Geotourism starts with accessible information: the Internet as a promotional tool for the georesources of Lower Silesia

Catalogues of geotourist resources

1. The Catalogue of Geotourist Sites in Poland from 2006;

2. The Catalogue of Geotourist Sites in nature reserves and monuments from 2012.

Legal documents

1. The Bulletin of Public Information, the Ministry of Sport and Tourism, the Department of Tourism, information on departments, the action range of the department;

2. The Act of 25 June 1999 on the Polish Tourism Organisation [Journal of Laws from 2016, item 156; Journal of Laws from 2017, item 1089].

Documents by the Polish Tourism Organisation (original: Polska Organizacja Turystyczna - POT)

1. tasks of POT regarding online promotion;

2. tasks of POT regarding the Polish Tourist Information System.

Planning documents

at the national level:

1. The Tourism Development Programme until 2020 (original name: Program Rozwoju Turystyki do 2020 roku);

at the level of the voivodeship:

1. The 2020 Development Strategy for the Lower Silesia Voivodeship (original name: Strategia rozwoju województwa dolnośląskiego 2020);

2. The Update of the Tourism Development Programme for the Lower Silesia Voivodeship (original name: Aktualizacja Programu Rozwoju Turystyki dla Województwa Dolnośląskiego);

at the level of the county:

1. the Kłodzko County Development Strategy for the Years 2016-2020 (original name: Strategia rozwoju powiatu kłodzkiego na lata 2016-2020).

Official tourism websites (OTWs)

at the national level:

1. a web portal administered by POT, available at: www.polska.travel;

at the level of the voivodeship:

1. a web portal administered by the Lower Silesia Marshall’s Office, available at: www.dolnyslask.info.pl;

at the level of the county:

1. a web portal administered by Kłodzko County, available at: www.powiat.klodzko.pl;

3.1 The Internet as a source of information for tourism

The Internet and online applications have revolutionized the contemporary image of tourism in terms of destination marketing and applicable promotion techniques [1, 2, 3, 4], and have also become indispensable components of modern travelling [5]. The initial assumptions in the subject matter and the possible potential of the phenomenon in question [6, 7, 8] are now an undeniable fact [9]. The Internet is the predominant information source that tourists nowadays refer to [10]. In the context given, information can be compared to “the lifeblood of the tourism industry” [11, p. 633 after 12] and the Internet to the heart that circulates it [12, p. 815]. Accessible information, as indicated in the article title, being given a broader technological perspective and understood as “individual tourist support system within the context of information services and an all-encompassing technology” can even be equated with the very notion of “Smart Tourism” [13, p. 293]. Official tourism websites (OTWs) are considered to constitute the channel for the provision of information that is crucial in the decision-making process of the potential tourists and their choice of destination [14].

What factors make an informative website then? What makes it a successful communication tool, especially between the official tourism entities and the public? Merely the online presence does not suffice with respect to meeting the demanding customers’ needs anymore [15]. A comprehensive overview of the existing website evaluation methods in tourism research in the time range of 1996-2009 can be reached [16]. It is suggested that the future research approach should combine the qualitative and quantitative website evaluation methods, taking into consideration the theories and models proposed by other disciplines, especially psychology and computer science [16]. Similar studies conducted in an identical time range proposed the adoption of the evaluation framework based on three distinctive variables, namely phase, features (i.e. website content, website content and design, website design) and features combined with effectiveness (i.e. expert evaluation, consumers’ intention, user satisfaction) [17]. This website evaluation structure, to a large extent, summarizes the research results in the subject matter to date. Another attempt to collate the existing state of research in this realm of interest in the new millennium provides an extended framework showing interrelations between the marketing-, customer-, technical- and internal perspectives [18]. The previously indicated call for an interdisciplinary evaluation model, that would incorporate both qualitative and quantitative research approach, has found its answer in the form of a Web Quality Index (WQI) applicable to OTWs, examined and described in the Spanish context studies [14]. Notwithstanding, there still is no common agreement among academics upon an efficient and exhaustive website evaluation model that would be seen as universal in its nature for the tourism industry [16, 18, 19], and the questions asked above, at least partly, remain unanswered thus far.

