Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE) ISSN 2714-6480.
Vol 2.
No 4, 2021, 213-232 https://doi.
org/10.
35912/joste.
Dynamics of Tourism Development in Geosite.
Gunungsewu Geopark Primantoro Nur Vitrianto1.
Wiendu Nuryanti2.
Dwita Hadi Rahmi3 Faculty of Engineering.
Universitas Gadjah Mada.
Yogyakarta.
Indonesia1,2,3 v@mail.
id1, wiendu@gmail.
com2, dwita_hr@yahoo.
Abstract Purpose: The designation of the Gunungsewu UNESCO Global Geopark has implications for the development of various tourism This article seeks to reveal how the development of the Gunungsewu geopark in Gunungkidul district as a tourism Methods: This study uses a qualitative method.
The data used were descriptive data, with in-depth analysis.
Collecting samples through proportional sampling, the selection of samples depends on the purpose of the study without regard to the ability of a generalist.
Results: The level of development of tourism destinations in mountain geoparks varies based on Butler's classification of tourism Article History Received on 17 September 2021 destination development.
Determination of an area with unique 1st Revision on 13 November 2021 geomorphology cannot simultaneously lift the entire area into a 2nd Revision on 5 December 2021 tourist destination.
3rd Revision on 20 December 2021 Limitation: This study focuses on developing a geosite seen as a Accepted on 13 January 2022 tourism destination.
This study emphasizes observing the development of tourism destinations using the AuTourism Area Life CycleAy approach proposed by Butler .
Contribution: This research is expected to benefit the development of tourism science and geoparks in Indonesia.
Conclusion: Species diversity in the Protection Report Diary .
was higher compared to the total number of wildlife species sighted by visitors .
and during the patrol .
indicating that some wildlife species in LCC declined within 10 Keywords: Butler.
Destination.
Development.
Geopark.
Gunungsewu.
Tourism.
How to cite: Vitrianto.
Nuryanti.
, and Rahmi.
Wildlife status and ecotourism potentials of Lekki Conservation Centre.
Lagos.
Nigeria.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship, 2.
, 213-232.
Introduction Geopark is a concept created to maintain the sustainability of a unique geological-based area.
addition, geoparks are also expected to develop the site in terms of economic improvement and community empowerment.
As a conservation guard tool, geopark is a very effective tool to protect the unique geology and geomorphology that exists in an area with various protection schemes.
Geopark is an area management model with unique geology that relies on three pillars: conservation of earth heritage, community development, and economic growth (Komoo, 2.
The term geopark in Indonesia became better known and much discussed after the Batur Lake-Mountain areas were appointed as part of the Global Geopark Network in September 2012.
Since then, new geoparks have emerged in several areas, although they are still in the national geopark ranking, such as Geopark Gunung Toba Caldera (North Sumatr.
Mount Merangin Geopark (Jamb.
Mount Belitung Geopark (Bangka Belitun.
Mount Bojonegoro Geopark (East Jav.
Mount Tambora Geopark (West Nusa Tenggar.
Mount Maros Geopark (South Sulawes.
, and Mount Geopark Raja Ampat (Papu.
In 2018 this number increased to 15 geoparks with the stipulation of 8 areas with unique geology as national geoparks, namely: Silokek Geopark (West Sumatr.
Ngarai Sianok-Maninjau Geopark (West Sumatr.
, and Sawahlunto Geopark (West Sumatr.
Natuna Geopark (Riau Island.
Pongkor Geopark (West Jav.
Karangsambung-Karangbolong Geopark (Central Jav.
Banyuwangi Geopark (East Jav.
, and Meratus Geopark (South Kalimanta.
It doesn't stop there.
Indonesia also has 6 geoparks under the global geopark network, including: Mount Batur (Bal.
Ciletuh Pelabuhan Ratu (West Jav.
Mount Sewu (Central Java.
East Java and Yogyakart.
Mount Rinjani (NTB).
Toba (North Sumatr.
, and Geopark Belitong (Bangka-Belitun.
The government provides excellent support to these geoparks because geoparks are expected to accelerate equitable development and encourage economic development and sustainable development in the region.
One of the benefits of a geopark designation is that it raises awareness among the general public and the government.
The forms of concern that arise include the desire to visit the area.
Visits to geopark areas cannot be separated from tourism activities that have previously emerged and developed in the Tourism is one aspect of leisure that usually, but not invariable, involves some expenditure by the participant (Tiimub et al.
, 2.
The development of tourism activities in geoparks is felt to be very in line with the main purpose of geoparks as a medium to preserve the region's uniqueness, improve the economy and empower the community.
The emerging and developing tourism activities will demand the area's development correlated with facilities and services.
The growth and development of the global tourism industry have engendered a new paradigm of sustainable socio-economic advancement (Bitok.
The link between tourism and development can be defined differently and viewed from several perspectives (Nuryanti, 1.
The relationship between tourism and development can be seen from the signs of development itself (Nuryanti, 1.
Previous studies related to geoparks and tourism area life cycles have been carried out, but the authors have not found a link between the two in one discussion.
(Zhonga et al.
, 2.
describe applying the Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) concept in China's Zhangjiajie National Forest Park.
The results of the study are in the form of external and internal factors that affect tourism development.
Vitrianto et .
explain that the semi-fixed element is the element that changes the most and determines the structure of tourism space in a geopark.
The dynamics of tourism activities as a non-permanent element greatly influence the development of semi-permanent elements in geoforests.
