Recent State Policy and Its Impact on Geopark Establishment and Operation in Slovakia

Abstract

The geological evolution and structure of the territory of Slovakia plays a key role in the current geodiversity of the country. The importance of this key element of the environment is widely and most effectively represented in geoparks. This paper is devoted to the state policy of geopark establishment and operation in Slovakia. Despite the relatively well-established concept of geoparks in the world, its position is not entirely clear in Slovak legislation. So, both bottom-up initiatives and top-down strategies are not quite successful in geopark operations, especially when considering the sustainability of Slovak geoparks. The possible future position of geoparks in Slovakia, in terms of state policies, may be found (as discussed in this paper) in adopting specific legislation which will effectively support the development of these potential (geo)tourist areas, contributing to both sustainable tourism development and nature protection.

1. Introduction

The concept of geoparks is recently one of the most effective and, in some regions, still relatively new forms for attracting the general public’s attention and informing them on the importance, values and protection need of geological heritage sites. In this regard, geoparks significantly contribute to the conservation of geological heritage and its preservation for future generations. At an international level, geoparks, with respect to sustainable development and environmental protection, were introduced in 1996 [1]. In June 2000, the European Geoparks Network was established by representatives of four countries (France, Germany, Greece, Spain) [2]. Then, in 2004, 17 European and 8 Chinese geoparks introduced the Global Geopark Network under the auspices of UNESCO [3]. The Program of geoparks was adopted by UNESCO in 2015 creating a new label, the UNESCO Global Geopark [4].

UNESCO [4] defines geoparks as unified geographical areas where the landscape and its localities are of international geological significance and are managed for the purpose of conservation, education, and sustainable development. A geopark should use its geological heritage, in connection with all other aspects of the area’s natural and cultural heritage, to enhance awareness and understanding of key issues facing society in the context of the dynamic planet we all live on, mitigating the effects of climate change and reducing the impact of natural disasters. By raising awareness of the importance of the area’s geological heritage in history and society today, UNESCO Global Geoparks give local people a sense of pride in their region and strengthen their identification with the area. The creation of innovative local enterprises, new jobs, and high quality training courses is stimulated as new sources of revenue are generated through sustainable geotourism, while the geological resources of the area are protected [5].

In Slovakia, the term geopark (unlike, for example, a national park or protected landscape area) has no specific definition within the state legislation. However, the most important (geo)sites located in the area of a geopark can be subject of legal protection at local, regional, or national levels. The multidisciplinary character of geoparks and support of tourism in these areas, predominantly represented by geotourism, clearly distinguish geoparks from any other sustainable tourism concepts. The support of sustainability in geoparks includes several individual sustainable tourism forms (e.g., geotourism, rural tourism, ecotourism, cultural tourism, heritage tourism, etc.) as geopark should (1) be based on the presence of geological heritage and (2) cover diverse interests (e.g., ecology, archeology, culture, history, etc.).

The importance of the global growth of geoparks is supported by the fact that, in the last two decades, geoparks have been a subject of interest of many authors, and geopark areas have become the subject of studies and research in various fields, including geology and geomorphology [6,7,8], geoconservation [9,10,11], geodiversity [12,13,14,15,16,17], geotourism [18,19,20,21], sustainable development [22,23,24,25,26], ecology and biodiversity [27,28,29,30,31,32,33], and education [34,35,36].

The aim of this paper is to revise the recent progress of implementation of the geopark concept in Slovakia and its potential future perspectives in Slovak state policy according to worldwide trends towards nature-based tourism forms. The article analyzes all relevant conception and strategic documents adopted in Slovakia, primarily focusing on the geoparks in the country and updates of these materials related to gradual assessment of acquired information and experiences.

2. Methods

Based on the aim of the paper (to evaluate the past development in the Slovak Republic from the implementation of Geoparks in accordance with global trends in environmental tourism until the present), which already allows drawing the first partial conclusions, the study was performed within two major stages.

The first stage includes an in-depth study of all relevant documents and publications related to legislation affecting geopark establishment and operation in Slovakia. In addition to the available literature and official information sources (e.g., Collection of Slovak Law), the authors primarily analyze other sources of relevant documents which contain conceptual and strategic materials of governmental provenance as well as their changes and adjustments related to the gradual evaluation of the gained experiences, which are made available on various government information portals (e.g., Open Portal of the Government Office of the Slovak Republic available at: https://rokovania.gov.sk/ accessed on 6 October 2021).