Even though the potential of the Internet in generating tourist interest and consequently tourist traffic is commonly recognized [1], among other examples American [12] and Chinese [20] context studies clearly indicate the critical issues that hinder the effectiveness of its use. It particularly refers to OTWs that either lack consistency among their elements, or restrict the scope of interest to basic tourist information only, as stated in the aforementioned research respectively. The Internet utility effectiveness in the tourism destination marketing sector can be raised ensuring high information accessibility, providing a proper online image of the destination, together with adjusting position strategies [21]. While creating an effective website DMOs (Destination Marketing Organisations) should also recognize the linear relationship between the website’s complexity and its performance, as well as rely on proper market segmentation [22].

Another question arises: what factors are the key ones in the decision-making process of the person surfing the Internet whose aim is to choose a particular tourism destination, and/or purchase a certain tourism product? For some researchers, it is the link between the information per se presented on tourism-related websites and its credibility that leads to the potential tourists’ buying intent [23]. For others, high levels of customer retention can be encouraged by the use of visuals, together with a complete layout of destinations to be visited [24]. The positive perception of a website should include being easy to navigate and user-friendly [25], as well as having irresistible features appealing to customers [26]. Information provided on high-quality destination websites should be complete, credible, usable and persuasive [27]. Other constituents of great importance in the hospitality industry context include the websites’ usability, ease of use, entertainment, and complementarity [28]. Also, a customer to customer, or a customer to potential customer interaction and the reviewing process accompanying it, in other words, the eword of mouth, cannot be underestimated. It is perceived to be an influential communication channel for online destination marketing [29, 30]. Therefore, strategic employment of social media by national tourism organisations (NTOs), as a powerful source of destination marketing and promotional tool, cannot be ignored. In order to boost levels of social engagement, continued attention needs to be paid to visual content and to ensuring the weekend posting, as concluded from the research performed analysing the use of NTO’s Facebook buzz amongst ten top countries ranked by international arrival between 2013 and 2015 [31].

3.2 Tourist resources and their division

The geotourist potential of any region, including Lower Silesia, is presented through different channels of distribution, including one of the most important, if not the most important – the Internet. Regardless of the channel type, the scheme of the presentation is based on the division of tourist resources proposed in the Polish literature. A similar approach is presented by Rogalewski [32], Warszyńska and Jackowski [33], Lijewski, Mikułowski and Wyrzykowski [34], Kowalczyk [35], Kruczek [36], Nowakowska [37], or Kurek [38]. The most detailed division comprises three basic groups, and was proposed by Lijewski, Mikułowski and Wyrzykowski [34]:

1. Leisure tourist resources

2. Sightseeing tourist resources

3. Qualified tourist resources

Concerning the inanimate environment – the natural setting for the geotourist resources – the most important is the second group, i.e. the sightseeing resources. In this group, there are elements of the natural environment, or the products of human activity. The sightseeing resources are divided into two more groups: the first one comprises the natural sightseeing resources, and the cultural sightseeing resources belong to the second one. The first group is of greater importance from the perspective of geotourism development. The multiplicity and variety of these resources implicates another division according to the degree and character of human interference in the resource creation process. Here, obviously, the most important ones for geotourism are those resources that are created without any human interference, such as the curiosities of fauna and flora; rocks and groups of rocks; gorges, valleys, and watershed; waterfalls, springs; caves and grottos; erratic rocks, the group of rocks and finally other geological sites. The second group consists of the man-made resources, like monumental parks, museums of nature, botanical gardens and zoological parks. The last category of natural resources is a group for which human interference had no influence on their character and importance. Good examples are viewpoints, national parks, landscape parks, forest preserves, and sanctuaries.

Even though cultural resources are of lesser importance for geotourism, some of them (especially architectural monuments) might still be found attractive due to the material they were erected with.