Pulina and Biagi .
explained the use of the Life Cycle (LC) approach as an analysis tool for the development of destinations and market segments on the island of Sardinia (Ital.
Economy, the development of the accommodation and tourist sectors.
Muangasame .
criticizes the Butler and Plog model by considering its validity and limitations in tourism research.
Using a case study in Thailand, this paper illustrates the nature, purpose, and diversity in tourism activities that apply the four characteristics of tourism products from Butler's marketing aspect.
In addition.
Utama .
conducted tourism life cycle research related to studying the tourism economy in tourism destinations in Bali.
The development of the geosite is expected to provide welfare to the community.
One of the possible forms is the functioning of a geosite as a tourism destination.
The development of tourism destinations on a geosite will undoubtedly vary, so the impact on welfare will also vary.
The Life Cycle tourism product method (Butler, 1.
or the life cycle of tourism product is used to observe the magnitude of the tourism development of an area on the factors forming tourist attractions by using several criteria or indicators in the geopark.
This research reported here was conducted to analyze how a geosite can be assessed within the framework of tourism development using the indicators that Butler has put Review of related literature UNESCO .
defines a geopark as "an area with unique geological elements, including archaeological, ecological, and cultural values, in which local people are invited to participate in protecting and enhancing the functions of natural heritage.
The development of the diversity of the potential for earth tourism in the Gunungsewu area, where the use of earth tourism in this area can use a geotourism model in a location, often called a geopark.
Robinson .
stated that geopark is a 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 concept of sustainable development in an area with a unique geoheritage that has international The concept of an earth park or so-called geopark was developed as a model to increase the protection of the earth's heritage .
The basic concepts developed in a geopark include conservation, education, and local economic Concerning national development.
Andriani & Pitana .
explains that the International Geopark Status or National Geopark is the initial stage to realize development that protects local communities' natural and cultural resources and welfare.
Geoparks are relatively new developments that focus on regional and national geo-social topics, bringing together stakeholders for sustainable development (Pforr & Megerl 2006 in Newsome & Dowling, 2.
Figure 1.
Pillars of geopark development Source: adapting from the Global Geopark Network (UNESCO, 2.
An earth park or geopark is a concept initiated by UNESCO (United Nation Educational.
Scientific and Cultural Organizatio.
as a model for protecting the earth's heritage .
The European Geopark Network (EGN) and the Global Geopark Network (GGN) explain that geoparks are areas with specific boundaries and areas for the benefit of sustainable development.
Geopark runs by considering the development of social, economic, cultural, and environmental aspects.
Geoparks, according to UNESCO .
, are national protected areas or regions where geological heritage assets have a specific beauty and distinctive appeal that may be promoted via conservation, education, and local economic development strategies.
Geoparks are expected to improve and enrich geodiversity, infrastructure, cultural diversity, capacity building, community development, biodiversity, and regulation.
To simplify the concept of geoparks, in daily life, geoparks are developed as tourism destinations.
The development of these destinations still maintains the main function of the geopark as a conservation area that has an increased in the local economy and community empowerment.
The level of development of the geosite as a tourism destination The context of a tourist destination site describes a place to be marketed by various tourism stakeholders (Awaritefe & Ejemeyovwi, 2.
In developing a tourist attraction, the concept of the Life Cycle product is known, which describes the level of development of a tourist attraction associated with the 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 characteristics of the tourist attraction from several parameters or indicators.
Territorial development occurs when there is integration by representatives of the public governance and society, by the diversity of institutional arrangements, and by the elements that make up the natural and cultural landscape (Walkowski et al.
, 2.
Life Cycle tourism product or tourism product life cycle is the level of development of a tourist attraction associated with the characteristics of the tourist attraction from several parameters or indicators.
The stages of tourism development, according to (Butler, 1.
, are as follows:
Exploration Before becoming a tourist attraction or destination, the existing potential first enters the identification and exploration stage.
The condition of tourism potential is still natural.
There are not many visitors.
The interaction of visitors with residents is relatively high, infrastructure is limited, or an introduction to new tourism products.
This condition is the main reason why this potential deserves to be a tourist destination or attraction.
Involvement In this phase, the community is directly involved by providing various services for tourists' goods and services.
Socialization or advertising on a limited scale began to be carried out by the community and the government, especially before the school holidays, so tourist visits increased.
Tourism infrastructure has already started to be built by the government on a limited scale and Tourism investment from the local community .
is also developing at this stage.
Development The community has started to develop and promote tourism to be known as a tourism destination.
The number of tourists is increasing rapidly, and new attractions are being added.
There were many tourist visits, and national or international investors began to be brought in.
Foreign companies (MNC) Multinational Companies began to operate and tend to replace existing local businesses due to the demands of global tourists who expect better quality standards.
Tourism organizations began to form and carry out their functions, especially as promotional agencies with the government, to attract foreign investors to invest in their chosen destinations.
Consolidation At this stage, the tourism sector shows dominance in the economic structure of an area, and there is a tendency for the dominance of international networks to become stronger in their role in the tourist area or destination.
Tourist visits still show a positive increase, but there has been price competition among similar companies in the tourism industry in the area.
The role of local government is starting to diminish so that consolidation is needed to organize and balance the roles and tasks between the government and private sectors.
In the consolidation stage, tourist areas that have attracted tourists, the number of visits is not as fast as before.
It is necessary to arrange rules between hosts and tourists as guests.
Tourist arrivals are growing slowly, and new markets are They are focused on seasonal travelers.
Services for tourists began to be provided by both national and international companies.
Stagnation In this phase, visits have exceeded their peak and cannot increase again .
ends to stagnat.
