Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Quaestiones Geographicae

The Journal of Adam Mickiewicz University

4 Issues per year


CiteScore 2016: 0.43

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.258
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.359

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2081-6383
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Secondary Geodiversity and its Potential for Urban Geotourism: A Case Study from Brno City, Czech Republic

Lucie Kubalíková / Karel Kirchner / Aleš Bajer
  • Department of Geology and Pedology, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Czech Republic
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2017-09-29 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/quageo-2017-0024

Abstract

Secondary geodiversity (represented by anthropogenic landforms, which can be considered a significant part of geoheritage of certain area) can be seen as an important resource for geotourism and geoeducational activities within urban areas. Brno city (Czech Republic) is rich in these landforms as well as numerous urban areas. Some of them (especially old quarries and underground spaces) are already used for recreation, tourism and leisure or they serve as excursion localities for the university students, some of them are unique from the geoscience point of view and they have also certain added values (historical, archaeological or ecological). However, in some cases, their potential is not fully recognised. The article describes the main anthropogenic landforms within Brno city and analyses their suitability for geotourism and geoeducational activities.

Keywords: geosites; geodiversity; anthropogenic landforms; recreation; geoeducation

References

  • Bajer A., 2012. Geologické vycházky okolím Brna (Geological walks around Brno). Rezekvítek Brno.Google Scholar

  • Bajer A., Kirchner K., Kubalíková L., 2015. Geodiversity values as a basis for geosite and geomorphosite assessment: a case study from Žďárské Vrchy Highland. In: Lněnička L. (ed.), Proceedings of 23rd Central European Conference: 56–69.Google Scholar

  • Chlupáč I., Jaeger H., Zikmundová J., 1972. The Silurian-Devonian boundary in the Barrandian, Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology 20(1): 104–174.Google Scholar

  • Cílek V., 2002. Geodiverzita – opomíjený aspekt ochrany přírody a krajiny (Geodiversity – a neglected aspect of nature and landscape conservation). Zprávy o geologických výzkumech v roce 2001: 13–15.Google Scholar

  • Coratza P., Giusti C., 2005. Methodological proposal for the assessment of the scientific quality of geomorphosites. Il Quaternario, Italian Journal of Quaternary Sciences 18(1): 305–313.Google Scholar

  • Czech Geological Survey, 2017a. Maps. Online: www.geology.cz/extranet/mapy (accessed 30 March 2017).

  • Czech Geological Survey, 2017b. Significant geological localities of the Czech Republic. Online: lokality.geology.cz (accessed 30 March 2017).

  • Demek J., Havlíček M., Kirchner K., Nehyba S., Lisá L., 2005. K rozšíření poznatků o kvartérních sedimentech na Červeném kopci v Brně (Distribution of Quaternary sediments on the Červený kopec (Red Hill) in Brno). In: Geomorfologický sborník. České Budějovice: Jihočeská univerzita v Českých Budějovicích, 2005: 159–163.Google Scholar

  • Demek J., Mackovčin P. (eds), 2014. Zeměpisný lexikon ČR. Hory a nížiny (Geographical lexicon. Mountains and lowlands). Agentura ochrany přírody a krajiny ČR, Brno, 607 p.Google Scholar

  • Dingwall P., 2005. Geological world heritage: a global framework. A Contribution to the Global Theme Study of World Heritage Natural Sites. IUCN, WCPA, UNESCO.Google Scholar

  • Dixon G., 1996. Geoconservation: An International Review and Strategy for Tasmania. Occasional Paper 35, Parks & Wildlife Service, Tasmania, 101 p.Google Scholar

  • Dowling R.K., 2011. Geotourism’s Global Growth. Geoheritage 3(1): 1–13.Google Scholar

  • Dowling R.K., Newsome D. (eds), 2010. Geotourism. The tourism of geology and landscape. Goodfellow Publishers, Oxford, 246 p.Google Scholar

  • Eberhard R. (ed.), 1997. Pattern and Process: Towards a Regional Approach to National Estate Assessment of Geodiversity. Technical Series No. 2, Australian Heritage Commission and Environment Forest Taskforce, Environment Australia, Canberra.Google Scholar

  • Gray M., 2013. Geodiversity: Valuing and Conserving Abiotic Nature. Wiley Blackwell, Chichester, 495 p.Google Scholar

  • Jihomoravský kraj, 2010. Koncepce EVVO Jihomoravského kraje na období 2011–2020 (Conception of the environmental education for the South Moravian Region). JMK, Brno. Online: https://www.kr-jihomoravsky.cz/Default.aspx?ID=154180&TypeID=2 (accessed 29 June 2017).

