Geotourism is still a relatively new direction of tourism and its development is bound mainly to the territory of geoparks. Many geoparks try to develop different types of geo-products with a focus on different target groups. However, the nature of these products is very different and their development is evident mainly in the time scale. In the past, simple forms of interpretation and application of geoproducts were popular, whereas currently, modern technologies such as animations or augmented reality are thriving. This is mainly due to the better availability of technological equipment. At the same time, a number of geoparks boast of above-average interpreters, who are able to render and simplify difficult geological topics. This also applies to their ability to create of new geoproducts, where the need to abbreviate and condense information is evident. The results of the study show a positive trend in the use of modern methods in geoscience interpretation and in the creation of new geoproducts. At the same time, it is clear that without a modern concept it is very difficult to reach the current visitors. Therefore, such a concept is necessary in order to develop geoscientific issues, especially in the area of geoparks.
Farsani, T. N., Coelho, C., & Costa, C. (2011). Geotourism and geoparks as novel strategies for socio-economic development in rural areas. International Journal of Tourism Research, 13(1), 68–81. DOI: 10.1002/jtr.800.
Farsani, N. T., Coelho, C. O. A., & Costa, C. M. M. (2013). Rural Geotourism: A New Tourism Product, Acta Geoturistica, 4(2), 1–10.
Kubalíková, L. (2017). Mining Landforms: An Integrated Approach for Assessing the Geotourism and Geoeducational Potential. Czech Journal of Tourism, 6(2), 131–154. DOI: 10.1515/cjot-2017-0007.
Moroni, A., Gnezdilova, V. V., & Ruban, D. A. (2015). Geological heritage in archaeological sites: case examples from Italy and Russia. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 126(2), 244–251. DOI: 10.1016/j.pgeola.2015.01.005.
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. DOI: 10.1016/j.pgeola.2015.12.009.
Newsome, D., Dowling, R., & Leung, Y. F. (2012). The nature and management of geotourism: A case study of two established iconic geotourism destinations. Tourism Management Perspectives, 2(3), 19–27. DOI: 10.1016/j.tmp.2011.12.009.
Pásková, M., & Zelenka, J. (2018a). How crucial is the social responsibility for tourism sustainability? Social Responsibility Journal, DOI: 10.1108/SRJ-03-2018-0057.
Pásková, M., & Zelenka, J. (2018b). Sustainability Management of UNESCO Global Geoparks. Sustainable Geoscience and Geotourism, 2, 44–64. DOI: 10.18052/www.scipress.com/SGG.2.44.
Tomić, N., Marković, S. B., Korać, M., Mrđić, N., Hose, T. A., Vasiljević, D. A., & Gavrilov, M. B. (2015). Exposing mammoths: From loess research discovery to public palaeontological park. Quaternary International, 372, 142–150. DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2014.12.026.
Wang, X. (2018). Information Extraction of Tourist Geological Resources Based on 3d Visualization Remote Sensing Image. ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLII-3, 1815–1820. DOI: 10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-3-1815-2018.
Zelenka, J., Olševičová, K., Cimler, R., Pásková, M., & Procházka, J. (2014). Aplikace umělé inteligence a kognitivní vědy v udržitelnosti cestovního ruchu (Application of Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science in the Tourism Sustainability). Hradec Králové: Gaudeamus.
Zelenka, J., Pásková, M., & Husáková, M. (2015). Aplikace umělé inteligence, kognitivní vědy a informačních a komunikačních technologií v udržitelném cestovním ruchu (Application of Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Science and Information and Communication Technologies in Sustainable Tourism). Hradec Králové: Gaudeamus.