This condition persists with a relatively high number of visits.
However, the problem is that the destination's attractiveness has faded and is no longer attractive to tourists.
Visits are dominated by loyal consumers and repeat guests.
The intensity of the promotional program is still not able to increase the arrival of new tourists.
Destination management exceeds the carrying capacity so that negative things happen about destinations such as environmental damage, rampant criminal acts, unfair price competition in the tourism industry, and cultural degradation of local communities.
Rejuvenation After stagnation occurs, two possibilities can occur in the continuity of a destination.
Suppose no efforts are made to get out of the stagnation stage.
In that case, tourists will likely abandon the destination and choose other destinations considered attractive.
Domestic tourists only visit the destination, and it is only crowded on weekends and holidays.
Many tourist facilities have changed functions into facilities other than tourism.
Tourism development needs to consider changing destinations, new target markets, and repositioning tourist attractions to other, more attractive Suppose Destination Management has enough capital or private parties interested in health 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 care, such as building artificial attractions.
In that case, such efforts can be carried out, but all actions do not guarantee rejuvenation.
Decline.
this stage will occur if rejuvenation measures are not carried out or fail to be carried out.
At this stage, the destination will experience a decline in tourists, resulting in a reduced workforce in the tourism business sector and a decrease in the quality of infrastructure facilities, resulting in a reduction in the destination's image.
Figure 2.
Ilustrasi Tourism Area Life Cycle Source: adapting from the butler Butler .
model The Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) (Butler, 1.
has been the main model to explain the changes and developments of tourist areas.
The TALC model is recognized as a valuable method for describing and interpreting changes and developments in tourist areas in terms of its application (KobylaEska.
Park, 2006.
Hovinen, 2002.
Prideaux, 2.
and theoretical approaches.
(Muangasame, 2014.
Butler, 2011.
Martin & Uysal, 1990.
and Oppermann, 1.
as well as criticism of the theory (Ma & Hassink, 2.
The Tourism Area Life Cycle also links in deepening and exploring the relationship between regional development studies and tourism related to Evolutionary Economic Geography (EEG) (Boschma & Martin, 2.
Materials and methods This research was conducted using field survey methods, mapping, topographic interpretation, remote sensing, and tourism development assessment.
The method used in this research is descriptive research because it does not provide treatment and does not manipulate variables.
Still, researchers observe the development of the geopark .
parts as a developing tourist destination.
The data used for the analysis came from field surveys, in-depth interviews, and previous research.
Remote sensing data use 1:35,000 scale aerial photography and satellite imagery (Google Eart.
A study of the development of tourism destinations is carried out through surveys and in-depth interviews.
The database used is primary data and secondary data.
The data from this study were collected from field surveys by observing the history of tourism development in each geosite.
Further analysis is explained using the tourism area life cycle approach (Butler, 1.
Discussions of findings Geoparks are managed as natural uniqueness that must be protected and conserved, as revealed by Pforr & Megerl .
that geoparks are focused on regional and national geo-social.
These geo-social topics can serve as instruments to coordinate stakeholders for the common goal of sustainable development.
The tourism development of a geopark requires a geotourism approach.
The Gunung Sewu Geopark is managed only by relying on a pure geopark approach, so tourism has not been appropriately developed 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 unless the geopark has developed as a tourism destination before.
Nglanggeran.
Pindul.
Kalisuci.
Cokro Cave.
Sri Gethuk.
Siung-Wediombo.
Baron-Krakal-Kukup.
Jomblang Cave.
Wanagama Forest had previously developed as a tourism destination before being developed as a geopark.
Other geosites such as Cokro Cave and Mulo Ngingrong Karst Valley were developed as tourist destinations shortly before being designated a geopark, so their development is different.
The Kali Ngalang geosite and the Sadeng valley - Bengawan Solo Purba have not yet been developed as tourist destinations.
These differences in initial conditions lead to different developments as well.
Geosites that have developed as tourist destinations will experience a relatively high increase in development after being designated as In contrast, those that do not develop as tourist destinations do not experience much tourism To make it easier to classify the development of each geosite as a tourist destination by using the Life Cycle Tourism Product model (Butler, 1.
, which is divided into:
Exploration - The occurrence of exploratory activities on tourism potential Involvement - The occurrence of community and government involvement in tourism activities Development - The occurrence of comprehensive development to improve the quality of the area related to tourism needs Consolidation - The emergence of the need to strengthen, unite, and strengthen relationships, unions, groups, and others.
Stagnation - The cessation of tourism development in an area Decline & Rejuvenation - A reduction in the quality of tourism-related areas 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 Table 1.
Model checklist 1 stages of tourism development in each geosite based on TALC Turunan Very high Tall Very high Innovators.
Followers Wanagama Tall Gua Cokro n Accommodation n The occupancy rate n Price level n Expenditure n Type of traveler Lembah Mulo /Ngingrong Growing fast Low BaronKukup- Krakal n Growth Sri Gethuk Stable Lembah Kering Sadeng Gua Pindul The least Siung Wediombo.
Kali Ngalang Increase/ very much Gua Jomblang Nglanggeran n Number of tourist Goa (Kalisuc.
Tourism Condition Very low Increase/ Slow Growing growing fast Very high Tall Increase/ Growing Tall Increase/ A little Growing Low Tall Very low Increase/ Decrease Growing Decrease Tall Very high Increase/ Growing Tall Low Tall Tall Explorer Tall Very high Very high Very high Low Low Tall Tall Tall Tall Low Very high Very high Very high Tall Followers Innovator Innovator Innovator Explorer Very high Low Tall Very high low Innovator Mass Tall Very low Very high Very high Very high Tall Very high Tall Very high Very high Very high Innovator Innovator Innovators.