  • Kirchner K., Münster P., Máčka Z., 2011. Stržový systém v Bosonožském hájku – jedinečný geomorfologický fenomén západně od Brna (Gully system in Bosonožský hájek – a unique geomorphological phenomenon west of Brno). Geologické výzkumy na Moravě a Slezsku 18(2): 33–36.Google Scholar

  • Kirchner K., Smolová I., 2010. Základy antropogenní geomorfologie (Elements of anthropogenic geomorphology). Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci, 287 p.Google Scholar

  • Kubalíková L., 2013. Geomorphosite assessment for geotourism purposes. Czech Journal of Tourism 2(2): 80–104.Google Scholar

  • Kubalíková L., Bajer A., Kirchner K., 2016. Secondary geodiversity and its potential for geoeducation and geotourism: a case study from Brno city. In: Fialová J., Pernicová D. (eds), Public recreation and landscape protection – with nature hand in hand… Conference proceeding. Mendel University Brno: 224–231.Google Scholar

  • Kubalíková L., Kirchner K., 2016. Geosite and Geomorphosite Assesment as a Tool for Geoconservation and Geotourism Purposes: a Case study from Vizovická vrchovina Highland (Eastern Part of the Czech Republic). Geoheritage 8(8): 5–14.Google Scholar

  • Kukla G., 1975. Loess stratigraphy of central Europe. In: Butzer K.W., Isaac G.L. (eds), After the Australopithecines, Mouton Publishers: 99–188.Google Scholar

  • Müller P., Novák Z., 2000. Geologie Brna a okolí (Geology of Brno and its surroundings). Český geologický ústav Praha, 90 p.Google Scholar

  • Musil R., 1982. Současný stav poznatků o kvartéru Brněnské kotliny (The current state of knowledge about the Quaternary of the Brno basin). Studia Geographica 80: 261–268.Google Scholar

  • Národní geoportál INSPIRE, 2017. Maps. Online: geoportal.gov.cz/web/guest/home (accessed 26 June 2017).

  • Novák Z. et al., 1991. Geologická mapa 1:50 000, list 24-32 Brno (Geological map 1:50 000, sheet 24–32 Brno). Český geologický ústav, Praha.Google Scholar

  • Pereira P., Pereira D., 2010. Methodological guidelines for geomorphosite assessment. Géomorphologie: relief, processus, environnement 3: 215–222.Google Scholar

  • Peterková L., 2011. Reliéf a geomorfologický vývoj řeky Svratky v brněnském prostoru v severozápadní části Bobravské vysočiny (Relief and geomorphological development of the Svratka river in Brno area in NW part of Bobravská vrchovina highland). Ph.D. thesis. Masarykova univerzita, Přírodovědecká fakulta, Brno, 147 p.Google Scholar

  • Pralong J.P., 2005. A method for assessing tourist potential and use of geomorphological sites. Géomorphologie: relief, processus, environnement 3: 189–196.Google Scholar

  • Reynard E., Fontana G., Kozlik L., Scapoza C., 2007. A method for assessing the scientific and additional values of geomorphosites. Geographica Helvetica 62(3): 148–158.Google Scholar

  • Sharples C., 2002. Concepts and principles of geoconservation. Tasmanian Parks & Wildlife Service website, September 2002. Online: xbiblio.ecologia.edu.mx/biblioteca/Cursos/Manejo/Geoconservation.pdf (accessed 9 March 2011).Google Scholar

  • Šlezingr M., 1998. Vliv lodní dopravy na Brněnské přehradě na vznik abraze břehů (Influence of shipping on the Brno Dam to the creation of shoreline abrasion). In: Přehradné dni 1998 – sborník referátov, Košice: 154.Google Scholar

  • Šlezingr M., 1999. Prezentace výsledků monitoringu postupu abraze na březích údolní nádrže Brno v letech 1989 – 1999 (Presentation of the results of the monitoring of the process of abrasion on the banks of the Brno reservoir in the years 1989-1999). Vodní hospodářství 9: 192–193.Google Scholar

  • Smolíková L., 1990. Regionální paleopedologie (Regional Palaeopedology). In: Němeček J., Smolíková L., Kutílek M., 1990. Pedologie a paleopedologie, Academia: 405–479.Google Scholar

  • Svoboda A., 2008. Brněnské podzemí I (Brno underground I). R-ateliér spol. s r.o., Brno, 168 p.Google Scholar

  • Szabó J., Dávid L., Loczy D. (eds), 2010. Anthropogenic Geomorphology. A Guide to Man-Made Landforms. Springer, Dordrecht, 250 p.Google Scholar

  • Thomas M.F., 2012. A geomorphological approach to geodiversity – its applications to geoconservation and geotourism. Quaestions Geographicae 31(1): 81–89.Google Scholar

  • Tourist information centre of Brno, 2017. Shelter 10-Z. Online: ticbrno.cz/cs/podzemi/kryt-10-z (accessed 30 March 2017).

  • UNESCO, 1972. Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage. Online: whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-en.pdf (accessed 17 November 2010).

  • Vávra V., Štelcl J., 2014. Významné geologické lokality Moravy a Slezska (Significant geological localities of Moravia and Silesia). Masarykova Univerzita Brno, 290 p.Google Scholar

  • Zeman A., 1992. New data on the Quaternary at Červený kopec hill in Brno. Scripta Geology 22: 123–131.Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2017-04-15

Revised: 2017-07-01

Published Online: 2017-09-29

Published in Print: 2017-09-01


Citation Information: Quaestiones Geographicae, ISSN (Online) 2081-6383, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/quageo-2017-0024.

Export Citation

© 2017 Lucie Kubalíková et al., published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in