The Role of Geomorphosites in the Local Economy Development of the Carpathian and Sub-Carpathian Area of Vrancea County, Romania

Nowadays, tourism has become an important sector of the global economy and a specific characteristic of modern society, a society for which travel, relaxation or a healthy lifestyle play a major role in planning and organising activities. Being one of the most dynamic and competitive industries (Kavaliauske, Kocyte 2014, Drăghici et al. 2015, Grecu et al. 2019), the tourism industry requires continuous adaptation to global changes and tourists’ needs (Vivek et al. 2020). At the same time, the field of tourism represents one of the most important economic sectors globally. In 2018, tourism contributed to the global economy with >8.8 trillion USD, representing >10.4% of the gross domestic product (GDP). Moreover, >319 million jobs belonged to the tourism industry in the same year, which in percentages equals around 10% of the available jobs (World Travel & Tourism Council 2019). For Romania, in 2018, tourism had a contribution of approximately 5.3% of the economy, with an increase of 3% compared to the previous year (World Travel & Tourism Council 2019).

One of the newest concepts in the field of tourism, geotourism has become an activity practised worldwide (Newsome, Dowling 2018). It aims to highlight the geological and geomorphological features of the landscape by promoting them as tourist attractions (Stoffelen, Vanneste 2015). Geotourism proves to us that different fields of study, such as geosciences and tourism, can coexist and correlate (Garofano 2012), creating a way to promote, preserve and understand the geoheritage (Hose 1995), which includes elements of the geodiversity that need to be protected because of their value (Gray 2018). Geotourism is also an efficient economic activity that generates benefits for the economy (Newsome, Dowling 2018) by incorporating several tourism activities, from transportation and accommodation to ways of leisure or recreation. Moreover, geotourism has educational values, with tourists having the opportunity to accumulate various useful information about how the environment works, the need for preserving the geotourism heritage and the importance of practising sustainable tourism (Comănescu, Nedelea 2010, Yolal 2012, Dowling 2015, Necheș, Erdeli 2015). Over the years, geotourism has been defined from different perspectives, with some researchers presenting it as geological tourism and others considering it as geographical tourism (Newsome, Dowling 2018). In this context, during an International Congress on Geotourism in 2011, geotourism was defined as ‘the tourism which sustains and enhances the identity of a territory, taking in consideration its geology, environment, culture, aesthetics, heritage and the well-being of its residents’ (Arouca Declaration 2011).

As a relatively recent term (Panizza 2001), ‘geomorphosite’ is considered one of the multiple types of geosites (Kubalikova 2013) and can be understood as a landform that has acquired a special value due to human perception or exploitation (Panizza, Piacente 2003). The value of the geomorphosite can vary depending on the orientation: scientific, ecological, cultural, aesthetic and/or economic (Reynard 2005). Another definition of the geomorphosites states that it can be any part of the Earth's surface that is important for understanding the Earth, its climate or the history of life (Grandgirard 1999, Reynard 2005). Different authors declared that geomorphosites can be single geomorphological objects or larger landscapes and can be affected, modified or even destroyed by human activities (Reynard, Panizza 2005).

The geomorphosite quality of an object is established following an evaluation process carried out according to specific methodologies, with a series of studies addressing this aspect (Bruschi, Cendrero 2005, Pralong 2005, Pereira et al. 2007, Reynard et al. 2007, Comănescu et al. 2011, Vujičić et al. 2011, Brilha 2018, Pal, Albert 2021).

Geomorphosites can have an important role in increasing the complexity of the functions of tourism within an area and can have a positive influence on local economies (Brilha 2018, Newsome, Dowling 2018). In order to demonstrate their role, an integrated economic analysis is needed to understand the evolution of the economy in an area, as well as the complex relationships that are created within (Nica et al. 2018, Ren et al. 2019). Moreover, economic development involves the creation of plans and strategies with the aim of increasing the economy of a place or area (Vivek et al. 2020), but using local resources.

Although in the literature from this field of study there are various works that focus on the assessment of geomorphosites or on the economic analysis of the tourism sector, there is no research that approaches the relationship between geomorphosites and the tourism share trend in local economies. Such methodology is necessary in order to demonstrate the influence of geomorphosites on the tourism sector in a certain area and implicitly on local economies.

The aim of the present study is to demonstrate the role of geomorphosites in the development of local economies in the Carpathian and Sub-Carpathian area of Vrancea County, Romania. To achieve this goal, this research will develop an assessment method for geomorphosites that best fits all of the features of the area, calculate the share of the tourism sector in local economies from 2000 to 2018 and find a way to observe the influence of geomorphosites on the tourism sector share trend over time. The study also aims to raise awareness about the value of the geomorphosites (including the economic one) in the analysed area, to offer a starting point for rethinking the protection and conservation measures and to promote the geotourism activities.

The study was divided into three main stages, as described below.