Followers Very high Very high Very high Innovator Tall Very high n Image of Tall Low Low Tall attraction/destination Stages of Consolidation Beginning/ Saturation Maturity Tall Tall Low Maturity Maturity Beginning/ Maturity Stagnation.
Maturity Down / Increase / Increase/ a lot very much Increase / a lot Growing Growing fast Growing Low Tall Low Very high Tall Consolidation grow Source: Analysis of each geosite using the Tourism Area Life Cycle model (Butler, 1.
2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 The development of the geosite using the butler model is strongly influenced by the development of tourist visits.
A geosite that is well developed and utilized by the community optimally and has unique geology that can be accepted as a tourist attraction will quickly develop as a tourist destination.
Zhonga et al.
explained that one of the parameters used to observe tourism development is the number of tourist visits.
The description of tourist visits in each geosite.
Gunung Sewu geopark is as follows:
Baron - Krakal - Kukup Beach Siung-Batur-Wediombo Beach Nglanggeran Ancient Volcano Wanagama Geoforest Sri Gethuk Waterfall Pindul Cave Kalisuci Cave Jomblang Cave Mulo Valley.
Ngingrong Cave Turunan Geoforest Cokro Cave Ngalang River Sadeng Dry Valley After Geopark Before Geopark Figure 3.
Tourist visits before and after geopark Source: tourism department data, processed by the author.
October 2018 From the data above, the development of tourist visits in the entire Gunung Sewu Geopark reached 3,555,986 people.
The Baron-Krakal-Kukup geosite achieved the highest visit.
In contrast, the three geosites with the lowest number of visits were Luweng Cokro.
Ngalang River, and Sadeng Dry Valley (Bengawan Solo Purb.
At the same time, the other nine geosites had an even number of visits with a range between 9,450 to 544,349.
The condition and development of the geosite are strongly influenced by the development of tourism in the geosite.
The gap in the data obtained by visits is noticeable.
Some geosites get visits of up to millions of visitors per year.
In contrast, some other geosites only get hundreds of visitors.
2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 Baron - Krakal - Kukup.
Before Geopark
NUMBER OF VISIT
After Geopark Siung-Batur-Wediombo.
Nglanggeran Ancient Volcano.
Wanagama Geoforest.
Pindul Cave.
Sri Gethuk Waterfall.
Jomblang Cave.
Kalisuci Cave.
Ngalang River Pindul Cave Kalisuci Cave Jomblang Cave Siung-Batur-Wediombo Nglanggeran Ancient Volcano Sadeng Dry Valley Sri Gethuk Waterfall Baron - Krakal - Kukup Cokro Cave Mulo Valley.
Ngingrong Cave Wanagama Geoforest Turunan Geoforest Mulo Valley.
Ngingrong Cave.
Turunan Geoforest.
Cokro Cave.
Ngalang River.
Sadeng Dry Valley.
Figure 4.
Chart of total tourist visits 2007-2017 Source: tourism department data, processed by the author.
Oktober 2018 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 From the data above, the development of tourist visits in the entire Gunung Sewu Geopark reached 3,555,986 people.
The Baron-Krakal-Kukup geosite achieved the highest visit.
In contrast, the three geosites with the lowest number of visits were Luweng Cokro.
Ngalang River, and Sadeng Dry Valley (Bengawan Solo Purb.
At the same time, the other nine geosites had an even number of visits with a range between 9,450 to 544,349.
The condition and development of the geosite are strongly influenced by the development of tourism in the geosite.
The gap in the data obtained by visits is noticeable.
Some geosites get visits of up to millions of visitors per year.
In contrast, some other geosites only get hundreds of visitors.
The development of tourism in the Gunung Sewu geopark is quite diverse and dynamic.
One of the indicators used in observing tourism development is the number of tourist visits, as explained by Nicely and Palakurthi .
This number of visits is useful for assessing the economic benefits of the tourism According to the research results, the geosites most frequently visited have been designated tourist attractions, such as Baron.
Krakal.
Kukup beaches.
Wanagama geoforest.
Siung Wediombo beaches.
Nglanggeran.
Pindul, and Sri Gethuk.
These conditions summarize the number of visitors to each geosite before and after it was declared a Different things will be seen when the number of tourists is compared to before becoming a Mulo Valley achieved the highest increase in visits - Ngingrong Cave.
Jomblang Cave, then, and Nglanggeran.
At the same time.
Baron Kukup Krakal.
Wanagama Kalisuci, and Sadeng Valley were the geosites with the lowest increase.
Table 2.
Traffic Increase Levels before and after geopark designation Mulo Valley.
Ngingrong Cave
Jomblang Cave
The Number After Geopark
& after 26,225 26,105 1,104 51,220 Ancient Volcano
Nglanggeran Geoforest Hutan
Turunan Kali Ngalang
59,280
990,776 931,496
12,095
11,295
Sadeng Dry Valley
Siung-BaturWediombo Beach
Luweng Cokro Cave
173,555
Pindul Cave
Contribut
Lokasi
Number Before Geopark
50,116
Total Amount 26,345 21754.
52,324 4539.
1,050,056 1571.
12,895 1411.
1,602,281 723.
1,428,726 1,255,1
1,200
1,045
64,698
449,990 385,292
514,688 595.
