and more attention in the scientific literature (e.g., References [18–24], and many others). Three national geoparks have been established, and designs of new ones are being prepared. The scientific basis for the development of geotourism is getting better and more complete. However, there is a lack of reliable, popular science information on the geotourist resources of the particular regions, lack of promotion, and a shortage of developed tourist products [11,24,25].

The primary objective of the study was to assess the geotourist resources of the Central Roztocze Region located in south-eastern Poland, for which the design of "The Stone Forest in Roztocze" Geopark was prepared [26]. Using two assessment methods made it possible to compare the perspectives of specialists (scientists) and users (tourists) on the assets of geoheritage sites. Analyses of this kind are carried out relatively rarely. Another objective of the study was to determine whether local authorities and institutions responsible for tourism development appreciate the existence of geotourist assets in this area, as well as possibilities of regional development related to the Geopark project. Our comprehensive studies enabled the identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the region, as well as actions that should be taken to make better use of its geotourist potential.

Until now, three areas in Poland received a national geopark certificate: The Polish part of the cross-border Geopark Łuk Mu˙zakowa (Muskau Arch Geopark) (2009), Geopark Góra Sw. Anny ´ (St. Anne's Mountain Geopark) (2010) and Geopark Karkonosze (Karkonosze Mountains Geopark) (2010). The certificates were issued by the Minister of the Environment, but after the establishment of the geoparks above, the State lost interest in this initiative. The Muskau Bend Geopark now has the status of a global UNESCO geopark, and the "Geopark Łuku Mu˙zakowa" association works in its territory (http://geopark.muzakowski.pl/). The legal status of geoparks in Poland is undefined: There are no formal grounds for the functioning and management of geoparks. There is no organisation or association dedicated to the development of geotourism on the national scale. Geoparks are isolated projects that currently receive no support from the State. The geopark area partially overlaps with the national park area (Karkonosze Mountains Geopark) or nature reserve area (St. Anne's Mountain Geopark). The protection of geoheritage assets in Poland is based on the protection of areas and objects: National parks, nature reserves, natural phenomena. In the case of a geopark, the location within a protected area with a strict conservation regime may be an obstacle to the geopark's development because the supremacy of protecting outstanding natural assets, including geodiversity precludes the full achievement of the goals for which geoparks are established. Only the cooperation of nature protection services, local authorities and tourist organisations can intensify the development of geotourism.

The study encompassed detailed investigations of the central part of the proposed geopark in Central Roztocze, characterised by a high intensity of tourist traffic and concentration of major geotourist attractions. Tourists are attracted mainly by the region's high diversity of landscapes. The landforms and elements of the geological structure of this meso-region become the destination for more and more tourists who begin to appreciate its geotourist assets. One can also observe an improvement in tourism infrastructure, which increases the accessibility of assets not only along general tourist trails, but also geotourist trails [27,28]. There are many indications that geotourism has a high potential for development but, for the time being, this potential is not fully used.

#### **2. Materials and Methods**

#### *2.1. Geoheritage Resources of Central Roztocze*

Roztocze is an elongated morphological ridge extending from the NW to the SE, between the Lublin Upland and the Volhynia–Podolia Upland in the north and north-east and the Sandomierz Basin in the south (Figure 1). It is a series of elevations reaching 300–400 m a.s.l., rising 100–150 m above the surrounding areas [26]. The morphological escarpments of Roztocze correspond to the fault lines separating it from the depressed neighbouring areas; hence, it has the character of a horst dissected by several displacements into numerous blocks [29]. The Roztocze ridge is composed of Upper Cretaceous opoka (silica-calcareous marine sedimentary rock), gaize (glauconitic sandstone) and marl that form a horizontally distributed, thick lithological complex [30].

Patches of younger Tertiary deposits lying on the Cretaceous rock include sandstone, conglomerates, *Serpula* and *Lithothamnium* limestone. Tertiary limestone overlying Upper Cretaceous rock was eroded, due to its low resistance to destructive factors. They survived only on residual hills. The surface deposits of Central Roztocze are primarily Quaternary sandy and silty deposits formed as a result of periglacial processes [29].

**Figure 1.** Location of the studied area in Central Europe, rectangle indicates the location of Figure 1.II; (**I**), SE Poland (**II**). Location of the studied geosites against: (**III**) Geomorphology of the Central Roztocze (**III**), (**IV**) Geological Map of Central Roztocze (based on [31]). (a) opoka, marl, limestone (Campanian), (b) limestone, chalk, opoka (Maastrichtian), (c) organogenic limestone (Miocene), (d) glacial till, sand and gravel (Pleistocene), (e) lacustrine sand and loam (Pleistocene), (f) fluvial sand, gravel and loam (Pleistocene), (g) loess (Pleistocene), (h) aeolian sand (Pleistocene), (i) fluvial sand, gravel and alluvial deposits (Holocene), (j) border of the proposed Geopark. 1—Nad Tanwi ˛a nature reserve, 2—Waterfall on the Jele ´n river, 3—Quarry in Nowiny, 4—Sopot river gap valley in the Czartowe Pole nature reserve, 5—Quarry in Józefów, 6—Szum river gap valley, 7—"Piekiełko" rock forms, 8—Underground quarry in Senderki, 9—Wapielnia Hill, 10—Quarry in Krasnobród.