The assessment of geomorphosites

The first stage follows the geomorphosite assessment in the Carpathian and Sub-Carpathian area of Vrancea County, in order to establish the geomorphosite feature of the tourism attraction within the analysed area. For this stage, the evaluation methodology was proposed by Tufănoiu et al. (2020). It involves four sub-stages (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1

Starting from the already existing evaluation methodologies (especially the works of Comănescu et al. 2011 and Pereira et al. 2007), it was aimed to obtain an evaluation of geomorphosites that takes into consideration the classic values of geomorphosites (scientific, aesthetic, ecological and cultural), but especially the useful characteristics for the tourism exploitation of geomorphosites or for increasing the degree of their integrity. As the geoheritage is just a part of the geodiversity of an area (Reynard et al. 2015), the objectives targeted by the evaluation process were selected after reading the literature of this field of study, consulting the topographic map of Romania, the satellite images and, most importantly, during the field trips, keeping in mind the four main pillars that support a good inventory: the topic, the value of the site, the scale and the aim (Lima et al. 2010). Once the geomorphosites were selected for evaluation, a database with their most important attributes could be created. The database was used in the evaluation process and also for creating the cartographic materials. The evaluation of the selected geomorphosites was done according to the criteria presented in Table 1.

Table 1

The criteria proposed for the evaluation of the geomorphosites (acc. to Comănescu et al. 2011, with modifications and additions by Tufănoiu et al. 2020).

Scientific value		Economic value		Aesthetic value		Cultural value		Management and use value
	25 points		20 points		20 points		20 points		15 points
1.5	Rareness at national level	4	Infrastructure	4	Visibility	4	Symbolic value	3	Preservation degree
1.5	Rareness in relation to the area	4	Accessibility	4	Colour contrast	4	Cultural characteristics	3	Intensity of use
3	Degree of scientific knowledge on geomorphological issues	4	Number of types and forms of use (inclusively touristic)	4	Level difference	2	Iconographic/literary representations	3	Use of aesthetic, cultural and economic value
3	Palaeogeographic interest	4	Yearly number of visitors	4	Landscape framing	4	Religious characteristics	2	Vulnerability / natural risks
3	Integrity / intactness	4	Economic potential (incomes)	4	Space structuring	4	Historical characteristics	2	Relationship with planning policies
3	Use in educational purposes					2	Cultural manifestations	2	Equipment and support services
2	Diversity
5	Ecologic value
2	Representativeness
1	Other geological features
	Vs points		Ve points		Va points		Vc points		Vmu points
					Total points
0	Minimum				Total value			1	Maximum

The total value of each geomorphosite was calculated according to the formula: Vtot=Vs+Ve+Va+Vc+Vmu/100 {\rm{Vtot}} = {\rm{Vs}} + {\rm{Ve}} + {\rm{Va}} + {\rm{Vc}} + {\rm{Vmu}}/100 –

Vtot – total value of the geomorphosite,

–

Vs – scientific value,

–

Ve – economic value,

–

Va – aesthetic value,

–

Vc – cultural value,

–

Vmu – management and use value.

The evaluation involves the distribution of 100 points (absolute maximum) among the five values (scientific, economic, aesthetic, cultural, and management and use) with their sub-criteria. Each of the five values receives more (or less) points depending on the degree of importance established by the author. The total points accumulated by each geomorphosite following the application of the criteria were divided by 100, so that the final value of the evaluated geomorphosite was between zero (minimum value) and one (maximum value). The results obtained by each geomorphosite were classified so that the values obtained for each individual criterion could be compared. They can be extremely useful in the eventuality of improving protection measures, but also for tourism promotion.

A Geographic Information System (GIS) software (Arc Map 10.3 – Esri, Redlands, California, USA) was used to create the cartographic materials.

The study area is located in the western part of Vrancea County, in southeast Romania, extending over approximately 70% of its surface (Fig. 2), which means around 3358 km² (including 47 ATUs). The main major relief units that define the position of the studied area are the following ones: the Vrancea Mountains, which represent the Carpathian part of the study area and are located on its western side; and the Vrancea Sub-Carpathians between Trotuș Valley and Râmnic Valley, which occupy the eastern part of the analysed area. These main relief units of the analysed area were formed during alpine orogenesis following the epeirogenic movements and belong to the flysch deposits (Roman 1989). One of the main characteristics of the Vrancea Mountains and Vrancea Sub-Carpathians is petrographic heterogeneity (Roman 1989), which contributes to the formation of an important geoheritage in the area. With a friendly temperate–continental climate, the study area offers favourable conditions for practising geotourism. The dominant vegetation cover is represented by forests, of which the coniferous ones are the most significant. Another important aspect of the study area is that it includes the Putna–Vrancea Natural Park, a major natural protected area in Romania that corresponds to the fifth category according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) classification. All of the above characteristics make the Carpathian and Sub-Carpathian area of Vrancea County an area with geotouristic potential that is suitable for such a study.

