10.57647/gcr.2026.0901.03

Evaluation of Paleontological Heritage Sites in Türkiye: Scale Design

PDF
  • Nazan Karakaş Özür1,
  • Gülşah Güler*2,
  • Ayla Sevim Erol3,
  1. Department of Geography, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Çankırı Karatekin University, Türkiye
  2. 2Independent Researcher, Ankara University, Ankara, Türkiye
  3. Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Language, History and Geography, Ankara University, Türkiye
Categories

Received: 2026-01-28

Revised: 2026-03-16

Accepted: 2026-03-16

Published in Issue 2026-04-25

Copyright (c) -1 Nazan Karakaş Özür, Gülşah Güler, Ayla Sevim Erol (Author)

Creative Commons License

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

How to Cite

Özür, N. K., Güler, G., & Erol, A. S. (2026). Evaluation of Paleontological Heritage Sites in Türkiye: Scale Design. Geoconservation Research. https://doi.org/10.57647/gcr.2026.0901.03
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 12

Abstract

Natural and cultural heritage sites are protected according to international and national laws. As of 2024, according to the lists of the Ministry of Culture, there are 624 sites where archaeological and paleontological excavations and similar studies are being conducted in Türkiye. These all form parts of the nation’s heritage, including paleontological, geological, and archaeological heritage elements. Here, we emphasize the importance of revealing the heritage values ​​of these areas within the context of their historical development, distribution, and relationship with the environment. We present an applied model using a scale to determine heritage value, focusing on three main dimensions—scientific, educational, and tourism—based on literature, expert opinions, and preliminary applications. For each main dimension, 48 items with four different ratings were prepared. The validity and reliability studies of the scale have been completed and are presented in the appendix of this publication.

Keywords

  • Geoheritage,
  • Geotourism,
  • Natural heritage,
  • Paleontological heritage,
  • Scale development,
  • UNESCO World Heritage,
  • Türkiye
PDF