After the study of all relevant documents, the second stage of this study includes critical analysis of findings within these documents. The subject of the analysis (also, but not exclusively) is from the legal point of view, as are government internal normative acts formulating political goals and, as well (although only so far marginal), rare occurring generally binding legislation in the given topic. This fact, as well as the need for a comprehensive approach to the issue, requires supplementing the legal method of interpretation of law, internal governmental decisions, and organizational guidelines with specific methods appropriate to the multidisciplinary aspects of the issue examined (e.g., historical, economic, political, and earth science topics).

3. The History of Development of Geoparks State Policy in Slovakia and Its Applications

From a geological perspective, almost all of the territory of Slovakia is formed by the Western Carpathians (Figure 1). Only the southernmost parts of the Pannonian Basin extend from Hungary. The recent geological structure is predominantly the result of Alpine orogeny with some remnants of previous (Hercynian) orogenic evolution [37]. The geodiversity of Slovakia depends on its inherited Alpine and Variscian structure and is also defined by a variety of geological phenomena that are located in specific areas of the country. Some of them are of international interest and are already protected. Rich geodiversity and the presence of geoheritage can be considered as the primary prerequisite for geoparks establishment [38]. In the territory of Slovakia, various geo(morpho)logical phenomena are located. For example, the smallest high-mountains in the world (High Tatras) with various landform types including tourist attractive locations such as valleys, waterfalls or tarns; one of the highest columns in the world (Speleologists of Rožňava Dripstone, 34 m high) in the Krásnohorská jaskyňa Cave (Figure 2B); cold-water geyser (Herľany Geyser) (Figure 2E); the lowest lying (503 m above sea level) classical ice cave up to the 50° of the northern latitude temperate climatic zone (Silicka ľadnica Cave) (Figure 2D); a precious opal deposit (Dubník Opal Mines) (Figure 2C) where the biggest precious opal mineral in the world, Harlequin, was found and probably the oldest precious opal mine (Libanka) is located; the UNESCO World Heritage caves of Slovak Karst; one of the biggest ice cave in Europe (Dobšinská ľadová jaskyňa Cave, UNESCO World Heritage); rich mineral deposits (e.g., Štiavnice vrchy Mts., Slovenské rudohorie Mts.), stone waterfall as a remnant of Neogene volcanism (Šomoška waterfall); and the cast of the skull of a Neanderthal (Homo Neanderthalensis) in Gánovce, or Dreveník, the largest travertine territory in Slovakia (which also includes numerous caves and cavities, a rocky city, travertine mounds, and tectonic faults (Figure 2A)).

Recently, four geoparks (

Table 1. Overview of geoparks operated in Slovakia.

Geopark Name	Year of Establishment	Legal Branch	Establishment Initiative	Legal Form	Partnership	Geopark Network
Banská Štiavnica Geopark	2006	private entity	top-down	Interest Association of Legal Entities	domestic	national
Banská Bystrica Geopark	2007	private entity	top-down	Civic Association	domestic	national
Novohrad-Nógrád Geopark	2008	private entity	bottom-up	Interest Association of Legal Entities	international	Global Geoparks Network
Malé Karpaty Geopark	2021 *	private entity	bottom-up	Non-profit Organization	domestic	national

* Note: Sandberg-Pajštún, recently part of Malé Karpaty Geopark, was defined as individual geopark in 2016.

) have been established and operated in Slovakia (Figure 3) rich in geological and many other associated sites (

Table 2. Types and numbers of sites in Slovak geoparks as identified by geopark operators [45].

Site Character	Banská Štiavnica Geopark	Banská Bystrica Geopark	Novohrad-Nógrád Geopark	Malé Karpaty Geopark
geological	1	46	15	5
cultural-historical	34	80	11	1
mining	83	36	3	2
archeological	1	7	3	0
natural	8	29	2	0
relaxation	17	0	1	4
mixed	12	94	18	55
Total	156	292	53	67

, Figure 4). The Banská Štiavnica Geopark, the first geopark established in Slovakia, is operated by the Association of Legal Entities for the Development of Banská Štiavnica and its surroundings, the Sitno Region. The Banská Bystrica Geopark is created and operated by the active cooperation of regional and local self-government administrations, professional institutions in the Banská Bystrica District, and representatives of the private sector, under the umbrella of the Banská Bystrica Geo-Mining Park Civic Association. The Association of legal entities of Geopark Novohrad Nógrád is responsible for the operation of the Geopark Novohrad Nógrád which, at present, is the only Slovak geopark included into the UNESCO Global Geoparks Network. These associations develop projects, implement them, and carry out all necessary activities for which they receive funding. Malé Karpaty Geopark is created by the bottom-up initiative of several enthusiasts of the non-profit organization Barbora, based on a wide range of activities. It consists of six geomining areas and is an opportunity to connect all tourist actors in the area of geopark.

