Geodiversity, geoconservation and geotourism in Hong Kong Global Geopark of China

Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/pgeola

Geodiversity, geoconservation and geotourism in Hong Kong Global Geopark of China Lulin Wang *, Mingzhong Tian, Lei Wang School of Earth Science and Resources, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Article history: Received 22 November 2014 Received in revised form 20 February 2015 Accepted 26 February 2015 Available online 14 April 2015

In addition to being an international financial center, Hong Kong has rich geodiversity, in terms of a representative and comprehensive system of coastal landscapes, with scientific value in the study of Quaternary global sea-level changes, and esthetic, recreational and cultural value for tourism. The value of the coastal landscapes in Hong Kong was globally recognized when Hong Kong Global Geopark (HKGG), which was developed under the well-established framework of Hong Kong Country Parks and Marine Parks, was accepted in the Global Geoparks Network (GGN) in 2011. With over 30 years of experience gained from managing protected areas and a concerted effort to develop geoconservation and geotourism, HKGG has reached a mature stage of development and can provide a well-developed example of successful geoconservation and geotourism in China. This paper analyzes the geodiversity, geoconservation and geotourism of HKGG. The main accomplishments summarized in this paper are efficient conservation management, an optimized tourism infrastructure, a strong scientific interpretation system, mass promotion and education materials, active exchange with other geoparks, continuous training, and effective collaboration with local communities. This useful information for preserving geoheritage and developing geotourism can help geoparks in the primary stage of development in China and other countries. ß 2015 The Geologists’ Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Coastal landscape Hong Kong Global Geopark Geodiversity Geoconservation Geotourism

1. Introduction The concepts of geodiversity, geoheritage, geosites, geoconservation, geotourism and geoparks are closely related and have significantly evolved in the last decade. The term ‘‘geodiversity’’ was first used in 1993 as the geological equivalent of biodiversity (Sharples, 1993). A commonly used definition of geodiversity by Gray (2013) is ‘‘the natural range (diversity) of geological (rocks, minerals, fossils), geomorphological (landforms, topography, physical processes), soil and hydrological features. It includes their assemblages, structures, systems and contributions to landscapes’’. Despite some initial resistance and concerns about the validity of implied parallels with biodiversity, the term has gained international acceptance and its use has rapidly expanded worldwide in recent years (Gray, 2008; Gordon et al., 2012; Erikstad, 2013; Gray et al., 2013). Geoheritage refers only to the components of geodiversity in a given place (Dixon, 1996; Gray, 2004; Bruno et al., 2014) with the understanding that as long as the geoheritage sites are preserved,

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 1082320640. E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Wang).

the geodiversity will be sustained. Furthermore, the geosite concept, defining a geoheritage site as a place with scientific, historical and cultural heritage interest, accessible for visits and studies, is well acknowledged internationally (ProGEO, 1998; Cleal et al., 1999; Todorov and Wimbledon, 2004; Ruban, 2010; Ruban and Kuo, 2010). Geodiversity, therefore, comprises a diversity of geoheritage and can be quantified with an account of geosite types, type counterparts, and their ranks. Geoconservation, now a growing activity, is defined by Prosser (2013) as ‘‘action taken with the intent of conserving and enhancing geological, geomorphological and soil features, processes, sites and specimens, including associated promotional and awareness-raising activities, and the recording and rescue of data or specimens from features and sites threatened with loss or damage’’. In practice, it is thought to be a more concise way of referring to geological, geomorphological and soil conservation and relates to activities aiming to conserve various geosites for future generations (Prosser et al., 2013). Among geodiversity settings, the most prominent examples of geoconservation are geoparks (Yeung, 2008; Erikstad, 2013; Wang et al., 2014; Dong et al., 2014). The organization of geoparks as a tool for dissemination of the value for protected geosites can be linked to the 1st International Conference on Geological Heritage

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2015.02.006 0016-7878/ß 2015 The Geologists’ Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

in Digne, France in 1991 (Patzack and Eder, 1998). Reflecting the desire to strengthen both international recognition and local appreciation of geodiversity, the European Geoparks Network was established in 2000 (Zouros, 2002; Zouros and Martini, 2003). The year 2004 marked a further important step in cooperation and geoconservation with the establishment of the UNESCO-endorsed Global Network of National Geoparks, known as the GGN, which defines a geopark as a well-defined area that contains one or more geoheritage sites selected on the basis of scientific importance, rarity, scenic quality, or relation to geological history, events and processes (Eder and Patzak, 2004; UNESCO, 2014). As of November 2014, 111 geoparks, including 31 in China, were current members of the GGN, facilitated by UNESCO. The other 80 global geoparks are distributed in 31 countries around the world. With the rapid development of geoparks at the global, national and regional levels, geotourism, which is tourism and recreation based on geology and landscapes, has evolved into an important industry (Hose, 2000; Hose and Wickens, 2004; Dowling and Newsome, 2010; Zouros, 2010a,b; Jin and Ruban, 2011; Bruno and Perrotta, 2012; Farsani et al., 2012; Gordon, 2012; Hose and Vasiljevic, 2012) and is regarded as a vehicle for geoconservation (Hose, 2011). As the current part of the geological record, Quaternary geoheritage is widespread, with a cover of superficial (drift) deposits of this age in many lowland regions and preserved landforms related to Quaternary processes in uplands (Bridgland, 2013). Thus, in accordance with geodiversity (Gray et al., 2013), Quaternary geoheritage is of great value because of the wide range of environmental changes and processes represented in this period, many of which record the glacial-interglacial climatic fluctuations that have been the over-arching characteristic of this geological era (Brown and Gordon, 2011). However, Quaternary geoheritage tends to be ‘‘high-maintenance’’ (Burek, 2012; Bridgland, 2013), since the conservation objects are generally Quaternary sediments of superficial and unconsolidated nature, such as loess, and landforms that are constantly developing and changing, such as karst and coastal landforms (Tian and Cheng, 2009). These factors confirm that Quaternary geoheritage represents an important element of geoheritage, and is worth protecting from possible threats, and promoting as a significant and attractive component of geodiversity. Quaternary geology is an important focus of geoparks such as HKGG (Tian, 2012). The HKGG, approved by the GGN Bureau in 2011, has an extensive coastal landscape of scientific, esthetic, recreational and cultural value, with geoconservation sites which provide a detailed record of climatic and environment changes throughout the Quaternary (Fyfe et al., 2000) and is the important site for studying global sea-level changes (Yim, 1999; Wong et al., 2003; Zhang and Ge, 2013). The establishment of HKGG has not only opened up new opportunities and created enthusiasm for geoconservation, but has also provided a major geotourism destination and attraction (Wu et al., 2011). In this paper the coastal geoheritage of HKGG is described in terms of its characteristics and landform-forming processes. Geoconservation and geotourism in HKGG are analyzed, and HKGG’s successful experience in preserving geoheritage and developing geotourism are discussed, as it provides useful information for the future development of geoparks in China. 2. Study area The HKGG is situated in the northeast part of Hong Kong, bordering mainland China in the north and facing the South China Sea in the south (Fig. 1a). The geopark covers two regions – the Northeast New Territories Sedimentary Rock Region and the Sai Kung Volcanic Rock Region (228150 1100 to 228330 1100 N; 1148120 5900 to 1148260 3200 E), which are divided into eight geo-areas, distributed over a total area of 49.85 km2 (Fig. 1b).

