A thematic review on interpretation perspective of UNESCO Global Geoparks over the past 5 years (2019-2024): Analysis of trends for future studies

Zoë Jiabo Zhang; Mohd Hafizal Bin Ismail; Noor Jalilah Binti Jumaat; Xiaoyang Pan

doi:10.31893/multirev.2026068

Keywords:

Abstract

The interpretation of the geological, geomorphological, and archeological significance of these geosites will assist visitors in comprehending and appreciating their importance to our heritage and the significance of their protection for future generations. The apparent lack of attention to interpretation in the geopark field has raised concerns among researchers and park authorities about how to promote the most effective interpretation principles when interpretive design and practice are popularized, despite the promising development of interpretive research. This study evaluates articles published between 2019 and 2024 to explore how interpretation is addressed in the context of the UNESCO Global Geoparks. Using a thematic review methodology, this research incorporates keywords from the SCOPUS and WoS databases. The thematic review analysis revealed four key themes: effective interpretation, geoconservation and SDGs, geoeducation and awareness, and the promotion of geotourism. The findings provide valuable insights for park policymakers, visitors, practitioners, and researchers interested in the interpretation field related to UNESCO Global Geoparks.
References
1. Antić, A., Radaković, M. G., Marjanović, M., Marković, S. B., Perić, Z. M., Spalević, V., ... & Tomić, N. (2023). Loess and geotourism potential of the Braničevo District (NE Serbia): From overexploitation to paleoclimate interpretation. Open Geosciences, 15(1), 20220546. https://doi.org/10.1515/geo-2022-0546
2. Beraaouz, M., Macadam, J., Bouchaou, L., Ikenne, M., Ernst, R., Tagma, T., & Masrour, M. (2019). An inventory of geoheritage sites in the Draa Valley (Morocco): A contribution to promotion of geotourism and sustainable development. Geoheritage, 11(2), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-017-0256-x
3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
4. Breg Valjavec, M., Dunato Pejnović, N., Draženović, M., Čonč, Š., & Polajnar Horvat, K. (2022). The transboundary approach to landscape geointerpretation: Challenges in interpretive planning and geoconservation. Geoheritage, 14(4), 116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-022-00751-3
5. Brzezińska-Wójcik, T., & Skowronek, E. (2020). Tangible heritage of the historical stonework centre in Brusno Stare in the Roztocze Area (SE Poland) as an opportunity for the development of geotourism. Geoheritage, 12(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-020-00442-x
6. Catana, M. M., & Brilha, J. B. (2020). The role of UNESCO global geoparks in promoting geosciences education for sustainability. Geoheritage, 12(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-020-00440-z
7. Cheng, Z., & Chen, X. (2022). The effect of tourism experience on tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior at cultural heritage sites: The mediating role of cultural attachment. Sustainability, 14(1), 565. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010565
8. da Silva, E. M. R. (2020). The contribution of the European UNESCO Global Geoparks for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – a study based on several data sources (Doctoral thesis). Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Portugal.
9. de Freitas, I. V., & Koskowski, M. R. (2021). Heritage and sustainable development: Capacity building through tourism (1st ed.). In Capacity Building Through Heritage Tourism (pp. 113–131). Apple Academic Press.
10. Dowling, R., & Newsome, D. (2018). Handbook of geotourism (1st ed.). Edward Elgar Publishing.
11. Drápela, E. (2023). Using a geotrail for teaching geography: An example of the virtual educational trail “The story of Liberec granite”. Land, 12(4), 828. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12040828
12. Fassoulas, C., Nikolakakis, E., & Staridas, S. (2022). Digital tools to serve geotourism and sustainable development at Psiloritis UNESCO Global Geopark in COVID times and beyond. Geosciences, 12(2), 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences12020078
