Unraveling Hong Kong Geopark experience with visitor-employed photography method

Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apgeog

Unraveling Hong Kong Geopark experience with visitor-employed photography method Charmaine K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim* Department of Geography, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 8 April 2015 Received in revised form 28 May 2015 Accepted 28 May 2015 Available online xxx

Geoparks have been established around the world with the major objective of protecting significant geoheritage features and reinforcing geoconservation ideas and support through educating visitors. Understanding visitors' perception of geoheritage can inform educational and conservation endeavors. This study used the visitor-employed photography (VEP) method to unravel visitor perception of geoheritage and associated natural and cultural features in the recently designated Hong Kong Global Geopark of China (HKGP). Participants were asked to take photographs of scenes with an effect on their experience in the HKGP and to elaborate in a logbook the chosen subject, reason of choice, and effect on their travel experience. Aimed at capturing real-time and organic experiences, it was found that geoheritage plays a major role in HKGP visits. Visitors develop strong emotional connections with nature through appreciating and learning about prominent features of both small and landscape scales. However, a mismatch was found between visitor belief or incorrect geological or geomorphological knowledge with inherently strong enthusiasm in deciphering the science behind geoheritage. The findings permit development of a new approach of geopark interpretation, commencing with aesthetic and emotional connections with geoheritage features. Modification of fixed on-site provisions and guiding services directed at visitor interests can better spread geoheritage knowledge and reinforce geoconservation ideas. Modeling after overseas practices, a park ranger system, audio guide devices and smart phone applications are essential to achieve meritorious geopark management, appreciation, and enjoyment. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Geopark Geoconservation Visitor-employed photography Geoheritage interpretation Nature appreciation Nature-based education

1. Introduction 1.1. Study context Geotourism is a form of nature-based tourism where people travel to admire and learn about notable geological (Dowling, 2011) and geomorphological features. Its unique conglomeration of tourism, cultural, economic and educational elements, and human interactions with local geology and landform, warrants the development of a dedicated field of knowledge (Farsani, Coelho, Costa, & Amrikazemi, 2014; Fung & Jim, 2015). Extending beyond the basic notion of tourist satisfaction through geological appreciation, geotourism denotes an encompassing vision of economic and environmental sustainability, geological education and the safeguarding and enhancement of local culture and livelihood

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (C.Y. Jim). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.05.014 0143-6228/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

(Dowling, 2011; Farsani et al., 2014). These ideas are elaborated and reinforced in the guidelines to application for membership to the Global Network of National Geoparks (GGN). The initiative is supported by the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for knowledge exchange and collaboration (GGN, 2010) among a growing number of geoparks around the world. In recent years, geoconservation has been accorded priorities (Farsani et al., 2014) to enhance geological awareness (Eder & Patzak, 2004). High incidences of international and regional geopark conferences (European Geoparks Network, 2014; GGN, 2014; HKSAR Government, 2014a) also reinforce geotourism as a global agenda. As geotourism activities can promote socio-economic development (Zhao & Zhao, 2003) and raise awareness for geoconservation (Neches¸ & Erdeli, 2015), the endowed regions are earnest to join this fledging market (Newsome & Johnson, 2013). This is reflected by the vast amount of literature on geotourism potentials, such as recent studies in Western Australia (Pforr,

302

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

Dowling, & Newsome, 2014), Nigeria (Anifowose & Kolawole, 2014), Poland (Nita & Myga-Pia˛ tek, 2014) and Romania (Neches¸ & Erdeli, 2015). Geotourism may impose visitor impacts to conflict with the cardinal goal of geoconservation. Visitors equipped with adequate geological knowledge are more likely to protect the environment and avoid negative activities and behaviors (Fung & Jim, 2015). Geopark management invariably includes an appreciable educational component to influence visitor behavior. Understanding visitor expectation and perception of geological features provides a basis to implement this endeavor. After initial setting up of the geoparks, nature and visitor management strategies are often based on the perceptions and visions of scientists and managers who tend to assume user preferences. Subsequently, the management strategies could be refined after gleaning responses from visitors, whose preferences may differ from the original management assumptions. The management approach is expected to be continually developed and modified according to user preferences regarding way-finding, visitation control and on-site management. In the long run, user inputs into guidelines are highly-valued to improve the quality of visit experiences (Lynn & Brown, 2003), to satisfy users, promote repeat visitation and cultivate goodwill. On-site questionnaire surveys and interviews are popular and conventional methods to gather data on visitor perception and expectation. As a new approach to geotourism research, this study utilizes the visitoremployed photography (VEP) method to investigate visitor experience in the Hong Kong Geopark (HKGP). The analysis focuses on how geoheritage features are perceived and experienced. Based on real-time and instinctual responses of participant attitudes and interests in geoheritage, the value of HKGP features and protection efforts are ascertained. From the findings, alternative interpretive educational approaches can be developed to foster geoconservation and contribute to the literature in geotourism, nature-based recreation and related management strategy. 1.2. Geotourism and geoconservation Geotourism definitions presented by Newsome and Dowling (2010) and in the Arouca Declaration (Anonymous, 2011) agree that the activity is based on one's travel to a site with a specific geological aspect. Most definitions further acknowledge the requirement of learning through interpretative provisions at the geological site. However, the prerequisite element of appreciating or merely looking at the geological features was overlooked, mentioned by less than half of the researchers in a summary of geotourism definitions by Fung and Jim (2015). Apparent trends in geotourism research show accentuation of the core issues of geology and geomorphology e collectively referred to as geoheritage in this study. Studies in key areas such as geological interpretation r, Engel, & Domaracka , 2009) (Hose, 2000), marketing (Gerner, Ryba and local economic, social and cultural sustainability (Farsani, Coelho, & Costa, 2012) have remained strong. Peripheral studies of the historical relationship between humans and unique local  mez-Ortiz, Oliva, Salv landscapes were also conducted (Go a & Latocha, 2013). It is Catarineu, & Salvador-Franch, 2013; Migon equally important for this fledging form of tourism to comprehend how visitors make contact with the site and what they think and feel. Such knowledge can inform the development of related tourism, interpretative and managerial provisions for greater achievement of geoconservation as a key geotourism objective. The main idea of geoconservation is to protect geological features (e.g. rock columns, fossils) (Partin, Robinson, & Meade, 2006) and to maintain the geodiversity and geological representativeness of a region (Hose and Vasiljevi c, 2012). Positive perception of geological values is a cornerstone to public support for

