Unearthing the geotourism experience: Geotourist perspectives at Mount Pinatubo,Philippines

Abstract

This study aims to explore the geotourism experience by undertaking a qualitative inquiry of the narratives of geotourists to Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines. This study proposes that the geotourism experience is created onsite through the tourists’ visual, performative and social aspects of gazing and produced in the tourists’ minds through their perception, imagination and self-reflection. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 12 purposefully selected geotourists. Thematic analysis procedures reveal 11 experiential themes that illustrate varying perspectives on the geotourism experience, categorised into three dimensions: ‘natural’, ‘recreational’ and ‘socio-cultural’. The findings indicate that apart from the expected leisure, hedonic and adventurous experiences, deeper outcomes such as a sense of awe, personal reflections and spiritual outcomes are apparent in the geotourism experience, as a result of individuals’ negotiations with Mount Pinatubo’s natural landscape and touristic environment. More meaningful and transformative experiences are also discovered from geotourists’ engagement with the landform’s cultural landscape, particularly from their social interaction with the indigenous people who live at Mount Pinatubo. These outcomes suggest the gaining of a holistic view of the Earth and its inhabitants through geotourism. This article thus provides some understanding of the experiential aspects of geotourism.

Keywords

geotourism geotourists Mount Pinatubo Philippines tourist experience

Introduction

Natural landscapes and landforms are important tourism resources for various destinations (Stoffelen and Vanneste, 2015). Travel to view unique and exotic landforms is not new, yet a concept to better understand this phenomenon has only been recently developed. Geotourism or ‘geological tourism’ involves tourist visitation and appreciation of landscapes and geological sites (geosites) in a way that protects geological heritage (geoheritage; Dowling, 2011; Newsome and Dowling, 2006, 2010b). By analysing the narratives of individuals undertaking a geotour, the aim of this article is to explore the experiential dimension of geotourism.

Initially, geotourism is defined as a medium for tourists to gain knowledge of a destination’s geoheritage through their visits to geosites and environmental interpretation (Hose, 1995). Furthermore, it is described as a phenomenon that entails individuals viewing and understanding geological attractions and the study of the Earth, respectively (Joyce, 2006). A more elaborate definition was provided by Newsome and Dowling (2010b) in conceptualising geotourism as ‘a form of natural area tourism’ that fosters the conservation of geological diversity (geodiversity), and learning of geology among visitors, with the help of interpretive provisions, geological trails and tourist activities (p. 4). The existing research on geotourism largely employs a supply development perspective, concentrating on how geological resources should be used for tourism and how geotourism should be properly established. Conversely, the conceptualisation, exploration and empirical investigations on the experiential outcomes held by individuals engaging in geotourism have been neglected. The main contribution of this article lies in addressing this gap in the literature by adopting a qualitative inquiry into the geotourism experience at Mount Pinatubo, a popular volcanic attraction in the Philippines. This is performed through analysing geotourist narratives on their experiences, which are subjected through the lens of multiple tourist gazes (visual, performative and social) and of complex psychological processes that inform their consumption of geotourism objects and the production of their experiences.

Geotourism and geotourists

As a form of tourism, geotourism is conceptualised as an integration of three components: geological form, process and tourism (Newsome and Dowling, 2006). Form (e.g. volcanoes and rock outcrops) and process (e.g. active volcanism and weathering) contextualise the setting of geotourism, while the tourism element introduces the provisions such as the facilities and activities (e.g. visitor centres and guided tours) established in the setting to help visitors view and appreciate geology and landscapes and, more importantly, to learn about these natural resources. These concepts are parallel with the conception of the 3Gs of modern geotourism, namely, geohistory, geointerpretation and geoconservation (Hose, 2012). Geohistory presents a general context into the theoretical and practical development of geotourism. This suggests the incorporation of a ‘time’ element with geological form and process in order to understand when the visited geosites are formed, the complexity of geomorphological phenomena and a place’s geodiversity, which are essential for the appreciation of landscapes (Dowling, 2013). Geointerpretation entails the creative communication of geological form, process and time, and the importance of landforms and geoheritage to visitors in an enjoyable and informative manner (Hose, 2012; Pralong, 2006). Dowling (2011) implies that interpretation cultivates visitors’ knowledge and understanding of geology which may enhance their attitudes towards geoconservation. The latter fosters the protection of geological landscape and environment for the benefit of the current and future generations, thus highlighting the sustainability element in geotourism (Dowling, 2011; Hose, 2012).

With the above theoretical foundations, it can be implied that geotourism is about the construction of tourism spaces through the commodification of landscapes, geosites and geoheritage, for tourist appreciation and learning. Various researchers have highly focused their attention on this aspect of geotourism, as evident in the multitude of studies on the identification, quantification and scientific valuation of geosites (Brilha, 2016; Reynard et al., 2016); assessment of landscapes for geotourism development (Dos Santos et al., 2016; Višnić et al., 2016); and the creation of products (e.g. geotours) for geotourist enjoyment (Norrish et al., 2014; Santangelo et al., 2015). In these investigations, landscapes and geosites were examined and ‘reproduced’ using technical and product development approaches, from a tourism supply-side perspective. It is important to note that although practical, the approaches adopted in such studies provide a limited view on how geotourism spaces and experiences can be created and regulated.

Since geotourism is based on geology and landscape, examining the notions of the ‘environment’ and ‘landscape’ for this context is imperative. Dowling (2013) proposes the ‘abiotic–biotic–cultural’ framework which implies that the environment can be better understood by analysing how the non-living elements (abiotic), such as geological and atmospheric settings, influence the way living organisms (biotic), such as plants and wildlife, prosper in that setting. The first two elements create the ‘natural landscape’ which impacts the ‘cultural landscape’ or the way ‘how people lived in the area in the past, as well as how they live there today, at present’ (Dowling, 2013: 64). Stoffelen and Vanneste (2015) postulate that landscapes are framed at the centre of the ‘interaction and co-evolution’ of its physical (natural) and cultural (social) dimensions, or the ‘active and mutual co-construction of society and nature’ (Benediktsson, 2007: 205), which shapes the identity and sense of place. Geotourism is also about bridging these natural and cultural elements and bringing people together to get a wider view of the Earth and its heritage (Gordon, 2012; Gordon and Baker, 2016) through the creation of authentic tourist experiences (Dowling, 2011). These experiences are not solely produced from the spectrum of the visited geosites (i.e. geotourism supply), but are actively re-produced (and consumed) by multiple stakeholders (Stoffelen and Vanneste, 2015), especially by geotourists. Thus, a way to gain a deeper insight into the geotourism phenomenon is through researching geotourists themselves by exploring their interaction with and experiences of these spaces.