Flat plateaus built of Cretaceous opoka and dissected by vast valleys are the main landform. Limestone residual hills tower above them, Wapielnia being the highest (386.2 m a.s.l.). In the south, Central Roztocze is delimited by a distinct escarpment zone consisting of several morphological elements parallel to each other. In the west, it is composed of a chain of hills formed by Tertiary rocks. The land relief features deep and narrow gap valleys of the Sopot, Tanew and Szum rivers. Series of cascades in Cretaceous or Tertiary rocks are visible in the river channels [32].

The proposed Geopark "Stone Forest in Roztocze" is 65 km long (NW-SE) and 2–18 km wide, covering an area of about 640 km2. It encompasses a considerable piece of the western part of Eastern Roztocze, the southern piece of Central Roztocze (its escarpment zone), and a small piece of Western Roztocze. The name of the Geopark is related to the pieces of fossil trunks and branches of *Taxodioxylon taxodii* Gothan occurring in this area [26]. Within the proposed geopark, about 150 geosites that can form the basis of geotourism development were indicated, including 85 located within Central Roztocze (the central part of the Geopark). Most of the geosites in this area are geological outcrops and exposures (40 sites), water sites, i.e., springs, waterfalls and lakes (23), geomorphological sites (16), and sites related to cultural heritage (6). Below is a description of the most important geosites of the proposed Geopark, located within parts of Central Roztocze intensively visited by tourists (Figure 2). Seven of them are located within the Central Roztocze Geotourist Trail [33]. The waterfall on the Jele ´n river, the Szum river gap valley, and "Piekiełko" rock forms are situated off the trail.

Nad Tanwi ˛a nature reserve (1)—Numerous cascades forming small waterfalls are visible in the gap valley of the Tanew river. The biggest waterfalls reach a height of 1.2 m. The formation of the cascades is linked to the vertical uplifting movements of Roztocze occurring since the Neogene until the present [32]. The most noteworthy geotourist assets of the nature reserve include the deeply incised valley of the Tanew river, the cascades revealing the geological structure of the area, the meandering river channel, and numerous outcrops of Upper Cretaceous, Miocene and Holocene rocks [21].

Waterfall on the Jele ´n river (2)—The highest waterfall in Roztocze (1.5 m) formed on a cascade in the Jele ´n river channel built of Cretaceous gaize.

Quarry in Nowiny (3)—Cretaceous gaize covered by Miocene limestone can be observed in this inoperative quarry. The quarry walls reach the height of 12 m. Outcrops of Upper Badenian deposits—calcarenite—occur in the walls. Miocene limestone was quarried here for many years. The site is located in the vicinity of two tourist trails [33].

Sopot river gap valley in the Czartowe Pole nature reserve (4)—A unique geotourist asset in the nature reserve is the deeply incised valley featuring cascades forming riffles between 25 and 90 cm high (Figure 2a). They formed on layers of Miocene limestone [33]. An educational path was designated along the river.

Quarry in Józefów (5)—It is one of the few where it is possible to admire the sedimentary features of the Miocene deposits. The outcrops show organogenic limestone, mainly from algae, along with silty deposits. The quarry walls are up to 15 m tall. This is the biggest quarry in Central Roztocze, and the ongoing quarrying activity is very limited (Figure 2b). A 19-metre observation tower was built at the quarry, offering views of the entire site and the surrounding landscape [33].

Szum river gap valley (6)—The river flows across the escarpment zone of Roztocze, along a winding, narrow and deeply incised valley. The steep slopes of the valley formed in Miocene limestone, quartz sand and Cretaceous gaize. Riffles and small cascades formed along a 300-metre stretch of the river, within gaize outcrops. The relatively steep gradient of the channel results in fast flow rates leading to the formation of cascades. Eleven waterfalls, up to 0.5 m high, can be found here [33].

"Piekiełko" rock forms (7)—The hill is built of organogenic limestone and Badenian sandy limestone. Several dozen rock forms were created by weathering and mass movements. The largest ones are two "towers", 4.5–5 m tall. Alongside large rocks, there are also smaller forms: Rock ledges, pulpits and ridges [34]. A waymarked educational path with interpretation panels about the origins of the rocks leads to the nature reserve.

Underground quarry in Senderki (8)—The underground galleries, 1 to 1.5 m high were built in order to obtain millstones. At present, six openings lead to the excavation galleries. Miocene rock occurs here in the form of layers of organogenic limestone, sandy limestone, sandstone and sand. Inoperative quarries, depressions and waste heaps can be seen on the surface. Although the underground quarry is not accessible to visitors, an educational path enables the observation of the surface traces of quarrying activity [35].