4.1 Tourism, information and promotion – an intrinsic link in the legal and planning documents

Tourism development is such a significant element of the economic and social growth of our country that special institutions responsible for the correct course of the process were established at the national, regional and local levels. At the national level, the Ministry of Sport and Tourism is responsible for the tourism sector. Within this Ministry, there is the Department of Tourism. It is assigned 19 main tasks dedicated especially to tourism [39]. One of those is the supervision of the Polish Tourism Organisation (POT). This organisation is crucial for the tourist promotion of the regions and resources of Poland. POT was established by the virtue of the Act of 25 June 1999 [Journal of Laws from 2016, item 156; Journal of Laws from 2017, item 1089]). Its first article points to the need to strengthen the promotion of tourism both in the country and abroad. The third article of the Act defines the basic tasks of POT. In the first and third points of the article, the promotion of Poland as a country attractive for tourism is stressed. At the same time, the need to ensure the functioning and development of the Polish system of tourist information both in the country and worldwide is underlined. To fulfil its tasks, the organisation is granted the right to create regional and local tourist organisations (art. 4). Their tasks, among others, are the tourist promotion in the region of their supervision, as well as the help given to the functioning of the tourist information system.

As emphasised by the Polish Tourism Organisation “(…) the Internet is one of those marketing tools of the most rapid development being both modern and efficient. Thus, the promotion of the tourist regions through the Internet is nowadays the most popular tool enabling both personalization, interactivity and global reach” [40]. The aim of the online projects is to build the brand awareness of Poland and to solidify the image of Poland as an attractive destination. The role of an official POT website (as owned by POT), being a digital part of the Polish System of Tourist Information (PSIT) is highlighted. As it was mentioned on the official website of the organisation: the digital part of PSIT is the answer to the ever-changing market needs and to the new emerging channels of information distribution. The key point of the Polish Tourism Organisation is creating the national base of data, the so-called Tourism Information Repository (original name: Repozytorium Informacji Turystycznej). It is being prepared together by POT and ROTs (Regional Tourism Organisations) and the National Tourist Portal (Poland’s Official Travel Website: www.polska.travel), which is available in 23 languages [41].

It is worth stressing again that the tourist resources (including the geotourist ones) presentation scheme generally overlaps with the division in the Polish source literature. Tourism Development Programme until 2020 being a resolution no. 143/2015 of the Council of Ministers, issued on 18.08.2015, prepared for the Ministry of Sport and Tourism [42, p. 23], points to three resource groups: natural, cultural and spa, understood broadly as the leisure resources. This division is the basis for the promotional activity of the departmental agendas and is used to present the resources of every voivodeship.

The same approach to the promotion of resources presented according to a particular scheme was noticed at lower organisational levels (voivodeship and county). The 2020 Development Strategy for the Lower Silesia Voivodeship, which is a general document mapped out under the Marshal of Lower Silesia voivodeship for the years 2014 – 2020, delineates the main points of the regional development policy, financial perspectives, system of implementation etc. One of the eight main spheres influencing the development is tourism. While presenting its potential landscape, natural, cultural and leisure resources are enumerated pointing in particular to the role of Lower Silesian spas [43, p. 18]. This division is even clearer in the documents relating to the programmes of tourism development in the region. The Update of the Tourism Development Programme for the Lower Silesia Voivodeship was prepared by the Polish Agency of Tourism Development (Polish original name: Polska Agencja Rozwoju Turystyki) in 2009. In the description of tourist attractiveness of Lower Silesia voivodship, the natural and cultural resources were mentioned [44, p. 20]. A similar situation concerns the Kłodzko County Development Strategy for the Years 2016-2020 (Polish original name: Strategia Rozwoju Powiatu Kłodzkiego) enacted by the Kłodzko County Council [45]. The richness of tourist resources of Kłodzko Land is divided into three basic groups: leisure resources, qualified resources, and sightseeing resources while the last ones are further divided into environmental (natural) and cultural resources [43, p. 61].

It is important to draw attention to this approach, as it is mirrored in the manner of tourist resources promotion on the Internet, the responsibility for which is held directly or indirectly by institutions setting regional and national developmental directions (also in the tourist context).