Additionally, according to official documents [41,42], six areas with potential of geopark establishment are specified in Slovakia (Figure 3):

• Dubník Geopark located the in Slanské vrchy Mts., where the world-famous precious opal was mined near Červenica until 1922;
• Zemplín Geopark in the Zemplínske vrchy Mts. and its surroundings with examples of rock complexes as well as examples of old mining activity. The world-known Tokaj wine region (Hungary) also extends to this area;
• Spiš Geopark, predominantly located in the area of the Slovenský raj NP (“Slovak Paradise National Park”). It will also include demonstrations of old mining activity and metallurgy and some important cultural monuments of the Spiš Region;
• Silica Geopark located in the western part of the Slovenský kras NP (“Slovak Karst National Park”) (Silica Plateau), with already built educational trails and educational sites (caves: Domica, Gombasecká jaskyňa, Silická ľadnica, Krásnohorská jaskyňa).
• Jasov Geopark located in the eastern part of the Slovenský raj NP (“Slovak Karst National Park”) (Zádiel and Jasov Plateau) including sites such as the Jasovská jaskyňa Cave and Zádielska tiesňava, Háj Gorge, Turniansky hradný vrch (castle hill), Jasovská skala and Jasov Monastery with its surroundings;
• Súľov-Manín Geopark in the Protected Landscape Area of Strážovske vrchy Mts., focusing on Súľovské skaly, Manínska tiesňava, and Kostolecká tiesňava, already with partly built infrastructure of environmental education.

The draft concept of geoparks (i.e., actually the concept as such) was adopted by Government Resolution no. 740/2008 [41]. This document introduced three categories of geoparks: (A) operated (Banská Štiavnica Geopark); (B) built (Banská Bystrica Geopark, Novohrad, Nógrád Geopark); and (C) proposed. It defined a geopark (“an area containing one or more places of scientific importance not only from a geological point of view but also from the point of view of its archaeological, economic or cultural specificity of European importance”) and geotourism (“a new form of cultural–environmental tourism”).

Based on the UNESCO definition from 2000 [2], the ‘Slovak Geopark‘ was to be an area not only with clearly defined boundaries and an appropriate number of geological localities (geosites) of special importance but also with a clearly defined structure capable of enforcing policies of protection, environmental education, sustainable development and at the same time influencing the territory concerned in such a way as to ensure its economic development and a positive impact on the living conditions and environment of its inhabitants [41]. As part of the realization of geoparks, the concept recognized its three phases (preparatory, implementation, operational). In the operational phase, the concept required one to clearly define the administrators of the individual built elements, of which the geopark was to consist, to ensure the functioning of the geopark. Administrators should also have a clearly defined way of financing the care of the elements of the geopark that they were to keep in a way and by means appropriate to their importance. The concept assumed that for this purpose, the personnel and material prerequisites will be provided, especially by state institutions operating in the territory of the geopark.

In the early 2000s, three geoparks were operated or in building in Slovakia. In the case of the operated Geopark of Banská Štiavnica, it was not a problem to ‘clearly’ define some state institutions operating in the geopark such as the administrators: Slovak Mining Museum (expositions and information center), the State Nature Protection of the Slovak Republic (expositions and educational and tourist routes), and the Centre of Environmental Education GEOpark). The administrators of other objects were the municipality of Štiavnické Bane (information center) and the Banská Štiavnica-Hodruša Mining Association (portal of the Hereditary Mining Tunnel). Part of the plans for the completion of this geopark was the creation of a management structure covering the activities of the geopark. Also, in the case of the built Banská Bystrica Geopark, the sequence of steps was maintained. Starting with the elaboration of project plans in the preparatory phase, through building a system of geopark objects in the implementation phase (in this case, e.g., educational trail or reconstruction of mining work) up to building a management structure as one of the prerequisites of the progress to the final operational phase. In both cases, the coordinating management structures eventually took the form of an Interest Association of Legal Entities. At that time, the process of building the Novohrad Geopark was different, given the history of its genesis, which depended on the initiative “from below” of local governments and cross-border cooperation. The fact that the concept wanted, at the administration and maintenance of geoparks, to rely on in the first place on state institutions generally corresponded to the conditions in the Banská Štiavnica area, which was a traditional showcase of Slovak mining tourism (in 1964 or 1967, respectively, the Slovak Mining Museum began to operate here as the most important institution of its kind in Slovakia).

