Maija Toivanen

Resilience thinking has become central to addressing environmental and societal challenges, yet it focuses primarily on ecological and social dimensions while physical foundations remain underrepresented. This systematic scoping review examined 90 geodiversity and geoheritage studies (2012–2025) analysing connections to resilience concepts. While most reviewed studies lack explicit resilience frameworks, they demonstrate extensive implicit resilience engagement, particularly through maintaining diversity and redundancy, managing slow variables, encouraging learning, and broadening participation. Geodiversity enriches resilience thinking by treating physical environments not as passive backdrops but as active participants in system change, and by bridging natural and social dimensions that are typically managed separately. Three interrelated barriers limit integration of resilience and geodiversity: disciplinary communities remain disconnected, evidence emphasizes description over mechanisms, and institutional infrastructure for geodiversity governance lags behind that for biodiversity. Overcoming these barriers through collaborative efforts could ground resilience thinking in the geological reality that underlies all sustainability challenges.

The concept of geodiversity is gaining recognition in many scientific fields, as well as in practical applications such as conservation and tourism. Although the importance of geodiversity is now widely accepted, its precise definition, scope and broader applicability continue to be debated and discussed. In this paper, we explore the variety of viewpoints that relate to geodiversity and scrutinize the importance of geodiversity for different audiences. These viewpoints include definitions, assessment, research fields, terminology and its applications. To help explore and convey the different viewpoints and values commonly attributed to geodiversity, we invoke the Rokua UNESCO Global Geopark in Finland as a specific case study. Finally, we present potential future directions for geodiversity research, including key knowledge gaps, and highlight the vulnerability of geodiversity to increasing human pressures that threaten its integrity and long-term sustainability.

Maija Toivasen maantieteen väitöskirja "Geodiversiteetin kvantitatiivinen arviointi biodiversiteetin tutkimuksessa" tarkastettiin Oulun yliopistossa 20.9.2024. Tämä teksti perustuu väitöstilaisuudessa pidettyyn lektioon. Väitöskirjaan voi tutustua osoitteessa https://doi.org/10.30671/nordia.147478. Vastaväittäjä Sonja Kivisen lausunto väitöskirjasta julkaistaan Alue ja Ympäristö -lehden samassa numerossa Väitösikkuna-palstalla. Geodiversiteetti eli elottoman luonnon monimuotoisuus on saanut yhä enemmän huomiota tieteellisessä keskustelussa. Käsite viittaa maan pintaosien geologisten, geomorfologisten ja hydrologisten piirteiden monimuotoisuuteen, jotka muodostavat perustan myös biologiselle monimuotoisuudelle, biodiversiteetille. Lektiossa esittelen väitöstutkimukseni, jossa kehitän menetelmiä geodiversiteetin määrälliseen arviointiin sekä tarkastelen sen merkitystä ja sovelluksia luonnon monimuotoisuuden tutkimuksessa ja suojelussa. Tulokseni osoittavat, että monimuotoinen eloton luonto tukee biologista monimuotoisuutta, mikä korostaa geodiversiteetin huomioimisen tärkeyttä esimerkiksi suojelutoimien suunnittelussa. Väitöskirjani ylipäätänsä haastaa perinteiset, elolliseen luontoon keskittyvät näkemykset luonnon monimuotoisuudesta ja laajentaa ymmärrystä siitä, miten hahmotamme ympäröivää maailmaa.