427

With numerous islands and a long coastline, the coastal landscape is well developed. The region has a sub-tropical monsoon climate, characterized by high humidity, high temperatures, ample rainfall, and frequent typhoons during the summer and autumn months (Davis, 1999; Yim, 2001). The average annual temperature, rainfall and relative humidity are 23.1 8C, 2382.7 mm, and 78%, respectively. Rivers in this area are mostly small, short waterways, the longest only about 8000 m in length. The headwaters are short and the flow rapid, manifesting seasonal characteristics. This area lies to the southeast of the Lianhuashan Fault Zone of the Cathaysian block (Fig. 1a) and displays the same dominant structural trend (Campbell and Sewell, 1997; Sewell et al., 2000). This defines the linear nature of the coastline. The southeast structural trend has controlled the geometry of the present river valleys, ridges, as well as the morphometry of the coastal estuaries, channels, bays and headlands (Fyfe et al., 2000). The terrain of this region is composed mainly of Devonian and Permian sedimentary rocks cropping out mainly in the Northeast New Territories Sedimentary Rock Region and the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous volcanic rocks with hexagonal columnar joints in the Sai Kung Volcanic Rock Region (Lee et al., 1997; Sewell et al., 2012). The details of the present landscape of Hong Kong were formed mainly during the Quaternary, evolving slowly as the crustal plates migrated, tectonic forces raised and depressed the land, the climate changed, and the sea level fluctuated. From the Paleocene to the Quaternary, the area experienced crustal uplift affected by the Himalayan Orogeny. Persistent weathering and strong wave erosion further sculpted the landscapes of Hong Kong. As the last glacial period came to an end, the sea level rose. Peaks created by crustal uplift were partially submerged and became islands. A new coastline was established, with typical coastal depositional landforms forming in sheltered locations and diverse coastal erosional landforms developing in the steeper, more exposed eastern area (Li and Yan, 1999). 3. Geodiversity and geosites The HKGG has well preserved geodiversity due to minimal exposure to humans. The main geoheritage is the coastal landscapes (see Table 1 and Fig. 2). Hong Kong is blessed with a long indented coast. The shorelines within the geopark boundary extend for over 150 km, showcasing a representative and comprehensive system of coastal features. Of particular note are the large-scale hexagonal columnar jointed volcanic rocks, a world-class geological attraction (Fig. 2a and e–i). The coastal landscapes are controlled primarily by the orientation or aspect of the coastal sections and the characteristics of the rocks. Coastal processes have shaped the outline of Hong Kong, controlling the base level of streams, and determining the fate of fluvial sediments (Fyfe et al., 2000). Tide, wind and waves are the main driving forces of the coastal processes, resulting in an abundant geoheritage of coastal landscapes, including diverse coastal types, coastal erosional landforms and coastal depositional landforms. This has created a rugged, often cliffed coastline with an intricate pattern of headlands and bays, and a number of small islands in the east areas of the geopark (Morton, 1996), where coastal erosion predominates. In contrast, due to less dynamic formation conditions, the west area of HKGG has a more subbed, depositional coastline of beaches and muddy tidal inlets. In the south part of the geopark, the erosion of volcanic rocks has resulted in the development of steep cliffs, which are normally fronted by rocky wave-cut platforms. The coastal geoheritage features in the study area are classified on the basis of their characteristics and the processes that formed them (Table 1), and the geosites are determined as geomorphologic sites (geomorphosite) (Panizza, 2001).

428

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

Fig. 1. Study area. (a) Simplified tectonic map of Southeast China. The bold black dashed line denotes the Lianhuashan Fault Zone. The red box shows the present study area. (b) Distribution of coastal landscapes in HKGG with location of cultural and ecological sites (revised by Yeung and Chan, 2010). (1) Beach (Cheung Sha Wan); (2) Abrasion Canyon; (3) Corals and Seaweed Beds; (4) Tin Hau Temple; (5) Marine Terrace; (6) Sea Cave; (7) Wave-cut Platform; (8) Sea Stacks; (9) Tin Hau Temple; (10) Hakka Fishing Village; (11) Sand Spit (Pak Sha Tau Tsui); (12) Biogenic Coast (Lai Chi Wo); (13) Hakka Fishing Village; (14) Muddy Coast; (15) Wave-cut Platform (Yan Chau); (16) Muddy Coast; (17) Corals; (18) Corals; (19) Muddy Coast; (20) Sandy Coast; (21) Sandy Coast; (22) Sandy Coast; (23) Shell Bank; (24) Fish-culture Zone; (25) Fish-culture Zone; (26) Beach(Tai Long Wan); (27) Beach(Ham Tin Wan); (28) Beach(Sai Wan); (29) Rocky Coast; (30) Beach(Long Ke Wan); (31) Sea Cave; (32) Sea Stack(Po Pin Chau); (33) Beach (Pak Sha Chau); (34) Beach; (35) Tombolo; (36) Tin Hau Temple; (37) Sea Arch(Wang Chau Kok); (38) Corals; (39) Rocky Coast; (40) Sea Arch(Lam Wan Kok); (41) Sea Cliff(Bluff Island); (42) Sea Arch(Sha Tong Hau); (43) Rocky Coast; (44) Sea Cave; (45) Tin Hau Temple. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

429

Table 1 Summary of coastal landscapes in HKGG. Class

Type

Distribution

Coast

Rocky coast Sandy coast Muddy coast Biogenic coast

Along the southern coast of HKGG In Mirs Bay and Tolo Channel North of HKGG Mangroves along the coast of Lai Chi Wo and northeastern deep bay of HKGG form the most typical biogenic coast

Coastal erosional landform

Sea cave Sea cliff Sea arch Sea stack Wave-cut shore platform Abrasion canyon Marine terrace

The northeastern and southern coast of HKGG Southeast of HKGG, the tallest around Bluff Island Along the southeastern coast of HKGG Po Pin Chau, eastern Tung Ping Chau South of Tung Ping Chau, Yan Chau in Double Haven Northwest of Tung Ping Chau Southwest of Tung Ping Chau

Coastal depositional landform

Beach

Cheung Sha Wan on Tung Ping Chau, Tai Long Wan, Pak Sha Chau, Kiu Tau, Sai Wan, Long Ke Wan, Ham Tin Wan Pak Sha Tau Tsui at the northwestern corner of HKGG Sharp Island at southeastern HKGG The southern coast of Ma Shi Chau