By Government Resolution no. 608/2012, in October 2012, after an inter-ministerial comment procedure, the Report on the Implementation of the Concept of Geoparks of the Slovak Republic [46] was adopted. The report dealt with the possibility of the Banská Štiavnica Geopark entering the European Geoparks Network (EGN) in detail. This geopark is situated in an undeniably exceptional area, not only in terms of geology but also in terms of culture and history, as this area is closely connected with mining activities, which in its development in this area has achieved several world primacies, such as building a water management system (so-called ‘tajchy’) (Figure 2A). Despite the undeniable potential of the area, the activities developed within the geopark have not yet met the criteria set for inclusion in the EGN and thus in the Global Geoparks Network (GGN) too. As stated in the documents of GGN [47], to include a geopark in this network, the geopark must have developed a management plan to support sustainable socio-economic development based on geotourism, demonstrate the methodology of conservation and enhancement of geological heritage, provide various methods of education in geosciences as well as in the wider environmental context and had the joint projects, submitted by representatives of public authorities, the domestic population and the private sector, which declare best practices for the conservation of the Earth’s heritage and its integration into sustainable development strategies [48].

The process was different and much smoother in the case of the Novohrad, Nógrád Geopark, which is all the more remarkable because in its case it was from the beginning an “initiative of local actors” (bottom-up initiative) with support in cross-border cooperation rather than from state authorities. The project of a joint Slovak-Hungarian geopark was theoretically born in the 1990s and was formulated in the form of an idea plan in 2003. A comprehensive spatial and development study was developed between 2006 and 2007. The manager building the Slovak part of the geopark became an Interest Association of Legal Entities Geopark Novohrad, Nógrád, registered in 2008. Its founders were the City of Fiľakovo and the Obručná Micro Region. In the same year, its representatives signed a Memorandum of Cooperation with their Hungarian partners and began to build joint management of the territory [49]. In 2009, official nomination documentation was submitted for mutually conditional entry into EGN and GGN, which was significantly helped by the uniqueness of the concept of the first international geopark on a global scale. Geopark Novohrad, Nógrád was adopted by The European and Global Network of Geoparks in March 2010 as its 37 resp. 66 member [50]. The diploma ceremony took place on 14 April 2010 at the 4th World Geoparks Conference in Malaysia.

In 2012, an interdepartmental commission was established based on the Report on the Implementation of Geoparks of the Slovak Republic composed of representatives of ministries, geoparks, self-governing regions, the Slovak Environmental Agency, the Dionýz Štúr State Geological Institute, and the Technical University in Košice with the task to update the concept of Geoparks of the Slovak Republic and to create a Network of Geoparks of the Slovak Republic until 2014.

The needs and development of Geoparks were also remembered in the meantime by the Strategy for the Development of Tourism until 2020 adopted by Government Resolution no. 379/2013 of 10 July 2013 [51]. Support, construction, and operation of geoparks in cooperation with stakeholders, including local governments and interest groups, was one of the formulated strategic goals. Geoparks were included among such priorities as the development of cycling, hiking, and water tourism, spas, and the amendment of the Travel Act no. 281/2001 Coll [52]. Specified goals were to be met by monitoring specific procedures following the Concept of Geoparks of the Slovak Republic [41] and its forthcoming update [42], as well as by creating a National Network of Geoparks. On a practical level, geoparks should have been supported the construction of educational trails, expositions, and information centers. The efforts were to be under the responsibility of the Ministries of the Environment and Transport of the Slovak Republic, the Association of Towns and Municipalities of Slovakia, self-administrative regions, and interest associations.