13. Figueiredo, S. D., Raposo, L., & Sousa, M. (2021). Upper Pleistocene fauna from the Middle Palaeolithic site of Foz do Enxarrique (Vila Velha de Ródão, Naturtejo UNESCO Global Geopark). Geoconservation Research, 4(2), 685–693. https://doi.org/10.30486/gcr.2021.1912483.1048
14. Gajek, G., Zgłobicki, W., & Kołodyńska-Gawrysiak, R. (2019). Geoeducational value of quarries located within the Małopolska Vistula River Gap (E Poland). Geoheritage, 11(4), 1335–1351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-019-00395-w
15. Global Geoparks Network International Association. (2024). Actively participate in global challenges. https://www.visitgeoparks.org/our-missions
16. Górska-Zabielska, M. (2023). A new geosite as a contribution to the sustainable development of urban geotourism in a tourist peripheral region—Central Poland. Resources, 12(6), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources12060071
17. Gross, M. P., Zimmerman, R., & Buchholz, J. (2006). Signs, trails, and wayside exhibits: Connecting people and places (3rd ed.). Uw-Sp Foundation Press.
18. Ham, S. (2013). Interpretation—Making a difference on purpose (1st ed.). Fulcrum Publishing.
19. Hose, T. A. (2007). Geotourism: Appreciating the deep time of landscapes (1st ed.). In Niche tourism (pp. 27–37). Routledge.
20. Kordos, L., Mészáros, I., & Szarvas, I. (2021). Tracking a “Prehistoric Pompeii”, Rhinoland and Crocodilia: New discoveries and interpretations of Ipolytarnóc (N Hungary) Lower Miocene track site. Geoconservation Research, 4(2), 621–634. https://doi.org/10.30486/gcr.2021.1914158.1062
21. Liuzza, C. (2020). UNESCO and the global responsibility for heritage preservation (Doctoral thesis). Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
22. Long, C., Lu, S., & Zhu, Y. (2022). Research on popular science tourism based on SWOT-AHP model: A case study of Koktokay World Geopark in China. Sustainability, 14(15), 8974. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14158974
23. Luan, F., & Wang, F. (2023). Tourists’ perceptions of popular science education in Tianshan Tianchi National Geopark in Xinjiang. Geoheritage, 15(4), 120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-023-00886-x
24. Martini, G., Zouros, N., Zhang, J., Jin, X., Komoo, I., Border, M., ... & Sá, A. A. (2022). UNESCO Global Geoparks in the “World after”: A multiple-goals roadmap proposal for future discussion. Episodes Journal of International Geoscience, 45(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2021/021002
25. Mc Keever, P. J., & Zouros, N. (2005). Geoparks: Celebrating Earth heritage, sustaining local communities. Episodes Journal of International Geoscience, 28(4), 274–278. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2005/v28i4/006
26. Migoń, P., & Pijet-Migoń, E. (2022). Exploring causal relationships for geoheritage interpretation—Variable effects of Cenozoic volcanism in Central European sedimentary tablelands. Geoheritage, 14(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00637-w
27. Mikhailenko, A. V., & Ruban, D. A. (2019). Geo-heritage specific visibility as an important parameter in geo-tourism resource evaluation. Geosciences, 9(4), 146. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9040146
28. Morante-Carballo, F., Apolo-Masache, B., Taranto-Moreira, F., Merchán-Sanmartín, B., Soto-Navarrete, L., Herrera-Franco, G., & Carrión-Mero, P. (2023). Geo-environmental assessment of tourist development and its impact on sustainability. Heritage, 6(3), 2863–2885. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage6030153
29. Muzambiq, S., Walid, H., Ganie, T. H., & Hermawan, H. (2021). The importance of public education and interpretation in the conservation of Toba Caldera Geoheritage. Geoheritage, 13(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-020-00523-x
30. Necheş, I. M. (2016). Geodiversity beyond material evidence: A geosite type based interpretation of geological heritage. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, 127(1), 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2015.12.009
31. Neto De Carvalho, C., Baucon, A. N., Bayet-Goll, A. N., & Belo, J. N. (2021). The Penha Garcia Ichnological Park at Naturtejo UNESCO Global Geopark (Portugal): A geotourism destination in the footprint of the Great Ordovician biodiversification event. Geoconservation Research, 4(1), 70–79. https://doi.org/10.30486/gcr.2021.1913338.1051