4.2 Information on geotourist resources of Lower Silesia in the Catalogues of Geotourist Sites in Poland

The geotourist resources are a significant potential that still awaits a detailed study. In the 21^st century, only two attempts to achieve this goal were made. They resulted in publishing two catalogues of the most important geotourist resources of Poland. Both catalogues were developed by an academic team of professor Tadeusz Słomka, representing the Kraków scientific community, supported by the scientists from other Polish universities. The research for both catalogues was co-financed by the National Found of Environmental Protection and Water Management. The first catalogue of the geotourist sites in Poland presents a selection of the geological sites of scientific documentation, while the second one describes (as declared in the title of the publication) geotourist sites in nature reserves and monuments. It is worth checking how the geotourist potential of the region is presented in both publications.

In both publications, the role of Lower Silesia as a region particularly predisposed to the development of geotourism is clearly visible. According to the first catalogue, developed in 2006, the number of geotourist sites places dolnośląskie voivodeship (the voivodeship of Lower Silesia) in the third position in the country (Table 1). The higher positions are taken only by two other regions, namely Małopolskie and Podkarpackie. Among 100 sites described in the volume, 13% of the georesources represent Lower Silesia. The significance of the region increases in the next juxtaposition of the resources. The catalogue from 2012 ranks the Lower Silesian potential on the second position, just behind the Małopolska region. The geosites recognized as important for the development of geotourism account for 17.5% of the country’s potential. Interestingly, both lists, at least in the case of Lower Silesia, are two independent collections that do not overlap. Therefore, it can be stated that in 2012, the total of 41 different geosites important for the geotourism development was presented. Not to get into details of why this happened (it is a topic for a separate discussion), both lists are at least worth mentioning.

In the 2006 catalogue there are as many as 13 geosites, i.e. the Kalwaria Hill in Bardo Śląskie; Paleozoic rocks in the Wapnica Mt. quarry in Dzikowiec; the Shepherd’s Rocks in Idzików; the melaphyres quarry in Kamienna Góra, the Rock Gate at the Trojak Mt.; the pillow in Lubiechów; Black Wall in Lutynia; Rock wall in Radków; the flysch from Srebrna Góra; the granulites from Stary Gierałtów; the nickel ore mine in Szklary; the granites from Walim.

After six years, the set of resources was expanded, both for Poland and Lower Silesia. From 160 sites considered to be the most important in Poland, as many as 28 from the region of Lower Silesia were described. These are: the Errant Rocks in the Table Mts.; the Red Rocks; the Dwarfs’ Boulders; the Choina Hill of the Owl Mts.; the Mount Ślęża; the Bear Cave, the Radochów Cave; the Daisy Lake; the Stony Mountain in Lubań; the Ravens’ Rocks; the Raven Stone; the Small Myślibórz Organs; the Wielisław Organs; the Ostrzyca Proboszczowicka; the Shepherds’ Rocks; the River Ravins in Książ; the Rock with Medallion; the Perkun Cone; the Grand Szczeliniec; the Śnieżnik Kłodzki; the Peat Bogs of the Izera River Valley; the Peat Bogs at Zieleniec; the Linden Gorge; the Myślibórz Gorge; the Siedmica Gorge; the Wolf’s Mountain; the Wilczka Stream Waterfall; the Forgotten Rocks.

Although the lists above may give the impression that the topic has been exhausted, one should be aware that this catalogue is incomplete. There are no resources of the surface character like national or landscape parks created for the protection of the inanimate environment. There are no geoparks either, although they were an important geotourist product for the last two decades. Thus, to be precise, the following must be mentioned as well: the Giant Mountains National Park, the Table Mountains National Park, twelve landscape parks in Lower Silesia or geoparks such as Łuk Mużakowa, the Izerskie Mountains Geopark, the Sudeckie Foothills Geopark, or the Mine of St. John from Krobica Geopark.

All the above-mentioned resources are unique for science and may be a factor attracting geotourists. Notwithstanding, without adequate information that would be easy to obtain for tourists, these resources remain only the potential ones. However, easily accessible information, combined with professional promotion, can make them generate tourist traffic. Hence, together with accompanying tourist infrastructure, such resources can create a tourist region.

4.3 Information on geotourist resources of Lower Silesia on selected websites

The promotion of the geotourist resources of Lower Silesia was analysed in reference to the web portals administered at a national, regional and local level. To begin with, it is worth presenting the phenomenon in question on Poland’s Official Travel Website. This national tourism portal, available at: www.polska.travel, is managed by the Polish Tourism Organisation (POT). Figure 1 below shows its homepage where successive links leading to particular categories are presented, and which are further briefly characterized.

