|
|
|
|
|
|
Programme
|
The OxGVC Programme of talks can be downloaded using the link to the left (Version 2)
| ||
|
The OxGVC Abstract Volume can be downloaded using the link to the left (Version 3)
| ||
Keynote Speakers
Prof. Heather Viles - Professor of Biogeomorphology and Heritage Conservation, University of Oxford
Title: Integrating the conservation of geological, biological and cultural heritage: challenges and prospects
Abstract: Heritage conservation is of increasing importance in a world where human connections with land, life and history are under threat from a wide range of environmental, social and economic changes. Many different approaches to heritage conservation have been trialled over the past 50 years, usually focusing on either cultural heritage or biodiversity, with conservation of geoheritage relatively neglected until recently. Increasingly however, today’s heritage conservation at local, national and international scales is seeking cost-effective approaches which can both integrate different aspects of heritage, and link heritage conservation with attempts to tackle major global challenges. But what are the challenges of such an integrated vision for heritage conservation, and how might it enhance the conservation of geoheritage? I address these themes through the lens of a case study of the Isle of Portland, Dorset, UK.
Title: Integrating the conservation of geological, biological and cultural heritage: challenges and prospects
Abstract: Heritage conservation is of increasing importance in a world where human connections with land, life and history are under threat from a wide range of environmental, social and economic changes. Many different approaches to heritage conservation have been trialled over the past 50 years, usually focusing on either cultural heritage or biodiversity, with conservation of geoheritage relatively neglected until recently. Increasingly however, today’s heritage conservation at local, national and international scales is seeking cost-effective approaches which can both integrate different aspects of heritage, and link heritage conservation with attempts to tackle major global challenges. But what are the challenges of such an integrated vision for heritage conservation, and how might it enhance the conservation of geoheritage? I address these themes through the lens of a case study of the Isle of Portland, Dorset, UK.
Prof. Murray Gray - Honorary Professor of Geography, Queen Mary University of London
Since the 1990s, Prof. Murray Gray has focused on applied research in the fields of geodiversity, geoheritage and geoconservation. In 2004, he published a book titled Geodiversity: Valuing and Conserving Abiotic Nature (John Wiley, 2004, 434pp.) and has become the leading international expert on geodiversity. Since then he has given numerous invited presentations on the theme all over the world. He continues to contribute to the work of the Geoheritage Specialist Group of the World Commission on Protected Areas/International Union for the Conservation of Nature to promote the importance of abiotic nature in international environmental policy. At present, his main research topics are focused on conservation of landscape character in the wider landscape, development of model planning policies, e.g. Geodiversity Action Plans (GAPs), geomorphologically authentic design of anthropogenic landforms or geoconservation and public policy.
Title: Geodiversity: redundant term or evolving, multi-faceted, geoscience paradigm?
Abstract: The term ‘geodiversity’ was first coined in the early 1990s and early development of the concept and principles was by Tasmanian workers. However, most criticism of it has come from geologists in mainland Australia. In a recent paper in the Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, Margaret Brocx and Vic Semeniuk stated that “use of the term geodiversity to refer to the ‘whole of Geology’ is a redundant use of the term and is self-evidentiary” since geology is known to be diverse. They also regard geodiversity as:
• ‘region-specific and site-specific’ and not global;
• a side issue and not part of the main relationship between geology, geoheritage, geoconservation, geotourism, etc.;
• related to ‘understanding and managing the biodiversity of a region or locality’.
This presentation will counter these claims by outlining several of the advantages of the concept including:
• celebrating geological and geomorphological diversity;
• focusing on how geodiversity benefits society;
• acting as the backbone of geoheritage and geoconservation;
• being a fundamental foundation for geotourism and geoparks;
• supporting sustainability principles.
In response to Brocx and Semeniuk, it is concluded that:
• geodiversity is a global concept, not just regional and local;
• geodiversity deserves to have an absolutely central position in the relationship between geology, geoheritage, geoconservation, geotourism, etc.;
• as well as underpinning biodiversity, geodiversity is the source of many other ‘geosystem services’;
• and therefore that geodiversity is a significant, evolving, multi-faceted, geoscience paradigm.