Wapielnia Hill (9) is a residual hill (subjected to denudation), built of rocks that were uplifted by about 70 m during the Alpine tectonic movements. Outcrops of reef limestone and *Lithothamnium* -*Bryozoa* limestone constituting various rock forms occur at the top of the hill. The limestone obtained here was used in industry and local construction work [21].

**Figure 2.** There are two general types of geosites of planned Geopark: River channels with small waterfalls (**a**) and quarries (**b**). (**a**) Sopot river gap valley in Czartowe Pole nature reserve (**b**) Quarry in Józefów.

Quarry in Krasnobród (10)—Upper Cretaceous opoka was quarried here. The main ingredients of opoka are calcium carbonate and silica formed mainly by various organisms, i.e., *Porifera*, *Bryozoa*, *Bivalvia*, *Echinoidea*, coccoliths. A small number of fossils can still be seen in the outcrops. The wall of the quarry is about 150 m long and 25 m tall. An observation tower stands at the top of the quarry wall [33].

#### *2.2. Methods*

In the assessment of the geotourist assets of Central Roztocze, a four-stage procedure was adopted. First, the results of the assessment of the scientific, educational and tourist value of the sites located in the region and included in the Polish Central Register of Geosites were analysed (http://geoportal.pgi.gov.pl/portal/page/portal/geostanowiska/). Data concerning the sites located in Central Roztocze were introduced into the register as part of the preparation of the geopark plan. The assessment in the Register is quite subjective because it is not based on specific formal criteria. However, it offers a general image of the value of the sites based on the assessment of experts knowing the region and its geoheritage features. Among the highest rated geosites, ten different sites were selected for further assessment (four river valleys with waterfalls, three quarries, one underground mine and two hills). At the same time, they are sites frequently visited by tourists, widely recognized as the region's largest natural tourist attractions. A detailed assessment of their geotourist assets was then carried out by means of a method developed by the authors (second stage). The attractiveness of the same geosites was also assessed based on the survey of tourists visiting Central Roztocze (four stage). The next step consisted of analyzing strategic documents prepared at various levels of administration—from province to district level—in terms of the presence of information on the possibility of using geoheritage assets for tourism and regional development.

Many methods of assessing the geotourist assets of geoheritage components have been developed so far (see, for example, reviews by Kubaliková [9] and Brilha [12]). The assessment used in the present study includes the criteria used in most evaluations of this kind. It is a modification of the method proposed by Warowna et al. [11]. The assessment comprises 12 criteria belonging to four groups: (i) Scientific value, (ii) educational value, (iii) functional value, (iv) tourist value (Table 1). Each criterion was assessed according to a three-degree scale—(i) 0.0, (ii) 0.5, (iii) 1.0.


**Table 1.** Categories and geotourist value assessment criteria.

Besides a general assessment, various ranks were assigned to the individual criteria depending on the degree of the potential tourists' interest in the assets of geoheritage, according to the approach used in such assessments [24,36,37]. Two groups of tourists were distinguished-geotourists for whom the scientific and educational values of geosites are key when assessing sites, and tourists who pay more attention to tourist and functional values. The number of points obtained in the particular groups of criteria was then multiplied by the appropriate coefficients (Table 2).

**Table 2.** Ranks of criteria groups for different audiences (multiplication coefficient).


A survey questionnaire was the second tool used to obtain information from tourists. The respondents were selected randomly, and the answers were anonymous. The respondents were asked to complete a paper questionnaire with 14 questions concerning the geotourist assets of Central Roztocze (Appendix A). The survey was conducted in the following locations—in Zwierzyniec, Górecko Ko´scielne, Józefów and Krasnobród—in 2014 and 2015. The respondents came from seven

provinces: Lubelskie, Mazowieckie, Małopolskie, Sl ˛ ´ askie, Podkarpackie, Lubuskie and Swi ˛ ´ etokrzyskie. A total of 311 survey questionnaires were collected from tourists visiting the areas above.

#### **3. Results**

#### *3.1. Geotourist Values*

The synthetic evaluation of 85 geosites in Central Roztocze listed in the Polish Central Register of Geosites indicates that their value is moderate. It should be noted that each value in the Register (scientific, educational and tourist) is assigned a rating from 1 to 10. Among them, there are sites with a score of 10 points (maximum value) in the individual categories, as well as sites with a score of 3 or 4 points (Figure 3, Table 3). The average scores of the particular groups of values are as follows: (i) Scientific value—4.8; (ii) educational value—4.7; (iii) tourist value—4.9. The correlations (correlation coefficient) between the types of values are the following: Scientific and educational—0.78; scientific and tourist—0.31, educational and tourist—0.6. Geological sites received higher ratings of their scientific value, while geomorphological and hydrologic sites obtained higher scores for their educational and tourist value.