32. Ólafsdóttir, R. (2019). Geotourism. Geosciences, 9(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9010048
33. Papadopoulou, E. E., Kavroudakis, D., Agelada, A., Zouros, N., Soulakellis, N., & Kasapakis, V. (2025). Virtual reality in geoeducation: The case of the Lesvos Geopark. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(2), 1653–1669. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2374399
34. Pásková, M., Zelenka, J., Ogasawara, T., Zavala, B., & Astete, I. (2021). The ABC concept—Value added to the Earth heritage interpretation? Geoheritage, 13(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00558-8
35. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
36. Prieto, J. L. P., de Castro Martínez, G. F., & González, E. M. R. (2019). Geotrails in the Mixteca Alta UNESCO Global Geopark, Oaxaca, Mexico. Cuadernos Geográficos, 58(2), 111–125.
37. Reynard, E., & Brilha, J. (2017). Geoheritage: Assessment, protection, and management (1st ed.). Elsevier.
38. Rodríguez, C., Sevilla, J., Obeso, Í., & Herrera, D. (2022). Emerging tools for the interpretation of glacial and periglacial landscapes with geomorphological interest—A case study using augmented reality in the Mountain Pass of San Isidro (Cantabrian Range, Northwestern Spain). Land, 11(8), 1327. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081327
39. Rubira-Gómez, G., Malavé-Hernández, J., Jaya-Montalvo, M., Candell-Soto, J., Caicedo-Potosí, J., Merchán-Sanmartín, B., ... & Morante-Carballo, F. (2024). Sustainable design for geotourism interpretation centres: Enhancing the Santa Elena Peninsula Geopark project experience. Heritage, 7(1), 499–516. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage7010024
40. Singh, R. B., Wei, D., & Anand, S. (2021). Global geographical heritage, geoparks and geotourism (2nd ed.). Springer Nature Singapore.
41. Stolz, J., & Megerle, H. E. (2022). Geotrails as a medium for education and geotourism: Recommendations for quality improvement based on the results of a research project in the Swabian Alb UNESCO Global Geopark. Land, 11(9), 1422. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091422
42. Tilden, F. (1957). Interpreting our heritage: Principles and practices for visitor services in parks, museums, and historic places (1st ed.). University of North Carolina Press.
43. UNESCO Global Geoparks. (2024). UNESCO International Geoscience and Geoparks Programme. https://www.unesco.org/en/iggp/geoparks/about
44. UNESCO Global Geoparks. (2025). Development and conservation. Global Geoparks Network. https://www.visitgeoparks.org/missions
45. Vegas, J., Galindo, I., Romero, C., Sánchez, N., Díaz, G. A., Martín-González, E., & Mateo, E. (2019). Geoconservation and geotourism in the Lanzarote and Chinijo Islands UNESCO Global Geopark (1st ed.). In Lanzarote and Chinijo Islands Geopark: From Earth to Space (pp. 99–108). Springer, Cham.
46. Veverka, J. (2015). Interpretive master planning: Strategies for the new millennium—Philosophy, theory and practice (1st ed.). Museums.
47. Wang, J., & Zouros, N. (2021). Educational activities in Fangshan UNESCO Global Geopark and Lesvos Island UNESCO Global Geopark. Geoheritage, 13(3), 51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00570-y
48. Xu, K., & Wu, W. (2022). Geoparks and geotourism in China: A sustainable approach to geoheritage conservation and local development—A review. Land, 11(9), 1493. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091493
49. Zafeiropoulos, G., Drinia, H., Antonarakou, A., & Zouros, N. (2021). From geoheritage to geoeducation, geoethics and geotourism: A critical evaluation of the Greek region. Geosciences, 11(9), 381. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11090381
50. Zairul, M. (2023). Thematic review template (Patent No. CRLY2023W02032). Controller of Copyright.
51. Zairul, M., & Mohd Zairul. (2020). A thematic review on student-centred learning in the studio education. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(2), 504–511. https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.02.95
52. Zairul, M., Azli, M., & Azlan, A. (2023). Defying tradition or maintaining the status quo? Moving towards a new hybrid architecture studio education to support blended learning post-COVID-19. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 17(3), 554–573. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-11-2022-0251

