Results and Significance of the Geological Heritage Workshop held on March 14, 2024

‘Geoheritage’ refers to important geological heritage having significant scientific, educational, aesthetical, cultural and economic values for human. It helps in understanding the past civilizations and progressive development from ancient times to present. Hence, such heritage sites are need to be preserved, conserved and renovated for present as well as future generations.The International Commission on Geoheritage (ICG) is a part of International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) which aims at recognition of geological heritage sites, geo-collections and heritage stones for their database generation and maintenance, followed by promotional and educational purposes. ICG comprises of three subcommisions among which sub commission on heritage stones deals with identification and characterization of natural stones used in historically significant buildings and monuments, its historical quarries and recognition of stone-built monuments.From India, several heritage stones such as Makrana Marble, Jaisalmer limestone, Jodhpur sandstone and many more have been reported. These stones have been used in establishment of historically significant monuments such as Mehrangarh fort, Taj Mahal, Umaid bhawan etc. However, no attention has been given to the historically important monuments in northern India. This study is aimed at highlighting monuments in Bangana area of district Una in Himachal Pradesh.Several historical forts and temples, such as Solasinghi Fort, Solasinghi Temple, Chaumukha Temple, Shiv Temple Jarola, and Baba Balak Nath Temple are present in Bangana area. Among them, Solasinghi fort is an important monument built during the 19th century. It is made up of plastered sandstone bricks. Similar sandstone blocks are used for building other monuments in the area. The sandstone belongs to the middle Shiwalik. It is a grey coloured fine-grained sandstone and is hard and compact. Mica flakes are easily visible.The sandstone mainly consists of mainly quartz, feldspar, muscovite and rock fragments. Quartz grains are angular to sub-rounded with either irregular or smooth grain boundaries. Silica and microscopic biotite flakes make up the matrix, which makes up around 5–10% of the volume of the rock. Silica cement is present. Even though the stone is not aesthetically appealing but due to its local availability and durability, it was used for the building these monuments.Currently, these monuments are in a dilapidated state. They have been left abandoned and are adversely affected due to natural and anthropogenic activities. Conservation of these monuments and historical buildings is a matter of serious concern. No attention is given to these monuments and buildings by the authorities for the conservation of these heritage sites.This work mainly focuses on the evaluation of the present condition and preservation of these heritage monuments. The study will provide some suggestive measures for the protection of these heritage structures using modern techniques and machinery, keeping in mind the building material to maintain the originality.Keywords: Heritage Monuments, Conservation, Geoheritage

The U.S. National Academy of Sciences' National Committee on Geological Sciences (USNC/GS) represents the United States in the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) and provides direction and advice on geological science issues of national importance. In 2016, the USNC/GS established the U.S. Geoheritage and Geoparks Advisory Group to facilitate communication about geoheritage issues at local, state, national, and international levels. (www.americasgeoheritage.com) Key goals of the advisory group include working with aspiring communities interested in developing their geological heritage; hosting an invitational U.S. geoheritage workshop in 2020; and collaborating with partners, including the Geological Society of America, the Association of American State Geologists, and the American Geosciences Institute, to develop programs that highlight individual states’ geological diversity. Goals of these partnerships include: Develop common terminology to describe geological heritage features and landscapes. Inventory sites and landmarks of geological significance (a geosite inventory). Assist communities in organizing their geoheritage into guides, trails, parks, etc. Link to other state agencies (tourism, education, parks) to promote the benefits of celebrating a state’s geological heritage. A review of state geological survey websites shows a wide variety in presentation and organization, but most have sections that include education, publications, mapping, geohazards, and mineral/energy/water resources. There is also a wide variety of educational information available on the state survey websites. Most present formal geo-education curricular information geared towards K-12 (“Educator Resources”) as well as basic scientific information geared towards the general public. Most geological survey websites also feature in-depth information about that state’s distinctive natural features and geological highlights. These presentations vary widely in style, level of detail, and organization. Some notable examples include: Utah - the Calendar of Utah Geology; the Texas GeoSign Project; the New Mexico: Virtual Geologic Tour; the Pennsylvania: 30 Outstanding Geologic Features (ranked & geographically organized); and the Indiana publication: ABCs of Indiana Geology