Mao et al. (2009) discovered that geotourists have a strong desire to increase their knowledge of geosites and Earth science. This degree of geological interest among individuals was considered by Gorman (2007) in proposing geotourism market typologies that include ‘accidental’ and ‘general’ tourists, and ‘interested’ and ‘scholarly’ (academic) geotourists. In Grant’s (2010) typology of geotourists, the degree of geological interest held by visitors is implied to vary, grouping geotourists into ‘interested’, ‘geo-amateurs’, ‘geospecialists’ and ‘geo-experts’, versus those who are either ‘unaware’ or ‘aware’ of their interest (as cited in Dowling, 2011). Hurtado et al. (2013) empirically clustered geotourists according to their motivation levels (low to very high) and experience outcomes (negative vs. positive), resulting in five groups: from ‘incidental’ to ‘accidental’ geotourists with low motivation levels, and from ‘serendipitous’, to ‘intentional’, to ‘purposeful’ geotourists, having medium to very high motivation and positive geotourism experiences. In terms of motivations, Allan et al. (2015) found ‘sense of wonder’ as a unique motive which is influenced by the exoticism of geosites and landscapes. It appears that geotourists, as the consumers of geotourism, are identified on the basis of their special interest on geology and landscapes. This perspective is rather limited, as geotourists are currently being understood based only on their interaction with natural landscapes. As the literature suggests, geotourism should entail the creation of tourism spaces that utilises both a place’s natural and cultural landscape elements. Therefore, this article argues that the geotourism experience is produced by geotourists’ interactions with a geosite’s natural landscape and geological objects, touristic environment and cultural landscape.

Experiences of volcanic landscapes

Due to the scope of geotourism, a variety of landforms and a complexity of experiences can be negotiated by tourists. In this article, a volcanic landform was selected as the study site because it can be argued that the geotourism settings encountered in volcanic geosites encompass both the natural and cultural landscape elements of the environment. As described by Erfurt-Cooper (2010), geotourism undertaken in volcanic landforms ‘involves the exploration and study of active volcanic and geothermal landforms and processes … [including] visits to dormant and extinct volcanic regions where remnants of activity attract visitors with an interest in geological heritage’ (p. 3). In most cases, these ‘remnants’ are uninhabited spaces where communities affected by volcanic eruptions once stood and are sometimes communities that continue to flourish despite the threats of potentially destructive volcanic activities, thus strongly exemplifying the environment’s cultural landscape and the latter’s co-evolution with the natural landscape.

The tourist experiences produced in volcanic sites are dependent on whether the visited landforms are ‘active’ or ‘dormant and extinct’. Aside from geological form, active volcanoes with ongoing eruptions demonstrate geological processes which are often the focal points of the tourist experience. Individuals’ interaction with the physical landscapes and their attached processes, through viewing, are known to result in intellectual, fulfilling and hedonic experiences, as well as emotive outcomes of fear, excitement and awe (Lockwood and Hazlett, 2010; Martin, 2010). As revealed by visitors to the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, the danger posed by active volcanism also urged them to get a closer view of flowing lava (Davis et al., 2013), indicating a desire for a more direct interaction with ‘riskscapes’. Eruptions add to the grandeur of volcanic landforms, and the risk imposed by these ignites an inspiration for their witnesses: those who had direct bodily involvement, as evident in 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajökull in Iceland (Benediktsson et al., 2010). This phenomenon also shaped the country’s identity as a place of inspiration and unstructured freedom (Huijbens and Benediktsson, 2013).

More embodied encounters are allowed in visiting dormant and extinct volcanic sites due to the lower levels of risk involved. Individuals may connect not only with geological form but also with the by-products of process and time, offered by the landscape and scenery produced by previous volcanic activities. These interactions are previously found to create feelings of peace and quietness augmented by a sense of awe, power and excitement (Covelli et al., 2005; Fairweather and Swaffield, 2002; Prodromiti, 2013). Evidence of identity formation and self-change are also discovered among visitors who had greater visual accessibility to these landforms (Cochrane, 2006; Noy, 2004). It can be depicted that the experience at dormant and extinct volcanoes is reliant on the aesthetics of nature and the sublime, which portrays a character of being wild, primitive and untouched, and is often romanticised (Lund, 2013; Sæþórsdóttir and Saarinen, 2016) and, to some extent, metaphorically interpreted as a human being or is ‘anthropomorphised’ (Benediktsson, 2007).

Another way of consuming these dormant and extinct volcanic landscapes is through utilising them for physical tourist activities. It has been implied that these settings impose the difficulty of performing these activities, and therapeutic effects and evidence of self-development are found in those who walked these places (Olafsdottir, 2013; Saunders et al., 2013). Furthermore, individuals may also situate themselves in the remnants of previous geological processes. Dark experiences may emerge among visitors of these cultural landscapes which are promoted as dark sites (Ryan and Kohli, 2006) and are known to feed a ‘Romantic desire for the spectacular and the morbid’ (Kovacs, 2013: 30). As shown above, there can be a multiplicity of ways where individuals may interact with and consume geotourism spaces. A multitude of experiential outcomes may also appear from these interactions.

Conceptualising the tourist experience

This section conceptualises the tourist experience and proposes a framework on analysing how geotourists consume geological objects and landscapes and how they produce their geotourism experiences. The tourist experience is a multi-dimensional construct (Larsen and Mossberg, 2007). Urry (1990) argues that whenever tourists travel, they gaze upon objects and scenery in the destination. This ‘gaze’ is not just merely seeing things, rather this is shaped by the meanings that individuals attach to what they witness (Urry, 1990). In this visual sensory form of experience creation, tourists assume the static role of ‘gazers’.

However, Urry’s (1990) original notion of the tourist gaze has received several criticisms. Perkins and Thorns (2001) imply that gazing is just a part of the many aspects of the tourist experience and propose that the latter is a multi-sensuous phenomenon. Benediktsson (2007) argues that ‘there is a great deal more to human encounters with nature in general, and to landscape appreciation more specifically, apart from and beyond what the visual sense affords’ (p. 206). Exploring experience by mainly adopting the ‘visual gaze’ is unreflexive to understanding how tourists experience multi-faceted tourist spaces (Everett, 2008). Tourist spaces are asserted to influence touristic performances; the former are viewed as regulated and pre-determined tourist stages (Edensor, 2000). Conversely, tourists as performers are asserted to reinvent tourist stages as they negotiate the symbolic meanings of these spaces (Edensor, 2001). This marked a shift from the passive tourist gazing to a more active concept of the ‘tourist performance’, which integrates a physical element (moving body) with the intellectual and cognitive properties, and the gaze (Edensor, 2000, 2001; Franklin, 2001; Perkins and Thorns, 2001).

Larsen and Urry (2011) responded to these criticisms as they propose that gazing and performing ‘should “dance together” rather than stare at each other at a distance’ and support that tourists, aside from being audiences, are performers as well (p. 1111). In the most recent version of the tourist gaze (Urry and Larsen, 2011), the concept of embodied performance has been introduced which is associated with the moving body that employs multiple gazing when encountering tourism objects and spaces. As some touristic activities require active bodily involvement, the metaphorical tourist performance to understanding experiences is recognised as a more appropriate approach (Everett, 2008; Perkins and Thorns, 2001). Geotourism is not limited to viewing of landscapes, rather it involves the undertaking of physical activities (e.g. trekking) as well (Erfurt-Cooper, 2011; Newsome and Dowling, 2010a).