References

  1. Abad HM, Moreno CB, de Pedro SB, Marugán-Lobón J, Poyato-Ariza FJ, Delvene G, Moratalla JJ, Martínez MF, Vullo R, Cuesta E, Iniesto M, Barral A, Gomez B, Buscalioni ÁD (2017). The exceptional fossil site of Las Hoyas (Spain) from an educational perspective. Geoheritage. 10:463–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-017-0270-z
  2. Acedo A, Fesharaki O, García-Frank A (2025). The didactic potential of paleontological immovable heritage for secondary education students in Spain. Geosciences. 15:164. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences15050164
  3. Alfaro EM, Liñán E, Gozalo R, Vintaned JAG, Álvarez MEED, Ruiz LC, Santos A, Gil-Toja A (2021). Early Cambrian (Marianian) trilobites and associated faunas from the Sierra Norte de Sevilla Geopark: a scientific and heritage approach. Geoconservation Research. 4:56–60.
  4. Aylar F, Zeybek H.İ, Alemdağ S, Yürüdür E, Bayram İ, Altun M (2023). The formation of Aktepe Travertine Bridge as a geomorphosite and its geotourism potential. Turkish Geographical Review. 84:167–186. https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.1362800
  5. Basedow H (1914). Aboriginal rock carvings of great antiquity in South Australia. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 44:195–211.
  6. Black Elk L (2016). Native science: Understanding and respecting other ways of thinking. Rangelands. 38:3–4.
  7. Boateng GO, Neilands TB, Frongillo EA, Melgar-Quiñonez HR, Young SL (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: a primer. Frontiers in Public Health. 6:149.
  8. Brilha J (2016). Inventory and quantitative assessment of geosites and geodiversity sites: A review. Geoheritage 8:119–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-014-0139-3
  9. Caetano JMV, Ponciano LCMO (2021). Cultural geology, cultural biology, cultural taxonomy, and the intangible geoheritage as new strategies for geoconservation. Geoheritage. 13:79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00603-6
  10. Campos Medina J, Vergara Pinto F, Echeverría Parra A, Contreras Fuentes P, Abarzúa AM (2018). Resignificación del patrimonio paleontológico presente en el río San Pedro. PASOS. 16:655–670. https://doi.org/10.25145/j.pasos.2018.16.047
  11. Carvalho IS, Raminelli R, Henriques MHP, Soares RC, Andrade JAFG, Freitas FI (2021). The Araripe Geopark (NE Brazil). Geoheritage. 13:60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00586-4
  12. Cavalcante VD, Santucci RM (2025). Paleontological salvage analysis in the context of Brazilian environmental licensing. Geoheritage. 17:5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-024-01049-2
  13. Cengiz C, Şahin S, Cengiz B, Başkır MB, Keçecioğlu Dağlı P (2021). Evaluation of visitor understanding of geoheritage potential. Sustainability. 13:11812. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111812
  14. Dictionary.com (n.d.). Heritage. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/heritage
  15. Fernandes AE, Mateus O, Bauluz B, Coimbra R, Ezquerro L, Núñez-Lahuerta C, Suteu C, Moreno-Azanza M (2021). The Paimogo dinosaur egg clutch revisited. Geoheritage. 13:66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00591-7
  16. GEORISK Project (n.d.). Main page. https://www.georisk-project.eu/georisk-tool/
  17. GEOS-IT LTD (n.d.). Main page. https://www.geosit.co.uk/
  18. Global Geoparks Network (2025). International Geodiversity Day. https://www.globalgeoparksnetwork.org/news/international-geodiversity-day-0
  19. González-Rodríguez KA, Bravo-Cuevas VM, Cuevas-Cardona C, Cabral-Perdomo MÁ, Ortiz-Caballero E (2023). The hidden faces of paleontology. Geoheritage 15:134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-023-00902-0
  20. Guo Y, Sun Y, Han X, Zhao Y, Zhou S, Zhou,Y, He T, Yang Y (2024). Implications for paleontological heritage conservation. Applied Sciences. 14:9843. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14219843
  21. Haag NA, Henriques MH (2016). Paleontological heritage of the Acre (Amazonia, Brazil). Geoheritage. 8:381–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-015-0163-y
  22. Henriques MH, Pena dos Reis R (2015). Framing palaeontological heritage within geological heritage. Geoheritage. 7:249–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-014-0141-9
  23. Henriques MHP, Carvalho IS (2022). Culturally differentiated paths towards conservation. Geoheritage. 14:68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-022-00700-0
  24. Hinkin TR (1998). A brief tutorial on development of measures. Organizational Research Methods. 1:104–121.
  25. International Commission on Geoheritage (IUGS) (2023). Annual report. https://iugs-geoheritage.org/annual-reports/
  26. IUCN (2022). Key geoheritage areas: A global framework for geoconservation. Gland, Switzerland.
  27. IUGS (2024). Geoheritage task group guidelines. https://iugs-geoheritage.org
  28. JEMİRKO (2025a). Digne declaration. https://www.jemirko.org.tr/digne-bildirgesi/
  29. JEMİRKO (2025b). Türkiye geological heritage inventory. https://www.jemirko.org.tr/turkiye-jeolojik-miras-envanteri/
  30. Kazancı N (2012). Geological background of Kızılcahamam–Çamlıdere Geopark Project. Geoheritage. 4, 249–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-012-0064-2
  31. Kazancı N, Şaroğlu F, Suludere Y (2015). Geological heritage and framework list of geosites in Türkiye. MTA Journal. 151:263–272.
  32. Kindle EM (1935). American Indian discoveries of vertebrate fossils. Journal of Paleontology. 9:449–452.
  33. Kubbealtı Lugatı (n.d.). Miras. https://lugatim.com/s/miras
  34. Lisec A, Drobne S (2009). Influence of protected heritage on land management. SPATIUM International Review. 20:41–48.
  35. Lopes RF, Candeiro CRA, Valais S (2019). Geoconservation of dinosaur footprint geosite in Brazil. Environmental Earth Sciences. 78:707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-019-8722-1
  36. ΛΟΓΕΙΟΝ (n.d.). Heritagium. https://logeion.uchicago.edu
  37. Marok A (2023). Paleontological heritage of Tlemcen region. Geoheritage. 15:71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-023-00840-x
  38. Mayor A (2000). The first fossil hunters. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ..
  39. Mayor A (2013). Fossil legends of the first Americans. Princeton University Press, Pricneton, NJ.
  40. Mayor A, Sarjeant WAS (2001). Folklore of footprints in stone. Ichnos. 8:143–163.
  41. Nişanyan Sözlük (n.d.). Miras. https://www.nisanyansozluk.com/kelime/miras
  42. Özcan K, Tarakcıoğlu H (2021). Analytical framework for conservation in Turkey. TÜBA-KED. 24:145–158.
  43. Özer S, Mülayim O (2022). Geoconservation and geotourism potential in SE Anatolia. Geoheritage. 14:12.
  44. ProGEO (1993). Digne declaration.
  45. ProGEO (2008). Oslo declaration.
  46. ProGEO (2018). Chęciny declaration.
  47. Resmî Gazete/Official Gazette of the Republic of Türkiye. (1983, July 23). 2863 Kültür ve Tabiat Varlıklarını Koruma Kanunu.
  48. Rodrigo A, Peñalver E, López del Valle R, Barrón E, Delclòs X. (2018). Heritage interest of Cretaceous amber outcrops. Geoheritage. 10:511–523.
  49. Romero G, Sandoval J, Caracuel J, Mancheno MA (2004). Jurassic paleontological heritage of Murcia (Betic Cordillera, south-eastern Spain). Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia. 110:17–32.
  50. Şahin G, Balcı Akova S (2019). Geological values of Turkey. Asia Minor Studies. 7:335–354.
  51. Simón-Porcar G, Martínez-Graña A, Simón JL, González-Delgado JÁ. Legoinha P (2020). Ordovician ichnofossils and popular architecture in Monsagro (Salamanca, Spain): ethnopaleontology in the service of rural development. Geoheritage. 12:76.
  52. Somuncu M, Yiğit T (2010). World Heritage Sites in Turkey. Journal of Geographical Sciences. 8:1–26.
  53. Troiano LP, Dos Santos HB, Aureliano T, Ghilardi AM (2024). A remarkable assemblage of petroglyphs and dinosaur footprints in Northeast Brazil. Scientific Reports. 14:6528.
  54. Turoğlu H (2025). Discussion about geopark terminology. Geoheritage. 17:32.
  55. UNEP (2021). UN decade on ecosystem restoration strategy.
  56. UNESCO (1971). Recommendation concerning protection of geological heritage.
  57. UNESCO (1972). Convention concerning protection of world cultural and natural heritage.
  58. UNESCO (2015). UNESCO Global Geoparks guidelines.
  59. UNESCO (2025). UNESCO Global Geoparks book.
  60. UNESCO Turkish National Commission. (n.d.). Natural heritage criteria.
  61. UNESCO World Heritage Convention. (n.d.). Criteria for selection.
  62. UNESCO World Heritage Convention. (2025). States parties.
  63. Worthington RL, Whittaker TA (2006). Scale development research. The Counseling Psychologist. 34:806–838.