Geoparks were explicitly mentioned in most documents, from which the Update of the Concept of geoparks in the Slovak Republic [42] adopted at the beginning of 2015 finally emerged (Government Regulation no. 15/2015 of 7 January 2015). These were: Program Statement of the Government of the Slovak Republic for 2012–2016 [53], Update of the National Strategy of Regional Development of the Slovak Republic [54], Tourism Development Strategy until 2020 [55], Slovak Tourism Agency (SACR) Marketing Strategy for 2014–2020 [56] and Conception of Geological Research and Geological Survey of Slovakia for 2012–2016 with a fore view to 2020 [57]. In the case of the Conception of Geological Survey, the issue of Geoparks was reflected in norm-setting during the amendment of the Mining Act Decree no. 33/2015 [58] Coll. of the Ministry of the Environment of the Slovak Republic, which implements some of the provisions of the Act no. 44/1988 Coll. on the protection and use of mineral wealth, as amended (the Mining Act) [59], in section 14 subsection 1 paragraph I, stipulated that the mining register will contain from now a record of the relationship of the old mining work to the geoparks [58]. The non-use of mining and other technical monuments in favor of tourism due to ambiguous legislation concerning the transfer of old mining works to municipalities can be considered to be one of the main current weaknesses in the development of the Concept of Geoparks in Slovakia.

Essentially now the brand-new concept, concerning the efforts to integrate Slovak geoparks into international structures, has now introduced a different categorization of geoparks than before, namely: (1) geoparks with membership in GGN and EGN; (2) geoparks in operation; (3) areas with the potential of inclusion into the geopark network (Figure 3).

The criteria of the updated concept for the integration of the territory among the geoparks were based on the material “Guidelines and Criteria for National Geoparks seeking UNESCO’s assistance to join the Global Geoparks Network”, issued by UNESCO in 2014. The criteria required that the management of the area to be a geopark had sufficient powers to be able to, e.g., provide financial resources for the implementation of projects, protect nature and landscape, settlements, cultural and technical monuments as a necessary prerequisite for the development of tourism. In the section “problem analysis” of the update, it is clear that the submitters were well aware that the neuralgic point of geoparks in Slovakia is precisely the inability to deal with these criteria. According to the creators of the Update of Concept of Geoparks in the Slovak Republic, this deficiency should have been associated with the absence of a response from the ranks of state administration as a coordinator in geopark management and with the non-acceptance of geopark destination management as equivalent (as regards experience and expertise in the public-private partnerships in the field of tourism and regional development). Destination managements of geoparks were not respected, even as eligible beneficiaries in operational programs of regional development and cross-border cooperation.

Updated concept includes the adoption of several specific measures to ensure its implementation. Measures of a general character accentuated the call for the efficient drawing of funds in favor of geoparks and their greater use in the development of tourism. On a practical level, it was then a matter of creating a Network of Geoparks of the Slovak Republic (SG SR) as an inter-ministerial management body focused on the integration of Slovak geoparks into the Global Geoparks Network. At the same time, an Action plan for the implementation of measures to ensure the realization of the updated Concept of Geoparks of the Slovak Republic [60] was to be developed. From now on, every five years, starting in 2019, information on the state of implementation of this updated concept is to be submitted to the Government of the Slovak Republic for discussion.

The action plan for the implementation of measures to ensure the realization of the updated Concept of Geoparks was adopted at a meeting of the Ministry of the Environment in January 2016. The action plan in the SWOT analysis, only one year apart from the updated concept, must, of course, take into account as a weakness the position of management structures of geoparks in public-private partnerships and in receiving financial contributions to operational programs. However, it also emphasized the absence of professional supervision over the creation of the professional content of the geopark, the non-existence of a unified information system, and insufficient promotion and enlightenment. The result, according to the action plan, was insufficient institutional and public acceptance of existing geopark products as a development phenomenon of tourism, which were to be considered only as a marginal area of support from the side of self-governing regions [60].

Based on measure no. 3 of the action plan, an interdepartmental management body of the Geoparks Network of the Slovak Republic was established in 2016, issued its Guidelines of the Interdepartmental Commission SG SR on the process of the integrating of potential areas into the Geoparks Network of the Slovak Republic, on the process of reassessing membership the Geoparks Network of the Slovak Republic, and on the process of integration of the geoparks to the Global Geoparks Network.

In the action plan, similarly to Government Regulation no. 15/2015 on updating the concept of geoparks, obligations, which must be fulfilled in a period lasting not less than two years by the organization or management structure of the territory that wants to become a geopark, are defined. They include the passportization of localities (including name of the site, cadastral area, GPS coordinates, protection level, importance (global, national, regional, local), accessibility, land property, short description, potential measures to make site accessible), the construction of an information center with customer service, including parking and refreshments, preparation, implementation, and financing of development projects, organizing events to support tourism, and operating the website of the future geopark. The organization should cooperate with locals, municipalities, state administration bodies, and other entities. Finally, the organization must “protect nature and landscape, settlements, cultural and technical monuments as a necessary prerequisite for the development of tourism.” The preparation period can be completed by applying for obtaining the Geopark Decree of the Slovak Republic. The content of the application includes basic data (name, seat, and statutory body of the area management) and additional information (description of management structure—a type of legal entity, registration, objectives, activities, membership, managing authorities, revenues, and budget, partners and technical support, description of developed strategic documents).