conservation and management of these protected areas. Education is the core strategy to achieve this end (Xu, Cui, Ballantyne, & Packer, 2012) and fundamental to the sustainable development of geoparks (Farsani et al., 2014). Efforts such as establishing and operating visitor centers, field guiding services (Newsome & Dowling, 2010), workshops and interpretative provisions (e.g. signs, featured walks) aim at equipping visitors with the correct scientific information, attitudes and awareness to fuel geoconservation. Geological education begins with visitors making actual contact with the site (Thrower, 1984). It allows visitors to understand different earth processes involved in creating the geological wonder (Eder & Patzak, 2004). Knowledge acquirement has the immediate effect of increasing trip satisfaction (Thrower, 1984); if appropriately administered, on-site interpretation can maximize the former benefit while upholding high wilderness levels of sites (van Riper, Kyle, Sutton, Barnes, & Sherrouse, 2012). Furthermore, long lasting memories of the knowledge and experience can be created through connecting geoheritage with visitors' personal lives (Walker & Moscardo, 2014). The ideal for geoconservation should stem from visitor awareness and discipline through education (Fung & Jim, 2015). In turn, the imbibed knowledge can be transformed into appropriate behavior to minimize destructive acts (e.g. clambering on rock columns) that threaten the completeness and quality of geological features. As a result, excessive site hardening (e.g. fences or barriers) that creates distance between visitors and geological features could be avoided. Photographs with better image construction (e.g. with proximity to the feature and free from artificial barriers) can be created for more joyous memories and extensive sharing with friends to promote geotourism. Since a lasting nature-based experience is constructed through experiences with a broad “sensescape” (Prazeres & Donohoe, 2014), close contact with geological features can allow aesthetic appreciation beyond the sense of sight (Kirillova, Fu, Lehto, & Cai, 2014). Expanding the tactile dimension of geotourism experiences deepens the experience as visitors can feel the rock textures and difference in mineral sizes with their hands. This dimension can also be developed into accessible tours (e.g. for the blind) (Farsani et al., 2014), spreading the geoconservation message to a broader audience. As geotourism transcends into a global phenomenon involving more international travelers, education has become more important in molding thinking and behavior. In 2014, mainland Chinese tourists visiting the HKGP were observed to be digging around coastal areas and taking away rock souvenirs (Yahoo! News Hong Kong, 2014). These damaging actions were against the Visitor Code displayed on-site and broadcasted on free-to-air Hong Kong television channels. Suchlike behaviors in geoparks call for augmented efforts on geoconservation, especially global endeavors in knowledge exchange to promote appropriate behavior, similar values of global resources, and civic responsibility. As emphasized by Boley, Nickerson, and Bosak (2011), the promotion of local values as a core geotourism objective should be observed by visitors, who should learn and incorporate appropriate behavior in their travel, and not to expect the destination to change to accommodate them. This should apply to both cultural, behavioral, geoconservation and civic values in geotourism. Global agreement on geotourism values and relevant actions are necessary to achieve harmonious geopark ambiance with top priority to geoheritage protection. 2. Study area 2.1. The Hong Kong Geopark The Hong Kong Geopark covers 50 km2 of land and sea in the East and Northeast New Territories of Hong Kong (Fig. 1). The HKGP

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

303

Fig. 1. Map of the Hong Kong Global Geopark and the field sampling and data collection sites. Sampled footpaths include (A) Ping Chau Country Trail, (B) Lai Chi Wo Nature Trail, (C) Ma Shi Chau Nature Trail, (D) Lai Chi Chong Nature Trail, (E) Tai Long Wan Hiking Trail, (F) High Island Geotrail, (G) Sharp Island Geotrail and (H) Kat O Nature Trail. Specific sites of geological interest are labeled (a)e(h): (a) Tung Ping Chau, (b) Lai Chi Wo, (c) Double Haven (d) Port Island, (e) Ma Shi Chau, (f) Tai Long Wan, (g) Sharp Island, (h) Po Pin Chau, (i) Ung Kong Group and (j) Ninepin Group.

was donned with National Geopark status of China before its official opening in 2009, and was subsequently accorded membership to the Global Geoparks Network in 2011 (to be reviewed and renewed in 2015). The park was established for geoconservation and also as a backdrop for quality nature-based education to promote the idea and related geological science (HKSAR Government, 2014b). Visitation reached around 1.5 million in 2011e12, with a slight drop of

0.1 million in 2012e2013 (HKSAR Government, 2014b). Two distinct zones of sedimentary and volcanic rock formations are designated. The Northeast New Territories Sedimentary Rock Region hosts Permian sedimentary rock outcrops and Hong Kong's oldest stratum of Devonian sedimentary rock that forms the feature ‘the Devil's Fist’. The coastal location is characterized by marine erosional processes which formed the scenic Tung Ping Chau with

304

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

well-formed wave-cut platforms and sea stacks from clear-bedded shale. The area is also steeped in the millennium-old Hakka culture at Kat O, which is often experienced alongside HKGP tours. A Jurassic volcanic eruption in the Sai Kung Volcanic Region formed the remote Ninepin Group with hexagonal columns in the south. In the same region, the High Island Reservoir hosts the magnificent sea stack of Po Pin Chau backdropped by the vast ocean (Fig. 2) and a close view of twisted rock columns (Fig. 3). Both regions are bestowed with outstanding coastal scenic beauty and landforms such as tombolos and beaches. Most sites are accessible by public land and sea transport and are frequented mainly by locals for day-trips on both self-guided and commercial tours. Furthermore, paved trails have been installed at the above sites for convenient access to geoheritage sights. Interpretation and directional signage are dotted along the trails to help unprepared or less informed visitors (Fung & Jim, 2015). Exceptions apply to Port Island, the Ung Kong Group and the Ninepin Group which do not have public ferry services or proper docking facilities. Often, personal boat arrangements are required and visitors have to transit into a small speedboat to reach the islands, and it is only possible on days with less daring waves. Despite intermittent tracks around the islands, the terrain is relatively challenging and is only recommended as destinations for more experienced hikers. 2.2. Interpretation and visitation To promote high-quality geological interpretation on tours with low visitor-guide ratio, the certification program of Recommended Geopark Guides (R2G) was established by the Association for Geoconservation and supported by the government's Agricultural, Fisheries and Conservation Department (i.e. the HKGP authority). In order to uphold public confidence and professionalism of R2G, the terms of probation and reassessment are strictly set. Apart from completing a syllabus of geo- and eco-tourism, >40 h of geotour guiding experience is a basic requirement (Recommended Geopark Guide System, 2015). The HKSAR Government (2014b) estimated the proportion of overseas visitors (referring to all non-local visitors) to the HKGP at merely 1e2%, while a recent HKGP study saw a higher proportion at 4.3% (Fung & Jim, 2015). Nonetheless, there is potential to increase

Fig. 3. An outstanding geological landscape feature, the folded hexagonal columns at the High Island Reservoir, is a popular spot that attracts responses querying its formation. Other interpretation signs (e.g. Fig. 6) are located at vantage points for visitors to learn about the feature. Photo credits: Dede Man.

overseas visitation, and the Hong Kong Tourism Board is actively promoting the HKGP through channels such as online social media (HKSAR Government, 2014b) to expand the international market. Furthermore, ancillary improvements to main roads to the Geopark region (e.g. the Hiram's Highway) are being planned to relieve traffic congestion into the Sai Kung area (Highways Department, 2014). 2.3. Other notable local geological features

Fig. 2. The sea stack named Po Pin Chau (yellow arrow) is an example of an attractive geological landscape feature. This photo was shot by a participant standing at the East Dam of the High Island Reservoir. The participant imagined the landscape as a turtle with the sea stack as the head and the adjacent land as the turtle's back. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Hong Kong has a warm and humid subtropical climate, with granite covering most parts of the territory. Under favorable conditions for weathering, many highly figurative tors are created in countryside areas. Although they fall short of strict geopark requirements of being rare and significant, they are backed by wellknown folklores and significant local cultural symbolism. Their sites are popular choices for day-trips, hikes and excursions. Southeast of Hong Kong Island, Po Poi Island features erosional outcrops mimicking a large turtle, a monk and a coffin. The Amah Rock in the New Territories resembles a woman carry a baby on her back. It is connected with the folklore that she turned into a rock after years of waiting forlornly for her seafaring husband to return. The Lion Rock presents a lion's lateral silhouette that is clearly visible from far across the Victoria Harbour. Since the economic hardship in the 1970s and creation of the renowned song ‘Under the Lion Rock’, the hill has been deeply etched in local culture as a long-standing symbol of people's indomitable spirit to soldier on despite the odds.