Furthermore, aside from being spatially bounded, tourist experiences are socially regulated (Edensor, 2001) and ‘tourism is a social experience’ (Sharpley, 2002: 315). Likewise, the tourist experience is not merely shaped by the physical elements that can be processed by the senses (Walls et al., 2011). It is important to note that the stage where tourists perform is shared with other actors who have specific roles, that the tourist co-produces the experience with (Edensor, 2001). This is suggested as the ‘social relations’ in the touristic performance where ‘varied gazes are intricately tied up with power relations between gazers and between “hosts” and “guests”’ (Larsen and Urry, 2011: 1116). Tourism is emphasised as a communal performance between tourists wherein they may affect each other’s experience, share and co-create experiences (Sharpley, 2002). Also, it is implied that individuals’ encounter with service providers who regulate and stage performances, and act as mediator between tourist and tourist spaces (Markwell, 2001; Vespestad and Lindberg, 2010), as well as with the locals who serve as cultural intermediaries shape tourist experiences too (Edensor, 2001; Walls et al., 2011). Thus, this study adopts notions of the visual and performative gazing, embodied performance and the social aspects of the tourist gaze to understanding geotourism consumption and experience production.

In addition, the production of tourist experiences is a ‘highly complex psychological process’ (Larsen, 2007: 16). Although touristic performances are performed on regulated spaces, it is proposed that tourist experiences are also produced in the tourist’s mind, which entails the employment of one’s sensation, perception and cognition (Volo, 2009). Moreover, tourist experiences are also created based on individuals’ internal reactions, which in geotourism may involve one’s emotions and imagination (Pralong, 2006), which may result in subjective emotive responses (Schänzel and McIntosh, 2000) and, sometimes, spiritual outcomes (Heintzman, 2010). Even though tourists are exposed to similar objects and activities and interact with the same individuals in a tourism site, they perceive, react and respond to these stimuli differently from each other (Di Betta, 2014; Larsen, 2007; Sharpley, 2002; Walls et al., 2011; Wang, 1999). In the context of geotourism, this article conceptualises geotourist experiences as subjective experiences that are created by the way individuals gaze upon geological objects; actively engage their physical bodies with activities performed in natural landscapes; socially relate with ‘like-minded’ and ‘other’ individuals who regulate, direct and co-create the experience; and the way they process, feel and construct meanings and interpretations of their own touristic encounters.

Through the above review and appraisal of the concepts on the tourist experience, a conceptual framework on geotourism consumption and experience production is proposed (Figure 1). It is suggested that geotourists assume multiple roles, as gazers, performers and socialisers, when they consume geotourism resources that entail the landscape and geological objects (natural landscape), physical tourist activities (tourism element) and the local people, including the services they provide (cultural landscape). This consumption process may indicate varied experiences produced on site and also in the geotourists’ minds through perception, imagination and self-reflection. In parallel with the geotourism concepts and the resources that individuals need to negotiate within their tour participation, three dimensions are assumed to construct the geotourism experience, namely, natural, recreational and socio-cultural.

Figure 1.

Conceptual framework on geotourism consumption and experience production.

Study methods

Qualitative research methods recognising the importance of looking at the subjective meanings and complexity of a social phenomenon (Creswell, 2009) were employed in this study. As tourist experiences are depicted as ‘subjective’, a qualitative research approach allows the gathering of thick and rich descriptions of human experiences and the meanings attached to them (McIntosh, 1998; Mason, 2014). Furthermore, since the study is exploratory, it is appropriate to adopt qualitative research techniques (Gray, 2014).

Mount Pinatubo: the geotourism site

Mount Pinatubo is a strato-volcano located on Luzon Island in the Philippines. Its most recent cataclysmic eruption occurred on 15 June 1991. The impact of this eruption was worldwide: the volcano released more than 5 km³ of volcanic material; ash clouds reached up to 35 km into the atmosphere; and global temperatures lowered up to 0.5°C as ash clouds circumnavigated the world (Newhall et al., 1997). The eruption buried nearby towns and villages, displacing more than 300,000 families and causing hundreds of deaths and casualties. Property damage amounted to US$1 billion (Gaillard, 2008; Mercado et al., 1996). The Aeta, the indigenous people who consider Mount Pinatubo to be their ancestral land and the home of their god Apu Namalyari, are some of the people who were greatly affected by the disaster. Most of them were immediately evacuated but some insisted on remaining and perished during the calamity (Seitz, 1998).

Tourism was not regarded as an opportunity for rebuilding communities and the local economy until the start of the new millennium when the crater lake created by the eruption was discovered. Visitor numbers steadily increased after the lake’s discovery, prompting the people of the impoverished village, Barangay Sta Juliana, to create a tourism council and to launch a community-based tourism project to benefit the locals, especially the Aeta. In turn, formal volcano tours were organised for individuals who want to view the crater lake (Department of Tourism, 2004; Sta Juliana Tourism Council Inc, 2004). The Mount Pinatubo tour experience is promoted as a natural, combination of hard and soft adventure, place to escape the city and an opportunity to have a cultural exchange experience with the Aeta (Sta Juliana Tourism Council Inc, 2004). The tour features a four-wheel drive (4 × 4) vehicle ride and a hike along a rugged path where rocks and streams must be negotiated. Viewing of geological formations, such as massive andesitic rocks and lahar cliffs, can also be experienced before reaching the crater lake. Visitors also have the chance to interact with the Aeta either along the trail or during a side-trip to an ethnic village.

Data collection and analysis methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect qualitative data from onsite visitors at Mount Pinatubo. These interviews started with introductory questions pertaining to tourists’ personal reasons for joining the Mount Pinatubo tour and their expectations, followed by the main interview questions that enquired about experiences, and appropriate follow-up questions. The interviews were facilitated with 12 purposefully recruited study participants from nine different tour groups organised by the local community (Table 1). The tours in question were conducted on fine summer days between the months of March and May 2014. The participants included domestic visitors who are predominantly female, 18–29 years of age and of Filipino descent, and international visitors who are predominantly male, 18–29 years old and from Western countries. Thus, a diversity of participants was achieved. Only those who had had an ‘immediate experience’ of the Mount Pinatubo tour qualified as respondents. The participants were interviewed at their homestay accommodation within 24 hours of their tour participation. The conversations were audio-recorded and lasted on average for 20 minutes.

Table 1.

The interview participants.

Visitor type	Gender	Age group (years)	Occupation	Ethnicity
Domestic visitor 1	Female	18–29	Human resources	Filipino
Domestic visitor 2	Female	18–29	Sales	Filipino
Domestic visitor 3	Female	18–29	Lecturer	Chinese
Domestic visitor 4	Male	30–39	Travel blogger	Filipino
Domestic visitor 5	Male	18–29	Civil servant	Filipino
Domestic visitor 6	Female	30–39	Civil servant	Filipino
Domestic visitor 7	Female	18–29	Professional	Vietnamese
Domestic visitor 8	Male	40 plus	Professional	German
International visitor 1	Male	18–29	Social worker	Australian
International visitor 2	Male	30–39	Professional	Slovakian
International visitor 3	Female	18–29	Professional	Singaporean
International visitor 4	Male	40 plus	Geologist	German

Thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) that was aided by NVivo 10, a computer-assisted qualitative data-analysis software, was performed on the qualitative data gathered. Thematic analysis is a qualitative data-analysis technique that searches for patterns within and reports meanings derived from textual information. First, data familiarisation was performed by actively listening to and transcribing the audio-recorded interviews. This step is an essential preparation for the second step, which is coding. In coding, interesting points in the raw qualitative data were extracted and labelled to transform them into the basic elements of thematic analysis. An ‘inductive’ coding process was applied to minimise any pre-conceptions and to let the real meanings in the data emerge. Forty initial codes that captured participants’ perceptions, emotions and views towards the tourism experience were extracted. In the third step, codes were searched for common themes by identifying and grouping codes with similar meanings into larger concepts. The fourth step took the initially formed themes through a recursive process of reviewing and refining by looking at any convergence of the concepts and data extracts that support them; the latter are presented in the ‘Findings and discussion’ section in the form of quotations. Thereafter, the themes were defined and named for presentation (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Finally, the conceptual framework (Figure 1) was employed in the construction of inferences, in conjunction with the resultant themes of this study, which are explained in the discussion and conclusions.