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

How to cite

Zhang, Z. J., Ismail, M. H. B., Jumaat, N. J. B., & Pan, X. (2025). A thematic review on interpretation perspective of UNESCO Global Geoparks over the past 5 years (2019-2024): Analysis of trends for future studies. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 9(2), 2026068. https://doi.org/10.31893/multirev.2026068

[1] Antić, A., Radaković, M. G., Marjanović, M., Marković, S. B., Perić, Z. M., Spalević, V., ... & Tomić, N. (2023). Loess and geotourism potential of the Braničevo District (NE Serbia): From overexploitation to paleoclimate interpretation. Open Geosciences, 15(1), 20220546. https://doi.org/10.1515/geo-2022-0546

[2] Beraaouz, M., Macadam, J., Bouchaou, L., Ikenne, M., Ernst, R., Tagma, T., & Masrour, M. (2019). An inventory of geoheritage sites in the Draa Valley (Morocco): A contribution to promotion of geotourism and sustainable development. Geoheritage, 11(2), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-017-0256-x

[3] Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

[4] Breg Valjavec, M., Dunato Pejnović, N., Draženović, M., Čonč, Š., & Polajnar Horvat, K. (2022). The transboundary approach to landscape geointerpretation: Challenges in interpretive planning and geoconservation. Geoheritage, 14(4), 116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-022-00751-3

[5] Brzezińska-Wójcik, T., & Skowronek, E. (2020). Tangible heritage of the historical stonework centre in Brusno Stare in the Roztocze Area (SE Poland) as an opportunity for the development of geotourism. Geoheritage, 12(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-020-00442-x

[6] Catana, M. M., & Brilha, J. B. (2020). The role of UNESCO global geoparks in promoting geosciences education for sustainability. Geoheritage, 12(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-020-00440-z

[7] Cheng, Z., & Chen, X. (2022). The effect of tourism experience on tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior at cultural heritage sites: The mediating role of cultural attachment. Sustainability, 14(1), 565. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010565

[8] da Silva, E. M. R. (2020). The contribution of the European UNESCO Global Geoparks for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – a study based on several data sources (Doctoral thesis). Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Portugal.

[9] de Freitas, I. V., & Koskowski, M. R. (2021). Heritage and sustainable development: Capacity building through tourism (1st ed.). In Capacity Building Through Heritage Tourism (pp. 113–131). Apple Academic Press.

[10] Dowling, R., & Newsome, D. (2018). Handbook of geotourism (1st ed.). Edward Elgar Publishing.

[11] Drápela, E. (2023). Using a geotrail for teaching geography: An example of the virtual educational trail “The story of Liberec granite”. Land, 12(4), 828. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12040828

[12] Fassoulas, C., Nikolakakis, E., & Staridas, S. (2022). Digital tools to serve geotourism and sustainable development at Psiloritis UNESCO Global Geopark in COVID times and beyond. Geosciences, 12(2), 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences12020078

[13] Figueiredo, S. D., Raposo, L., & Sousa, M. (2021). Upper Pleistocene fauna from the Middle Palaeolithic site of Foz do Enxarrique (Vila Velha de Ródão, Naturtejo UNESCO Global Geopark). Geoconservation Research, 4(2), 685–693. https://doi.org/10.30486/gcr.2021.1912483.1048

[14] Gajek, G., Zgłobicki, W., & Kołodyńska-Gawrysiak, R. (2019). Geoeducational value of quarries located within the Małopolska Vistula River Gap (E Poland). Geoheritage, 11(4), 1335–1351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-019-00395-w

[15] Global Geoparks Network International Association. (2024). Actively participate in global challenges. https://www.visitgeoparks.org/our-missions

[16] Górska-Zabielska, M. (2023). A new geosite as a contribution to the sustainable development of urban geotourism in a tourist peripheral region—Central Poland. Resources, 12(6), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources12060071

[17] Gross, M. P., Zimmerman, R., & Buchholz, J. (2006). Signs, trails, and wayside exhibits: Connecting people and places (3rd ed.). Uw-Sp Foundation Press.