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

3. Methods 3.1. Visitor-employed photography (VEP) method A strongly experiential research method (Dakin, 2003), VEP makes use of the entrenched tourist habit of photo-taking to capture visitor perceptions in-situ. It is also a form of public engagement for constructive contribution to planning and management of natural resources (Beilin, 2005). As beneficiaries of the HKGP, it is suggested the public should be involved in decision-making regarding the management of the area (Castro et al., 2015). Commonly used in nature-based recreation or tourism contexts, each participant is given a camera before their trip to create snapshots according to preset guidelines and to complete soon afterward corresponding log records in a booklet. The cameraelog combination allows visitors to keep an image as well as its on-thespur written records, and other things that strike their minds during the whole trip. This arrangement can avoid limitations of common post-experience methods (e.g. interviews) such as memory decay and altered perceptions of displacement from the experience's setting (e.g. the trail) (Taylor, Fletcher, & Calbaugh, 1993). Furthermore, participants are conferred a ‘leading role’ (Loeffler, 2004) in the study as they are given a high degree of freedom to generate data within broadly defined research boundaries. Unlike traditional methods (e.g. questionnaire survey), VEP data is dynamic, intuitive, organic, real-time and free from expert redefinition (Dorwart, Moore, & Leung, 2010; Heyman, 2012; Taylor, Czarnowski, & Flick, 1995). Studies generally cover one-time and spontaneous recreational visitor experiences in natural settings (e.g. urban forest, national park or mountain trail) (Dorwart et al., 2010; Heyman, 2012; Taylor et al., 1995) or at tourist spots (e.g. historic or world heritage site) (MacKay & Couldwell, 2004). As conveyors of multi-dimensional and manifold meanings, photographs capture broad dynamics of the visitor experience. Participants are required to record the photographed subject, reason of choice and the subject's effect on their experience right after each photograph is taken. This permits accurate analysis and minimizes disagreements among specialists (Dorwart et al., 2010) or problematic inference of importance to elements incidentally occurring in frames (Taylor et al., 1995). First conducted in the 1970s (Heyman, 2012), the VEP method has been applied to nature-based recreation studies mainly to decipher visitor experiences and preferences for advising management and conservation actions. The flexible and rather openended VEP method can yield a wide range of results from which researchers can perform both general and selective analysis according to study objectives. In VEP studies by Dorwart et al. (2010) and Heyman (2012), it was found that nature-oriented details and picturesque views had extremely strong positive influence on visitor experience (Jim, 2000). Dorwart et al. (2010) required visitors at the Great Smoky Mountains National Park to record both positive and negative aspects encountered along the trail. Heyman (2012) conducted a more structured study in which participants were instructed to take a fixed number of photographs of urban forest settings equally distributed between liked and disliked scenes. VEP records of natural and anthropogenic elements, vistas, fellow hikers (Dorwart et al., 2010) and forest landscapes (Heyman, 2012) were enjoyed. However, traces of destructive human influence were often disliked. Evidence of depreciative behaviors (e.g. litter, damaged tree) (Dorwart et al., 2010) and artificial or human-modified objects (e.g. a golf course and construction work) (Heyman, 2012) were largely disliked. As a study of the role of aquatic resources on visitor experience, participants were invited to photograph elements that significantly

305

affected their visit at the Rocky Mountain National Park (Taylor et al., 1995). The results included notable variations of subjects, and the proportion of photographs with water-related themes to all images was used to determine a resource's importance. As a direction for managerial consideration, the presence of water (e.g. riparian features) was found to be highly important to visitors. This also renders visitors' support and willingness to pay for protection of the resource. Conservation advice from VEP studies also includes suggestions for maintenance of natural forest settings (i.e. both open and with dense understory) and minimizing managerial influence to create more likable urban woodlands (Heyman, 2012). VEP studies may be extended with semi-structured interviews (Heyman, 2012) or focus group interviews, using VEP-generated photographs as elicitation (Oku & Fukamachi, 2006) to induce deeper visitor responses. Often, broader research directions could be developed from the results and VEP as a site management tool is advocated (Dorwart et al., 2010). 3.2. Data collection and response rate Data collection was conducted on 24 days between July and October 2011, of which 20 days were public holidays or weekends. The summer weather was generally fine. The five field sampling sites (Fig. 1) included three intra-park and two pier locations from which the respondents started their journey: Ma Shi Chau (MSC), High Island Reservoir (HIR), Tai Long Wan, Ma Liu Shui Pier and Sai Kung Pier (SKP). Pier sites are chosen to capture responses from visitors to HKGP's island sites. The response rate was 50.0%, denoting collection of 163 usable VEP sets. Complication and burden of the exercise (39.7%), lack of time (14.3%), and lack of interest (13.5%) were the main refusal reasons offered by participants. Time intervals and ratios of VEP distribution were strictly controlled to minimize modification of the geopark environment and mutual influence of VEP participants. Due to different travel patterns at intra-park and pier locations, the sampling approach varied at different sites. Visitors passing by intra-park sites and headed for Sharp Island (i.e. island site accessible from SKP) were approached at intervals throughout the day of data collection due to their constant flow. As visitors at pier sites usually gather in the morning in large groups (i.e. over 100 visitors) and depart by boat for a full-day trip, an approximate ratio of one VEP to 15 visitors in a group were distributed. Designed as an individual exercise, participants traveling in small, acquainted groups were chosen using the “next birthday” method. After obtaining agreement to participate, trained research assistants would brief the participants on the VEP procedures. With the camera provided, participants were required to take a maximum of 15 photographs of ‘anything with an effect on their experience in the HKGP’, and both positive and negative elements could be recorded. They were free to decide what and when to record the images. After taking each photograph, they were required to fill in the corresponding log page to record: (i) the photograph subject; (ii) the subject's effect on their trip on a 4point Likert scale (1 for very positive, 2 for positive, 3 for negative, and 4 for very negative); and (iii) the main reason for taking the photograph and other feelings and thoughts. To allow maximum available data for analysis, participants were encouraged to provide information at least on items (i) and (ii). Lastly, they were reminded that the research was based on individual perceptions and they should not let others affect their photo-taking decisions and logbook contents. Participants' basic demographics are recorded at the end of the logbook, they were free to provide a email address to receive the photographs. Single-use cameras with 24 exposures (35 mm film of ISO 400) with a waterproof case were used. Each participant was provided

306

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

with a A5-size logbook with 15 pages for making records and a pen. Cameras and logbooks were pre-numbered to ensure that they are matched. Participants were invited to leave their mobile phone numbers to ensure return of VEP sets. Loop-walk park designs and out-and-return itineraries were common among participants, for which the VEP sets were collected on the sampling day in the field. However, to enable the VEP study to cover large HKGP areas and time spans, stamped and addressed envelopes were provided to participants with one-way itineraries or on overnight camping trips.

3.3. Data analysis A total of 200 VEP sets were distributed and 163 usable VEP sets (81.5% rate of cooperation) were retrieved (11.0% by post). The majority of VEP logs (82.2%) were written in Chinese and the rest were in English. A total of 1748 photographs and 1769 usable log entries were collected; the 28 entries without accompanying photographs were still coded as log descriptions were clear. Only 35.0% of respondents used all 15 exposures, but VEP sets of all lengths were analyzed to include short trips and participants who were oblivious to their surroundings. On average, each participant took 10.7 photographs and made 10.9 subject-entries. Not all entries were accompanied by photo-taking reasons; on average, each participant provided 9.8 response entries. As preparation for content analysis, all log entries were translated into English by taking the closest meaning, with retention of personal touches, punctuations and vocabulary (Vining & Merrick, 2012) to ensure data originality. The data were classified and coded to identify prominent categories of photographed subjects and responses. Coding was based mainly on log entries; ambiguous entries were clarified or confirmed with reference to photographs. To ascertain consistency, all entries were categorized by the researchers. To improve reliability of the data set (Weber, 1990), the initial coding was reviewed and refined twice by us in a threemonth period. Taking an inductive approach, six subject categories and 12 main response categories were condensed from the VEP results (Table 1). The sixth subject category accommodated comments on the VEP method or the research per se. Despite limited number of items, some response categories were retained due to distinctive characteristics. The categories included both positive and negative