Sri Gethuk Waterfall 217,671 640,420 422,749 858,091 194.
Kalisuci Cave
25,324
74,370
99,694 193.
Baron Beach - Krakal Kukup
Geoforest Wanagama
3,514,903
678,694
1,355 674.
49,046
8,330,948 4,816,0 11,845,851 137.
806,832 128,138 1,485,527 23.
Source: tourism department data, processed by the author.
July 2019 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 The differences in the level of development between geosites can be broadly divided into three groups, namely geosites with very significant improvement (>1000%), high .
0%-200%), and low (<200%).
Five geosites experienced an increase of more than 1000%, while four geosites experienced an increase in the number of visits between 1000%-200%.
The remaining four experienced an increase in visits of less than 200%.
However, compared to the difference in the number of visits, the highest spike was found in geosites with the lowest percentage, namely Baron - Krakal - Kukup Beach, followed by SiungWediombo Beach and Wanagama Geoforest.
The lowest number of spikes is occupied by Cokro Cave.
Ngalang River, and Sadeng Dry Valley.
According to the statistics presented above, there was an increase in visitors before and after being a geopark.
On average, all geosites experienced an increase in the number of visits after being designated as geoparks.
Baron.
Krakal, and Kukup received the highest visits among the thirteen existing geosites.
It is estimated that the big name of this area has long been known as a pioneer of tourism in Gunungkidul district.
Baron.
Krakal, and Kukup have been known since before the 70s and began to overgrow and happen continuously, which eventually made this area a tourism icon in Gunungkidul.
The development of Baron.
Krakal, and Kukup shows no relationship with the status of this area as a Gunung Sewu Geopark, as evidenced by the absence of changes in the pattern of tourist visits in 2013 or 2015.
In addition to Baron.
Krakal.
Kukup, the number of tourist visits at Geoforest Wanagama and Siung beach.
Wediombo is also relatively high with an achievement of A 400 - 500 thousand.
The development of Siung-Wediombo beach tourism is supported by the recognition of this area as a tourism destination.
The developments in these two locations appear to be related to the determination of the Gunung Sewu The increase in the number of visits that occurred in 2014 took place after the determination of the Siung-Wediombo geopark.
The Nglanggeran.
Pindul, and Sri Gethuk geosites received relatively high visits.
However, they were still below the previous three geosites, namely at 100 Ae 150 thousand visits.
This area was already known as a natural tourist destination several years before the determination of the geopark.
Nglanggeran has a slightly different case from other areas where the number of visits in this area decreased significantly in 2014.
According to the data obtained.
Nglanggeran in 2015 decreased by 100 thousand trips compared to the previous year.
Whereas in that year, the Gunung Sewu Geopark was designated part of UNESCO's global geopark network.
Siung-Wediombo more than > 1 million visit Wanagama Geoforest Baron - Krakal - Kukup Turunan Geoforest Mulo Valley.
Ngingrong Cave Jomblang Cave Visit 10 tousand - 1 Kalisuci Cave Pindul Cave Gethuk Waterfall Anchient Volcano Nglanggeran Sadeng Dry Valley Ngalang Dry Valley CokroCave Figure 5.
Grouping the number of visits at each geosite Source: tourism department data, processed by the author.
Oktober 2018 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 Total tourist visits until 2018 based on the data obtained can be divided into three groups, namely: high group > 1 million visitors occupied by Siung-Wediombo Beach.
Wanagama Geoforest, and Baron Krakal - Kukup Beach.
a medium group with a total number of visits between 10 thousand Ae 1 million, occupied by Geoforest Turunan.
Mulo Valley-Ngingrong Cave.
Jomblang Cave.
Kalisuci Cave.
Pindul Cave.
Sri Gethuk Waterfall.
Nglanggeran Ancient Volcano.
and visits under 10 thousand which are occupied by the Sadeng Dry Valley.
Ngalang River, and Cokro Caves.
The results of the above analysis can also be presented in a checklist model to facilitate grouping and to calculate the results, as stated in the following table:
The results of the analysis of tourism development using the Tourism Area Life Cycle model (Butler, 1.
are as follows:
2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 Table 3.
Model checklist two stages of tourism development in each geosite based on TALC
Lembah
Kering Sadeng
BaronKukupKrakal Sri Gethuk
---
---
---
--A
--A
---
---
---
---
---
---
--A
--A
--A
--A
--A
---
---
--A
---
---
---
---
--A
---
---
--A
---
---
---
--A
---
---
---
Turunan Siung Wediombo.
---
Wanagama
Jomblang
Cave
--A
---
Cokro
Cave
Kalisuci Cave
---
n Lembah Mulo /Ngingrong Pindul Cave Exploration The number of tourists is still small n Facilities and accessibility are still limited n The tourist attraction is still very natural Involvement n Emerging facilities from the local community n There is government intervention n The number of tourists is increasing n Facilities and accessibility are starting to grow Development n The number of tourists increased sharply n There is participation from investors n The growing popularity of the area n There was damage to the facility n The need for planning and control & promotion Consolidation n The growth rate is declining, but the numbers are still large n Emerging unilateral domination of investors Stagnation n At peak times, tourists can no longer afford to be served n Environmental, social, and economic problems arise n The need for visitor management Decline & Rejuvenation n Decreased attractiveness/ originality of the area n The emergence of a tendency to become a new concept tourism n Depending on the weekend or holiday, visit n The need for innovations .
romotion, attraction, managemen.