Findings and discussion

Figure 1 proposes that individuals engage with various touristic resources when they participate in geotourism. Geotourists are depicted to interact with and consume these resources through gazing, performing and socialising and through complex psychological processes that involve their perception, imagination and self-reflection. In turn, a multiplicity of experiences can be produced, which in this study are represented by the 11 themes that are revealed by thematic analysis, categorised into three experiential dimensions: ‘natural’, ‘recreational’ and ‘socio-cultural’.

Natural dimension

Appreciation of nature

Various geological features and landscapes can be viewed as the journey at Mount Pinatubo progresses. In the ‘appreciation of nature’ theme, the participants indicate their roles as ‘witnesses’ of the volcano’s natural wonders. Appreciation of the volcano’s geological attributes was experienced by the participants:

It’s really amazing because you know the sand formations, the first time I saw them is really ‘wow’. It’s like, ‘really? For real?’ These are sand but they are formed into cones! (Domestic visitor 5)

Of course the highlight was when I saw the crater. It looks like a painting. Actually it is hard to choose a word for [to describe] that. (Domestic visitor 2)

The aesthetic outcomes of geotourism are reflected in this theme and were evident in the narratives of all the respondents. During these instances, tourists passively involved themselves in the settings where these experiences were manifested and assumed the role of ‘gazers’ (Urry, 1990). It has been previously discovered that tourists, as spectators of nature, form initial reactions of appreciation and awe when they encounter the toured objects and wild landscapes (Coghlan et al., 2012; Hill et al., 2014).

Novel experiences

The novel experiences that comprise this theme are not formed solely by viewing the toured objects; rather, they are developed in the minds of the tourists. The participants described that being in the wild and exotic setting shaped these experiences, which were then further created by comparing what the participants have actually viewed on site to their pre-tour images of Mount Pinatubo:

It was nice to suddenly see the lake of it. Of course I knew it from photos before so it was not a total surprise but still when you see it in real life, it is something else. (Domestic visitor 8)

Furthermore, participants tended to cite their previous travel experiences as ‘points of reference’ in describing their tourism experience. These descriptions suggest the latter’s novelty, as reported by International visitor 4:

It [crater lake] was amazing. It’s really really big. We thought it’s a bit smaller. It’s nice so we swim around the lake … but there are also lakes in Kamchatka [in Russia] but they are all acidic and really hot, so it’s impossible to swim on the crater lakes.

It can be inferred that ‘mental matching’ was present in communicating the novelty of the geotourism experience at Mount Pinatubo. Mental matching occurred as the participants compared digital images they had viewed prior to visiting Mount Pinatubo to the experience of viewing the actual landscape. By referring to their previous travel experiences, the unfamiliarity of the participants’ geotourism experience can be amplified.

The use of imagination while at the volcanic site was also captured in the ‘novel experiences’ theme:

When we went to the lahar trail, you [we] can actually see how the water carved the way to Mount Pinatubo. That alone told us how devastating the eruption was. (Domestic visitor 4)

As Pralong (2006) implies, geological formations provide individuals with an opportunity for imagining that may help them construct their experiences. Thus, through forming mental images, the participants indicate a better understanding of the geosite and its heritage.

Personal reflections on nature

This theme captures geotourists’ deeper emotional bonding with nature which was illustrated by their reflection on some aspects of life while viewing landscapes and geological objects. It was reported that Mount Pinatubo’s peaceful, calm, quiet and serene ambience made the participants temporarily forget reality. The tranquillity of the environment charmed the participants and helped them form an emotional bond with the landscape:

It’s really captivating like when you see that, you won’t look at anything else anymore. You would not mind your friends anymore. You would just look at it. It’s really calm. It’s perfect, just perfect. (Domestic visitor 2)

Experiencing solitude and quietness appears to prompt tourists to enter into a reflective state from which to develop new perspectives on individual existence (Sharpley and Jepson, 2011):

It’s a pretty enlightening experience … yes, it’s [Mount Pinatubo] beautiful in its own way that you can see the darker side of nature and how nature can be cruel. It’s like a person. A person there looks nice when you meet him or her for the first time. He is pretty. He is good looking. You know, but of course there’s another side of a person – the bad side of a person. (Domestic visitor 4)

In this reflection, Mount Pinatubo is shown to be anthropomorphised. This may occur when individuals express deeper emotional attachment to the visited destination (Hill et al., 2014). Also, for this to emerge, individuals need to not only engage themselves with the visual of the landscapes but also further intimately situate themselves in, connect to and be enchanted by the aesthetic of the sublime (Benediktsson, 2007).

Awe in the power of nature

Previous studies show that individuals understand the power of volcanic landscapes by viewing actual eruptions, and that this experience may, in turn, produce mixed affective outcomes. However, these intense emotions and increased understanding were also indicated in the narratives of study participants, even though Mount Pinatubo did not have an ongoing eruption during the time of their visit:

I was really amazed by that [volcanic stones]. It comes in different sizes especially when you see the big ones, you’re gonna think how much pressure or how powerful the eruption was. (Domestic visitor 2, female)

The narratives suggest that by being physically present in Mount Pinatubo’s disaster landscapes showed geotourists the intensity of its most recent eruption and induced in them feelings of awe. The comments of some participants also illustrate that the disaster terrain introduced an element of risk into the Mount Pinatubo experience. In addition to awe, feelings of fear and uncertainty were engendered by having direct bodily encounter of the geological formations carved by the volcano’s eruption, as communicated by Domestic visitor 7 (female): ‘Also a little bit scared because I don’t know … some of the soil [pyroclastic deposits] is very soft and these might fall’. Here, the presence of risk has been shown to influence negative feelings and concern for safety. However, the negative attributes of the landscape also resulted in the refinement of their human-to-nature relationship. By immersing themselves in the disaster terrain, participants reveal a deeper attachment with Mount Pinatubo, helping them to realise their relationship with the geosite:

You know that the explosion [eruption] killed lots of people … you’re there looking at the beauty of that thing [crater lake] but you know in your mind that that ‘beauty’ killed a lot of people. It’s like I felt the spirit of the mountain itself … It was devastating. I mean the scenery is very nice but you can actually feel the immense power of nature … The place tells a lot of lessons. One is the power of nature that we can’t control; we really can’t control. (Domestic visitor 4)

The crater lake was described as provoking feelings of fascination. It may be proposed that apart from these positive feelings provided by the volcano, being in close proximity to a geological feature that has negatively affected the lives of thousands may also generate more intense feelings and insight into the landscape.