A Global Geopark is a unified area with geological heritage of international significancewith a strong management structure and sustainable economic development strategy already in place. Global Geoparks use the local and regional geological heritage with its strong relation to the technical and cultural heritage in the area to promote awareness of key issues facing society; to educate visitors and local communities; and to link these local and regionalpeculiarities to the broader aspects of the area’s natural and cultural environment in the context of the dynamic planet we all live on. Global Geoparks promote awareness of geological hazards, help prepare disaster mitigation strategies among local communities, educate on current climate change, promote best practise approach to utilising renewable energy and employing the best standards of “green tourism”, inform about the sustainable use and need for natural resources, whether they are mined, quarried or harnessed from the surrounding environment, promote respect for the environment and the integrity of the landscape. The Global Geoparks Network (GGN), supported by UNESCO, provides a global platform of active cooperation between experts and practitioners in geological heritage. Under the auspicesof UNESCO and through regional network partners, significant national geological sites gain worldwide recognition and visibility through tourism as well as best practices within the scientific and education community.Within a designated Global Geopark area, models of best practice are developed, setting high quality standards in all aspects of their operation.The GGN continues to expand each year, in May 2015 comprising 111 Global Geoparks in 34 countries from five continents. The International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) is a partner with UNESCO and the GGN and assists in finding geoscientists – volunteerexperts in the fieldsrelevant to the aspiring Global Geopark applications – who are willing to evaluate the geological sections of each new Global Geopark application for their international significance. Given the fact that unique geological settings and their globally recognised importance are the foundation on which a Global Geopark is first established the evaluation of the geological section of a Global Geopark application follows high quality standards of and is of quintessential importance,a critical part of the Global Geopark evaluation process, and helps maintain the high global standards of the Global Geoparks Network. In 2014, 17 new applications were submitted to UNESCO and these were evaluated in the first half of 2015. The 2015 aspiring Geoparks were (in alphabetic order): Beaujolais (France), Belogradchik (Bolgaria), Celestienne, Lesse and Lomme(Belgium), Dunhuang (PR China), Golden Geopark of Lapland (Finland), Grevena Tethys (Greece), Imbabura (Ecuador), Izu Peninsula (Japan), Lochaber (Scotland), Mons (Belgium), Mount Apoi (Japan), Pollino (Italy), Shouf Jezzine (Lebanon), Sitia (Greece), Toba (Indonesia), Troodos (Cyprus), Zhijindong (PR China). The evaluators for these 17 aspiring Geoparks were (in alphabetic order): Michel BAKALOWICZ, S.K. BHUSHAN, Attilio BORIANI, Robert BUTLER, Jose-Pedro CALVO, Pedro CASTINERAS GARCIA, Patrick DE WEVER, Yildirim DILEK, Steve DRURY, Franz Wolfgang EDER, John HUGHES, Mike KATZ, Christian KOEBERL, Frederic LACOMBAT, Richard LANGFORD, Randy MILLER, Greg MOORE, Damian NANCE, Adriana NIZ, Yujiro OGAWA, Nazire OZGEN ERDEM, Annie RASSIOS, Corina RISSO, Matti SAARNISTO, Veli-Pekka SALONEN, Harold STOWELL, Michiel VAN DER MEULEN, Benjamin VAN WYK DE VRIES, Guido VENTURA, Pierre VERPAELST, Nadja ZUPAN HAJNA and those other geoscientists that helped in the process, but choose to remain anonymous.

In recent decades, the growing awareness and necessity of dealing with geodiversity and geoheritage has drawn the attention of the global geoscientific community to conserving and safeguarding it. As a result, the global initiatives, reinforced by the efforts of the regional and local geological communities, have led to a paradigm shift in how geodiversity (diverse geological elements) and geoheritage (geological heritage) are perceived. The efforts and actions of some nations in conserving geodiversity and geoheritage have been exemplary, while others are still in a nascent stage and a few still need to awaken. The concepts of geodiversity, geoparks, geoheritage, and geoconservation are the fruits of the efforts of many global and regional organizations. The collective efforts of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Global Geoparks Network (GGN), and the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) have brought the attention of the global geoscientific community, policymakers and governments of almost all nations to ponder the issues of geodiversity and geoheritage. These globally recognised organisations have been at the forefront and their initiatives have permitted the conservation of some significant geological heritage and have demonstrated that they can pave a new path for more sustainable development. These organisations have worked in tandem for the past few decades and have been successful in identifying and designating some of the outstanding and geologically significant sites/geosites as ‘Natural World Heritage Sites’, ‘UNESCO Global Geoparks’. The novel ideas and statutes defining global designation criteria and protocols by these organisations are there to enthuse and encourage earth scientists, policymakers, the public, and governments of all nations to frame their own national and local statutes for the identification and conservation of outstanding national geoheritage and to further integrate them with the international organisations for global designations.