Ngalang
River
Nglanggeran Stages of development TOURISM AREA LIFE CYCLE
---
--A
--A
---
---
---
--A
---
---
--A
---
---
--A
--A
--A
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--A
--A
---
--A
Result ue Kali Ngalang A ue Sadeng Dry Valley --A ue Luweng Cokro A ue Turunan forest --ue Goa (Kalisuc.
ue Jomblang Cave ue Siung - Wediombo.
A ue Sri Gethuk ue Mulo Valley/ Ngingrong --ue Nglanggeran ue Wanagama Forest --ue Pindul Cave ue Baron- Kukup- Krakal --ue Baron- Kukup- Krakal Source: Analysis using the Tourism Area Life Cycle model (Butler, 1.
2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 The calculation table above shows that the development of tourism in all geosites, especially in the "development phase," saw a significant increase in the number of visits, starting from the emergence of participation from investors, increasing the popularity of the area, decreasing the quality of available facilities, and improving planning, controlling, and promotion.
Five geosites occupying the development stage are Goa (Kalisuc.
Jomblang Cave.
Siung - Wediombo.
Sri Gethuk.
Mulo/Ngingrong Valley.
The development of this phase is indicated by the increasing number of visits to the five geosites.
Communities around the geosites also invest, as was the case in Kalisuci Cave, where investors carried out investment activities from nearby villages in the Semanu sub-district or the city of Yogyakarta.
People are interested in investing due to the increasing popularity of the area.
The increasing number of tourist visits to this area will damage or decrease the quality of the available facilities.
Proper development planning is expected to reduce the impact of increasing the number of visits.
Two geosites, namely the Ngalang River and the Sadeng Dry Valley, occupy the early stages of development based on observations using the TALC model.
At this early stage, the number of tourist visits is still tiny, facilities and accessibility are limited, and the tourist attraction is still very natural.
The Ngalang River and the Sadeng Dry Valley both have a small number of visits, and it can be said that there are no regular visits to this geosite.
The condition of the two is still original, and there are no tourism support facilities available at all.
Existing visits are more approximation or school assignments.
In contrast to the Ngalang river and the dry valley of Sadeng.
Luweng Cokro and the Derived forest are more in demand and visited.
Some facilities such as bathrooms still owned by residents, parking, prayer rooms are also initiatives.
In this case, the government's role in the village government is minimal in assistance, installing information boards, and improving access to this area.
Under these conditions, according to the TALC model.
Luweng Cokro and Derived Forest are in the Involvement stage.
Nglanggeran and Wanagama forest are geosites that are widely known by the public.
Nglanggeran is a leading tourist destination in Gunungkidul Regency and is part of a strategic national tourism area.
It is different from Nglanggeran.
Wanagama as a conservation forest managed by UGM and used as a pilot area for forest management and germplasm breeding.
The public will very well know it.
The number of visits to these two geosites is still significant, but the growth rate has begun to decline.
These two geosites have been managed in an integrated manner.
youth organizations manage Nglanggeran, and the UGM forestry faculty govern Wanagama.
Under these conditions, according to the TALC model, these two areas can be included in the consolidation stage.
Pindul cave geosite is a geosite known for its cave tubing tourist attraction or cave walking tours using used tires.
There are quite a lot of visitors to this cave, up to 4000 people per day.
Sometimes it even looks crowded by visitors.
The manager himself has begun to feel unable to serve tourists properly at the peak of the visit.
The high number of visits has also begun to cause several environmental, social, and economic problems, such as waste problems and trade competition among tourism actors in this This increase in visits requires good management and the need for visitor management.
With these indications, it shows that Pindul cave is in the stagnation stage on the TALC scale.
The increasing number of tourist visits to the Pindul.
Baron.
Kukup.
Krakal geosites impacts the decline in the quality of the available facilities.
This decrease proves that these two geosites have entered the decline stage and require rejuvenation, such as proper development planning.
This decrease also affects the quality of the attractiveness/authenticity of the area.
One form of rejuvenation is the emergence of culinary tourism in this area.
The density of tourist visits occurs on weekends or holidays.
The decline in visits outside this weekend is attributed to the declining popularity of the geosite and the increasing popularity of other nearby beaches.
The decline in tourist visits to geosites can be overcome by innovating in various fields, including promotion, attractions, management and arrangement of the area, improvement of facilities, and new icons such as the Baron's lighthouse.
The development phasing findings, which are contrasted with the empirical circumstances of each geosite, are as follows:
2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 Table 4.
Developments in a geosite that started as a tourism destination Process of Reaching Initial conditions Development Highest Visit Rate.
Development indicators DTW and characters Nglanggeran n 20-40 minutes from Developed as a DTW 325,303, n The increasing popularity of Stage of Ancient Volcano the parking area, the area starting 2011, in the Th.
2014 Number .
-700 mhike to the top, 170- form of a special decreased in 2014.
n Damage to facilities appears (Developmen.
AMSL) Contributed 4.
25% of n Need for planning and control towards interest tourist Price <100k & promotion Consolidation n 10-15 minutes from adventure, agron The growth rate of tourists is (Consolidatio.
Visiting time 4.
the parking area down, but the number is still hours, index repeater hike to the reservoir, 15-20m.
n There is unilateral control elevation hike from investors n Requires physical Ngalang n 5 minutes from the In the form of a n The number of tourists is still Exploration River parking area to the river, it has tourism Th.
2017, the number is small Stage .
-135 mriver, using the n Facilities and accessibility are potential for AMSL) elevation of the still limited particular interest in 0.
01% of total Free entrance stairs -3m Visiting time 0.