**Table 3.** Assessment of the value of 10 selected geosites in Central Roztocze according to data from the Polish Central Register of Geosites (maximum score—30).


**Figure 3.** Mean geotourist value rating for geosites in Central Roztocze based on the Polish Central Register of Geosites (rating scale from 1 to 10). A—geological sites (quarries, outcrops), B—geomorphological sites (sand dunes, gullies, hills), C—hydrologic sites (springs, peat bogs, waterfalls).

On average, the sites received 60% of the maximum score. It can be, thus, concluded that their geotourist value is moderately high (Table 4). The lowest score was given to the group of tourist values—30% of the maximum score. The highest mean scores were obtained by the following criteria: (i) Presence of tourist trails and educational paths, (ii) scientific knowledge, (iii) rarity, (iv) visibility. The lowest mean scores occurred in the case of the following criteria: (i) Presence of viewpoints, (ii) scenic beauty, (iii) additional biotic or cultural assets. Two quarries, in Józefów and Krasnobród, received the highest scores—87% and 83% of the maximum rating, respectively. The lowest rating was obtained by the underground quarry in Senderki and the Wapielnia Hill (33% and 41%, respectively).

The synthetic assessment indicates the occurrence of sites with high main values and moderate additional values (Figure 4). With regard to the main values, the highest score was achieved by the Nad Tanwi ˛a nature reserve, quarry in Józefów, Sopot river gap valley in the Czartowe Pole nature reserve, and "Piekiełko" rock forms. On the other hand, the quarries in Józefów and Krasnobród, as well as the Sopot river gap valley in the Czartowe Pole nature reserve, were rated as having the highest additional values.

The geoutourist value assessments taking into account various audience groups indicated relatively small differences (Table 5). The differences primarily concern the order of geosites with the highest score even though the top three sites are the same in the case of both assessments. The group of sites with the lowest score also contains the same geosites.


**Table 4.** Results of the own geotourist assessment of 10 selected geosites in Central Roztocze (maximum score—12).

**Table 5.** The variation of value assessment results among geotourists and tourists.


**Figure 4.** Total main (scientific and educational) and additional values (functional and tourists) for the 10 geosites. 1—Quarry in Józefów, 2—Quarry in Krasnobród, 3—Nad Tanwi ˛a nature reserve, 4—Sopot river gap valley in the Czartowe Pole nature reserve, 5—"Piekiełko" rock forms, 6—Quarry in Nowiny, 7—Szum river gap valley, 8—Waterfall on the Jele ´n river, 9—Wapielnia Hill, 10—Underground quarry in Senderki.

#### *3.2. Questionnaire Survey Results*

The possibility of direct contact with nature and of admiring the landscapes and diverse landforms was the main motivation for tourists to come to Central Roztocze (36%) (Figure 5a). Many respondents were also motivated by the possibility of active leisure (24%) and visiting interesting historic sites (20%). The respondents associated the region primarily with forests and fresh air (36%) and attractive landscapes (31%) (Figure 5b).

When rating the tourist attractiveness of a given site, area or phenomenon, 24% of the respondents take into account mainly aesthetic values, and 22%—good access to a given tourist attraction (Figure 6). 20% pay attention to a large number of tourist attractions in the vicinity. 16% of the respondents regard free admission or low cost of admission as very important.

The respondents looked for information about the geotourist assets of Central Roztocze mostly on the Internet (43%), in brochures, flyers, tourist guides (22%), and among family and friends (20%). Other sources of information were rarely used (Figure 7).

**Figure 5.** (**a**) Motivation for coming to Central Roztocze. A—nature tourism, B—active tourism, C—cultural tourism, D—family visit, E—event tourism, F—education. (**b**) The tourist assets of Central Roztocze. A—forests and fresh air, B—beautiful landscapes, C—active recreation, D—cultural values, E—agritourism, F—regional cuisine, G—tourist infrastructure.

**Figure 6.** Most significant values for tourists. A—aesthetic value, B—good access, C—many attractions in the vicinity, D—cost of entrance, E—location against tourist trails, F—scientific value.

**Figure 7.** Sources of information about the region and its tourist offer. A—Internet, B—booklets, leaflets, C—friends, family, D—tourist information, E—do not look for information, F—scientific publications.

The term "geotourism" is known to 43% of the respondents (Figure 8). However, when attempting to define geotourism, 64% of the tourists gave an incorrect answer. Geotourism was described as tourism focused on natural environment assets, including biotic and abiotic nature. Respondents usually associated geotourism with geography, which was influenced by the prefix geo-. About 36% of the respondents connected geotourism with geoheritage: "Geological tourism", "tourism related to visiting geological sites" (Table 6). Only 12% of the tourists were familiar with the term Geopark "Stone Forest in Roztocze". In this case, most of the respondents who declared their familiarity with the term provided a correct answer (Table 7).

**Figure 8.** The familiarity of tourists with the term "geotourism" (**A**), geopark "Stone Forest in Roztocze" (**B**).