Recreational dimension

Hedonism and physical stimulation

The hedonic experiences revealed in this theme are directed towards having fun, excitement, relaxation and enjoyment. These are the positive perceptions that frequently manifest when visiting tourist attractions:

And it was really a hardcore 4x4 jeep ride because we were just going over the rocks, streams. And it’s really bumpy but it was really good. I enjoyed it. (International visitor 3, female)

Here, the landscape is viewed as a space that provides opportunities for recreation (Reis, 2012). Visitors reveal that their participation provided them the opportunity to get away from the usual demands of life. As a long-distance walk, the trek up to Mount Pinatubo’s crater lake is depicted as a stress reliever and a therapeutic activity (Olafsdottir, 2013; Saunders et al., 2013), as narrated by Domestic visitor 6:

I mean you tend not to do that in the city because every time you walk, there is pollution, there is traffic, and there are the chores that you have to do both at home and in the office. But here, while trekking, all those were gone.

In addition, study participants’ embodied performance of tourist activities gave rise to the experiences of adventure emerging under this theme. These perceptions of adventure were indicated from riding the 4 × 4 jeep, described by Domestic visitor 8 (male) as ‘a rough but a fun experience’. The adventure experience outcomes can also be identified from the perception of being physically challenged by the trekking part of the tour. As commented by Domestic visitor 7, ‘It’s not easy to go [do the trek]. I think it’s very difficult because of so many stones, the big ones and the streams. It’s so difficult’.

Rather than an audience for nature, tourists are viewed in this theme as ‘performers’ who benefit from the utilitarian outcomes of the tour (Edensor, 2001; Larsen and Urry, 2011; Perkins and Thorns, 2001). The unfamiliar setting of Mount Pinatubo together with the physical activity was explored to provide tourists with powerful emotional experiences.

Spiritual performance

The participants’ deeper reflections while engaged in recreational activities reveal the spiritual experiences analysed in this theme. As in the theme labelled ‘personal reflections on nature’, participants indicate that they entered a contemplative state while performing physical activities (e.g. trekking up to the crater lake).

Individuals tend to detach themselves from reality and form spiritual experiences, especially when they are deeply engaged with challenging physical activities (Heintzman, 2010). The challenges force people to focus less on their surroundings and to persevere despite physical hardship (Saunders et al., 2013). Participants’ narratives indicate that the spirituality of the journey was constructed by facing the physical challenge of trekking Mount Pinatubo:

I related it [the long walk] to ‘life’. It is like before you reach the top of your life, it will really be a long trek. You will feel the pain, the heat of the sun, the sun will kiss your skin … That in life, before you will reach the success or true happiness, you will really encounter challenges and all the pain along the way before reaching the top … it’s tiring. Instead of complaining, I related it to life. (Domestic visitor 5)

Therefore, by deeply immersing themselves into the performance-oriented aspect of the tour, individuals reveal to divert themselves from experiencing physiological pain and difficulty into a more positive state by learning from reflecting on the challenging activity.

Sense of fulfilment

This theme is centred on the feelings of satisfaction and personal achievement experienced upon completing a task undertaken at the volcanic site. Similar to mountaineering where reaching a summit is a personally fulfilling experience (Pomfret, 2006), the positive outcomes reported here are narrated to emerge upon reaching Mount Pinatubo’s main geological feature, the crater lake:

… a bit of relief. It was good to finally get there. (International visitor 1)

After trekking, I feel proud of myself. (Domestic visitor 7)

Furthermore, it was communicated that the aesthetic of the landscapes may intensify the sense of fulfilment for the visitors to Mount Pinatubo, as the scenery acts as an added value for the participants after completing the trek:

The crater lake is at the very end of the trek, so it’s like a sense of satisfaction when you see something beautiful at the end of a trek that is not hard but also not very simple. So it’s a kind of reward. It’s a rewarding experience. (International visitor 3)

Thus, it appears that completing a physical task and overcoming the challenges shaped by the landscape can be one of the most fulfilling events in geotourism, among the intense and climactic feelings that geotourists may experience.

Lack of environmental education

Study participants reported that they anticipated environmentally educative experiences. However, it was stated that learning experiences were not delivered in the Mount Pinatubo tour:

I expect to know more things about the volcano, about the eruption, etc. I’m quite interested with those things. We had to really ask for those kinds of questions. (International visitor 2)

When were up there, there was one guy coming and he was telling us some interesting facts but it was some combination between Tagalog and English, so I could get like 60% to 70%. But when he couldn’t explain himself, express himself he just says everything in Tagalog and everything was understood. (International visitor 2, male)

The lack of intellectually stimulating experiences on Mount Pinatubo demonstrates a departure from the goals of geotourism (Newsome and Dowling, 2010b). At the Mount Pinatubo site, it has been found that the staff labelled as ‘tour guides’ have difficulty communicating in English and actually only perform the role of ‘trail guides’. This means that their main function is to lead tourists along the trail and to ensure guest safety throughout the tour.

Socio-cultural dimension

Solidarity with the local people

The ‘solidarity with local people’ theme encapsulates the interaction between the host and tourists. On Mount Pinatubo tours, hosts are composed of both non-indigenous and indigenous people who work in various tourism-related jobs. The study participants communicated their admiration of the local people and especially mentioned the genuine hospitality they received:

I would like to say that the people here were very friendly. I mean the owners of the lodge are very nice people. The tour guides even though he did not speak English but he was very nice and considerate, and the driver. Everything was kind of smooth and polite. That’s very important because you have this kind of respect between the tourists and the tour guides. Both sides respect each other and it’s a nice tourist experience. (Domestic visitor 8)

Experiences such as these reported by Domestic visitor 8 are conceptualised as being generated within Mount Pinatubo’s ‘servicescape’, a construct that combines the hosts, the services they deliver and the setting in which the service is delivered (Vespestad and Lindberg, 2010). Reciprocity of respect is illustrated as an important factor in the social exchanges performed in this servicescape. As narrated, even though a language barrier is present, the universal language of ‘respect’ is seen as an underlying factor in generating harmonious experiences and relationships on site.

Compassion

A visit to an Aeta village located on the slopes of the volcanic site enabled some of the participants to recognise the challenges of living in active volcanic landscapes. This, in turn, caused those participants to empathise with the Aeta, which resulted in negative feelings:

On the way, we saw a village with poor people and I feel sorry for them because they were born there. They have to stay there and their life there is not good. (Domestic visitor 7)

Negative emotive outcomes are also reported during the photo opportunity with the Aeta, which some of the respondents viewed as unethical and unacceptable:

When we saw the Aeta, we also saw some of the visitors taking pictures but we didn’t choose to do so because it is exploitation. They are in that situation and we are in this situation, so we don’t want to feel the awkwardness … I felt hurt. Why would we exploit that moment? (Domestic visitor 5)

It was analysed that altruistic feelings were triggered in witnessing the Aeta people’s living condition. The visitors then turned these feelings into actions, showing compassion through giving whatever they could in that moment, as narrated in the following:

Instead of taking pictures, we just gave them food … of course it was fulfilling. It is like their first time to receive food like that so it’s kind of fulfilling. (Domestic visitor 5)

The socio-cultural exchanges presented above are suggested to have occurred in the geosite’s cultural landscape rather than in a servicescape. The latter is known to be highly tourism-oriented, while the former happens naturally and is not staged. The charitable instances the participants experienced can be regarded as the humanistic outcomes of the tour which are centred on participants’ ethical concerns about human equality.