Fig. 2

Following field trips and consultation of available materials, a total of 22 geomorphosites from the Carpathian and Sub-Carpathian area of the Vrancea County were selected for evaluation (Fig. 3): Cascada Putnei (Fig. 4), Valea Algheanului, Cheile Tișiței (Fig. 5), Groapa cu Pini, Strâmtura Coza, Cascada din Horn, Cascada Văsui, Cascada Mișina, Cheile Nărujei, Căldările Zăbalei (Fig. 6), Râpa Roșie, Lacul Negru (the lake bed), Grumaz, Vârful Lăcăuți, Vârful Goru, Vârful Zboina Neagră, Vârful Tisaru Mare, Vârful Zburătura, Vârful Coza, Vârful Pietrosu, Vârful Zboina Frumoasă and Măgura Odobești.

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Many authors have addressed the evaluation of geomorphosites (Coratza, Giusti 2005, Serrano, Gonzalez-Trueba 2005, Pereira et al. 2007, Comănescu, Nedelea 2010, Erhatic 2010, Comănescu et al. 2011, Vujičić et al. 2011, Brilha 2018, Tufănoiu et al. 2020, Barbălată, Comănescu 2021, Pal, Albert 2021), as well as the economic approaches of tourism (Drăghici et al. 2015, Grecu et al. 2019), but none have presented a method that combines these two types of study, geomorphosite assessment and tourism economic analysis, to demonstrate the relationship between geomorphosites and the tourism sector.

At first glance, it is clear that the majority of the geomorphosites are concentrated in the western and northwestern parts of the study area. It can also be observed that seven out of the 22 geomorphosites are located within or in the immediate vicinity of the administrative boundary of Tulnici ATU, and many others are located in the areas of neighbouring ATUs. It is important to analyse the results from a quantitative point of view (the density of the geomorphosites in a specific area), but especially from a qualitative one, because an important geomorphosite can have a greater influence on the local economy than several others with lower values. In this regard, it can be observed that two (Cascada Putnei and Cheile Tișiței) out of the seven geomorphosites located in the area of Tulnici ATU represent the geomorphosites that obtained the first two positions following the evaluation carried out in the first stage of the study.

Drawing a parallel between the positioning of geomorphosites, the score obtained by them in the evaluation and the evolution of the tourism sector share trend in the economy, we can assume that the geomorphosites have a positive influence on the evolution of the tourism sector and the development of local economies. Even if the area of Tulnici–Soveja ATUs confirms the efficiency of the method, it is a partial one because it can be observed that in the analysed area, there are some ATUs with a positive evolution of the tourism share trend in the local economy, although they are not directly influenced by geomorphosites (Adjud, Străoane, Broșteni, Cârligele, Cotești and Dumbrăveni). The positive evolution of the tourism sector share trend in the economies of these ATUs can be explained by a tourism activity stimulated by other factors (the practice of wine tourism, positioning along a heavily trafficked road section or urban centres).

The perfect method for this research does not exist; there will always be a slight subjectivity from the evaluator (Pal, Albert 2021) or difficulty in obtaining relevant data. Although the presence of geomorphosites is an important aspect that influences economic indicators, there can be other reasons that contribute to the positive evolution of the tourism sector (attractive vegetation and fauna; presence of cultural heritage such as old wooden churches; ecotourism activities). Despite the fact that this method is only a visual comparison of the results and has limitations, it can aid in understanding the complex relationship between geoheritage and economy and can serve as a jumping-off point for future research.

The first stage of the study consisted of the evaluation of geomorphosites in the Carpathian and Sub-Carpathian area of Vrancea County. The results of this first stage highlight very high values of aesthetic value for most of the analysed geomorphosites, an important aspect for the eventuality of touristic exploitation of these objectives. With a few exceptions, the scientific value represents a large part of the total value of the geomorphosites, which demonstrates their great importance from a scientific point of view. Regarding the cultural value, an important aspect for possible tourism utility, the fact that the analysed area is under the influence of the cultural region known as ‘Țara Vrancei’ has a big impact. It should be noted that most of the geomorphosites scored low for economic value, mostly due to the lack of infrastructure and poor accessibility, but also for management and use value. This fact should prompt immediate measures by the local authorities in order to improve the weak points.

The second stage of the present study represented the contribution of economic data necessary to establish the evolution of the tourism sector in the period 2000–2018 at the level of each ATU. Following the completion of the trend matrix and trend maps regarding the share of the tourism sector in the economy of each ATU for each of the four economic indicators, it can be observed that some evolutions were positive, some were negative, but most of them had a constant evolution (the ATUs with a share of zero for all 19 years). Even though several ATUs experienced a positive trend in the share of the tourism sector in the economy during the analysed period (Tulnici, Soveja, Reghiu, Străoane, Adjud, Broșteni, Cârligele, Cotești and Dumbrăveni), the Tulnici ATU stood out through a much clearer evolution than the others.

The results of the third stage of the study consist of a graphic representation that includes both the information obtained from the completion of the first stage and the information resulting from the second stage of the study. It allows us to have an overview of all attributes and to observe that there is a connection between the position of geomorphosites, their values and the tourism sector share trend in local economies.

This study can make an important contribution to the development of methodologies dedicated to the analysis of the role of geomorphosites for the development of the tourism sector and local economies, but it can also increase the degree of awareness among the population regarding the tourism value of geomorphosites and help to re-evaluate strategies for protecting or promoting them.