On 30 June 2019, for the first time at a specified five-year interval, information on the status of implementation of the updated concept of geoparks was submitted to the Government of the Slovak Republic. The material once again summarizes the current problems of management of geoparks in Slovakia which “prevent them from performing the basic tasks assigned to them, make difficult to run their office or information center, limit the possibilities of permanent employment of personnel, promotion, and maintenance of infrastructure”, as follows:

• Total capital under dimensioning of organizations managing geoparks, which are maintained from low-budget grants, from own and sponsorship contributions;
• Non-claim ability of financial coverage, absence of direct financial support or regular subsidy mechanism;
• Ineligibility of wage costs from existing grant funding;
• Congestion and double-tracking: organizations must focus on the infrastructure, marketing, and educational activities of geoparks, even when they share an area with the administration of national parks or protected landscape areas.

4. Discussion

The Destination Management Department of the Tourism Section of the Ministry of Transport and Construction of the Slovak Republic has developed the Methodology of Destination Management of the Geopark [61] which not only concerns the proposed Geopark Zemplín but is designed as a recommendation for managing all geoparks. The methodology understands the geopark with respect to the intentions of destination management as a product of tourism linked to a specific area, the essence of which lies in a unique way of interpreting the potential of a given area. From a structural point of view, according to the methodology, the geopark is primarily a cluster of initiatives of local and regional entities that support the geopark project “according to the degree of its solidity and professionalism”. The role of the managing entity of the geopark is therefore to facilitate communication between stakeholders based on a prepared destination management plan. It is supposed to “manage the geopark”, but above all as ‘primus inter partes’, among the other participants in the “project” and not as an authoritative body, equipped not only with tasks but also with concrete powers. Regarding the legal form of the geopark, the methodology is ambivalent; according to the methodology, it can be not only a legal one but also a natural person. However, it admits that the “association” seems to be the ideal form. Significantly, the recommended organizational form of “association”, with legal personality, in the Slovak legal system strictly speaking does not even exist. Since the only requirement is a legal personality, the use a single “association” (consortium, societas iuris civilis), known to Slovak law as a binding legal relationship and regulating it peculiarly as an association contract in § 829 et seq. of the Civil Code no. 40/1964 Coll., relapses even as a theoretical possibility.

Organizational considerations in connection with the update of the concept in 2015 and the official announcement of the Geoparks Network of the Slovak Republic on 9 December 2016 went in a different direction and emphasized the sequence of integrating the geopark as a fundamental element in unspecified legal and organizational form into superior structures in the following order: the geopark, the Geoparks Network of the Slovak Republic and the European and Global Network of Geoparks.

The question ‘What is actually a geopark in terms of law and management in Slovakia or what it should be?’ remains open. Mostly, a geopark is currently understood as an area defined by a specific perimeter (target area—destination) characterized by certain attributes, with a personnel substrate in the form of interested partners and the managing entity of the geopark, whose role is to coordinate and facilitate between the participants. Štěpánková and Kristiánová [62] state that the top-down strategies (coordination, administration, expertise and execution from the state governmental level) are not sufficient for the successful geopark existence and management in Slovakia. The geopark is perceived as a destination management tool for the creation of a specific tourism product (based on geotourism principles), not as territory management, which, according to the Regional Tourism Organization (OOCR), would be a ‘legal entity that supports and creates conditions for tourism development in its territory and protects interests of its members’ (Section 13 (1) of Act No. 91/2010 Coll. on the Promotion of Tourism) [63].

At the same time, the Update of the Concept of Geoparks in the Slovak Republic itself, despite focusing more on establishing a superstructure in the form of the Geoparks Network of the Slovak Republic, by a detailed adjustment of the law scopes and powers of the Steering Committee of the Geoparks Network and the process of gaining membership in this network, in the part named ‘Management of the Geoparks’, acknowledges and emphasizes that the condition for the functioning of the geopark is the creation of an effective management system at the level of individual geopark. “The presence of unique or internationally significant geological phenomena is not enough in itself for a territory to become a geopark. Where appropriate, the geological and other values of the geopark’s territory must be interconnected and managed by an entity capable of promoting the policy of protection, promotion, and sustainable development of the geopark, cooperating effectively with the state administration, local and regional self-government, citizens and the business community, as well as with foreign partners.”