**Table 6.** Selected definitions of the term "geotourism" according to respondents.

**Table 7.** Definitions of the "Stone Forest" Geopark according to the respondents.


A vast majority of the respondents correctly selected four geotourist assets from the prepared set: Fossils (74% of the respondents), quarries (68%), springs (64%), sand dunes (60%). It should be noted, however, that 46% of the respondents indicated sites belonging to the category of cultural and biotic assets (Figure 9). The respondents were allowed to choose more than one answer. The respondents mentioned the Kraków-Cz ˛estochowa Upland (Jura Krakowsko-Cz ˛estochowska) and Central Roztocze as areas of high geotourist value, and the Kaczawskie Mountains and the Suwałki Region as areas of the lowest geotourist value in Poland (Table 8).

The geotourist sites received a relatively high rating from the respondents (Table 9). In the assessment, each site was given a particular rating without any particular criteria (1—lowest rating, 5—highest rating). The five biggest attractions of Central Roztocze include two geotourist sites: Waterfalls on the Tanew river in the Nad Tanwi ˛a nature reserve (second place) and the gap valley of the Szum river (fifth place). The synthetic assessment for six geosites was lower than the mean. The lowest scores were received by the underground quarry in Senderki and rock forms in the "Piekiełko" nature reserve. No site received a score lower than 3.5 in a 5-degree scale (1—least attractive, 5—most

attractive). This means that, in the opinion of visitors, the geotourist assets of Central Roztocze can be regarded as attractive. Religious sites turned out to be the best rated attractions that surpassed 80% of all geotourist attractions: The church "On the Island" in Zwierzyniec, the church in Krasnobród, and Saint Roch's Chapel.

**Figure 9.** Kinds of geotourist assets (according to tourists). A—fossils, B—quarries, C—springs, D—dunes, E—botanical gardens, F—battlefields, G—manor houses, H—museums, I—festivals.

**Table 8.** Assessment of the geoutourist value of the selected regions of Poland.


**Table 9.** Respondents' assessment of the value of tourist sites (maximum value—5). Bolded names refer to the geosites studied in the paper.


#### **4. Discussion**

The questionnaire survey results indicate that a portion of tourists (less than 30%) visiting Central Roztocze can be regarded as more or less conscious geotourists. This is confirmed by their correct answers to questions concerning terms, such as geotourism, geotourist attractions, geotourist assessment of regions. At the same time, the assessment of the value of 10 selected geosites, carried out based on the survey results, is consistent with the results of geotourist assessment results—Polish Central Register of Geosites and the assessment developed by the authors. Particularly in the latter case, a large similarity of the assessments occurred, the correlation coefficient is 0.57 (Figure 10). Of course, one can hardly assume that the respondents' assessment was determined by the scientific value of the sites. However, the high synthetic assessment of their tourist value indicates that abiotic nature sites arouse the interest of visitors and can be the basis for the development of geotourism. The favourable perception of geoheritage sites by tourists and residents is of key importance from the perspective of spatial management and preservation of abiotic nature assets [17].

Questionnaire surveys also indicate that there is a group of tourists who do not regard geoheritage assets as important and interesting. Familiarity with the assessed sites plays a very significant role in this respect. A low rating of geosites very often results from the lack of information about them: The correlation coefficient between the assessment results and the respondents' lack of knowledge about geosites is 0.62. The underground quarry in Senderki is an example of such a site. One can suppose that the situation was similar in the case of the low score of geotourist assets of regions, such as the Kaczawskie Mountains or the Suwałki Region which are actually unique on a national scale in terms of geological structure (remnants of volcanic phenomena and forms) and geomorphology (young glacial landscape). The lack of knowledge about the studied geosites was indicated by 16 to 69% (average of 38%) of the respondents. It should be stressed, however, that the Kaczawskie Mountains and the Suwałki Region are among the most valuable and generally quite frequently visited areas (with few exceptions). In the case of other geosites in Central Roztocze, the level of knowledge about them is clearly lower. Zgłobicki, Baran-Zgłobicka [15] mentioned the significant variation of familiarity with valuable geotourist sites in the area of the potential Małopolska Vistula Gap Geopark.

**Figure 10.** Correlation between tourists' assessment (questionnaire survey) and author's geotourist assessment (data from Tables 4 and 9).

A high degree of consistency between assessments occurs in the case of the following geosites—Nad Tanwi ˛a nature reserve, Waterfall on the Jele ´n river, Sopot river gap valley in the Czartowe Pole nature reserve (Table 10). This applies both to sites of undoubtedly high scientific and tourist value (Nad Tanwi ˛a nature reserve, Sopot river gap valley in the Czartowe Pole nature reserve) and those of lower value. A moderate degree of consistency occurs for the Wapielnia Hill and the Quarry in Józefów. In the case of some sites, however, quite a considerable variation of assessments was found, namely—Underground quarry in Senderki, quarry in Nowiny, "Piekiełko" rock forms, Quarry in

Krasnobród. These differences result primarily from the tourists' poor familiarity with these sites despite their high scientific value.