Transformative

The reported experiences grouped within the ‘transformative’ theme can be closely related to those revealed in the two previously discussed themes (‘compassion’ and ‘solidarity with the local people’). Future-oriented outcomes are explored in this theme, which are based on participants’ deep reflections after social encounters with the Aeta, in the latter’s living environment:

When you get there and actually see them working, living up their lives in the middle of all that devastation, you can actually feel their resilience – their determination to live. The place tells a lot of lessons [including] the resilience of humankind. (Domestic visitor 4)

A sense of awe towards human adaptive capacity and resilience, despite the destruction caused by natural forces, are exhibited in the above response. This awe resonates with a transformative sense of awe (Coghlan et al., 2012). Because the majority of the participants were city-dwellers, the rurality of the Aeta village is proposed to induce schema-changing experiences, including a re-examination of their lives for some participants. As International visitor 3 shared, ‘I’ve learned to not take things for granted’.

While the previous statements show some visitors’ new appreciation of their own lives, a refinement in the attitude towards the treatment of the Aeta as an ethnic ‘minority’ was revealed by some participants:

They’re also human beings like us. I don’t see any difference. Why they should be featured? (Domestic visitor 6)

Self-reflection leading to the development of new perspectives towards themselves and others are demonstrated in this theme. These instances are proposed to inspire goal-clarification outcomes and to ignite potential personal transformation. Although they can be analysed as individual processes, it can be assumed that what triggered these personal realisations were the Aeta themselves. The inhabitants of the volcanic site act as ‘socio-cultural interpreters’ communicating to their guests that, despite the continuous threat posed by the volcano, the Aeta remain connected to their ancestral domain and supreme being.

Conclusions

In unearthing the geotourism experience, this article conceptualises that geotourists’ interaction with geology and landscapes is mediated by the multiple aspects of the ‘gaze’, enriched by their psychological responses and internalisations. This article proposes that geotourism resources at Mount Pinatubo are composed of its natural and cultural landscapes, and tourism environment which visitors have to negotiate with during their journey at the geosite. The analysis reveals experiential outcomes categorised in parallel with these elements, suggesting three dimensions, namely, ‘natural’, ‘recreational’ and ‘socio-cultural’.

In the natural dimension, the wild and romantic images prompted by the aesthetic of the landscapes were explored to inspire common experiential themes found in tourist-to-landscape interaction, such as nature appreciation and sense of awe (Cochrane, 2006). These outcomes are analysed as being mediated by the visual tourist gaze (Urry, 1990). In addition, the importance of close bodily involvement with the natural landscape was highlighted in the findings, as geotourists reveal to process their encounters psychologically. As the geotourism concept promotes the learning of geology and landscapes, the provision of interpretive facilities and activities on geosites is essential (Hose, 1995; Newsome and Dowling, 2010b). However, this article reveals that when interpretation is insufficient, geotourists may focus more on their sensations and perceptions and may resort to their imagination to allow them to understand landforms better. This was shown by the metaphorical images of Mount Pinatubo and its most recent eruption that were constructed by the participants. It can be suggested that imagination may act as a mediator between individuals and natural landscapes when geotourists interpret what they witness and attach meanings to their actual-visual and mental images of the landform. The findings confirm that geotourism may indeed be a producer of emotions (Pralong, 2006), as deep emotional bonding was illustrated in the narratives of the participants, especially when they sensed the presence of risk. This strong emotional connection was communicated as overwhelming and enabling individuals to feel the power of the geological formation. This was further emphasised by instances where tourists narrated a sense of reverence and being humbled by the vast and hostile environment of the landscape, which can be a manifestation of identity formation and self-change (Noy, 2004).

Aside from the usual leisure and hedonistic outcomes of participating in tourist activities in general, more meaningful and spiritual outcomes were the highlights of the recreational dimension of the Mount Pinatubo geotourism experience. In this case, geotourists assume the role of actors and actively engage their moving bodies on a spiritual journey that delivers the story of disastrous events that have happened in the past. This journey begins with traversing the lahar canyons and culminates with being at the crater lake. During this performance, individuals were discovered to contemplate and reflect on the hardship imposed by trekking the natural terrain that allowed them to spiritually connect with these spaces and produce existentially authentic experiences (Saunders et al., 2013; Wang, 1999). This outcome is indicative of geotourists’ subjective responses, created both in situ and in their minds, to the same stimuli along the Mount Pinatubo journey.

The distinctiveness of the geotourism experience at Mount Pinatubo lies in its socio-cultural dimension which is proposed to stem from geotourists’ engagement with other actors that deliver the landform’s story: the local people, especially the Aeta. Transformative outcomes were revealed during the visit to the indigenous people’s village which inspired a sense of awe and admiration for the indigenous people’s resilience, leading the visitors to reflect on and question their own lifestyles. In turn, altruistic motives and even actions were, respectively, communicated and performed on site. These personal transformative experiences are often unexpected and emphasise the relationship that the indigenous people have with the landform, and how geological processes and time affect the development of the indigenous culture. As the Aeta are assumed to serve as socio-cultural ‘brokers’, it appears that Mount Pinatubo was naturally interpreted by its inhabitants who remained connected with and continue to take care of it, showing their resilience to natural hazards brought about by the landscape that they call home.

This article provides deeper insights into the understanding of the geotourism experience. This was achieved by furthering the limited view on geotourists, which is currently based on their interest to learn about geology and to encounter natural landforms. The findings indicate that while a ‘sense of wonder’ and spiritual outcomes emerge in individuals touristic encounters with the natural landscape, more profound experiences can be produced by tourist engagement with the geosite’s cultural landscape. In the case of geotourism at Mount Pinatubo, the interaction of these elements is strongly exhibited, proposing the witnesses of this landscape co-evolution to have a holistic understanding of the Earth and of those who live on it. This article serves as a valuable addition to the developing concept of geotourism. By employing a qualitative research approach, the narratives of individuals who had first-hand and immediate geotourism encounters were explored as a first to do so in the context of geotourism. On a practical note, the findings may serve as a reference for tourism marketers who seek to develop tourism product offerings at other geosites.

This article is exploratory in nature and the findings are therefore not generalisable. The limited number of study participants, with a majority being Filipino domestic tourists, suggests that the findings may be situated in the geotourism experiences of visitors to Mount Pinatubo. In addition, the Filipino tourists may have a closer cultural orientation to the volcanic site than international tourists do, which is why they show a stronger sense of attachment and understanding towards the landform and its people. Consequently, this limitation opens up an opportunity for future research to investigate how domestic and international tourists potentially consume geotourism resources and produce their experiences differently. The Earth comprises a dynamic environment consisting of a vast array of geological features. Further investigations are required at other geosites to increase our understanding of the geotourism experience.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade through the New Zealand Aid Programme.

Author biographies

Richard S Aquino is a PhD candidate at Auckland University of Technology in New Zealand. Previously, he worked as university instructor and researcher for government-funded community-based tourism projects in the Philippines. His research interests are geotourism, tourist behaviour, destination marketing, tourism planning and development, and tourism impacts and sustainability.