Active or recently active volcanic areas present very visible and easy to understand phenomena for the broad population to appreciate as geological heritage. However, in a geologically stable country such as Ireland, with no volcanism evident for tens of millions of years and few clearly visible traces of volcanoes of a ‘school textbook’ nature, the significance of ancient volcanic remains is much harder to explain or to present to visitors to geological heritage sites. This paper explores the wide range of evidence of ancient volcanic activity within recognised geological heritage sites across Ireland, both in County Geological Sites and in the UNESCO Global Geoparks. Some of the stories that can be told using the available evidence are documented, including some of the current efforts to present Ireland’s volcanic geological heritage. The stories are told within the context of the geological and volcanic history of Ireland over the past 500 million years. As such, the promotion of geological heritage is at an early stage, and this contribution may provide inspiration or ideas for approaches to this problem for other countries or terrains with similar ancient volcanic rocks.

A geological definition of the Anthropocene, shorthand for humanity’s cumulative disruption of the Earth-Human Ecosystem, looms as the planet-and-people focused UN approaches its Summit of the Future in New York City on 22-23 September 2024. The International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) “aims to promote development of the Earth sciences through the support of broad-based scientific studies relevant to the entire Earth system”. With the UN recently declaring that the planet is in peril and in need of a rescue plan, Anthropocene considerations with a geoethical lens are urgently needed.Each potential new interval in the Geological Time Scale begins with a working group mandated by the International Stratigraphic Commission (ICS), in the case of the Anthropocene also by its Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS). The Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) was formed in 2009. In 2010, its first chair Jan Zalasiewicz with co-authors Mark Williams, Will Steffen and Paul Crutzen recognized that “the Anthropocene represents a new phase in both humankind and of the Earth, when natural forces and human forces become intertwined, so that the future of one determines the fate of the other”. In 2015, the AWG’s second and current chair Colin Waters with ten co-authors posed the question "Can nuclear weapons fallout mark the beginning of the Anthropocene Epoch?" in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. This was affirmed in 2019 and the AWG presented its recommendation to the SQS in early 2024. The remaining review and decision steps are the ICS and IUGS. Reflecting concerns of other geoscience scholars as well as of other professions and an anxious public, an opposing mindset advocates for an Anthropocene event that spans the cumulative and ongoing environmental impacts of Homo sapiens. It views Geological Time Scale protocols as unsuitable for archaeological and contemporary developments, regards unemotive references to humanity’s most abhorrent invention as distasteful, and visualizes the Anthropocene Event as valuably informing a new zeitgeist for our troubled world.In 1950 astronomer Fred Hoyle anticipated that humanity’s first view of the Earth from space would revolutionize the course of history. Insofar as a ‘giant leap of mankind’ did not result from NASA’s Apollo 1969 lunar mission with its estimated 600 million viewers, the Anthropocene Event fuels an opportunity for geoscience to inform a realistic outlook during NASA’s upcoming Artemis lunar mission. With unique knowledge of once pristine environments, current climate change and incipient sea level rise, ongoing biodiversity loss and ecosystem disruption, finite energy and mineral resources, the geoscience profession should arguably have already become a crucial asset in this troubled world.

Račiška Pečina, a limestone cave in the Classical karst in southwestern Slovenia, which belongs to the External Dinarides (Slovenian Cave Register No. 935; 45°30’12.10’’N; 14°09’00.83’’E; 609 m a.s.l.), has received international recognition for its exceptional sedimentary section. The cave’s sediments, which span 3.4 Ma, provide a continuous and detailed record of climate, environmental and paleomagnetic changes. This unique archive of the Earth’s history has earned Račiška Pečina a place among the “Second 100 IUGS Geological Heritage Sites”, an award announced by the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) at the 37th International Geological Congress in Busan, South Korea.