Sand spit Tombolo Shell bank

3.1. Coastal types The coastal types in HKGG are classified according to material composition as the coasts of rock (Fig. 2a), sand (Fig. 2b), mud (Fig. 2c) or biogenic material (Fig. 2d). The distinctive morphology of the coastal types is chiefly determined by their position relative to the main fluvial influences, in particular those from the Pearl River, and the main oceanic regimes (Huang, 1984). 3.2. Coastal erosional landforms A great many steep, rocky coasts in HKGG have been visibly changed by wave erosion. Soluble rock in the north part of the geopark, such as limestone and dolomite, dissolves as waves wash against it (Nau, 1979; Taylor et al., 1990; Lai, 1991), and the more durable rock in the south part of the geopark, such as rhyolitic tuff, has been fractured by the enormous pressures caused by waves slamming into it (Davis et al., 1997). 3.2.1. Sea cave In the northeast part of HKGG, sea caves, 1–2 m high and 0.5– 1 m wide, are linearly distributed along the bottom of the sedimentary rock beds, which are easily eroded by seawater. The south part of HKGG has well developed sea caves 5–7 m high, 1–2 m wide and 3–5 m long (Fig. 2e). The caves are developed both above and below sea level. Several shallow underwater sea caves exist off the coast and on the islands, providing important evidence of sea-level change. 3.2.2. Sea cliff The coastlines in the southeast part of HKGG are made up of volcanic rocks, some of which have almost vertical columnar joints. These characteristic columnar joints, along with strong wave action, have led to the formation of high, steep cliffs, spectacular formations of high scientific value (Xing et al., 2011). The tallest sea cliffs in HKGG, around 140 m high, are around Bluff Island (Fig. 2f). Sea caves have developed in some of the cliffs. 3.2.3. Sea arch When two sides of a sea cave sustain continuous, violent wave erosion, the water eventually breaks through, forming a sea arch. Along the southeast coast of HKGG, the collapse of some of the volcanic rock columns has resulted in fascinating tall sea arches. The top four sea arches in HKGG are the 45-m-high Lam Wan Kok Arch (Fig. 2g), the 40-m-high Wang Chau Kok Arch (Fig. 2h),

the 30-m-high Tiu Chung Arch and the 24-m-high Sha Tong Hau Arch (Yeung and Ng, 2008). 3.2.4. Sea stack Sea stacks in HKGG are well developed and some have a spectacular shape, making them a popular destination for both locals and tourists. Po Pin Chau, in the south part of HKGG is a sea stack (Fig. 2i). It was once a headland, part of Fa Shan, but cracks between the vertical volcanic rock columns expanded gradually under the relentless impact of waves and erosion, forming first a sea cave and then a sea arch. The top of the sea arch eventually collapsed, separating what is now Po Pin Chau from the main island, forming an isolated sea stack. Another two huge sea stacks are about 7–8 m high, situated on a wave cut platform on Tung Ping Chau, at the northeast tip of HKGG. The sea stacks are well known as watchtower stones after their shapes, which is like the ‘‘watchtower’’ of an ancient village. The perspective views on the top of sea stacks generate a feeling of the mystery of nature (Fig. 2j). 3.2.5. Wave-cut platform Rocky wave-cut platforms are distributed along the north coast of HKGG. The width and morphology of these wave-cut platforms depend on wave energy, lithology, position of the surf zone, and tidal range (Trenhaile, 2000, 2001; Dickson, 2006; Waele et al., 2009). Owen (1995) described two types of platforms, sub-tidal and supra-tidal, both of which generally slope gently seawards. Sub-tidal platforms are present around Tung Ping Chau in the east part of Mirs Bay, which is open to direct wave action from the South China Sea (Fig. 2k). The platforms were formed by erosion from high-energy wave action. There are supra-tidal platforms in sheltered areas of Double Haven, where the impact of wind and waves is minimal, but erosion caused by salinity and weathering is common. Yan Chau is a supra-tidal platform with an interesting shape, like that of a stone seal (Fig. 2l). It is one of the famous geosites called ‘‘Six Treasures of Double Haven’’. 3.2.6. Abrasion canyon In the northeast part of the geopark there is an abrasion canyon. The north-south interlinked canyon, 5 m wide, 10 m high and 20 m long, was originally part of the main island of Tung Ping Chau, but was penetrated and then separated by wave erosion along a north-south trending fault (Zhang et al., 2009) (Fig. 2m). 3.2.7. Marine terrace Marine terraces along rocky coastlines in northeast HKGG are controlled by changes in environmental conditions and by tectonic

430

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

activity in recent geological times. Southwest of Tung Ping Chau is a well-defined sequence of uplifted marine terraces from the Holocene (Zhang et al., 2009), featuring a well preserved lower terrace, a widely eroded higher terrace and another still higher terrace, which rises over 20 m above sea level (Fig. 2n). 3.3. Coastal depositional landforms The coasts along the west part of HKGG were primarily shaped by sediment deposition, particularly by longshore drift of sand. 3.3.1. Beach The beaches in Pak Sha Chau, Sai Wan, Long Ke Wan, Kiu Tau and Tai Long Wan (Fig. 2o) are the most significant depositional features (Yu et al., 2013). Like most of the beaches in and around HKGG, they are formed on coasts with a southerly aspect, facing the prevailing wind and waves. The beach sediment is sand, typically quartz-rich. The beach at Ham Tin Wan is noted for large waves with very long wavelengths that are associated with collapsing or surging breakers. Consequently, they build a steep beach profile. 3.3.2. Sand spit The sharp sand spit at Pak Sha Tau Tsui, in the northwest corner of HKGG resembles an ink brush (Fig. 2p). Vast amounts of sand were moved by longshore transport and built up off a point of land, forming a sand spit, a fingerlike ridge of sediment that extends out into the open water. 3.3.3. Tombolo There is special tombolo in the southeast part of the geopark, which is a striking but rare feature formed by longshore drift. At low tide, the 700-m-long gravel tombolo emerges, linking Sharp Island with Kiu Tau, a much smaller island, allowing visitors to walk from Sharp Island to Kiu Tau along the tombolo (Fig. 2q). The unique tombolo and picturesque beauty and views have made Sharp Island one of most popular geosites in recent years. 3.3.4. Shell bank On the south coast of Ma Shi Chau is a layered shell bank, about 5 m wide and 80 m long (Fig. 2r), consisting mainly of mollusk shells and shell fragments. The shell bank indicates a relocation of the ancient coastline, and is a good resource for studying the history of the coast development. 4. Geoconservation in HKGG 4.1. Conservation legal framework Hong Kong, like many big cities, faces strong pressure for development with its high population density, so there is always a temptation to encroach on sensitive sites for various social uses, such as roads, utilities or housing. Other potential pressure on the geopark comes from natural hazards and visitor impact. The subtropical climate with high precipitation in summer accelerates the weathering and erosion of the geoheritage and cultural relics in the geopark. For example, falling hexagonal columns on the sea cliffs pose a potential danger to visitors. Human factors also present a threat, as visitors who do not follow the geoconservation code, for example, may cause damage to the rocks and landforms by digging, defacing, littering, and so forth. Thus, legislation protecting the geodiversity is important for the sustainability of the geopark. Since the designation of first Hong Kong Country Parks in the 1970s (Yeung, 2007), the legal