99 hours n The tourist attraction is still ancient fossils n Requires special very natural index repeater 12% knowledge and Pindul Cave n 5-10 minutes from Developed as a DTW 145,081 n There is interference from the Consolidation .
-165 -AMSL) the parking area, the starting 2011, in the Th.
2017, the number is government Entrance Price vehicle transfer to form of a special n Damage to facilities appears Stagnation <100k the cave, security Contributing 4.
08% of n The growth rate of tourists is (Stagnatio.
interest tourist equipment provided attraction for caving the total down, but the number is still n No skill required Long visit 2.
50 hours n Requires physical n At peak times, tourists are no index repeater 4% longer able to be served n Emerging environmental, social, and economic n The need for visitor Kalisuci n 10-15 minutes from Developed as a DTW 20,108 n The number of tourists Development .
-165 mthe parking area, increased sharply starting 2009, in the Th.
2015, the Number (Developmen.
AMSL) down the stairs n There is participation from form of a special Price <100k .
owards the Contribute 0.
41% of the investors interest tourist Consolidation underground river, attraction, cave, and total n The increasing popularity of (Consolidatio.
safety equipment Length of visit 2.
the area underground river n Damage to facilities appears crossing adventures hours index repeater n No skill required n Need planning, control & n Requires physical n The growth rate of tourists is down, but the number is still Luweng n 10-15 minutes from Developed as a DTW 21,200 n The number of tourists Development Jomblang the parking area, starting in 2005, in Th.
2017, the number is increased sharply (Developmen.
-185 mwalk to the cave, n There is participation from the form of a special increasing.
AMSL, depth 60single rope technic interest tourist Contribute 0.
60% of the investors Consolidation (SRT) protocol, n The increasing popularity of attraction for caving total (Consolidatio.
Entrance Price safety equipment Length of visit 3.
the area >100k n Damage to facilities appears hours index repeater n Requires expertise n There is unilateral control n Requires physical from investors Siung Beach n 5-10 minutes from Developed as a DTW 432.
n The number of tourists Development Ae Wediombo the parking area to starting in 2000, in Th.
2017, the number is increased sharply (Developmen.
-30 -AMSL) the beach, 15 n There is participation from the form of a mass increasing.
Entrance Price minutes to the Contributing 12.
16% of investors beach tourist Consolidation <100k the total n The increasing popularity of attraction and (Consolidatio.
Climbing Visiting time 4.
08 hours the area special interests in equipment is n Damage to facilities appears rock climbing, rock index repeater 6% n Need for planning and control n Beach tourism does & promotion not require n The growth rate of tourists is expertise, and rock down, but the number is still climbing requires Sadeng Dry n It can be directly In the form of n The number of tourists is still Stage of Valley observed from the agricultural land and Th.
2016, the Number Exploration .
-140 m-AMSL) side of the road decreased in 2016.
river valleys, it has (Exploratio.
Location 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 Location Free Entrance Process of Reaching Initial conditions Highest Visit Rate.
DTW and characters n To reach the the potential to Contributed 0.
03% of location, 150m develop rest areas valley on foot as Length of visit 0.
deep as 70m hours repeater index n Requires special knowledge and n 10-15 minutes from Developed as a DTW 140,315 the parking area, starting 2009, in the Th.
2015, the Number down the stairs form of a special .
owards the rive.
, interest tourist Contributed 3.
16% of 15-20 minutes by attraction, riverside total Length of visit 3.
adventures, and n No skill required riverside waterfalls hours, index repeater Development n Facilities and accessibility are to Involvement still limited (Involvemen.
n The tourist attraction is still very natural n There are facilities from the local community Development indicators Involvement local community n There is interference from the development n The number of tourists is n Facilities and accessibility are starting to grow n The number of tourists increased sharply n There is participation from n The increasing popularity of the area n Damage to facilities appears n Need for planning and control & promotion Baron Beach n 5-10 minutes from Developed as a DTW 2,112,597 n Damage to facilities appears Stagnation to - Krakal Ae Kukup the parking area to starting in 1980, in Th.
2017, the number is n The growth rate of tourists is Decline & .
-10 -AMSL) the beach, 15 the form of a mass increasing.
Contributing down, but the number is still Rejuvenation Entrance Price minutes to the tourist attraction for 59.
41% of the total <100k Visiting time 4.
02 hours n At peak times, tourists are no beaches, culinary Climbing longer able to be served index repeater 4% equipment is n Emerging environmental, social, and economic n Beach tourism does not require n The need for visitor expertise, and rock climbing requires n Decreased attractiveness/authenticity of the area n The emergence of a tendency to become a new concept tourist attraction n The need for innovations .
romotions, attractions.
Mulo n It can be directly n There are facilities from the Developed as a DTW 10,400 Stage of Valley.
Ngingrong observed from the starting 2007, in the Th.
2017, the number is local community Involvement Cave side of the road Contribute n There is interference from the (Involvemen.
form of a special .
-140 -AMSL) n To reach the 29% of the total interest tourist Entrance Price location, down a Visiting time 2.
n The number of tourists is attraction, caving <100k 150m valley on foot adventure, valley hours, index repeater (Developmen.
as deep as 70m n Facilities and accessibility are n No skill required starting to grow n Requires physical n The number of tourists endurance .
nter the increased sharply n There is participation from n The increasing popularity of the area n Damage to facilities appears n Need for planning and control & promotion Luweng n 10-15 minutes from Developed as a DTW 280 n The number of tourists is still Stage of Cokro Cave the parking area, starting 2012, in the Th.