Heike A Schänzel is a senior lecturer and programme leader postgraduate at Auckland University of Technology in New Zealand. Her research interests include tourist behaviour and experiences, families and children in tourism, sociality in tourism, femininities and paternal masculinities in tourism research, innovative qualitative research methodologies, and critical theory development in tourism.

Kenneth F Hyde is an associate professor of Marketing at Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand. His research addresses consumer behaviour in services, including consumer behaviour in tourism. His research has been published in a number of peer-reviewed journals including the Annals of Tourism Research, Journal of Travel Research, and Tourism Management.

References

Allan

Dowling

Sanders

(2015) ‘The Motivations for Visiting Geosites: The Case of Crystal Cave, Western Australia’, GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites 16(2): 141–52.

Benediktsson

(2007) ‘“Scenophobia,” Geography and the Aesthetic Politics of Landscape’, Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 89(3): 203–17.

Benediktsson

Lund

K. A.

Huijbens

(2010) ‘Inspired by Eruptions? Eyjafjallajökull and Icelandic Tourism’, Mobilities 6(1): 77–84.

Braun

Clarke

(2006) ‘Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology’, Qualitative Research in Psychology 3: 77–101.

Brilha

(2016) ‘Inventory and Quantitative Assessment of Geosites and Geodiversity Sites: A Review’, Geoheritage 8(2): 119–34.

Cochrane

(2006) ‘Indonesian National Parks: Understanding Leisure Users’, Annals of Tourism Research 33(4): 979–97.

Coghlan

Buckley

Weaver

(2012) ‘A Framework for Analysing Awe in Tourism Experiences’, Annals of Tourism Research 39(3): 1710–4. Available at: https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.annals.2012.03.007

Covelli

E. A.

Burns

R. C.

Graefe

A. R.

(2005) ‘Recreation Patterns at Lava Lands Recreation Area, Newberry National Volcanic Monument’, pp. 387–92 in Peden

Schuster

(eds) 2005 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium. Bolton Landing, New York: USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station.

Creswell

J. W.

(2009) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

10.

Davis

Anshuka

Aoki

. (2013) ‘Managing Risk and Allure at Volcanoes in Hawaii: How Close Is Too Close?’, GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites 12(2): 85–93.

11.

Department of Tourism (2004) Mount Pinatubo Kabuhayan sa Turismo Project: A Strategy for Sustainable Development. San Fernando, Philippines: Department of Tourism – Region III.

12.

Di Betta

. (2014) ‘Authenticity as a Mental State: A Primer’, Annals of Tourism Research 47: 86–8.

13.

Dos Santos

W. F. S.

de Souza Carvalho

Brilha

J. B.

. (2016) ‘Inventory and Assessment of Palaeontological Sites in the Sousa Basin (Paraíba, Brazil): Preliminary Study to Evaluate the Potential of the Area to Become a Geopark’, Geoheritage 8(4): 315–32.

14.

Dowling

(2011) ‘Geotourism’s Global Growth’, Geoheritage 3: 1–13.

15.

Dowling

(2013) ‘Global Geotourism – An Emerging Form of Sustainable Tourism’, Czech Journal of Tourism 2(2): 59–79.

16.

Edensor

(2000) ‘Staging Tourism: Tourists as Performers’, Annals of Tourism Research 27(2): 322–44.

17.

Edensor

(2001) ‘Performing Tourism, Staging Tourism: (Re)producing Tourist Space and Practice’, Tourist Studies 1(1): 59–81.

18.

Erfurt-Cooper

(2010) ‘Introduction’, pp. 3–34 in Erfurt-Cooper

Cooper

(eds) Volcano and Geothermal Tourism: Sustainable Geo-Resources for Leisure and Recreation. New York: Earthscan.

19.

Erfurt-Cooper

(2011) ‘Geotourism in Volcanic and Geothermal Environments: Playing with Fire?’, Geoheritage 3(3): 187–93.

20.

Everett

(2008) ‘Beyond the Visual Gaze? The Pursuit of an Embodied Experience through Food Tourism’, Tourist Studies 8(3): 337–58.

21.

Fairweather

J. R.

Swaffield

S. R.

(2002) ‘Visitors’ and Locals’ Experiences of Rotorua, New Zealand: An Interpretative Study Using Photographs of Landscapes and Q Method’, International Journal of Tourism Research 4(4): 283–97.

22.

Franklin

(2001) ‘The Tourist Gaze and beyond: An Interview with John Urry’, Tourist Studies 1(2): 115–31.

23.

Gaillard

J. -C.

(2008) ‘Alternative Paradigms of Volcanic Risk Perception: The Case of Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines’, Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 172(3–4): 315–28.

24.

Gordon

J. E.

(2012) ‘Rediscovering a Sense of Wonder: Geoheritage, Geotourism and Cultural Landscape Experiences’, Geoheritage 4(1–2): 65–77.

25.

Gordon

J. E.

Baker

(2016) ‘Appreciating Geology and the Physical Landscape in Scotland: From Tourism of Awe to Experiential Re-Engagement’, Geological Society, London, Special Publications 417(1): 25–40.

26.

Gorman

C. E.

(2007) Landscape and Geotourism: Market Typologies and Visitor Needs (ARROW@DIT). Dublin: Dublin Institute of Technology.

27.

Grant

(2010) ‘Towards a Typology of Visitors to Geosites’, in Second Global Geotourism Conference, Making Unique Landforms Understandable, Mulu, Malaysia, 17–20 April.

28.

Gray

D. E.

(2014) Doing Research in the Real World. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

29.

Heintzman

(2010) ‘Nature-Based Recreation and Spirituality: A Complex Relationship’, Leisure Sciences 32(1): 341–6.

30.

Hill

Curtin

Gough

(2014) ‘Understanding Tourist Encounters with Nature: A Thematic Framework’, Tourism Geographies 16(1): 68–87.

31.

Hose

(1995) ‘Selling the Story of Britain’s Stone’, Environmental Interpretation 10(2): 16–7.

32.

Hose

(2012) ‘3G’s for Modern Geotourism’, Geoheritage 4(7): 7–24.

33.

Huijbens

E. H.

Benediktsson

(2013) ‘Inspiring the Visitor? Landscapes and Horizons of Hospitality’, Tourist Studies 13(2): 189–208.

34.

Hurtado

Dowling

Sanders

(2013) ‘An Exploratory Study to Develop a Geotourism Typology Model’, International Journal of Tourism Research 16(6): 608–13.

35.

Joyce

E. B.

(2006) ‘Geological Heritage of Australia: Selecting the Best for Geosites and World Heritage, and Telling the Story for Geotourism and Geoparks’, in Australian Earth Sciences Convention. Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 2–6 July 2006.

36.

Kovacs

C. L.

(2013) ‘Pompeii and Its Material Reproductions: The Rise of a Tourist Site in the Nineteenth Century’, Journal of Tourism History 5(1): 25–49.

37.

Larsen

Urry

(2011) ‘Gazing and Performing’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 29(6): 1110–25.

38.

Larsen

(2007) ‘Aspects of a Psychology of the Tourist Experience’, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 7(1): 7–18.