**Table 10.** Comparison of the assessment results of selected geosites (their rank).

A—assessment based on the Polish Central Register of Geosites, B—geotourist assessment developed by the authors, C—tourists' assessment.

The gap valleys of the rivers in Central Roztocze are definitely popular and frequented by tourists. They are among the best rated geomorphological sites in the Lublin Region [15]. They arouse the interest among tourists in other regions of the world as well [29,38].

One of the reasons behind the high rating given by tourists to such geosites is their unquestionable visual (landscape) value. The significance of landscape beauty in the perception, and consequently, assessment of natural components and entire landscapes are indicated by the results of previous studies [17,39]. There is no doubt that geotourism can also develop based on the assets of the cultural landscape [40]. In this respect, a special role can be played by a large number of quarries in Central Roztocze [28,41,42]. Some of them are located close to important tourist localities, which is a significant advantage. In addition, their tourist and geotourist value are enhanced by the existence of observation towers [43]. The quarries also make it possible to actively learn about geological assets by observing and collecting rocks and fossils. It is particularly important from the perspective of the educational function of geosites, particularly with respect to children and youth [24]. Thus, it seems that the first promotional measures and development of geotourist products in Central Roztocze should be based on greater use of the selected quarries.

Very few people have heard about the proposed geopark, which is not surprising, given that this term is mostly used in the scientific literature. Studies conducted in Kielce (central Poland) at the turn of the 21st century show that even geography students were not familiar with this concept: Only 40% of them were able to provide a correct definition [14]. At the same time, actions aimed at establishing the geopark seem to be the only possible direction of geotourism development in this area. Therefore, as other authors indicate, it is necessary to conduct in-depth studies on the motivation of tourists visiting abiotic nature sites in Central Roztocze [16].

Tourists indicated certain deficiencies in the geotourism development of Central Roztocze. The most frequently mentioned issues include the lack or inadequate marking of tourist trails, the lack of or insufficiently detailed interpretation panels, poor condition of geotourist sites, lack of information and maps with marked geotourist sites (Table 11). According to tourists, the most important elements are absent, namely the marking of trails and interpretation panels. The only geotourist product developed so far is the Geotourist Trail of Central Roztocze [33], but, since the map of the trail is no longer available for purchase, its impact is limited. Seven among the 10 geosites under study are located on this trail and are "equipped" with geotourist interpretation panels (Figure 11). It seems, however, that these boards need some modification because their current content is sometimes too scientific.


**Table 11.** Tourism in the development strategies of districts in Central Roztocze.

**Figure 11.** Elements of tourist infrastructure. (**A**) Observation tower at the quarry in Józefów, (**B**) Walkways and panels along the educational path in the Czartowe Pole nature reserve.

The peripheral location of the studied area at the Polish-Ukrainian border and in relation to larger cities, is a challenge to the further development of tourism here. There is a lack of good roads to arrive in the area although their condition is improving (Figure 12).

**Figure 12.** The location of the studied geosites within the proposed geopark and the distance (travel time by car) from larger cities. (1) Main tourist localities, (2) cultural assets—museums, (3) health resorts, (4) geosites, (5) boundaries of the proposed geopark, (6) railway line, (7) main roads. Border of proposed Geopark after Kr ˛apiec et al. (2012) [26]

The way of presenting scientific knowledge to tourists is a key challenge to the development of geotourism [44,45]. Studies show that the tourists' knowledge about abiotic nature is distinctly more limited than in the case of the fauna and flora [46]. The same also applies to students of natural science study programmes [14,25]. It is necessary to prepare popular science products presenting geoheritage information in an accessible way. Even in the case of sites of outstanding value, such as the Giant's Causeway, tourists indicate the need for the improvement of interpretation panels with regard to format, size and content [46]. Questionnaire surveys conducted in the vicinity of the Iguazu Falls National Park show that about 70% of tourists do not read the information presented on the interpretation panels [43]. This may result from the inadequate location of the panels, the poor finishing

of the panels, or long-winded, hermetic language. On the other hand, individuals who *have* read the information presented on the panels give them a favourable rating. Well-prepared interpretation panels can, thus, be an important means for tourists to acquire knowledge about the geological and geomorphological assets of a given region.

In modern times, the Internet is the most common and the fastest source of information. The Polish Central Register of Geosites is the database providing information about the geological assets. However, this information is often incomplete, and the descriptions are not easily digestible for ordinary tourists. Efforts should be made to create and launch a geoportal—a database of natural assets (components of biotic and abiotic nature) at the regional level. It could be complemented by a mobile application providing the basic information on the region's natural environment, geosites and geotourist paths. However, Rozenkiewicz et al. [47] indicate that still in Central Europe "*information on geotourism resources available online is rather dispersed*".