aspects. Double-counting was avoided. Response phrases and vocabulary are presented in double quotation marks to highlight participant responses. 4. Results and discussion 4.1. Basic demographics Nearly all (94.0%) respondents were Hong Kong residents (locals) and the rest were overseas tourists (6.0%) (i.e. from Mainland China and other countries). Young adults (21e30) formed a sizeable age group of 44.3%, followed by 22.7% of 31e40 year-olds. Male composition was larger (59.1%) and 73.3% of respondents have received higher education. The majority (80.0%) of respondents was working full-time and 12.7% were students. ANOVA, t- and chisquare tests confirmed that demographics had no impact on the number of photographs taken and overall impact of photographed subjects. 4.2. VEP categories and general results Similar to previous VEP studies with a natural backdrop, our results confirmed the importance accorded to nature-based elements of the HKGP trips. Over 60% of the entries were naturerelated, of which, 32.2% were categorized as ‘geoheritage’ (N ¼ 569) and 28.6% ‘nature’ (N ¼ 505) (Table 2). Nearly all respondents included one photograph each of ‘nature’ (91.4% of respondents) and geoheritage (92.6%). The remaining entries were related to experience (9.0%), human impacts (17.3%) and management issues (12.2%). Some 14 photographs (0.8%) recorded VEP equipment or the research, and thoughts on the exercise were given. The share of a range of subcategories within each of the above groups is presented in Table 3, and Table 4 provides key examples of verbal and qualitative comments for some response categories. The ‘nature’ category, including natural sceneries (e.g. mountain views), vegetation, animals, water bodies (e.g. streams), and weather elements (e.g. the sun), was well enjoyed. This category received 86.7% of positive responses with a mean score of 1.87, signifying a largely positive effect on participant experiences. Nature's details are often intriguing and add to visit experiences (Dorwart et al., 2010); in this study, 20.8% of entries were attributed

Table 1 Explanations of the six subject categories and 12 main response categories condensed from the VEP results. Subject category

Main theme

Geoheritage Nature Experience Human impacts Management issues The research

Geoheritage features of landscape and small scale; elements relating to geology. All natural elements without an expressed or implied relationship with geology. Human subjects and activities. Traces of human influence or previous presence. Way-finding, interpretative or site-hardening provisions. VEP equipment, the researcher and research assistants.

Response category

Definition

Extraordinary Enjoying Nature Curiosity and discovery Feelings Humaneland relationship Imagination Detailed account Geological knowledge Convenience Deep thoughts Physical Factual record

Subject was rare, beautiful or different from those encountered in daily life. General descriptions or feelings relating to the enjoyment of Nature. Thoughts about Nature's power or its impact on human life. Discoveries and the desire to know more about the subject or related aspects. Responses that reveal or are connected with emotions. Conservation or development that reflects the relationship between humans and Nature. Metaphor and other figurative comparison. Detailed account of the chosen subject. Records of knowledge or questions about rocks, geological formations and processes. Convenience, safety and other practical issues. Memories, cultural history and thoughts about life. Physical benefits or hardships. Factual record of parts of the trip, first encounters or memorable moments.

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

307

Table 2 Summary of VEP responses in relation to the six subject and 12 response categories. Subject category

Geoheritage

Nature

Experience

Human impacts

Management issues

The research

Response frequency (%) Response frequency (N) Positive responses (%) Mean impact scorea

32.2 569 93.2 1.69

28.6 505 86.7 1.87

9.0 160 81.7 1.92

17.3 305 48.8 2.63

12.2 215 72.8 2.03

0.8 14 83.3 1.69

Response category

Response rate within each category (%)

Extraordinary Enjoying Nature Curiosity and discovery Feelings Humaneland relationship Imagination Detailed account Geological knowledge Convenience Deep thoughts Physical Factual record

26.8 11.0 4.2 6.6 3.6 12.6 11.6 16.8 2.2 1.0 1.4 2.2

19.1 11.6 8.4 9.2 7.9 4.9 20.8 1.3 1.7 6.9 5.8 2.4

2.6 10.4 7.1 16.9 7.8 1.9 6.5 1.9 6.5 5.8 22.1 10.4

12.7 1.5 5.6 4.1 46.4 3.4 12.4 0.0 5.6 6.4 0.4 1.5

2.0 3.9 2.9 6.4 10.8 2.9 8.8 0.5 30.9 7.4 16.2 7.4

0.0 25.0 0.0 50.0 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0

Total

100

100

100

100

100

100

a

Impact scores range from 1 (very positive) to 4 (very negative).

Table 3 Distribution of respondents (%) by subcategories under the six subject categories. Subject category

Subcategory (%)

Geoheritage

Nature

Small-scale features Landscape features Guide Signage

51.1 Vegetation 40.9 Scenery

26.2 Unacquainted human subjects 21.8 Companions

1.4 1.6

18.6 Sports activities 21.4 Other leisure activities

Others

5.0

Animals Water bodies Meteorology Others

Experience

8.7 3.4

Others

to such key observations. Some 19.1% described nature as extraordinary (i.e. beautiful and rare), and 11.6% were explicit wordings of ‘enjoyment’ of nature. Adding up these responses, it is undeniable that the living ingredients, the green and the blue of the HKGP, have captured and touched the hearts of many participants (>50%). Encounters with countryside plants and animals stimulated feelings of “curiosity and discovery” (8.4% of category entries). For some participants, seeing corals, sea cucumbers and the screw pine were novelties or breakthroughs, whereas the inquisitives showed interest in “why can they (grass growing on the coastline) survive in the sea water (!)” and “why is the water (in the lake) clear”. Submerged in nature, participants mainly expressed ‘feelings’ (9.2% of category) of freedom, happiness, comfort, relaxation and tranquility. Whereas some dog lovers were happy with canine company in the HKGP, isolated entries (N ¼ 4) reflected uneasiness and insecurity upon encountering unfamiliar fauna (i.e. a bee and a feral dog) and animal excretion (e.g. cow dung) in their path. ‘Nature’ entries of beautiful and pristine sceneries prompted responses relating to humaneland relationship. A well-educated participant attributed high awareness to the fragility of nature and human responsibility to “add more green to the Earth”, “upkeep the ecological environment” and “reduce… pollution”. These antinature features reflect visitors' perception of dissatisfaction and distraction from appreciation of the keystone geoheritage endowment. Despite being part of nature, the ‘geoheritage’ entries are categorized separately under the objective of the study; as it was also extensively recorded on its own (Heyman, 2012). Small-scale

Human impacts

Management issues The research

36.3 Litter and graffiti

41.3 Transport

35.3 Equipment

28.6

18.8 Houses, temples and churches 14.4 Other constructions 13.8 Culture

16.7 Food

9.3

71.4

16.9 Others

Researcher or assistants

20.7 Shop 7.4 3.0 Trails and 40 signage 18.4 Other Facilities 7.9

geological features (51.1%) and landscape geological features (40.9% of category) dominated this category; vistas of geopark areas took up 5% of the category. Geological signage and tour guides were included in 1.6% and 1.4% of category responses. As the main feature of the HKGP, geoheritage was the most recorded subject category (32.2% of all entries) and received the best impact score of 1.69, with 93.2% of positive responses (Table 2). Participants were able to access and identify key site features at both terrestrial and coastal geopark sites. Large landscape features such as sea stacks (Fig. 2), beaches and rows of hexagonal columns (Fig. 3) were recorded. Small-scale features comprised rock details (e.g. quartz veins) (Fig. 4) and intriguing individual rocks (Fig. 5). The ‘experience’ category mainly includes recreational activities and human subjects which held active roles in each visit. Traces of human influence or presence (e.g. litter), however, were categorized as ‘human impacts’ which includes other human-made features. Enjoying nature and sharing common goals (i.e. under the ‘experience’ category) with friends and family members (18.8% of category) were occasions of sustained communication that accentuated trip satisfaction. Participants were ready to share nature with unacquainted persons (36.3% of category). Fellow visitors who were rule-abiding were preferred over those who exhibited depreciative behavior (e.g. collecting shells, climbing on rocks); the latter were disliked and detracted from participants' experiences. Common at coastal sites, litter and graffiti (41.3% of category) contributed most to the negative rating (48.8% of positive responses) of the category of ‘human impacts’ (17.3% of all entries). Large constructions (20.7% of category) recorded included the