According to the updated concept, this entity may be a legal person, a civic association, an association of legal entities, a non-governmental organization, a local government, a foundation, a museum, or another institution consisting of qualified and professionally qualified personnel. Such a broad spectrum of potential actors gives the impression that the question of the form of the governing structure of the geopark is not of cardinal significance. In the case of geoparks, it is already anticipated that they will enter into economic relations, not only with visitors (entry and services) but also with partners during the implementation of project schemes, as recipients of subsidies and support from the state, municipalities, and sponsors, etc. Despite everything, in one breath legal forms and specific institutions are recommended, in the case of which it cannot even be argued that the leadership of the geoparks could be their primary task. One of the most critical problems of Slovak geoparks is the ability to achieve the functional quality of the geopark management group, capable of gathering financial resources in order to ensure the sustainability of the projects and constructions of infrastructure and their sustainability in a long run [62].

In the case of the above-mentioned ‘interest associations’, it can be either a Civic Association, e.g., according to section 4(2) of the Criminal Code (Act No. 301/2005 Coll.) [64], for this Law, interest associations are considered to be Civic Associations according to the Act on Citizens’ Associations No. 83/1990 Coll [65]. The Civic Association is the Banská Bystrica Geopark or the Interest Associations of Legal Entities (sections 20f–20j of the Civil Code [66]), from which circle of founders natural persons is excluded, even if they are natural persons as business entities. The Novohrad—Nógrad Geopark exploit this legal form, similarly to the Regional Association for the Development of Banská Štiavnica and its Surroundings (Sitno Region), which manages the Banská Štiavnica Geopark. An Association based on the association contract enables a merger to achieve a common goal for natural and legal persons, but such a corporation does not have a legal personality. So far, it has used the legal form of a non-profit organization (e.g., the Barbora non-profit organzation, which manages the Geopark Malé Karpaty).

The need for legislation support of geoheritage and geoparks is discussed by various authors. For example, Ruban [15] points out the necessity to develop national policies in order to receive significant direct and indirect socio-economic benefits from the use geoheritage sites which are often located in geopark areas. According to Nikolova and Sinnyovsky [67] ‘a special legal tool for geological heritage protection and conservation should be elaborated in the most of the European countries and designation of geoparks as areas of special protection could contribute to increasing environmental and economic benefits.’ Geological heritage represents the core of any geopark and so it needs to be properly managed and protected [37]. So, from the legislation point of view, the future of geoparks in Slovakia can be seen in following three alternatives:

(1)

Using the available spectrum of legal forms, while a suitable framework is offered for more widespread use a non-profit organization, since according to section 2(2) of Act no. 213/1997 Coll. on Non-profit organizations providing services of general interest [68], may provide services under which, according to paragraph C of this subsection also means ‘creation, development, protection, restoration, and presentation of spiritual and cultural values’. This is especially inspiring for geoparks, which are to unify the presentation of natural as well as cultural values. According to section 2(2) paragraph G of this Act, the generally beneficial service is also the ‘creation and protection of the environment and protection of public health’ respectively according to paragraph H ‘services to support regional development and employment’. To this extent, the generally beneficial goals overlap identically with the goals of establishing geoparks according to government resolutions.

(2)

From the sustainable (geo)tourism development perspective, geopark can be based on the form of a Regional Tourism Organization (RTO) which is a legal person embodied in Slovak law by Act no. 91/2010 Coll. on the support of tourism [63]. RTO is a specialized organization of destination management with a mission, according to section 15 paragraph E, of this law to support “cultural, social and sports life and the preservation of natural and cultural heritage”, resp. according to paragraph I, to promote “the sustainable development of tourism in such a way as to protect and preserve the environment in all its aspects and to respect the way of life of the local population and respect for property rights”. However, for a geopark, as an entity in this legal form, not to be burdened beyond its ‘raison d’être’ with the obligations of a regional tourism organization concerning the development of tourism in general and not primarily geotourism as its specific form, following alternative seems to be more suitable.