All actions aimed at establishing geoparks and developing geotourism should be based on the involvement of local communities in the process [4]. Therefore, it is necessary to persuade residents that using landscape and preserving geoheritage assets for geotourism purposes generates social and economic benefits [48]. The influence of geoparks on local economy and regional development can occur by means of [49]: (i) Production of geoproducts (souvenirs, handicrafts, geofood), (ii) involving local business in geotourism marketing, (iii) development of recreational and sports activities related to geomorphology and geology (geokayaking, geohiking, climbing). In the case of Central Roztocze, Brzezi ´nska-Wójcik [27] mentions several decorative geoproducts, geofood, and themed towns associated with masonry that can help in the education, interpretation and promotion of geoheritage.

Based on examples from Iceland, Australia and Malaysia, Dowling [48] indicates that the immediate benefits that local communities can derive from the development of sustainable geotourism include increased opportunities for employment and generation of additional revenue. The bottom-up strategy is the most efficient for the promotion and development of geotourism, as well as actions aimed at establishing geoparks. This is exemplified by the activities of the Local Action Group *Land of Extinct Volcanoes*, encompassing 14 districts in SW Poland, aimed at promoting and educating the public about geoheritage assets [50]. Unfortunately, the attempts to establish such an organisation in Central Roztocze have not been successful so far.

The appropriate positioning of the preservation and tourist use of abiotic nature assets in the spatial planning and economic development system is of fundamental importance to the establishment of the Geopark and the development of geotourism, including its new forms. At the central planning level, in the 2030 National Spatial Development Concept [51], geoparks are merely mentioned in the spatial development vision as elements (nodes) of Poland's ecological network. In the draft National Raw Material Strategy [52], the establishment of geoparks is an action within the preservation of geodiversity.

At the regional level, in the Development Strategy for Lubelskie Province for the years 2014–2020 [53], and in the Spatial Development Plan for Lubelskie Province [54], the Central Roztocze meso-region is in a separate area of strategic intervention—area of the economic use of natural and cultural assets—in "*the Roztocze and Solska Forest functional area and areas with identified health resort assets."* The Strategy [53] defines the operational objective that encompasses the rational and effective use of natural environment resources for economic and recreational needs, while preserving and conserving the natural environment assets. The Plan [54] also sets out the framework for the conservation of abiotic nature, within which it proposes the establishment of geoparks and placing the most valuable assets of abiotic nature under the protection of the law. It indicates the proposed geopark "Stone Forest in Roztocze" as an area of geological heritage protection that should be used for the extensive promotion of geological sciences and propagation of the educational and tourist functions of geosites, while ensuring their effective protection. According to the Plan, nature and sightseeing tourism using the assets of abiotic nature requires special developmental stimuli.

The Programme for Tourism Development in Lubelskie Province until 2020 with a perspective until 2030 [55] mentions the problem of geotourism only when indicating the need for tailoring specialised products to specific audiences as part of nature tourism. The lack of a broader approach to geoparks and geotourism in a sectoral problem at the regional level does not create a climate favourable to their development. What is more, the Polish legal system does not provide any regulations concerning the formal establishment, rules of functioning and management of geoparks.

The situation is not much better at the local level. In the development strategies of local governments of six districts within which the sites included in the questionnaire surveys are located, only the abiotic resources and a very general framework of tourism development are presented to a varying extent (Table 11). In some cases, specific measures are indicated, but they do not apply directly to geotourism either. Issues related to tourism are covered most broadly in the Development Strategy of the Town and District of Krasnobród. Districts located in the functional area of Roztocze and Solska Forest [56] established a group called "Active Roztocze", for which a strategic territorial-functional plan was prepared up to the year 2023. The Geopark is indicated as a significant element of the integrated tourist product.

The area of the planned geopark has valuable abiotic nature assets but, at the same time, there are several unfavourable internal factors that pose a serious challenge to the development of geotourism (Table 12). Making the most of the existing potential can be facilitated or impeded by external determinants. Developmental stimuli arising from the formal and legal regulation of the functioning of geoparks, along with the institutional and financial support from central and regional governments, are particularly important.


**Table 12.** Development of geotourism in Central Roztocze—expert-based SWOT analysis.

Spatial planning does not offer any practical solutions with regard to the tourist use of geoparks because the planning of spatial development is merely a segment of spatial planning. The problems of the location and rules of the functioning of tourist infrastructure are discussed in planning documents on a par with problems related to housing and economy, social and technical infrastructure, environmental protection, etc. These problems as a whole are regulated by the Act on Spatial Planning

and Development [57]. At the same time, the formal links between strategic and spatial planning are quite loose at the local level. It should be stressed that the geoparks are not discussed in the current Act on Nature Conservation [58]. Since they do not exist in the legal system, including the laws on nature conservation, it is very difficult to take the initiative to establish and manage them. The lack of a formal framework makes it impossible to obtain organizational and financial support for the process of geopark creation. They are not included in the spatial planning system either. Only the proposed National Raw Materials Policy mentions the protection of geodiversity through the establishment of geoparks, among other measures. Geoparks were mentioned only in the bill on the Polish Geological Agency with the attached Council dealing with the certification of geoparks and responsible for information, education and promotion. At the same time, there are no regulations imposing an obligation to prepare master plans for geoparks.