308

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

Table 4 VEP records of notable verbal or qualitative thoughts and comments in relation to response categories under six subject categories. Response category

VEP records

Geoheritage (sample subject: sea cave) Extraordinary The cave is very special. Enjoying Nature Stunning and shocking. Do not underestimate Nature! Imagination Like a bamboo fan. Detailed account Looking into the cave from a distance. Geological knowledge The direction of how the cave was formed does not seem to align with the waves' direction. Nature (general sample subject: vegetation) Extraordinary Amazing. Enjoying Nature Nature replenishes itself. Curiosity and discovery Often heard about it (the screw pine), but it's my first time seeing it. Feelings Feel thankful. The old tree is unaffected by environmental deterioration, still standing firmly. Humaneland It is impossible to have such forests near the urban area, hope people would treasure it. relationship Detailed account The mangrove forest seems to be withering. Experience (general sample subject: humans) Enjoying Nature People enjoying the beach in various ways and making use of nature in a positive manner. Feelings It is a very hot day, and it was painful to see my friend so uncomfortably hot. Humaneland They (visitors collecting shells) need education through the media. relationship Physical Higher health awareness of Hong Kong people sees popularization of hiking. Human impacts Extraordinary (The East Dam is)… a grand sight. Magnificent work. Detailed account (The East Dam is) very big. Humaneland (The rubbish) damages the ecological environment. relationship Management issues (sample subject: ferry pier) Humaneland Too many people, brings pollution. relationship Convenience The connection between the park and people. The research (subject: the researcher and assistants) Enjoying Nature Thought of coming for a look, (the researcher) introduced to us this research. We can look more seriously at the scenery, and concentrate more. Feelings Happy to see good students studying the parks and their social impact. Humaneland Knowing that someone is caring about the beauty of Nature. relationship

reservoir dam, whereas localized constructions (16.7% of category) were represented by village houses, temples and churches. Mainly city inhabitants, participants were attracted to village houses regardless whether they were intact, old or dilapidated ruins. To them, they represented a simple rustic lifestyle hugely different from fast-paced city living. Old village houses symbolized a treasured and cherished reminder of traditional agrarian culture and  mez-Ortiz et al., 2013) embodied in the HKGP. history (Go Responses to management and accessibility issues (12.2% of all

entries) were mixed. Transportation provisions (35.3% of category) were greatly liked for the convenience, but only low-level intrusions were acceptable at pristine surroundings (e.g. Tai Long Wan). Records of trails and signage (40.0% of category) also reflected important opinions. Open, wide, well-paved and shaded trails were preferred. Warning signs (e.g. landslip warning symbol at HIR) were appreciated for their practical purposes but were disliked for “destroying natural views”. The VEP logbook, the researcher and research assistants were also recorded and categorized as ‘the research’ (N ¼ 14) (Table 2). Responses were largely positive with the mean score of 1.69. Participants mainly liked the VEP exercise as it allowed them to pay more attention to the HKGP and reflect on the experience. Some even expressed appreciation for a pro-environment research that could contribute to the future of Hong Kong and “her beautiful nature”. The rest of this paper is focused on results in this category to explore ‘geotourism’ as reflected through VEP in the aspects of visitor enjoyment and geoconservation and geo-education. 4.3. Appreciation and enjoyment of geological features

Fig. 4. Quartz veins crisscrossing individual rock boulders present a popular smallscale geological feature taken by a VEP participant at Ma Shi Chau. These intriguing rock patterns lead participants to imagine and propose vivid descriptions, such as “blood veins”, “veins on a leaf”, and “cheese on a pizza slice”.

Visual enjoyment of geological features dominated the results (31.2% of landscape features, 27.1% of small-scale features) as participants came across “nature's works of wonder”. Reflective of a strong “aesthetic value” (van Riper et al., 2012, p. 167) of geoheritage, the most popular portrayals were “beautiful”, “special” and “rare”, whereas a large proportion of participants appreciated geological features for that fact that they were “natural scenery”. Visitors traveling by boat around the Sai Kung seas marveled at sea arches and sea caves of Bluff Island, and those touring the North

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

309

Fig. 5. The cracks and the rounded shape of quartz monozite (left, photo taken by VEP participant) on Sharp Island bears resemblance to the palm-sized pineapple bun with a crispy crust (right) which is a popular local delicacy.

Eastern islands of Wong Chuk Kok Tsui and Tung Ping Chau identified the ‘Devil's Fist’, ‘Watchtower Rock’ and ‘Beheaded Island’ as “highlight(s) of the park”. Folded hexagonal columns (Fig. 3) as evidence of previous tectonic movements were “eye-opening”. Voted as the “Favorite Geosite in Hong Kong” (Hongkong Post, 2014), the rather pristine and magnificent beach of Tai Long Wan also appealed greatly to participants as it dominated a third of “beautiful” landscape feature records. At the terrestrial site of Ma Shi Chau, outstanding colors of red (in web version) siltstones patterned with quartz veins (Fig. 4) collectively took up nearly a third of small-scale features recorded for the reasons of rarity and novelty. Participants established strong connection with nature through contact with geological features which allowed them “to see the truth about nature”. These “magnificent”, “stunning” and “spectacular” sights enabled enjoyment of nature away from the crowded city, as they generated positive feelings and enabled relaxation (11.7% of landscape responses). Vistas of beaches and coastlines provided peace and tranquility. Participants' sensescapes of connecting with the HKGP were broadened as they enjoyed the sea breeze and the fresh air. One participant captured the view of Sai Wan Beach while she looked back from swimming in the sea and remarked that it was “worth the hike”. The countryside location and quietude of the HKGP provided some with escape from the crowded city areas of Hong Kong. Participants were also eager to share the area and suggested government promotion to attract more visitors to the HKGP. As a result of deep immersion in the surroundings of the HKGP, both broad landscape (10.2% of responses) and small-scale features (17.3% of responses) stimulated imaginations; truncated islands were likened to turtles (Fig. 2), and stratified rocks were layered cakes. A result of differential erosion, the exposed coastal feature of Lung Lok Shui (“dragon entering the water”) at Tung Ping Chau was described as majestically “dividing the ground in two”. At MSC, quartz veins (Fig. 4) were compared to “blood vessels on rocks”, “giving the rock life and vitality”. As metaphors are “derived from the human body and its affective experiences” (Modell, 2003, p.16), it is fair to say that visitors have an underlying passion for geoheritage and that the HKGP has the power to create touching experiences and conjure up their imagination.

4.4. General understanding of geoheritage features and processes Evident through 24.7% of small-scale rock records and 12.7% of landscape records, participants demonstrated basic understanding

of origins of landforms. They were able to tell that features were the results of prolonged weathering and erosion, and occasionally the erosional element (e.g. waves) were identified. Additionally, interest was expressed in 6.8% of landscape records and 2.7% of smallscale geological records. The descriptive terms “new discovery” and “interesting” were commonly used, but further elaboration was scarce. For landscape records, participants recorded sea caves, arches and truncated islands (i.e. Po Pin Chau at HIR) (Fig. 2), and they deeply felt “nature's power” and human insignificance. Although only one explicitly recorded that waves created these coastal features, participants' expression of awe indicated their awareness that powerful nature created the coastal erosional features over millions of years. Comments that these spectacles were “naturally created” and “unattainable by human efforts” reinforce this deduction. Admiration of large-scale landform features was significant in connecting participants with nature, and provided them with a broad perspective of the HKGP. Small-scale features, on the other hand, captured participants' attention with reference to their underlying geological science. While only 3.9% of landscape feature responses were explicit records with geological jargons, participants had more in-depth understanding of small-scale features (24.7% of categorical responses). Records of close observation of small-scale features reflected that participants were knowledgeable and aware of rock age and type. Sample responses include “formed by sedimentation a few million years ago” (i.e. referring to sedimentary rocks at MSC), “the special appearance comes after the weathering process” (i.e. ‘pineapple bun rocks’ on Sharp Island) (Fig. 5). Participants were able to identify various mineral compositions, colors and rock details (e.g. quartz veins). Strong curiosity was coupled with heightened motivations to unveil the formation processes that molded the special features. Having gathered site information pre-trip (e.g. doing internet research or taking HKGP pamphlets) or from hearsay (e.g. from friends or fellow visitors), visitors often make an effort to locate the special features during their time in HKGP.