2017, the number is small Exploration .
-250 mwalk to the cave.
Contribute n Facilities and accessibility are (Exploratio.
form of a special AMSL, 18m dept.
single rope technic interest tourist 01% of the total still limited to Involvement Entrance Price (SRT) protocol, n The tourist attraction is still attraction for caving Length of visit 3.
(Involvemen.
>100k safety equipment very natural hours repeater index n There are facilities from the n Requires expertise local community n Requires physical n There is interference from the n The number of tourists is Sri Gethuk Waterfall 104-120 -AMSL) Entrance Price <100k n There are facilities from the 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 Location Process of Reaching DTW Initial conditions and characters Highest Visit Rate.
Development indicators Development n Facilities and accessibility are starting to grow n Damage to facilities appears Wanagama n 10-15 minutes from Developed as a DTW 544,349 n The number of tourists Stage of Geoforest the parking area starting in 2005, in Th.
2017, the number is increased sharply .
-200 -AMSL) n It can be enjoyed by the form of a special increasing.
Contributing n The increasing popularity of (Developmen.
Entrance Price 31% of the total the area interest tourist <100k n Complete facilities attraction, adventure Length of visit 2.
n Damage to facilities appears Consolidation n Need for planning and control (Consolidatio.
forest conservation, hours repeater index n No skill required & promotion agro-tourism n Need interest n The growth rate of tourists is down, but the number is still n There is unilateral control from investors Turunan n 10-15 minutes from Developed as a DTW 9,450 n Facilities and accessibility are Stage of Geoforest the parking area starting 2017, in the Th.
2017, the number is still limited Exploration .
-262 mn Complete facilities form of a special Contribute n The tourist attraction is still (Exploratio.
AMSL) 27% of the total very natural interest tourist to Involvement Entrance Price n No skill required n There are facilities from the attraction, adventure Length of visit 2.
(Involvemen.
<100k local community forest conservation, hours index repeater n There is interference from the agro-tourism n The number of tourists is n Facilities and accessibility are starting to grow Source: researcher analysis From the discussion above, it can be concluded that the development of a geosite as a tourism destination in a geopark is not always uniform.
many things affect this development, especially the initial condition of the geosite before it turns into a geopark.
A geosite, a tourist destination, will undoubtedly develop better than a geosite not derived from a tourism function.
In addition, the community's contribution to developing an area has a considerable influence on the development of geoparks as tourism destinations.
From this condition, the programs implemented by geoparks cannot necessarily turn an area into a tourism destination directly.
Tourism development is an approach that is needed to advance an area.
However, community-based tourism development does not always positively impact local communities (Prakoso et al.
, 2.
In Butler's calculations, the visit factor is one of the main keys determining the grouping of these developments so that the community's ability to accept the geosite as a destination and the motivation for visiting the geosite is also a determinant of how the development of a geosite as a tourism The following diagram shows the results of observing the development of a geosite as a tourism destination using the model Butler .
2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 (Exploratio.
(Involvemen.
(Developmen.
(Consolidatio.
(Stagnatio.
Nglanggera Pindul Cave (Decline & Rejuvenatio.
Kalisuci Cave Ngalang River Sadeng Dry Valley Cokro Cave Turunan Geoforest Jomblang Cave SiungWediombo Beach Sri Gethuk Waterfall Mulo Valley / Ngingrong Wanagama BaronKukupKrakal Beach BaronKukupKrakal Beach Figure 6.
Grouping the number of visits at each geosite Source: Researcher, 2018 Conclusion Research on the development of geosite tourism destinations in a geopark concludes that the development of geosites in a geopark is very diverse and not always evenly distributed even though it is carried out with the same planning.
This development is strongly influenced by the development of the number of tourist visits to the geosite.
Differences in the development of geosite tourist destinations are influenced by the initial conditions of the area before it turns into a geosite.
Geosites with initial conditions as tourist destinations will adapt more quickly to the programs owned by geoparks so that visits will increase and tourism will be easier to develop.
Ideally, if the geosite is not initially developed as a tourist destination, its development will not be optimal Limitation and study forward The following recommendations are proposed:
TwentyAetwo .
of the 28 animal species observed during the patrol were least concerned although some including Tragelaphus scriptus were rare during the study.
There is therefore a need for a regional reassessment of the species based on the IUCN guidelines.
Also, eco-tourists to LCC should be given more opportunities to give feedback about their experience with wildlife.
The information provided by the ecotourists could be a valuable resource for biodiversity conservation policy-making and also a reference for future To mitigate primate-human conflict in LCC, visitors must be advised to stop feeding the Researchers have shown that there are critical breeding and nesting periods when animals are most vulnerable to disturbances.
In such periods, appropriate restrictions of ecotourism activities should be enforced.
Playing music within the LCC forest should be prohibited.
Efforts must be made to keep noise levels low and maintain a specified minimum distance between visitors and wildlife (Jilo.
For example, the minimum distance from which visitors are allowed to view sea lions at Seal Bay is 6m (Wolf & Croft, 2.
Acknowledgment This research is a part of Ph.
thesis research.
in accordance, we would like to thank The Indonesian Ministry of Research.
Technology and Higher Education and the Indonesian Endowment Fund for 2021 | Journal of Sustainable Tourism and Entrepreneurship (JoSTE)/ Vol 2 No 4, 213-232 Education for the award of BUDI-DN Scholarship.
We also would like to thank The Doctoral Program of Architecture.
Universitas Gadjah Mada, for all the assistance that makes this research conductible.
References