Geotourism, as a form of the sustainable development of rural areas and using land resources of high natural value, requires the involvement of local small business, as well as appropriate instruments and management [48]. Local governments in Poland are not actively initiating the creation of geoparks or supporting the actions of local communities [59]. The lack of systemic regulation of the formal status and management rules of geoparks is currently the biggest challenge. The need to protect geoheritage, on the one hand, and appropriate tourist development, on the other, forces the conflict-free coexistence of various functions in the use of space. The proper functioning of geoparks, stimulating local development, requires appropriate provisions in strategy and planning documents at various levels of government. Particularly significant is the local level where, due to the autonomy of districts with regard to planning, it is necessary to introduce detailed provisions into planning documents. In the context of tourism (including geotourism) planning and management, it is necessary to develop strategies of tourism development. In the case of geoparks, it is indispensable to prepare professional master plans [60] that are the basis for the operation of managing bodies, typically established by way of agreements of local governments, and enable the practical implementation of the idea of a geopark as part of business [61]. A geopark should be managed by a clearly defined structure, operating in accordance with the provisions of the law that would also enable the preservation of the assets and sustainable development. The body managing a geopark could play an active role in the economic development of a region. It should cooperate with local businesses in order to promote and support the creation of new products associated with geological heritage [60–65].

#### **5. Conclusions**

Central Roztocze is one of the most important potential areas for the development of geotourism in south-eastern Poland. The relatively large tourist traffic offers opportunities for building an offer based on geoheritage assets. The number of geotourist products existing here is distinctly greater than in another potential geopark in the region—the Małopolska Vistula Gap.

Some tourists can be regarded as conscious geotourists, able to accurately identify the assets of abiotic nature and for whom these assets are an important factor in making the decision to visit an area. However, the knowledge of the idea of establishing the Geopark in Central and Eastern Roztocze is very poor, which results from the total lack of promotion of the idea.

The present study found a strong consistency between the respondents' assessments and geotourist assessments. What is particularly important, sites of significant scientific value received high ratings, which creates the possibility of using the educational potential of the geosites.

The fundamental challenge to the development of geotourism and establishment of the Geopark is the total lack of activity among local governments and local communities in this respect. They do not regard the Geopark and geotourism as an opportunity for the economic development of the area. This may result from a lack of familiarity with the idea of geoparks, which shows the need for research on the perception of geotourism among residents.

The main obstacle to the creation of geoparks and their inclusion in the economic development of the region through the development of geotourism is the lack of legal regulations concerning the rules of their functioning and management. These sites are not integrated into the system of economic and spatial development planning at a more detailed level. At the same time, the idea of geoparks will not be able to develop without the institutional and organizational support from the State.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, W.Z. and S.K.; methodology, W.Z. and S.K.; investigation, W.Z., S.K., B.B.-Z.; writing—original draft preparation, W.Z. and B.B.-Z.; writing—review and editing, W.Z. and B.B.-Z.; visualization, W.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors wish to thank the Editors and anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of this paper.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **Appendix A**

Geotourist values of Central Roztocze—questionnaire survey

*Faculty of Earth Sciences and Spatial Management, Maria Curie-Sklodowska University Al. Kra´snicka 2cd 20-718 Lublin*

The aim of the study is to gather information on the motivation of visitors to Central Roztocze and to determine geotouristic values of the region. The survey is anonymous, and the information collected will be for scientific purposes only.

#### **1. Which of the above motives prompted or will lead you to come to Central Roztocze?**

*Please select, at most, two answers*


#### **2. What do you associate with Central Roztocze most?**

*Please select, at most, two answers*


#### **3. What do you pay attention to when assessing the tourist attractiveness of a given object, area or phenomenon?**

*Please select, at most, three answers*


#### **4. Where are you looking for or would you like to find information about the geotouristic values of Central Roztocze?**



#### **11. How do you assess the attractiveness of individual tourist attractions in Central Roztocze?**

1—no attractive 5—very attractive *Please mark only one answer per line*


#### **12. Please indicate deficiencies in the geotourism development of Central Roztocze**

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

#### **13. Age**


#### **14. Education**


#### **15. Place of stay (province)**

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

Thank you for completing the survey! -

#### **References**


© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

MDPI St. Alban-Anlage 66 4052 Basel Switzerland Tel. +41 61 683 77 34 Fax +41 61 302 89 18 www.mdpi.com

*Resources* Editorial Office E-mail: resources@mdpi.com www.mdpi.com/journal/resources

MDPI St. Alban-Anlage 66 4052 Basel Switzerland

Tel: +41 61 683 77 34 Fax: +41 61 302 89 18