4.5. Limited geological knowledge Most participants could only pick up information limited to the aforementioned domains, and were unable to convey more advanced geological terms and cognate concepts. For example, despite knowing that the sedimentary rocks at MSC were the oldest in Hong Kong, as an indicator of interesting local geological knowledge, only two gave the rock's age in numerical terms (i.e.

310

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

approximately 280 million years), and none mentioned the geological period (i.e. Permian). Participants with ideas of formation processes lacked confidence in their assumptions and erroneous records were prevalent. Nevertheless, HKGP visitors were strongly curious in geoheritage (Fung & Jim, 2015) and this was reflected in VEP records. Descriptions of the formation of toppled rock columns were accurate but ended with a dubious question: “rock columns fell down because of previous weathering by sea water?” Another queried how the vast amount of rocks accumulated at a rocky beach. One participant correctly identified some sedimentary rocks but wrongly related the formation to volcanic eruption; his doubt was reflected by the question mark at the end of the entry. Another thought that the hexagonal columns at High Island Reservoir (Fig. 3) were formed by weathering, despite that they were created through rapid cooling of lava after a volcanic eruption. Participants with information acquired from formal education or leisure reading of what the site offers eagerly looked out for significant features. However, self-guided visitors were often unable to identify the correct rock or feature. Taking MSC as example, the site is endowed with a well-known display of sedimentary rock folds as evidence of previous tectonic moments in Hong Kong. However, since this particular signage along the trail was removed for renovation during the data collection period, participants were only able to find a very small bend in the rock strata as the example and missed the prominent and well-formed feature near the end of the trail. Moreover, MSC is prominent for having the oldest sedimentary rock outcrop (i.e. a single boulder) in Hong Kong, but participants were mistaken that all the rocks on the island share the same geological history. Lastly, only two participants explicitly mentioned the joy of learning something new, reflecting room for improving visitor satisfaction through knowledge acquirement. 5. General discussion 5.1. Visitor perceptions of geological features and visitation concerns This study demonstrated the attractiveness of geological and related natural features to visitors from visual, knowledge-seeking, emotional and sensual aspects. The appreciation and experience of geoheritage features could widely expand visitor horizons beyond being physically present at the HKGP. Magnificent features caused them to contemplate their position in the world at large and their insignificance against the power of nature. Imagination flows through visual associations of rocks with daily objects and encounters. Novelty of the features interacts with curiosity to create motivations to learn and discover the science behind these features. As beautiful scenery can increase visitor loyalty, satisfaction and also return motivation (Kirillova et al., 2014). Thus visitors' huge appetite for picturesque vistas can be tapped to attract visitation. Apparently, HKGP visits have reaped rewards in visitor satisfaction, but the achievement of geoconservation goals is questionable. Most participants recognized that features were rare but only a handful expressed the feeling of the difficulty or importance of conserving these wonders. Lack of environmental commitment is often the case for nature-seeking visitors, and improved interpretation is suggested to heighten awareness levels especially for Asian Pacific visitors (Frost, Laing, & Beeton, 2014). Appreciation was largely confined to an aesthetic spectrum and the educational and scientific portions of HKGP visit have room for enhancement. An overall interpretation strategy applicable all HKGP-related provisions (e.g. existing on-site interpretation signs, guidebooks, audio-guides, and R2G) can be further refined to enrich these experiences (Ciolfi, McLoughlin, & Bannon, 2008).

5.2. A new interpretative strategy e beginning with the aesthetics Scenic beauty and the opportunity to enjoy nature were found to be an important factor in several conventional nature-based recreation studies (Boley et al., 2011; van Riper et al. 2012; Xu et al., 2012). This study has also illustrated how geotourism is experienced in a similar manner. An aesthetic landscape interpretation approach through association with ancient poems and philosophical ideas was suggested for Chinese visitors, as Western scientific approaches were deemed unattractive and ineffective for the domestic Chinese geopark visitors (Xu et al., 2012). In fact, the destination quality of being “picturesque” was what nature-based tourists had in mind as early as in the 17th century (Hose, 2010). Surprisingly, a similar approach of incorporating poetry in landscape appreciation was advocated by Gordon (2011). In the 17th century, literature and art were common forms of spreading information about places worth visiting (Hose, 2010). Didactic approaches common in Western geotourism are in fact most effective on visitors with a basic geological background and interest (Gordon, 2011). Although the approach is currently applied to HKGP interpretation signage (Fig. 6), modifications of design including illustrations and font type and size are required to effectively transmit geological messages to HKGP visitors. Similar to Mainland Chinese tour guides, commercial guides in Hong Kong tend to introduce geological features with highly figurative language. This approach is well-received by local HKGP visitors from the evidence that many features were referred to by their popular metaphors instead of more geological terms. As higher interpretative effectiveness can be achieved through interpretative measures relevant to local culture (Xu et al., 2012), the knowledge of which can be rendered understandable to overseas tourists. In the case of Australian geotourism, linkage to intriguing local aboriginal culture was suggested (Joyce, 2010); their unique beliefs, art and traditions could offer fitting introductions for geoheritage. Although currently a special administrative region of the People's Republic of China, Hong Kong's British colonial background sees lower levels of ancient Chinese traditional and cultural influence in domestic tourists. As reflected in the study, Hong Kong people dominate the visitor portion with a unique and somewhat hybrid cultural background. Showing interest in landscapes and geoheritage features named to impress, HKGP visitors share similar interests with mainland Chinese tourists, yet they also harbor Western traits such as strong visual concerns (Dakin, 2003), broad sensecapes (Prazeres & Donohoe, 2014) and inquisitiveness for scientific information. It was found that both general and nature tourists in Hong Kong are willing to pay more for high-quality ecotourism services (Cheung & Jim, 2013). In addition to the high education levels of HKGP visitors and strong scientific curiosity, there are broad potentials for development of top-tier interpretation services. This visitor profile sees strong potentials for development of the HKGP into a destination with interpretation provisions that appeals and educates local and overseas tourists in the international city. Such strategies could also be applied to other forms of nature-based tourism and education. 5.3. Trail-side interpretative measures A study at a Chinese nature-based destination found that <2% of visitors stopped at interpretation signs, and stopping visitors only glanced briefly at the photographs without digesting the contents (Xu et al., 2012). Signage-wise, it is important to insert both visually attractive and scientifically informative illustrations to make visitors stop and imbibe information at each sign. Figurative labels can be used for titles of signage (e.g. “the pineapple-bun rock”) to

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

311

Fig. 6. Interpretative information on the sign displayed in Fig. 3. Explanations are printed in small fonts and illustrations demonstrating geological processes are unclear. Photo credits: Dede Man.