foundation has provided an important framework for geoconservation in HKGG. At present, HKGG is protected by the Country Parks Ordinance and Marine Parks Ordinance, which forbid all activities that may destroy the biological, geological or cultural environment in the geopark. The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) is charged with the legal responsibility of developing and managing the protected areas (Wong, 2013). This legal framework not only has ensured the formal protection of the geosites in HKGG, but is the foundation for planning and managing HKGG. 4.2. Zoning for geoconservation Gray (2005) stated that geodiversity should be conserved for two main reasons – its value and threats against it. Geodiversity should be protected not only for its fragility or potential irreversible loss, but for its enormous value to mankind, from its cultural, esthetic and economic value to its functional and educational benefits. In 2009, public deliberations in Hong Kong indicated a clear consensus to place geodiversity at the top of the agenda, particularly in view of its value for geotourism and education. The three-tier protection zoning system HKGG subsequently introduced was based on this consensus (see Table 2 and Fig. 3). Core Protection Areas in HKGG are places which have been preserved in their natural state and are very sensitive to human impact. These places have, therefore, been designated mainly for conservation purposes. No infrastructure is permitted, including pier or trails, as they have low carrying capacity and are often dangerous for casual visitors. In order to protect important geoheritage and prevent accidents due to strong waves and steep cliffs, visitors are not encouraged to land in these areas. Sightseeing is suitable only on boat tours on calm summer days. Special Protection Areas are places which already have basic visitor facilities, such as trails, and thus have medium carrying capacity and sensitivity. Apart from conservation purposes, these places are ideal for education and science popularization. Integrated Protection Areas have high carrying capacity. Most visitor facilities, such as kiosks, barbeque sites, and camping sites, are already in place in these geopark areas. Thus, in addition to conservation and education, these places can serve recreational purposes (Yeung and Chan, 2010). 4.3. Local communities and young people – the main force of geoconservation As ignorance is thought to be one of the greatest threats to geodiversity (Gray, 2004, 2008; Hose, 2005), one of the best ways to raise the public awareness of the value of the geoheritage is through education and promotion (Dunbar, 2007; Loon, 2008). In the early stage of the geopark project in Hong Kong, when the geopark concept was new to the local community, the AFCD started consulting and liaising with local organizations. As trust and confidence developed, a number of local engagement projects were initiated as a way to enhance public awareness of geoheritage, such as setting up local geoheritage centers, organizing geological tours and events, and developing and promoting geopark cuisine. Over time, they have created a respectful and mutually beneficial relationship with the local communities, which is a valuable and integral asset to the geopark. The economic benefits gained through sustainable tourism and revitalization of traditional culture provide incentives for local people to support conservation in their area. Furthermore, formal school groups are the most typical and easiest group to engage with local geodiversity (Worton and Gillard, 2013). HKGG organizes activities and provides logistical support to convey

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

431

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

432

Table 2 The three-tier protection zoning system of HKGG (Yeung and Chan, 2010). Protection level

Vulnerability

Carrying capacity

Naturalness

Safety level

Locality name

Core Protection Area

High

Low

High

Low

Fa Shan of High Island, Ninepin Group and Ung Kung Group

Special Protection Area

Medium

Medium

Medium

Medium

Ma Shi Chau, Lai Chi Chong and High Island Reservoir East Dam

Integrated Protection Area

Low

High

Medium

High

Lai Chi Wo, Tung Ping Chau, Sharp Island and Tai Long Wan

geoscientific knowledge and environmental and cultural concepts to students. This is accomplished through protected and interpreted geosites, geoheritage centers, trails, guided tours, school class excursions, educational materials and displays, seminars, and so on. One such activity organized for young people is a rock-cleaning activity for students (Fig. 4a). The activity not only effectively restores the natural appearance of the rocks, but helps the participants understand the irreversible impact of the destruction of our invaluable geoheritage. HKGG has also put a lot of effort into providing training for teachers so that they can carry out geological education activities such as ‘‘Rock Classroom’’ and ‘‘Rock Academy’’ on their own. In terms of HKGG’s contribution to promotion and geological education, a growing number of local communities and young people are getting enthusiastically involved in geoconservation, which sustains the geopark’s conservation efforts now and in the long term. 5. Geotourism in HKGG Supported by its strategic location as the gateway to China’s huge, rapidly expanding market, Hong Kong is a world famous free port and modern metropolis. In addition to being an international financial center, Hong Kong boasts a wealth of geosites, in particular, a representative and comprehensive coastal landscape, which presents a wide range of geological and geomorphological features. Geodiversity, together with an appealing ecological environment, creates an attractive tourist product. For this reason, with the rapid development of HKGG, geotourism has evolved to become a hot new industry, which can help promote geoconservation and an understanding of earth science through appreciation and learning (Newsome and Dowling, 2010; Hose, 2011, 2012). The development of geotourism through HKGG which is one of the first geoparks in the world to be established in a densely populated metropolis, illustrates that geotourism can occur in urban areas just as appropriately as in natural areas (Zhang, 2000; Ng, 2007; Ng et al., 2010; Dowling, 2010). In order to harmonize the geoheritage and urban contexts of HKGG, various measures had been taken to develop geotourism and good results have been obtained. (1) The most important aspect of geotourism is interpreting the geoheritage information in a way that makes it easily accessible and understandable to the public. Accordingly, HKGG developed an integrated interpretation system, which comprises different types of geological interpretation in five levels, from easy (level 1) to expert (level 5). For example, two to three levels must meet the needs of the majority of visitors, so there are clear guidelines that ensure all interpretation materials are easily understandable. Geological jargon and esoteric terms are avoided to some extent. The information uses an imaginative combination of text and visuals to tell a