39.

Larsen

Mossberg

(2007) ‘Editorial: The Diversity of Tourist Experiences’, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 7(1): 1–6.

40.

Lockwood

Hazlett

(2010) Volcanoes: Global Perspectives. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

41.

Lund

K. A.

(2013) ‘Experiencing Nature in Nature-Based Tourism’, Tourist Studies 13(2): 156–71.

42.

McIntosh

A. J.

(1998) ‘Mixing Methods: Putting the Tourist at the Forefront of Tourism Research’, Tourism Analysis 3(2): 121–7.

43.

Mao

Robinson

A. M.

Dowling

(2009) ‘Potential Geotourists: An Australian Case Study’, Journal of Tourism 10(1): 71–80.

44.

Markwell

(2001) ‘“An Intimate Rendezvous with Nature?”: Mediating the Tourist-Nature Experience at Three Tourist Sites in Borneo’, Tourist Studies 1(1): 39–57.

45.

Martin

(2010) ‘Uncovering Unconscious Memories and Myths for Understanding International Tourism Behavior’, Journal of Business Research 63(4): 372–83.

46.

Mason

(2014) Researching Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality for Your Dissertation. Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers Ltd.

47.

Mercado

Lacsamana

Pineda

(1996) ‘Socioeconomic Impacts of the Mount Pinatubo Eruption’, pp. 1063–70 in Newhall

Punongbayan

(eds) Fire and Mud: Eruptions and Lahars of Mount Pinatubo. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press; Quezon City, Philippines: PHIVOLCS.

48.

Newhall

Hendley

J. W.

II Stauffer

P. H.

(1997) ‘The Cataclysmic 1991 Eruption of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines’. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs113-97/fs113-97.pdf

49.

Newsome

Dowling

(2006) ‘The Scope and Nature of Geotourism’, pp. 3–25 in Dowling

Newsome

(eds) Geotourism. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

50.

Newsome

Dowling

(2010a) Geotourism: The Tourism of Geology and Landscape. Woodeaton: Goodfellow Publishers Ltd.

51.

Newsome

Dowling

(2010b) ‘Setting an Agenda for Geotourism’, pp. 1–12 in Newsome

Dowling

(eds) Geotourism: The Tourism of Geology and Landscape. Woodeaton: Goodfellow Publishers Ltd.

52.

Norrish

Sanders

Dowling

(2014) ‘Geotourism Product Development and Stakeholder Perceptions: A Case Study of a Proposed Geotrail in Perth, Western Australia’, Journal of Ecotourism 13(1): 52–63.

53.

Noy

(2004) ‘The Trip Really Changed Me: Backpackers’ Narratives of Self-Change’, Annals of Tourism Research 31(1): 78–102.

54.

Olafsdottir

(2013) ‘“… Sometimes You’ve Just Got to Get Away”: On Trekking Holidays and Their Therapeutic Effect’, Tourist Studies 13(2): 209–31.

55.

Perkins

H. C.

Thorns

D. C.

(2001) ‘Gazing or Performing? Reflections on Urry’s Tourist Gaze in the Context of Contemporary Experience in the Antipodes’, International Sociology 16(2): 185–204.

56.

Pomfret

(2006) ‘Mountaineering Adventure Tourists: A Conceptual Framework for Research’, Tourism Management 27(1): 113–23.

57.

Pralong

J.-P.

(2006) ‘Geotourism: A New Form of Tourism Utilising Natural Landscapes and Based on Imagination and Emotion’, Tourism Review 61(3): 20–5.

58.

Prodromiti

(2013) Two Case Studies about Peoples’ Perceptions and Feelings towards Visiting Volcanic Areas. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen University.

59.

Reis

A. C.

(2012) ‘Experiences of Commodified Nature: Performances and Narratives of Nature-Based Tourists on Stewart Island, New Zealand’, Tourist Studies 12(3): 305–24.

60.

Reynard

Perret

Bussard

. (2016) ‘Integrated Approach for the Inventory and Management of Geomorphological Heritage at the Regional Scale’, Geoheritage 8(1): 43–60.

61.

Ryan

Kohli

(2006) ‘The Buried Village, New Zealand – An Example of Dark Tourism?’, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 11(3): 211–26.

62.

Sæþórsdóttir

A. D.

Saarinen

(2016) ‘Changing Ideas about Natural Resources: Tourists’ Perspectives on the Wilderness and Power Production in Iceland’, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 16(4): 404–21.

63.

Santangelo

Romano

Santo

(2015) ‘Geo-Itineraries in the Cilento Vallo di Diano Geopark: A Tool for Tourism Development in Southern Italy’, Geoheritage 7(4): 319–35.

64.

Saunders

Laing

Weiler

(2013) ‘Personal Transformation through Long-Distance Walking’, pp. 126–46 in Filep

Pearce

P. L.

(eds) Tourist Experience and Fulfilment: Insights from Positive Psychology. New York: Routledge.

65.

Schänzel

H. A.

McIntosh

A. J.

(2000) ‘An Insight into the Personal and Emotive Context of Wildlife Viewing at the Penguin Place, Otago Peninsula, New Zealand’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism 8(1): 36–52.

66.

Seitz

(1998) ‘Coping Strategies in an Ethnic Minority Group: The Aeta of Mount Pinatubo’, Disasters 22(1): 76–90.

67.

Sharpley

(2002) ‘The Consumption of Tourism’, pp. 300–18 in Sharpley

Telfer

D. J.

(eds) Tourism and Development: Concepts and Issues. Clevedon: Channel View.

68.

Sharpley

Jepson

(2011) ‘Rural Tourism: A Spiritual Experience?’, Annals of Tourism Research 38(1): 52–71.

69.

Sta Juliana Tourism Council Inc. (2004) Mount Pinatubo Kabuhayan sa Turismo: An Ecotourism Strategy/A Sustainable Community-Based Ecotourism Development Project for Sta Juliana, Capas, Tarlac, Philippines. San Fernando, Philippines: Department of Tourism – Region III.

70.

Stoffelen

Vanneste

(2015) ‘An Integrative Geotourism Approach: Bridging Conflicts in Tourism Landscape Research’, Tourism Geographies 17(4): 544–60.

71.

Urry

(1990) The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies. London: SAGE.

72.

Urry

Larsen

(2011) Tourist Gaze 3.0. London: SAGE.

73.

Vespestad

M. K.

Lindberg

(2010) ‘Understanding Nature-Based Tourist Experiences: An Ontological Analysis’, Current Issues in Tourism 14(6): 563–80.

74.

Višnić

Spasojević

Vujičić

(2016) ‘The Potential for Geotourism Development on the Srem Loess Plateau Based on a Preliminary Geosite Assessment Model (GAM)’, Geoheritage 8(2): 173–80.

75.

Volo

(2009) ‘Conceptualizing Experience: A Tourist-Based Approach’, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 18(2–3): 111–26.

76.

Walls

A. R.

Okumus

Wang

. (2011) ‘An Epistemological View of Consumer Experiences’, International Journal of Hospitality Management 30(1): 10–21.

77.

Wang

(1999) ‘Rethinking Authenticity in Tourism Experience’, Annals of Tourism Research 26(2): 349–70.