Currently, approximately 6000 mineral species have been identified, and every year, approximately 100 more are discovered. The discovery of a new mineral has a close relationship with geological heritage. It involves the definition of both the type mineral (the specimen from which the sample used for the description of the new mineral species was obtained) and the type locality (the location where the corresponding specimen was found). All type minerals constitute elements of movable geological heritage and must be kept in a museum or a reference research center. However, not all type localities are recognized as geological heritage sites (geosites), despite their connection to a heritage interest. This article discusses these different considerations regarding type minerals and type localities as geological heritage in a general context. In addition, the situation in the case of Spain is analyzed, which, for various reasons, can serve as a model at the international level. It is concluded that type localities should be considered part of the geological heritage, and that the number of type minerals is always greater than that of type localities.

Introduction. The article presents the results of an inventory of geological heritage sites in the Toratau geopark. An analysis of international experience in inventory geological heritage sites has been carried out. Criteria for assessing the scientific, educational, tourist significance, and vulnerability of geological heritage sites have been selected. Based on the analysis, the following principles for inventorying geological heritage sites in the Toratau geopark have been adopted: 1. To make effective decisions in managing geological heritage objects, expert assessment of their scientific, educational, touristic significance and vulnerability is necessary. 2. The use of a 5-point scale is promising. 3. Each evaluation criterion has its own degree of importance, so the introduction of weighting coefficients is necessary. The aim of the study is to inventory geological heritage sites of the Toratau geopark, assessing their scientific, educational, tourist significance and vulnerability. Materials and methods. Analysis of international best practice and own research allowed selection criteria for different types of significance. Three criteria were used for scientific significance, five for educational significance, nine for tourist significance, and four for the assessment of the need for conservation and vulnerability. Some criteria were used in the assessment of several types of significance. The assessment was carried out using a five-point system. For some criteria, previously developed methodologies (e.g. aesthetic evaluation) or geoinformation technologies were used. The overall assessment of all significance options can reach 100 points. Special coefficients were calculated to adjust the values. Passports are filled out for each object, and their analysis allows determining which geological objects of the geopark have greater significance. Results. Currently, sites actively visited in the geopark have the highest ratings. Scientific significance has high ratings mainly for geological sections. Educational significance correlates with scientific significance, but there are some discrepancies. For example, many hydrological and karst sites have a high rating of educational significance, unlike scientific significance. Most key sites of the geopark have relatively high touristic significance. However, geological sections have lower tourist significance on average, unlike hydrological and karst sites. It is important to note that most sites have relatively high vulnerability (less than 10 points). The analysis shows that creating a sustainable infrastructure (stairs, ramps, observation platforms) allows regulating number of tourists and ensuring the preservation of geological heritage sites. Discussion. The presented approach to the inventory of geological sites is in many ways similar to foreign practices. The analysis revealed objects with potential for scientific, educational, and touristic use. The proposed methodology has been developed taking into account the socio-economic and landscape features of the Toratau geopark. Conclusion. More and more regions in Russia strive to create geoparks. The inventory and detailed assessment of the geological heritage sites of an aspiring UNESCO Global Geopark is determined by Criterion 1 of UNESCO Global Geoparks. The methodology for inventory and assessment of geological heritage sites of the Toratau geopark used the experience of the UNESCO Global Geoparks network. Resume. This methodology was adapted to the natural conditions of the Toratau geopark territory but can also serve as a basis for similar inventories of other geoparks in the Russian Federation and Central Asia Countries.

The Geological Society of Australia Geological Heritage Standing Committee promotes the understanding and conservation of the geological heritage of Australia through identifying and documenting features or sites. This paper outlines the methodology, protocols and procedures for assigning or reviewing geological significance developed by the GSA (Victoria) Geological Heritage subcommittee.