story about a certain coastal feature or an entire coastal landform, for example, catering for visitors of different backgrounds. The materials are currently available on the HKGG website and in its publications. (2) Quality tour guides are essential for providing worthwhile tours for visitors. In Hong Kong, there are currently over 5000 tour guides, but the number of geotourism guides is limited. In order to encourage existing tour guides to upgrade their skills and knowledge to provide high-quality geotours, a two-level tour-guide system for HKGG has been developed: Recommended Geopark Guides (R2G) and Accredited Geopark Guides (A2G). Routine training and periodic assessments for the guides have been organized (Fig. 4b). The training includes basic knowledge of the geosites in HKGG, covering geology, culture and ecology; an understanding of the code for visiting geosites in HKGG, especially regarding safety requirements and geoconservation; and seminars on geotourism. In addition, effective interpretation can contribute to sustainable tourism and recreation (Moscardo, 1998). A Hong Kong Geopark Handbook for tour guides was published, with voice-over in Cantonese, English, Putonghua, Japanese and Korean, which has greatly facilitated interaction between the guides and foreign visitors. (3) For the development of geotourism and sustainable geological education, the HKGG has set up two visitor centers and four local geoheritage centers as a partnership project among local villagers, local environmental organization and the government (Fig. 4c and d). These centers function both as transport hubs to the geosites in HKGG and museums to enrich visitors’ experience and knowledge. Combining pictures, text and modern technology (interactive panels, presentations and audiovisual effects), the exhibits in the centers give an overview of HKGG including general information about the coasts, coastal features, formation processes of coastal landforms, geopark coastal landscapes and their scientific value, marine life and cultural relics. (4) A number of cultural and ecological sites can be found in the geopark, such as Tin Hau temples (Fig. 2s), traditional Hakka fishing villages dating back to the late 18th century (Fig. 2t), several fish-culture zones (Fig. 2u), and more than 60 hard coral species and extensive seaweed beds in the surrounding waters. Eight geotrails and two boat-tour routes have been developed to link these cultural and ecological sites with the geological highlights of the sites (Fig. 4). Along the geotrails, the geodiversity is explained, including its relationship with the surrounding biodiversity, and the historical and cultural aspects of the region. Information is shared through interpretive panels, leaflets and signs (Fig. 4e). To provide high-quality boat tours, the geopark and local boat rental companies have had two geopark-themed yachts designed (Fig. 4f), with geopark decorations on both the interior and exterior. Visitors

Fig. 2. Photos of typical coastal landscapes in HKGG. (a) Rocky coast; (b) Sandy coast; (c) Muddy coast; (d) Mangrove coast; (e) Sea cave; (f) Sea cliff; (g and h) Sea arch; (i and j) Sea stack; (k) Sub-tidal platform; (l) Supra-tidal platform; (m) Abrasion canyon; (n) Marine terrace; (o) Beach; (p) Sand spit; (q) Tombolo; (r) Shell bank; (s) Tin Hou Temple; (t) Traditional Hakka Fishing village; (u) Fishermen in the fish-culture zone. All the photos provided by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department.

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

433

Fig. 3. Map of protection zones of HKGG (revised by Tian et al., 2009).

can learn about the geology of coast as they cruise past the coastal landscape. (5) To promote HKGG as a brand for visitors, a geopark logo was designed, comprising eight columns, representing the special hexagonal volcanic columns in HKGG (Fig. 4g). The logo won ‘‘The Outstanding Greater China Design Awards 2010’’.

(6) HKGG stimulates economic activity and sustainable development through geotourism. The coastal geosites are an important element in the economic development of the region and the center of geotourism development. HKGG is located in the northeast part of Hong Kong (Fig. 1), which is relatively unpopulated except for traditional villages dependent on

434

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

Fig. 4. Geoconservation activities and geotourism facilities in HKGG. (a) Rock-cleaning activity; (b) Training for the guides; (c) Visitor center; (d) Geoheritage center; (e) Interpretive panels outside; (f) Geopark-themed yacht; (g) Logo of HKGG; (h) Geopark gourmet; (i) Safety warning board; (j) Interpretive panel corresponding to the stop on geotrail; (k) Definitive stamps of HKGG; (l) Science popularization publications of HKGG available in the bookstore; (m) Geopark hotel with videos and the leaflets of HKGG in the lobby. All the photos provided by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department.

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

fishing, mariculture and agriculture. However, these primary industries have been declining in recent decades due to ruralurban migration and the decline in fishery resources. To assist fishermen in the geopark area who have been affected by declining harvests, HKGG has been providing them with training and assistance with a view to engaging them as boat operators or tour guides for geotourism to help them increase their income. In addition, with a view to promoting the coastal landscape in an interesting and understandable way through nonconventional means while engaging the local community, HKGG, together with Sai Kung District Council and the Sai Kung Food and Beverages Association, has been working with Sai Kung restaurants to make gourmet meals depicting geological concepts, such as typical coastal landforms in HKGG (Fig. 4h). Four leading restaurants are participating in the project and over 10 dishes have been developed.

6. Discussion The focus of geoparks is geoheritage, geology and landscapes, which are part of an integrated concept of protection, education and sustainable development. Geoparks achieve their goals through geoconservation, education and geotourism (Dowling, 2010; Tian, 2012). With the rapid development of geoparks in China, the geoparks have made some significant advances in implementing geoconservation and developing geotourism. However, some geoparks in China are still in the primary stage of development, and there remain problems restricting the positive development of geoconservation and geotourism that need to be addressed, such as inefficient conservation management, the lack of geopark legislation, ineffective interpretation of geological features for visitors, uninspiring museum exhibits, and a lack of local community participation, all of which affect the development of geotourism (Dong et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2014). The establishment of HKGG marked a new phase of nature conservation in Hong Kong, and with its development reaching the mature stage, it can be used by the geoparks in China and other countries which are still in the primary stage of development as a model of good practices for geoconservation and geotourism. To summarize the development of HKGG, the successful experience is as follows: (1) Effective conservation management The HKGG is managed under the previously existing management framework for protected areas in Hong Kong. This management system comprises three bodies: the policy maker, which is the Environment Bureau, advisors, which form a Task Force, and the management authority, which is the AFCD. The Environment Bureau of the Hong Kong Government is the policy bureau for HKGG. It formulates the related policies and offers direction to the operations department. The Task Force on HKGG was established to give advice on strategies for the development of HKGG. The Task Force members include academic experts, geologists, representatives of nongovernmental organizations, government officials and overseas advisors. Working together with the policy maker and advisors, the AFCD is the statutory management authority of the geopark. It is responsible for all aspects of the implementation of the geopark project, including conservation, management, visitor services, etc. Under the Country and Marine Parks Branch of the AFCD, five divisions are involved in the management of the geopark. The daily management duties of HKGG are shared among different divisions of the department. For example, foot patrols are carried out by park