capture attention, however, they should be closely followed by the scientific name of the rock type or formation process. For grand landscape features, an aesthetic approach could be used as a starting point to attract visitor attention. Interpretation could begin with a focus on the beauty and grandeur of the vista and how the geoheritage is embraced by the greater surroundings. Emphasis on nature's power can be used as a leading point towards explaining formation processes and geological terms such as rock types and characteristics could come into the picture. Similarly, vivid descriptive language of visual imageries (i.e. the watchtower rock) should be used to commence if applicable. Given visitors' interest in rock details, introduction of small-scale features or rock details should begin with minerals of bright colors or distinctive rock patterns (e.g. quartz veins in Fig. 4) and usual rock features (e.g. folded hexogonal columns in Fig. 3) to capture attention. An audio guide system should also be developed for self-guided visitors so that they can receive extended information by inputting corresponding codes at signage or vantage points. Another strategy is to design a smartphone application to facilitate self-guided tours. However, it was discovered that the smartphone application “Hong Kong National Geopark” was removed from both the iOS and Android application stores in 2015 without publicizing a reason. With reference to overseas geopark apps, the HKGP apps should be redeveloped with features such as basic geoheritage education, the area's geology (Shetland Amenity Trust, 2011), in-app general maps, geoheritage maps, and map orientation (BrooksDesigns, 2013). In view of relatively low download rates (e.g. >100 for the Android applications of Geopark Shetland and Magma Geopark), free-wifi points at appropriate locations could be set up to facilitate app download. Furthermore, efforts targeted at young visitors (e.g. <12 years old) can be developed such as animated electronic audio books, which are necessary to spread geoconservation messages to the younger population. 5.4. Guiding services As each individual participant has different queries and

backgrounds, generalized information on interpretation signage is insufficient to fulfill their needs. In fact, it was suggested in as early as the 1980s that on-site interpretation services should be provided at Hong Kong country parks (Thrower, 1984). Modeling after American and Australian park systems, park rangers or on-site guides could serve a wide range of purposes from guiding, educating to enforcing regulations (Thrower, 1984). In Asia, the Yehliu Geopark of Taiwan opts for maximum visitor-geoheritage proximity by opening up fragile geoheritage areas. To complement this arrangement, duty staff is stationed within the area to caution and prevent visitors from touching or leaning on features with toppling chances. No doubt, further investigation into the feasibility and implementation of on-site staff is required, but on-site interpretation services are crucial to answer visitors' queries as reflected in the study. Given their fundamental role in conveying conservation messages, R2Gs (cf. subsection on Interpretation and visitation) should be trained to display positive emotion or even passion to strengthen the connection between geoheritage features and conservation messages (Wijeratne, Van Dijk, Kirk-Brown, & Frost, 2014). This can echo visitors' feelings of nature's powers and human inferiority to establish stronger connections and affection for geoheritage. In fact, better guidelines on graphical display can be developed according to contextual differences, and this study's findings should provide hints for effective interpretation. Furthermore, the guides should encourage interactions by asking visitors questions about mineral compositions or how the patterns were formed. Use of wireless audio transmitters and receiver systems can also be used to create more effective guiding experiences while participants can have the freedom to walk around on their own. Promotion of the R2G program, at present through the popular media and website, can be improved to reach more potential visitors. It could highlight the difference between R2G guides and untrained guides of commercial tours who may provide faulty geoheritage and geoconservation information.

312

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313

6. Conclusion This VEP study found geoheritage and nature as major HKGP trip components and strong connections between visitors and geoheritage. This warrants continual and further support and resources for the development and conservation of this natural endowment. Being strongly aware of and often identifying geoheritage in the HKGP, visitors have a general understanding of features' formation and rock type but fell short of in-depth scientific knowledge. It is suggested that visitors' aesthetic and emotional appreciation of these features should be used as the starting point for scientific interpretation in order to fully tap their inquisitiveness for learning about this natural resource. Interpretation strategies can be developed according to the above suggestions, and geoconservation efforts can be more effective to create support for geoheritage conservation in Hong Kong and around the world. Hong Kong people's unique cultural background can be used as reference for overseas geosites aiming at attracting international tourists. The wider implications of geopark management and conservation could be explored. Under the shadow of urban encroachment and development pressure, it is of utmost importance to safeguard natural endowments with green belts or buffer zones. HKGP boundaries should be safeguarded to ensure an immersive experience in quality natural environment to genuinely satisfy visitors (Frost et al., 2014; Jim, 1989). Quietude, naturalness and escape are greatly sought as a break from city dwellers' busy lives, and the well-protected HKGP offers an important outlet to satisfy the earnest and growing demands. Public awareness of geoheritage values as part of local culture can also strengthen Hong Kong people's identity (Frost et al., 2014) as an international city with a ‘green’ side for multi-faceted lifestyles and tourism experiences (Fung & Jim, 2015). Highly dependent on visitation levels, consumption of HKGP services (e.g. village ferries and seafood cuisines) provides important sources of income to sustain villagers and local culture. Lastly, geo-education should be extended beyond HKGP boundaries to raise territory-wide geoheritage awareness. Locally and culturally significant rock features can be incorporated into HKGP's public-education programs. As mascots, they can help advocate collaterally other globally significant geoheritage features in Hong Kong's outskirts and foster a stronger sense of belonging and local identity. Acknowledgments We express our gratitude to the research grants kindly provided by the Government Matching Grant, Dr Stanley Ho Alumni Challenge Fund, and Postgraduate Studentship of our university. Support of the Geopark authority, the government's Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, is warmly appreciated. We thank the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions to improve the manuscript. References Anifowose, A., & Kolawole, F. (2014). Appraisal of the geotourism potentials of the Idanre Hills, Nigeria. Geoheritage, 6(3), 193e203. Anonymous. (2011). Arouca declaration. In The International Congress of Geotourism. Arouca, Portugal (p. 1). Beilin, R. (2005). Photo-elicitation and the agricultural landscape: “seeing” and “telling” about farming, community and place. Visual Studies, 21(1), 56e68. Boley, B. B., Nickerson, N. P., & Bosak, K. (2011). Measuring geotourism: developing and testing the geotraveler tendency scale (GTS). Journal of Travel Research, 50(5), 567e578. BrooksDesigns. (2013). Geopark way newent. https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/ geopark-way-newent/id626278957?mt¼8 Accessed 26.01.15.