Since the 1990s, Prof. Murray Gray has focused on applied research in the fields of geodiversity, geoheritage and geoconservation. In 2004, he published a book titled Geodiversity: Valuing and Conserving Abiotic Nature (John Wiley, 2004, 434pp.) and has become the leading international expert on geodiversity. Since then he has given numerous invited presentations on the theme all over the world. He continues to contribute to the work of the Geoheritage Specialist Group of the World Commission on Protected Areas/International Union for the Conservation of Nature to promote the importance of abiotic nature in international environmental policy. At present, his main research topics are focused on conservation of landscape character in the wider landscape, development of model planning policies, e.g. Geodiversity Action Plans (GAPs), geomorphologically authentic design of anthropogenic landforms or geoconservation and public policy.
Title: Geodiversity: redundant term or evolving, multi-faceted, geoscience paradigm?
Abstract: The term ‘geodiversity’ was first coined in the early 1990s and early development of the concept and principles was by Tasmanian workers. However, most criticism of it has come from geologists in mainland Australia. In a recent paper in the Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, Margaret Brocx and Vic Semeniuk stated that “use of the term geodiversity to refer to the ‘whole of Geology’ is a redundant use of the term and is self-evidentiary” since geology is known to be diverse. They also regard geodiversity as:
• ‘region-specific and site-specific’ and not global;
• a side issue and not part of the main relationship between geology, geoheritage, geoconservation, geotourism, etc.;
• related to ‘understanding and managing the biodiversity of a region or locality’.
This presentation will counter these claims by outlining several of the advantages of the concept including:
• celebrating geological and geomorphological diversity;
• focusing on how geodiversity benefits society;
• acting as the backbone of geoheritage and geoconservation;
• being a fundamental foundation for geotourism and geoparks;
• supporting sustainability principles.
In response to Brocx and Semeniuk, it is concluded that:
• geodiversity is a global concept, not just regional and local;
• geodiversity deserves to have an absolutely central position in the relationship between geology, geoheritage, geoconservation, geotourism, etc.;
• as well as underpinning biodiversity, geodiversity is the source of many other ‘geosystem services’;
• and therefore that geodiversity is a significant, evolving, multi-faceted, geoscience paradigm.
Prof. José Brilha - Director of the Centre for Applied Research in Earth Sciences, University of Minho
Title: Geoethical principles in geoconservation
Abstract: Geoconservation and geoethics are two emerging themes that have been gaining prominence in the international geoscientific community during the last couple of decades. However, there are still few papers that discuss how and why geoconservationists should follow geoethical principles or whether geoconservation has to deal with specific geoethical values, in comparison with other geoscience domains. As geoconservation is essentially an applied geoscience with strong connections with several sectors of the society, it is important that ethical, cultural and social values are taken into account in the various fields of activity of the geoconservationist, that include actions in protected areas, UNESCO World Heritage properties, UNESCO Global Geoparks, in local environmental education or geotourism projects, among others. This communication intends to raise awareness of the geoconservation community about the importance to pursue geoethical principles in the conservation of geological heritage.
Title: Geoethical principles in geoconservation
Abstract: Geoconservation and geoethics are two emerging themes that have been gaining prominence in the international geoscientific community during the last couple of decades. However, there are still few papers that discuss how and why geoconservationists should follow geoethical principles or whether geoconservation has to deal with specific geoethical values, in comparison with other geoscience domains. As geoconservation is essentially an applied geoscience with strong connections with several sectors of the society, it is important that ethical, cultural and social values are taken into account in the various fields of activity of the geoconservationist, that include actions in protected areas, UNESCO World Heritage properties, UNESCO Global Geoparks, in local environmental education or geotourism projects, among others. This communication intends to raise awareness of the geoconservation community about the importance to pursue geoethical principles in the conservation of geological heritage.