Despite the growing recognition of geodiversity in recent years, it remains overshadowed by its biotic counterpart, biodiversity. The objective of this thesis is to narrow this gap by advancing the quantitative assessment of geodiversity within the context of biodiversity. The main objective is to provide a theoretical and methodological framework for the study of landscape-scale geodiversity in biodiversity investigations, with some insights for nature conservation. To achieve this goal, I will I) review the theory of the geodiversity–biodiversity relationship, II) empirically test the relationship in Finnish freshwater ecosystems, and III) provide data and methods for Europe-wide geodiversity and biodiversity studies. By employing quantitative geographical research methods inspired by ecological research traditions, I investigate the relationship between geodiversity and biodiversity across aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Empirical investigations revealed positive correlations between geodiversity and vascular plant species richness in distinct studies conducted in Finland and Switzerland, across both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. This aligns with the theoretical assumption that geodiversity fosters greater biodiversity. Moreover, the Europe-wide geodiversity data produced within the thesis provides ready-to-use variables for future biodiversity investigations across the continent and contributes to large-scale geodiversity assessment in general. In conclusion, I recommend further development of geodiversity assessment methods and the establishment of systematic frameworks for various research contexts. Such actions would facilitate the implementation of standardized and reproducible research practices, thereby helping to unlock geodiversity’s potential in biodiversity and conservation research and in practice. Integrating geodiversity systematically into conservation and policy making is essential to fully acknowledge its crucial role in shaping sustainable future. By broadening perspectives on natural diversity beyond biodiversity alone, this thesis seeks to enhance general understanding and appreciation of geodiversity.

Geodiversity—the diversity of abiotic features and processes of the Earth's surface and subsurface—is an increasingly used concept in ecological research. A growing body of scientific literature has provided evidence of positive links between geodiversity and biodiversity. These studies highlight the potential of geodiversity to improve our understanding of biodiversity patterns and to complement current biodiversity conservation practices and strategies. However, definitions of geodiversity in ecological research vary widely. This can hinder the progress of geodiversity–biodiversity research and make it difficult to synthesize findings across studies. We therefore call for greater awareness of how geodiversity is currently defined and for more consistent use of the term ‘geodiversity’ in biodiversity research.

Kirja-arvio Johanna Isosävin ja Camilla Lindholmin teoksesta "Yhteisöllisen kirjoittamisen opas". Art House, Helsinki, 2023. (216 s.)

Geodiversity is an essential part of nature's diversity. However, geodiversity is insufficiently understood in terms of its spatial distribution and its relationship to biodiversity over large spatial extents. Here, we present European geodiversity data at resolutions of 1 km and 10 km. We assess terrestrial geodiversity quantitatively as a richness variable (georichness) using a commonly employed grid-based approach. The data incorporate aspects of geological, pedological, geomorphological and hydrological diversity, which are also available as separate richness variables. To evaluate the data, we correlated European georichness with empirically tested national georichness data from Finland, revealing a positive correlation at both 1 km ( r _p = 0.37, p < 0.001) and 10 km ( r _p = 0.59, p < 0.001) resolutions. We also demonstrate potential uses of the European data by correlating georichness with vascular plant species richness in two contrasting example areas: Finland and Switzerland. The positive correlations between georichness and species richness in Finland ( r _p = 0.34, p < 0.001) and Switzerland ( r _p = 0.26, p < 0.001) further support the use of our data in geodiversity–biodiversity research. Moreover, there is great potential beyond geodiversity–biodiversity questions, as the data can be exploited across different regions, ecosystems and scales. These geodiversity data provide an insight on abiotic diversity in Europe and establish a quantitative large-scale geodiversity assessment method applicable worldwide. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue ‘Geodiversity for science and society’.

Changes in natural land cover have been pronounced in the last 12,000 years, and land use has intensified in the last century owing to anthropogenic pressures on landscapes. This trend has led to concomitant changes in the abiotic templates and biotic communities of different ecosystems embedded in a landscape. Deciphering the role of land use is key to understand ecological change in boreal landscapes. These landscapes are characterized by large numbers of lakes that have been affected by various anthropogenic factors, of which land use has considerable direct and indirect effects on lakes. In this review, we focus on land use impacts on boreal lakes in a historical perspective. We will consider lake features related to abiotic conditions, biological communities and ecosystem services, and provide potential solutions for planning lake management and conservation in a landscape setting. More specifically, we propose a novel way to characterize lake abiotic, biotic and ecosystem service features by applying the alpha, beta and gamma concept used widely in ecological research. Finally, we highlight situations where this approach could be a valuable addition to existing means to identify lakes that should be reserved for ecosystem services (‘lake‐sharing’) and those that are vital for protecting aquatic biodiversity (‘lake‐sparing’).