pez, B., Lo pez, E., Plieninger, T., Alcaraz-Segura, D., Castro, A. J., Martín-Lo Vaughn, C. C., et al. (2015). Do protected areas networks ensure the supply of ecosystem services? Spatial patterns of two nature reserve systems in semi-arid Spain. Applied Geography, 60, 1e9. Cheung, L. T. O., & Jim, C. Y. (2013). Ecotourism service preference and management in Hong Kong. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 20(2), 182e194. Ciolfi, L., McLoughlin, M., & Bannon, L. J. (2008). Learning from a walk in the park: augmenting the visitor experience at heritage sites. In Irish Human Computer Interaction Conference. Cork, Ireland: University College Cork. Dakin, S. (2003). There's more to landscape than meets the eye: towards inclusive landscape assessment in resource and environmental management. Canadian Geographer, 47(2), 185e200. Dorwart, C. E., Moore, R. L., & Leung, Y. F. (2010). Visitors' perceptions of a trail environment and effects on experiences: a model for nature-based recreation experiences. Leisure Science, 32(1), 33e54. Dowling, R. K. (2011). Geotourism's global growth. Geoheritage, 3, 1e13. Eder, F. W., & Patzak, M. (2004). Geoparks e geological attractions: a tool for public education, recreation and sustainable economic development. Episodes, 27(3), 162e164. European Geoparks Network. (2014). In 12th European Geoparks Conference. http:// www.europeangeoparks.org/?p¼2118 Accessed 10.01.15. Farsani, N. T., Coelho, C., & Costa, C. (2012). Geotourism and geoparks as gateways to socio-cultural sustainability in Qeshm Rural Areas, Iran. Asia Pacific Journal of Travel Research, 17(1), 30e48. Farsani, N. T., Coelho, C., Costa, C. M. M., & Amrikazemi, A. (2014). Geo-knowledge management and geoconservation via geoparks and geotourism. Geoheritage, 6, 185e192. Frost, W., Laing, J., & Beeton, S. (2014). The future of nature-based tourism in the Asia-Pacific Region. Journal of Travel Research, 53, 721e732. Fung, C. K. W., & Jim, C. Y. (2015). Segmentation by motivation of Hong Kong Global Geopark visitors in relation to sustainable nature-based tourism. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 22(1), 76e88. r, P., Engel, J., & Domaracka , L. (2009). Geotourism marketing in Lake Gerner, D., Ryba Constance' region. Acta Montanistica Slovaca, 14(1), 197e204. GGN. (2010). Guidelines and criteria for national geoparks seeking UNESCO's assistance to join the Global Geoparks Network. Beijing: Global Geoparks Network. GGN. (2014). In 6th International UNESCO Conference on Global Geoparks. http:// www.geoparks2014.com/main.html Accessed 04.03.15. mez-Ortiz, A., Oliva, M., Salv Go a-Catarineu, M., & Salvador-Franch, F. (2013). The environmental protection of landscapes in the high semiarid Mediterranean mountain of Sierra Nevada National Park (Spain): historical evolution and future perspectives. Applied Geography, 42, 227e239. Gordon, J. E. (2011). Rediscovering a sense of wonder: geoheritage, geotourism and cultural landscape experiences. Geoheritage, 4(1e2), 65e77. Heyman, E. (2012). Analysing recreational values and management effects in an urban forest with the visitor-employed photography method. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 11, 267e277. Highways Department. (2014). In Hiram's highway improvement stage I. https:// www.hyd.gov.hk/en/road_and_railway/road_projects/703th_Hirams/index. html Accessed 04.03.15. HKSAR Government. (2014a). In HK hosts geopark roundtable conference. http:// www.news.gov.hk/en/categories/environment/html/2014/07/20140714_ 152334.shtml Accessed 04.03.15. HKSAR Government. (2014b). LCQ14: Measures to attract more people to visit Hong Kong Geopark. http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201410/29/P201410290412. htm Accessed 04.03.15. Hongkong Post. (2014). 2014 Hong Kong definitive stamps launched today. http:// www.hongkongpost.hk/eng/publications/news/2014/20140725a/index.htm Accessed 04.03.15. Hose, T. A. (2000). European geotourism: geological interpretation and geoconsercation promotion for tourists. In D. Barrentino, W. P. Wimbledon, & E. Gallego (Eds.), Geological heritage: Its conservation and management (pp. 127e146). Madrid: Instituto Tecnologico Geominero de Espana. Hose, T. A. (2010). The significance of aesthetic landscape appreciation to modern geotourism provision. In D. Newsome, & R. K. Dowling (Eds.), Geotourism: The Tourism of Geology and Landscape (pp. 13e26). Oxford: Goodfellow. Hose, T., & Vasiljevi c, D. A. (2012). Defining the nature and purpose of modern geotourism with particular reference to the United Kingdom and South-east Europe. Geoheritage, 4, 25e43. Jim, C. Y. (1989). Changing patterns of country-park recreation in Hong Kong. Geographical Journal, 155(2), 167e178. Jim, C. Y. (2000). Environmental changes associated with mass urban tourism and nature tourism development in Hong Kong. Environmentalist, 20, 233e247. Joyce, E. B. (2010). Australia's geological heritage: a national inventory for future geoparks and geotourism. In D. Newsome, & R. K. Dowling (Eds.), Geotourism: The tourism of geology and landscape (pp. 27e45). Oxford: Goodfellow. Kirillova, K., Fu, X., Lehto, X., & Cai, L. (2014). What makes a destination beautiful? Dimensions of tourist aesthetic judgment. Tourism Management, 42, 282e293. Loeffler, T. A. (2004). A photo elicitation study of the meanings of outdoor adventure experiences. Journal of Leisure Research, 36(4), 536e556. Lynn, N. A., & Brown, R. D. (2003). Effects of recreational use impacts on hiking experiences in natural areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 64, 77e87. MacKay, K. J., & Couldwell, C. M. (2004). Using visitor-employed-photography to investigate destination image. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 390e396.

C.K.W. Fung, C.Y. Jim / Applied Geography 62 (2015) 301e313  , P., & Latocha, A. (2013). Human interactions with the sandstone landscape of Migon central Sudetes. Applied Geography, 42, 206e216. Modell, A. H. (2003). Uncertain steps towards a biology of meaning. In Imagination and the meaningful brain (pp. 1e24). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Neches¸, I. M., & Erdeli, G. (2015). Geolandscapes and geotourism: Integrating nature and culture in the Bucegi Mountains of Romania. Landscape Research, 40(4), 486e509. Newsome, D., & Dowling, R. (2010). Setting an agenda for geotourism. In D. Newsome, & R. K. Dowling (Eds.), Geotourism: The tourism of geology and landscape (pp. 1e12). Oxford: Goodfellow. Newsome, D., & Johnson, C. P. (2013). Potential geotourism and the prospect of raising awareness about geoheritage and environment on Mauritius. Geoheritage, 5, 1e9. Nita, J., & Myga-Pia˛ tek, U. (2014). Geotourist potential of Post-mining regions in Poland. Bulletin of Geography: Physical Geography, 7(1), 139e156. Oku, H., & Fukamachi, K. (2006). The differences in scenic perception of forest visitors through their attributes and recreational activity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 75, 34e42. Partin, C., Robinson, S., & Meade, B. (2006). Geological heritage in Chinese parks: balancing protection and development. Focus Geogrraphy, 49(3), 10e16. Pforr, C., Dowling, R., & Newsome, D. (2014). Geotourism: a sustainable development alternative for remote locations in Western Australia? In M. Brueckner, A. Durey, R. Mayes, & C. Pforr (Eds.), Resource curse or cure? (pp. 153e162) Berlin: Springer. Prazeres, L., & Donohoe, H. (2014). The visitor sensescape in Kluane National Park and Reserve, Canada. Journal of Unconventional Parks, Tourism and Recreation Research, 5(2), 2e9. Recommended Geopark Guide System. (2015). Assessment criteria. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong Government. http://www. hkr2g.net/en_r2gd.htm. Assessed 19.05.15. van Riper, C., Kyle, G. T., Sutton, S. G., Barnes, M., & Sherrouse, B. C. (2012). Mapping

313

outdoor recreationists' perceived social values for ecosystem services at Hinchinbrook Island National Park, Australia. Applied Geography, 35, 164e173. Shetland Amenity Trust. (2011). Geopark shetland. Shetland, UK. Taylor, J. G., Czarnowski, K. J., & Flick, S. (1995). The importance of water to Rocky Mountain National Park visitors: an adaptation of visitor-employed photography to natural resources management. Journal of Applied Recreation Research, 20(1), 61e85. Taylor, D. T., Fletcher, R. R., & Calbaugh, T. (1993). A comparison of characteristics, regional expenditures, and economic impact of visitors to historical sites with other recreational visitors. Journal of Travel Research, 32(1), 30e35. Thrower, S. L. (1984). Hong Kong country parks. Hong Kong: Government Printer. Vining, J., & Merrick, M. S. (2012). Environmental epiphanies: theoretical foundations and practical applications. In S. D. Clayton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 485e508). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Walker, K., & Moscardo, G. (2014). Encouraging sustainability beyond the tourist experience: ecotourism, interpretation and values. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(8), 1175e1196. Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis. Sage university paper series on quantitative applications in the social sciences. Newbury Park, UK: Sage. Wijeratne, A. J. C., Van Dijk, P. A., Kirk-Brown, A., & Frost, L. (2014). Rules of engagement: the role of emotional display rules in delivering conservation interpretation in a zoo-based tourism context. Tourism Management, 42, 149e156. Xu, H., Cui, Q., Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2012). Effective environmental interpretation at Chinese natural attractions: the need for an aesthetic approach. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21, 117e133. Yahoo! News Hong Kong. (2014). Mainland China visitors capture offshore islands and Sai Kung. https://hk.news.yahoo.com Accessed 03.04.15. Zhao, X., & Zhao, T. (2003). The socio-economic benefits of establishing national geoparks in China. Episodes, 26(4), 302e309.