The International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) is evaluating whether there are additional geoscientific activities that would be beneficial in helping mitigate the impacts of tsunami. Public concerns about poor decisions and inaction, and advances in computing power and data mining call for new scientific approaches. Three fundamental requirements for mitigating impacts of natural hazards are defined. These are: (1) improvement of process-oriented understanding, (2) adequate monitoring and optimal use of data, and (3) generation of advice based on scientific, technical and socio-economic expertise. International leadership/ coordination is also important. To increase the capacity to predict and mitigate the impacts of tsunami and other natural hazards a broad consensus is needed. The main needs include the integration of systematic geological inputs - identifying and studying paleo-tsunami deposits for all subduction zones; optimising coverage and coordination of geodetic and seismic monitoring networks; underpinning decision making at national and international scales by developing appropriate mechanisms for gathering, managing and communicating authoritative scientific and technical advice information; international leadership for coordination and authoritative statements of best approaches. All these suggestions are reflected in the Sendai Agreement, the collective views of the experts at the International Workshop on Natural Hazards, presented later in this volume.

The geological heritage protection and its development at home and abroad reflect the progress in the aspect from the single protection to the coordination between protection and exploitation. The geopark established by UNESCO has closely combined the protection of geological heritages with the promotion of sustainable development of local economy, which has become the best way to protect geological heritages. The geological heritages in Xinjiang, China, are characterized by their large quantity, rich variety and high grade. The complicated geologic-geomorphic environment in Xinjiang contributes to the creation of various geological heritage types and their spatial distribution, and at the same time makes them under control. The main types of the geological heritages in Xinjiang are the geologic-geomorphic landscapes and the water landscapes. The spatial distribution can be divided into five geological heritage districts: Altay, Junggar, Tianshan, Tarim and Kunlun-Altun, among which Tianshan and Kunlun-Altun are most important. Based on the first systematic investigation of the geological heritages in Xinjiang, it is confirmed that the insufficient coordination between protection and exploitation is the primary cause for the backward situation in the geological heritage protection. To solve the problem, this paper proposes 6 major protection steps-from determining the protection types, the protection forms, the protection modes, the protection grades, the protection sequences to determining the protection zones, brings forward the idea of optimal-selection which integrates geoparks with geological heritage protection areas and other protection areas as well as 5 corresponding modes, and makes a protection and exploitation reserve list for 209 important geological heritages in Xinjiang.

New evidence of highly-complex geological heritage in Iran: Miocene sections in the Zagros Fold-Thrust Belt

Beginning in 1966, research by the Geological Heritage Subcommittee of the South Australian Division of the Geological Society of Australia has identified over 450 geologically significant areas in the State, including those important or teaching and research. This work was partly funded from the National Estate Grants Program. In March 2008, Geological Monuments in South Australia, Parts 1–9 was published as a DVD in a joint project of the Geological Heritage Subcommittee and Primary Industries and Resources South Australia (now Department of State Development). Selection of sites for designation as places with geological heritage status was initially focussed on the settled areas of the State where threats from residential and other development were greatest. An objective assessment system was devised for Part 9 of this record to identify sites which best illustrated the geological features displayed in the remote and vast area of the South Australian portion of the Lake Eyre Drainage Basin. An initial review identified 96 sites with heritage potential. These were then assessed in terms of the presence or otherwise of seven criteria considered to be essential attributes for heritage status. Each of these potential sites was then ranked on a merit scale of the quality of each of the attributes present. A score of the percentage of the maximum points available at each site was calculated. Of the 96 potential sites assessed, 24 recorded a score of 67% or more, and the remainder scored well below this figure.

Banyu Ajlok is one of the tourist destinations in Purwodadi Village, Tirtuyudo District, Malang Regency. Banyu Anjlok is located in the southern mountainous area, this area shows the existence of ancient volcanic activity from the south of Java which causes Banyu to have a geodiversity that can be used as a geological heritage. The purpose of this study is to identify geodiversity in the Banyu plummeting area as the basis for geological-based tourism development. The methods used include geological surveys and assessments of geological values using the technical guidelines of the Geological Survey Center by the Geological Survey Center which include scientific values, educational values, tourism values and risk of degradation. The results showed that the lithology of Banyu plummeted including andesite, basalt, ryolite, andesite breccia, sandstone, grandiorit and plant fossils. In addition, geological structures that can be found are joints. The assessment results show a scientific value of 76.25%, an educational value of 75%, a tourism value of 66.25% and a risk of degradation of 235. Based on the results of the assessment, Banyu plummeting has potential as a geological heritage site in terms of geological diversity and risk of degradation.