Figure 1

Source: [48, ED 5.09.2017]

Homepage of Poland’s Oflcial Travel Website (www.polska.travel).

The home page (in the Polish version) contains some basic categories that refer to different types of tourist information:

1. AlePolska with the following subcategories:

   1. General practical information – an introductory article,

   2. Hits – the article presenting the most important tourist attractions of the country and regions,

   3. Certificated – a short description of tourist products awarded the Golden Certificate by POT (since 2008),

   4. Ideas – the presentation of selected proposals and ideas for the weekend break,

   5. Poland for – the tourist offer for specific clients grouped into categories: families with children, young but not only, for a conference, for shopping, for the disabled, for seniors,

   6. Unknown Poland – a set of articles on tourist attractions which are less popular (according to the author of the category) among tourists,

   7. History and tradition – sketches related to past events or traditions,

   8. Poland travel advice – some practical information about traveling in Poland,

2. Regions and cities with the following subcategories:

   1. Regions – an interactive map redirecting to the administrative region, where the short description of the main tourist resources is presented,

   2. Main cities,

   3. At the seaside,

   4. In the Mountains – articles describing the mountain ranges in Poland, including the Sudety Mountain range in Lower Silesia,

   5. Top 5 spas and leisure centers,

3. Attractions with the following subcategories

   1. Monuments and sightseeing,

   2. Nature,

   3. Sport and recreation,

   4. Culture – entertainment – education,

   5. Spa & wellness,

   6. Cuisine,

   7. In the countryside.

The most probable place for the geotourist attractions seems to be the subcategory called Nature. There the Internet surfer will meet other subcategories such as:

1. Poland naturally – a short general information about nature in Poland, together with links to the articles concerned with experiencing both natural and leisure resources,

2. National Parks – one can find here the links to 23 articles about every national park in the country,

3. Landscape Parks – an article dedicated to this form of protection of the natural landscape in Poland,

4. Parks and gardens – information about the monumental parks, botanical gardens, zoological gardens, city parks, arboreta to be visited in Poland,

5. Animal watching – general information about the richness of nature in the countryside,

6. Geoparks – brief description and a link to three geoparks: Łuk Mużakowa, the St. Anna Mountain Geopark, the Giant Mountains National Park.

The English version of the website promoting Polish tourist attractions looks different and is reduced practically to one category: What to see? This is one of the three categories dedicated to attractions. Two others, namely About Poland and What to do? do not refer to the natural tourist resources.

The What to see? category is divided into four different subcategories. Heritage, Unesco Sites, and Cities & towns barely relate to the natural attractions. However, within Regions, there is an interactive map leading to administrative regions described in a general manner. Additionally, brochures with the more detailed information can be downloaded. The last category – Nature – is divided into four subcategories: Highlights with the general information and some articles on the mountain ranges in Poland; National Parks with a short introductory article and links to more detailed articles on each national park and brochures to download; Animal watching which is a translation of the Polish version and Did you know? with the very brief general information about the most important sightseeing natural resources.

At the regional level, the website promoting a tourist attraction, in this case, the Lower Silesia region, is www.dolnyslask.info.pl administered by the Lower Silesian Tourist Organisation (Dolnośląska Organizacja Turystyczna – DOT – created by the local government in 2000). On the official website, one can find links relating to different categories: Tourist Routes, Tourist Offer, Practical info, or DOT library. Under Tourist Offer, the following subcategories are seen: spa tourism, ecotourism, business tourism, cultural tourism, active tourism, ski resorts and the year of educational tourism. The information about natural resources of the region (Figure 2) is presented in the form of different articles describing tourist regions in Lower Silesia, or particular tourist attractions of the natural character.

Figure 2

Source: [49, ED 5.09.2017]

www.dolnyslask.info.pl website – geotourist information.

The website of one of the most subsidized tourist subregions of Lower Silesia, the Kłodzko Land within the Kłodzko county, can serve as an example of the local promotional activity. On its official website, there are six links: county government, county, promotion, non-government organisation, information, and contact. Clicking on the promotion category, a virtual tourist can pick a subcategory of tourism, and there, tourist attractions link with a brief article. Natural attractions, with the short description of each attraction worth mentioning in the region (Figure 3), are available on the website among many different types of tourist attractions – as presented in the Polish literature (see the division above).