[18] Ham, S. (2013). Interpretation—Making a difference on purpose (1st ed.). Fulcrum Publishing.

[19] Hose, T. A. (2007). Geotourism: Appreciating the deep time of landscapes (1st ed.). In Niche tourism (pp. 27–37). Routledge.

[20] Kordos, L., Mészáros, I., & Szarvas, I. (2021). Tracking a “Prehistoric Pompeii”, Rhinoland and Crocodilia: New discoveries and interpretations of Ipolytarnóc (N Hungary) Lower Miocene track site. Geoconservation Research, 4(2), 621–634. https://doi.org/10.30486/gcr.2021.1914158.1062

[21] Liuzza, C. (2020). UNESCO and the global responsibility for heritage preservation (Doctoral thesis). Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

[22] Long, C., Lu, S., & Zhu, Y. (2022). Research on popular science tourism based on SWOT-AHP model: A case study of Koktokay World Geopark in China. Sustainability, 14(15), 8974. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14158974

[23] Luan, F., & Wang, F. (2023). Tourists’ perceptions of popular science education in Tianshan Tianchi National Geopark in Xinjiang. Geoheritage, 15(4), 120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-023-00886-x

[24] Martini, G., Zouros, N., Zhang, J., Jin, X., Komoo, I., Border, M., ... & Sá, A. A. (2022). UNESCO Global Geoparks in the “World after”: A multiple-goals roadmap proposal for future discussion. Episodes Journal of International Geoscience, 45(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2021/021002

[25] Mc Keever, P. J., & Zouros, N. (2005). Geoparks: Celebrating Earth heritage, sustaining local communities. Episodes Journal of International Geoscience, 28(4), 274–278. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2005/v28i4/006

[26] Migoń, P., & Pijet-Migoń, E. (2022). Exploring causal relationships for geoheritage interpretation—Variable effects of Cenozoic volcanism in Central European sedimentary tablelands. Geoheritage, 14(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00637-w

[27] Mikhailenko, A. V., & Ruban, D. A. (2019). Geo-heritage specific visibility as an important parameter in geo-tourism resource evaluation. Geosciences, 9(4), 146. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9040146

[28] Morante-Carballo, F., Apolo-Masache, B., Taranto-Moreira, F., Merchán-Sanmartín, B., Soto-Navarrete, L., Herrera-Franco, G., & Carrión-Mero, P. (2023). Geo-environmental assessment of tourist development and its impact on sustainability. Heritage, 6(3), 2863–2885. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage6030153

[29] Muzambiq, S., Walid, H., Ganie, T. H., & Hermawan, H. (2021). The importance of public education and interpretation in the conservation of Toba Caldera Geoheritage. Geoheritage, 13(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-020-00523-x

[30] Necheş, I. M. (2016). Geodiversity beyond material evidence: A geosite type based interpretation of geological heritage. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, 127(1), 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2015.12.009

[31] Neto De Carvalho, C., Baucon, A. N., Bayet-Goll, A. N., & Belo, J. N. (2021). The Penha Garcia Ichnological Park at Naturtejo UNESCO Global Geopark (Portugal): A geotourism destination in the footprint of the Great Ordovician biodiversification event. Geoconservation Research, 4(1), 70–79. https://doi.org/10.30486/gcr.2021.1913338.1051

[32] Ólafsdóttir, R. (2019). Geotourism. Geosciences, 9(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9010048

[33] Papadopoulou, E. E., Kavroudakis, D., Agelada, A., Zouros, N., Soulakellis, N., & Kasapakis, V. (2025). Virtual reality in geoeducation: The case of the Lesvos Geopark. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(2), 1653–1669. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2374399

[34] Pásková, M., Zelenka, J., Ogasawara, T., Zavala, B., & Astete, I. (2021). The ABC concept—Value added to the Earth heritage interpretation? Geoheritage, 13(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00558-8

[35] Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

[36] Prieto, J. L. P., de Castro Martínez, G. F., & González, E. M. R. (2019). Geotrails in the Mixteca Alta UNESCO Global Geopark, Oaxaca, Mexico. Cuadernos Geográficos, 58(2), 111–125.