(3)

To adopt an independent legal regulation about the geopark, as one of a destination management organizations. It should be noted once again that Slovakia already has relatively detailed legislation of destination organizations (in addition to the aforementioned OOCR, it is also a District Tourism Organization (KOCR)) in the Act on the Support of Tourism no. 91 of 2010 [63]. This possibility is supported by the fact that it would be appropriate to delimit the relationship of the geopark to protected areas, as their territories can and usually even do overlap (especially as regards the sensitive solution of the relationship between nature protection and tourism development) [69]. The current situation is such that the geopark, although also defined by its territorial district and its founders emphasizes its protective and public benefit mission, the initiative (project) is completely based on private law and its founders are against state or local government bodies representing nature protection or regional development as recipients of obligations, prohibitions, and restrictions. In addition, local governments could also apply for membership in such a destination management organization (e.g., organizational units of the State Nature Protection, which would make them simultaneously holders of both rights and certain obligations with the destination organization). But in every case, it would certainly strengthen the feeling of public-private partnership. A promising competence for the geopark in this form would be the possibility to formulate its relationship to geologically important localities in Slovakia, which lack the prominence of direct protection through Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection [70]. There is the majority of such geological phenomena in Slovakia [71], specifically geosites outside the territorial districts of territorial nature protection in Slovakia (there are currently 305 out of the total number of 480, i.e., 61.8%) [72]. Here, geoparks can play a key role in protection of such locations as they may be an considered as an effective tool for the nature protection [73]. The Global Geoparks Network provides an international framework for preservation and promotion of geological heritage. As mentioned by Crofts and Gordon [74] (2015), creation of geoparks ensures, at some specific level, coordination of landscape protection, sustainable development and additional social and economic development, (albeit not still within the strict definition of IUCN categories). In this regard, it can be concluded that geoparks represent a complementary concept of nature protection rather than competitive compared to, for example, national parks or protected landscape areas [75]. However, despite well established and generally accepted international framework for geopark establishment supported directly by the UNESCO, establishing a geopark is primarily a matter of national legislation which may not reflect some of international regulations or recommendations in this field. Therefore, adopting international standards of geopark definition, establishment, and operation into state policy may positively affect the position and function of geoparks not only in Slovakia but in many other countries all around the world.

Despite the results, which at first glance do not correspond to the efforts and attention paid by both state authorities and the interested public to the development of geoparks, progress in moving the issue to a new quality level can be observed in at least two points: (1) geotourism and geoparks represent the first conceptual attempt at the symbiosis of natural heritage conservation and tourism development, in comparison with the previous ‘rigid’ approach of nature protection legislation, as mentioned by Petráš ([76], p. 179) on the case of perception of the ‘threat of geotourism to the protection of geodiversity’ by environmentalists); and (2) the shift of interest from living to inanimate nature—the protection of nature and landscape with its traditional emphasis on the biotic component of the environment put the protection of geological heritage rather in the background [69]. At the same time, geoparks have a certain additional potential in this direction and can supplement the means of territorial protection of nature and landscape, albeit indirectly (e.g., by developing effective geo-interpretation and geo-education), as most geosites located in Slovakia which can be included into core zones of proposed geoparks (Figure 3), according to the original Concept of Geoparks of the Slovak Republic [41], are still outside the borders of perimeter of national parks and landscape protected areas.

5. Conclusions

Despite the efforts of several organizations, associations, or individuals, geotourism in Slovakia and the concept of geoparks in its practical form, as well as in other countries, is developed at a very low level and many tourists know very little about it, respectively (or they know nothing at all). However, geotourism, as a still new and dynamically developing form of tourism on a global scale, can be based on its principles and nature, making a significant contribution to the protection and preservation of the geological heritage for present and future generations (especially in geopark areas).

In this paper we revised implementation of geopark concept in Slovakia from the perspective of state policy and actual legislation.

In Slovakia, concerning geoparks, the axiom was the protection of nature and geological heritage. However, for a closed system of comprehensive nature and landscape protection, state policies currently pursue primarily the goals of tourism development and regional development. The government documents adopted so far on the issue of geoparks and geotourism revised in this study are not generally binding legislation, but government resolutions (i.e., organizational acts formulating development intentions and goals that have a conceptual, political, and not an administrative legal character). Thus, from the Slovak legislation perspective, geoparks have no legal definition. So, establishment and operation of geopark seems to be more in hands of enthusiasts than within a legal framework, even though geoparks may effectively contribute to both nature protection and sustainable tourism development. However, the first signs of legal regulation are present. For example, the Government Resolution (No. 15/2015) determines the conditions under which it is possible to establish a geopark within a transitional preparatory period, so it is essentially a normative legal act. As geoparks effectively contribute to protection and promotion of geoheritage, provide education in geosciences and related fields and contribute to sustainable tourism development, they should be functionally supported by legislation at a national level.