Figure 3

Source: [50, ED 5.09.2017]

powiat.klodzko.pl website – natural resources.

6.1 Conclusions

The conducted research enabled the authors to draw the following conclusions:

1. The promotional measures connected with the georesources of Lower Silesia and their potential for the tourism industry are insufficient at both national and regional level;

2. There is no information transfer between the providers of adequate and professional information on geoheritage, such as the authors of the catalogues listing and describing the geosites in Poland, or the authors of the websites devoted to particular geotourist sites, and institutions responsible for the promotion of tourism in the country and within the region;

3. Geotourism is not promoted as a separate and crucial subcategory of tourism. Nowadays, merely selected georesources are presented online, and the problem is that they are usually dispersed and hidden under divergent umbrella terms, for instance: natural, or nature tourism, nature-based resources or ecotourism;

4. Even if the information regarding geotourism as such, or its chosen aspects appears on the official tourism-related websites, it is usually out of date, insufficient, or completely inaccessible due to technical issues. Without a doubt, it is discouraging the potential visitors from using the region’s geotourist offer altogether, or at least not to the fullest. As a consequence, the geotourism traffic to the area is of lesser volume than it could be otherwise concerning its possibilities and expectations.

5. In practical terms, the geotourist information is frequently inaccessible for international visitors. Only Poland’s Official Travel Website provides some knowledge on geoheritage of the country for speakers of English. Nonetheless, this information, yet again, needs updating, or after clicking on a certain link, it is impossible to reach. If the information does appear on the screen, it is usually fragmentary in its nature, especially in comparison to the Polish version of the website. The current situation clearly limits the potential significance of geotourism for the international inbound tourism market.

6.2 Recommendations for improvement

Since the present situation needs to be changed, recommendations for the future encompass the following set of actions to be taken:

1. It is necessary to undertake measures aimed at promoting geotourism as a separate tourism category that is based on unique resources of abiotic nature. It is essential to emphasize its distinctive character as opposed to the notions of nature-based tourism, sightseeing, and other related tourism types.

2. It is of pivotal importance to ensure the sufficient level of knowledge on geotourism and its character. It should take the form of educational training within institutions and amongst persons responsible for the process of preparation of information on, and promotion of geotourist resources of Poland and certain regions.

3. The necessity of promoting geotourism should also be emphasised as early as at primary and secondary school educational levels, in order to ensure high awareness of the phenomenon in question amongst its recipients in the future.

4. It is worth thinking about creating an expert group lobbying for geotourism in the institutions responsible for developing and implementing tourism development strategies at regional and national levels. Such a solution would prevent geotourism from being omitted or misinterpreted. It is essential to ensure close cooperation between academics, local associations aimed at tourism development, and institutions preserving the inanimate nature, such as the authorities of national parks, nature reserves, as well as the legislative representatives at local and national levels.

5. Not only should the information on geotourism be properly prepared, but it should also be accessible in the languages of tourists visiting Poland most frequently. Translation into English, perceived nowadays as lingua franca, and into German should be seen as an absolute minimum in this matter. The next recommended step is making it available for the speakers of French and Czech.

6. Concerning the technical aspect of information accessibility, it is recommended that websites aimed at the promotion of certain tourism types would have a separate bookmark linking visitors to geotourism. This category should be of equal importance apposed to cultural tourism or active tourism.

6.3 Limitations of the study and suggestions for future research

This study has several limitations that the authors would like to address. Firstly, it eliminates social media and blogs that are relevant from the point of view of promotional techniques within inbound marketing. Therefore, to see a holistic picture of accessibility of information on geotourism on the Internet, further empirical studies in this field should incorporate them. Another research limitation, and at the same time research opportunity for the future, includes referring to all the regions of the country known for their geoheritage and making a comparative analysis of online information accessibility between them. It would pose an attempt at assessing the online presentation methods and selecting the most appealing ones that facilitate travel for both lovers and amateurs of geotourism.