[37] Reynard, E., & Brilha, J. (2017). Geoheritage: Assessment, protection, and management (1st ed.). Elsevier.

[38] Rodríguez, C., Sevilla, J., Obeso, Í., & Herrera, D. (2022). Emerging tools for the interpretation of glacial and periglacial landscapes with geomorphological interest—A case study using augmented reality in the Mountain Pass of San Isidro (Cantabrian Range, Northwestern Spain). Land, 11(8), 1327. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081327

[39] Rubira-Gómez, G., Malavé-Hernández, J., Jaya-Montalvo, M., Candell-Soto, J., Caicedo-Potosí, J., Merchán-Sanmartín, B., ... & Morante-Carballo, F. (2024). Sustainable design for geotourism interpretation centres: Enhancing the Santa Elena Peninsula Geopark project experience. Heritage, 7(1), 499–516. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage7010024

[40] Singh, R. B., Wei, D., & Anand, S. (2021). Global geographical heritage, geoparks and geotourism (2nd ed.). Springer Nature Singapore.

[41] Stolz, J., & Megerle, H. E. (2022). Geotrails as a medium for education and geotourism: Recommendations for quality improvement based on the results of a research project in the Swabian Alb UNESCO Global Geopark. Land, 11(9), 1422. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091422

[42] Tilden, F. (1957). Interpreting our heritage: Principles and practices for visitor services in parks, museums, and historic places (1st ed.). University of North Carolina Press.

[43] UNESCO Global Geoparks. (2024). UNESCO International Geoscience and Geoparks Programme. https://www.unesco.org/en/iggp/geoparks/about

[44] UNESCO Global Geoparks. (2025). Development and conservation. Global Geoparks Network. https://www.visitgeoparks.org/missions

[45] Vegas, J., Galindo, I., Romero, C., Sánchez, N., Díaz, G. A., Martín-González, E., & Mateo, E. (2019). Geoconservation and geotourism in the Lanzarote and Chinijo Islands UNESCO Global Geopark (1st ed.). In Lanzarote and Chinijo Islands Geopark: From Earth to Space (pp. 99–108). Springer, Cham.

[46] Veverka, J. (2015). Interpretive master planning: Strategies for the new millennium—Philosophy, theory and practice (1st ed.). Museums.

[47] Wang, J., & Zouros, N. (2021). Educational activities in Fangshan UNESCO Global Geopark and Lesvos Island UNESCO Global Geopark. Geoheritage, 13(3), 51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00570-y

[48] Xu, K., & Wu, W. (2022). Geoparks and geotourism in China: A sustainable approach to geoheritage conservation and local development—A review. Land, 11(9), 1493. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091493

[49] Zafeiropoulos, G., Drinia, H., Antonarakou, A., & Zouros, N. (2021). From geoheritage to geoeducation, geoethics and geotourism: A critical evaluation of the Greek region. Geosciences, 11(9), 381. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11090381

[50] Zairul, M. (2023). Thematic review template (Patent No. CRLY2023W02032). Controller of Copyright.

[51] Zairul, M., & Mohd Zairul. (2020). A thematic review on student-centred learning in the studio education. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(2), 504–511. https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.02.95

[52] Zairul, M., Azli, M., & Azlan, A. (2023). Defying tradition or maintaining the status quo? Moving towards a new hybrid architecture studio education to support blended learning post-COVID-19. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 17(3), 554–573. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-11-2022-0251

Abstract

References

How to cite