435

wardens, while the remote coastal areas are patrolled using Marine Parks patrol vessels, in order to prevent any illegal development or activities. (2) Optimizing the tourism infrastructure Most of the geosites in HKGG are in close proximity to the city, and Hong Kong’s well-developed public transport system makes it easy for individual visitors to visit most geosites in the integrated protection areas and special protection areas on their own. The eight main geotrails in the geopark (Fig. 4) are accessible by public bus, minibus, ferry, or a combination of these, along with hiking. To help visitors choose and prepare for the visit, the geopark website provides video clips, public transport information, trail length and difficulty level, a map and highlights of each trail, as well as a trail leaflet, which can be downloaded and printed (http://www.geopark.gov.hk/ en_s5a.htm), or obtained at geopark visitor centers. Basic visitor facilities, such as piers, trails, safety warning boards (Fig. 4i) and toilets, are provided. (3) Strong scientific interpretation system In general, the interpretation of geosites may be easy and interesting to geoscientists but difficult and dull for nonspecialists. As pointed by Hose (2012), geo-interpretation is not about ‘‘dumbing down’’ the science but rather developing vehicles to convey a message to tourists using a gradual journey of knowledge. Thus, the major point of interpretation is the phrase ‘‘as perceived by people’’ (Erikstad, 2013). Since Hong Kong National Geopark was approved by the Ministry of Land and Resources (MLR) of China in 2009, interpretative boards and panels for the geosites have been upgraded several times to ensure that visitors find the content interesting and easy to understand. All the panels have undergone a series of editorial revisions to simplify the content for easy understanding and are provided in English and Chinese. After several years of exploration and experience, all the interpretative boards and panels now have a standard format with eight elements: (1) the GGN logo, the National Geopark of China logo and the Hong Kong Geopark logo to increase geopark visibility; (2) a concise and interesting heading; (3) a short explanation of the main geosite features; (4) diagrams illustrating the formation of the features; (5) a representative photo of the feature; (6) a map showing the geotrail and location of the panels along the trail; (7) the code number of the geosite; and (8) a mark indicating the location of the panel (Fig. 4j). To cater for the needs of boat tours, a special interpretation system has been designed, using a speaking pen and a special map which allow tourists to listen to an interpretation text by pointing to a geosite on the map. (4) Mass promotion and education material The AFCD has teamed up with the Hong Kong Tourism Board to promote HKGG to visitors by organizing and participating in exhibitions and geo-cultural activities. With the support of a local business group involved in the transport industry, videos on various interesting geosites in HKGG and an MTV clip of the HKGG theme song have been broadcast on public buses and ferries. The broadcasts have greatly aroused the public’s interest in the geosites. On 24 July, 2014, Hong Kong Post launched a new set of definitive stamps with 16 different denominations with ‘‘HKGG of China’’ as the theme (Fig. 4k). These definitive stamps display the unique coastal landscape of HKGG. According to UNESCO (2014), geoparks should have three targets: conservation, education and development of the local economy through geotourism. It can be said that among the main goals of geoparks are preserving unique geoheritage and introduce it as a tourist attraction, and popularizing geological science. Over the last decade, the AFCD has partnered with many nongovernmental

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437

436

organizations to publish over 200 books, which are sold in major bookstores in Hong Kong (Fig. 4l). This has proved to be the most effective means of science popularization and has been widely welcomed by the public. (5) Active exchange and training activities To ensure that HKGG policies are in line with the GGN requirements, representatives from HKGG have visited over 20 geoparks in mainland China, Japan, Australia and Europe to learn from good examples, and Mainland and overseas experts have been invited to visit HKGG to give valuable advice. Every year representatives from HKGG also attend various conferences organized at home and abroad. These visits have been very useful in helping to identify areas for improvement and in learning how to make changes. HKGG has also established a sister arrangement with six global geoparks, such as English Riviera Global Geopark, United Kingdom; Marble Arch Caves Global Geopark, United Kingdom/Republic of Ireland; and Geo-Naturpark Bergtrasse-Odenward, Germany. In general, activities with the six sister geoparks include organizing workshops, mutual promotion, exchanging specimens for display, and mutual visits. In addition, arrangements are made to ensure that all geopark staff receive basic training on geology, geoconservation, geotourism and geoparks, which not only is fundamental to the good management of the geopark, but also supplements and strengthens the work of geoconservation and geotourism. (6) Collaboration with local communities HKGG’s efforts and experience in encouraging local participation in HKGG could be of great value in geoconservation and geotourism. Geoconservation has gradually become a strong movement in local communities in Hong Kong since the Association for Geoconservation, Hong Kong (AGHK) was set up in 2006 with the aim of promoting the importance of geoconservation. This has expedited geopark development by arousing public awareness of the importance of protecting valuable geoheritage and encouraging public participation in geotourism. This has helped create strong public interest, appreciation and knowledge of geoheritage, as well as support for the geopark. Furthermore, HKGG plays an important role in rural development through local involvement in geopark and geotourism activities. HKGG engages local communities in designing new tourist facilities, such as trail alignment, content selection and material selection. The local communities also make recommendations on the location of the interpretation panels and safety warning boards. In the development of the boat tours, the boat operators are involved in suggesting visitor routes which meet different requirements. To promote local development through geodiversity, HKGG encourages local companies to invest in and contribute to the development of the local economy. This engagement spans several sectors, such as geopark hotels (Fig. 4m), geopark gourmet (Fig. 4h) and providers of outdoor leisure activities, and plays a very important role in geotourism development. It is obvious that HKGG contributes positively to the daily lives of local communities by working together with them. 7. Conclusion As geodiversity, geoconservation and geotourism are rather new, emerging topics in the earth science field (Hjort and Luoto, 2010; Gordon et al., 2012), HKGG puts a lot of effort into promoting geodiversity, geoconservation and geotourism. In addition to a good management foundation, the main achievements in promoting geoconservation and geotourism in HKGG are as follows: (1) Establishment of effective conservation management.

(2) (3) (4) (5)

Optimization of tourism infrastructure. Reinforcement of the science interpretation system. Effectiveness of mass promotion and education. Taking the initiative in organizing exchange and learning activities. (6) Engaging in close collaboration with local communities. Through these effective measures and unremitting effort, HKGG has become a major tourist destination, and this can be used as a model for the development of geoconservation and geotourism in other geoparks. One serious challenge that HKGG faces, however, is the potential conflict between geoconservation and scientific observation. In HKGG, there are designated geoheritage protection areas, but there is no clear indication of places where sampling is allowed or prohibited for scientific study. In the long run, we suggest HKGG designate certain areas where geologists have access to samples for geoscience research. Acknowledgements This work was supported by an investigation program of the AFCD, of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Grant No. AFCD/SQ/92/14). We are very grateful to Dr. Ka-ming Yeung, Alvin Ng and T.K. Woo of the geopark division of the AFCD for their help during the field investigation.

References Brown, E., Gordon, J., 2011. Climate change: learning from our geological past. Earth Heritage 35, 25–26. Bruno, D.E., Crowley, B.E., Gutake, J.M., Moroni, A., Nazarenko, O.V., Oheim, K.B., Ruban, D.A., Tiess, G., Zorina, S.O., 2014. Paleogeography as geological heritage: developing geosite classification. Earth-Science Reviews 138, 300–312. Bruno, D.E., Perrotta, P., 2012. A geotouristic proposal for Amendolara territory (northern ionic sector of Calabria, Italy). Geoheritage 4, 139–151. Bridgland, D.R., 2013. Geoconservation of Quaternary sites and interests. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 124, 612–624. Burek, C., 2012. The importance of Quaternary geoconservation. Quaternary Newsletter 126, 25–33. Campbell, S.D.G., Sewell, R.J., 1997. Structure control and tectonic setting of Mesozoic volcanism in Hong Kong. Journal of the Geological Society 154, 1039–1052. Cleal, C.J., Thomas, B.A., Bevins, R.E., Wimbledon, W.A.P., 1999. Geosites – an international geoconservation initiative. Geology Today 15 (2), 64–68. Davis, A.M., 1999. Quaternary stratigraphy of Hong Kong coastal sediments. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 17, 521–531. Davis, D.W., Sewell, R.J., Campbell, S.D.G., 1997. U-Pb dating of Mesozoic igneous rocks from Hong Kong. Journal of the Geological Society 154, 1067–1076. Dickson, M.E., 2006. Shore platform development around Lord Howe Island, southwest Pacific. Geomorphology 76, 295–315. Dixon, G., 1996. Geoconservation: An International Review and Strategy for Tasmania. Miscellaneous Report. Parks and Wildlife Service, Tasmania, pp. 1–101. Dong, H.M., Song, Y.G., Chen, T., Zhao, J.B., Yu, L.P., 2014. Geoconservation and geotourism in Luochuan Loess National Geopark, China. Quaternary International 334–335, 40–51. Dowling, R., Newsome, D., 2010. Geotourism: a global activity. In: Dowling, R., Newsome, D. (Eds.), Global Geotourism Perspectives. Goodfellow Publishers, Woodeaton, pp. 1–17. Dowling, R.K., 2010. Geotourism’s global growth. Geoheritage 3 (1), 1–13. Dunbar, P.K., 2007. Increasing public awareness of natural hazards via the Internet. Natural Hazards 42 (3), 529–536. Eder, F.W., Patzak, M., 2004. Geoparks – geological attractions: a tool for public education, recreation and sustainable economic development. Episodes 25, 162–164. Erikstad, L., 2013. Geoheritage and geodiversity management – the questions for tomorrow. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 124, 713–719. Farsani, N.T., Coelho, C., Costa, C., 2012. Geotourism and geoparks as gateways to sociocultural sustainability in Qeshm rural areas, Iran. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 17, 30–48. Fyfe, J.A., Shaw, R., Campbell, S.D.G., Lai, K.W., Kirk, P.A., 2000. The Quaternary Geology of Hong Kong. Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil Engineering Department, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, pp. 1–43. Gordon, J.E., 2012. Rediscovering a sense of wonder: geoheritage, geotourism and cultural landscape experiences. Geoheritage 4, 65–77. Gordon, J.E., Barron, H.F., Hansom, J.D., Thomas, M.F., 2012. Engaging with geodiversity – why it matters. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 123, 1–6.

L. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 126 (2015) 426–437 Gray, M., 2004. Geodiversity: Valuing and Conserving Abiotic Nature. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK 434 pp. Gray, M., 2005. Geodiversity and geoconservation: what, why, and how? In: Santucci, V.L. (Ed.), Papers Presented at the George Wright Forum. pp. 4–12. Gray, M., 2008. Geodiversity: the origin and evolution of a paradigm. In: Burek, C.V., Prosser, C.D. (Eds.), The History of Geoconservation, vol. 300. The Geological Society, London, Special Publications, pp. 31–36. Gray, M., 2013. Geodiversity: Valuing and Conserving Abiotic Nature, 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell, , pp. 3–14. Gray, M., Gordon, J.E., Brown, E.J., 2013. Geodiversity and the ecosystem approach: the contribution of geoscience in delivering integrated environmental management. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 124, 659–673. Hjort, J., Luoto, M., 2010. Geodiversity of high latitude landscapes in northern Finland. Geomorphology 115, 109–116. Hose, T.A., 2000. European ‘‘geotourism’’ – geological interpretation and conservation promotion for tourists. In: Barettino, D., Wimbledon, W.A.P., Gallego, E. (Eds.), Geological Heritage: Its Conservation and Management. ITGE, Madrid, pp. 127–146. Hose, T.A., 2005. Geotourism and interpretation. In: Dowling, R.K., Newsome, D. (Eds.), Geotourism. Elsevier, Oxford, UK, pp. 221–241. Hose, T.A., 2011. The English origins of geotourism (as a vehicle for geoconservation) and their relevance to current studies. Acta Geographica Slovenica 51 (3), 343–359. Hose, T.A., 2012. 3gs for modern geotourism. Geoheritage 4 (1–2), 7–14. Hose, T.A., Vasiljevic, D.A., 2012. Defining the nature and purpose of Modern Geotourism with particular reference to the United Kingdom and South-East Europe. Geoheritage 4 (1–2), 25–43. Hose, T.A., Wickens, E., 2004. Typologies, tourism locations and images: meeting the real needs of real tourists. In: Weber, S., Tomljenovic´, R. (Eds.), Reinventing a Tourism Destination: Facing the Challenge. Institute for Tourism, Zagreb, pp. 103–114. Huang, J., 1984. Changes in deltas and major rivers of China in historical periods. In: Whyte, R.O. (Ed.), The Evolution of the East Asian Environment, vol. 1. Centre for Asian Studies, The University of Hong Kong, pp. 320–338. Jin, Q., Ruban, D.A., 2011. A conceptual framework of tourism crowding management at geological heritage sites. Natura Nascosta 43, 1–17. Lai, K.W., 1991. Stratigraphy of the Ping Chau Formation. Geological Society of Hong Kong Newsletter 9, 3–23. Lee, C.M., Chen, J.H., He, G.X., Lai, K.W., 1997. Stratigraphical sequence of Hong Kong. Journal of Stratigraphy 21, 161–181 (in Chinese with English abstract). Li, J.S., Yan, Y.D., 1999. Formation and evolution of island in the Hong Kong area. Marine Sciences 1, 61–64 (in Chinese with English abstract). Loon, A.J.V., 2008. Geological education of the future. Earth-Science Reviews 86, 247–254. Morton, B., 1996. Protecting Hong Kong’s marine biodiversity: present proposals, future challenges. Environmental Conservation 23 (1), 55–65. Moscardo, G., 1998. Interpretation and sustainable tourism: functions, examples and principles. Journal of Tourism Studies 9 (1), 2–13. Nau, P.S., 1979. Geological notes on the sedimentary rocks of Ping Chau Island, Mirs Bay, Hong Kong. Annals of the Geographical, Geological and Archaeological Society. University of Hong Kong 7, 33–41. Newsome, D., Dowling, R., 2010. Geotourism: The Tourism of Geology and Landscape. Goodfellow Publishers, Oxford, pp. 1–300. Ng, Y.C.Y., 2007. The Urban Geopark Concept as a tool in geological conservation in a metropolitan city – the Case of Hong Kong. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Development within Geoparks. Geological Publishing House, Beijing, pp. 247–255. Ng, Y.C.Y., Fung, L.W., Newsome, D., 2010. Hong Kong geopark – uncovering the geology of a metropolis. In: Dowling, R.K., Newsome, D. (Eds.), Global Geotourism Perspectives. Goodfellow Publishers, Oxford, pp. 179–191. Owen, R.B., 1995. Rock platforms – characteristics and origins. Hong Kong Geologist 1, 43–45. Panizza, M., 2001. Geomorphosites: concepts, methods and examples of geomorphological survey. Chinese Science Bulletin 46, 4–6. Patzack, M., Eder, W., 1998. UNESCO Geopark, a new programme – a new UNESCO label. Geologica Balcanica 28 (3–4), 33–35. ProGEO, 1998. A first attempt at a geosites framework for Europe – an IUGS initiative to support recognition of world heritage and European geodiversity. Geologica Balcanica 28 (3–4), 5–32. Prosser, C.D., 2013. Our rich and varied geoconservation portfolio: the foundation for the future. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 124, 568–580. Prosser, C.D., Brown, E.J., Larwood, J.G., Bridgland, D.R., 2013. Geoconservation for science and society – an agenda for the future. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 124, 561–567. Ruban, D.A., 2010. Quantification of geodiversity and its loss. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 121, 326–333. Ruban, D.A., Kuo, I., 2010. Essentials of geological heritage site (geosite) management: a conceptual assessment of interests and conflicts. Natura Nascosta 41, 16–31. Sewell, R.J., Campbell, S.D.G., Fletcher, C.J.N., Lai, K.W., Kirk, P.A., 2000. The Prequaternary Geology of Hong Kong. Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil

437

Engineering Department, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, pp. 1–157. Sewell, R.J., Tang, D.L.K., Campbell, S.D.G., 2012. Volcanic-plutonic connections in a tilted nested caldera complex in Hong Kong. Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems 13, Q01006. Sharples, C., 1993. A methodology for the identification of significant landforms and geological sites for geoconservation purposes. Technical Report. Forestry Commission Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania. Taylor, G., Workman, D.R., Peart, M.R., 1990. The rocks of Ping Chau, Mirs Bay, Hong Kong. Geological Society of Hong Kong Newsletter 8, 46–50. Tian, M.Z., 2012. Rising national geoparks and geoheritage conservation of China developed a new research field of the Quaternary science. Quaternary International 279–280, 492. Tian, M.Z., Cheng, J., 2009. Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology. Geology Publishing House, Beijing, pp. 1–307 (in Chinese). Tian, M.Z., Wu, F.D., Zhang, J.P., Wang, L.L., Xie, L.L., Liu, S.W., 2009. Comprehensive report of Hong Kong Geopark. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong SAR Government (in Chinese). Todorov, T., Wimbledon, W.A.P., 2004. Geological heritage conservation on international, regional, national and local levels. Polish Geological Institute Special Papers 13, 9–12. Trenhaile, A.S., 2000. Modeling the development of wave-cut shore platforms. Marine Geology 166, 163–178. Trenhaile, A.S., 2001. Modeling the effect of late Quaternary interglacial sea levels on wave-cut shore platforms. Marine Geology 172, 205–223. UNESCO, 2014. Guidelines and Criteria for National Geoparks Seeking UNESCO’s Assistance to Join the Global Geoparks Network (GGN). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, , pp. 1–13. Waele, J.D., Mucedda, M., Montanaro, L., 2009. Morphology and origin of coastal karst landforms in Miocene and Quaternary carbonate rocks along the centralwestern coast of Sardinia (Italy). Geomorphology 106, 26–34. Wang, L.L., Tian, M.Z., Wen, X.F., Zhao, L.L., Song, J.L., Sun, M., Wang, H., Lan, Y.H., Sun, M., 2014. Geoconservation and geotourism in Arxan-Chaihe Volcano Area, Inner Mongolia, China. Quaternary International 349, 384–391. Wong, C.G., 2013. Country parks and marine parks in Hong Kong. Shanghai Urban Planning Review 6, 6 (in Chinese). Wong, W.T., Li, K.W., Yeung, K.H., 2003. Long term sea level change in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Meteorological Society Bulletin 13, 23–40. Worton, G.J., Gillard, R., 2013. Local communities and young people – the future of geoconservation. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 124, 681–690. Wu, F.D., Tian, M.Z., Zhang, J.P., Wang, L.L., 2011. Resource types and construction features of Hong Kong National Geopark. Acta Geoscientica Sinica 32 (6), 761–768 (in Chinese with English abstract). Xing, G.F., Ng, C.Y., Tao, K.Y., Ng, S.L., Chen, R., Jiang, Y., Li, Z.M., Yu, M.G., 2011. Petrological study of High Island Formation volcanic columns in the Hong Kong National Geopark. Geology in China 38 (4), 1079–1093 (in Chinese with English abstract). Yeung, K.M., 2007. 30th Anniversary of Country Park. Friends of the Country Parks, Hong Kong, pp. 1–195 (in Chinese). Yeung, K.M., 2008. Geodiversity – a new challenge for nature conservation in Hong Kong. In: Proceedings of Asia-Pacific Seminar on Geological Conservation and Sustainable Development, Hong Kong, pp. 47–58. Yeung, K.M., Chan, Y.N., 2010. Rediscovering geology and Hong Kong. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong SAR Government. Yeung, K.M., Ng, C.Y., 2008. Landmark Excursions. Friends of the Country Parks, Hong Kong, pp. 1–199. Yim, W.W.S., 1999. Radiocarbon dating and the reconstruction of late Quaternary sea-level changes in Hong Kong. Quaternary International 55, 77–91. Yim, W.W.S., 2001. Stratigraphy of Quaternary offshore sand and gravel deposits in the Hong Kong SAR, China. Quaternary International 82, 101–116. Yu, F., Switzer, A.D., Lau, A.Y.A., Yeung, H.Y.E., Chik, S.W., Chiu, H.C., Huang, Z., Pile, J., 2013. A comparison of the post-storm recovery of two sandy beaches on Hong Kong Island, southern China. Quaternary International 304, 163–175. Zhang, J.P., Wu, F.D., Tian, M.Z., Xie, L.L., Liu, S.W., Wang, L.L., 2009. Tung Ping ChauGeopark Field Guide. Friends of the Country Parks, Hong Kong, pp. 1–17. Zhang, X.Q., 2000. High-rise and high-density urban form: the development of Hong Kong. In: Jenks, M., Burgess, R. (Eds.), Compact Cities – Sustainable Urban Forms for Developing Countries. Spon Press, London, pp. 245–254. Zhang, Y., Ge, E., 2013. Temporal scaling behavior of sea-level change in Hong Kong – multifractal temporally weighted detrended fluctuation analysis. Global and Planetary Change 100, 362–370. Zouros, N., 2010a. Lesvos Petrified Forest Geopark, Greece: geoconservation, geotourism, and local development. The George Wright Forum Journal 27, 19–28. Zouros, N., 2002. The European Geoparks Network: geological heritage protection and local development. Episodes 25, 165–171. Zouros, N., 2010b. Geotourism in Greece: a case of the Lesvos Petrified Geopark. In: Dowling, R.K., Newsome, D. (Eds.), Global Geotourism Perspectives. Goodfellow Publishers, Oxford, pp. 215–229. Zouros, N., Martini, G., 2003. Introduction to the European Geoparks Network. In: Zouros, N., Martini, G., Frey, M.-L. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd European Geoparks Network Meeting, Natural History Museum of the Lesvos Petrified Forest, Lesvos, pp. 17–21.