Cadmium is a highly-toxic metal, and, its environmental occurrence and human exposure consequently deserve close attention. The insight into the relationships between cadmium and tourism relations has deepened during the past three decades and the research into this relationship is reviewed. For this purpose, 83 relevant publications (mainly articles in international journals) were analyzed. It was found that investigation of Cd in the tourism environment took place in all continents (except Antarctica) and has intensified since the mid-2000s; Chinese researchers are the most active contributors. The Cd occurrence in air, living organisms, sediments, soil, suspended particular matter, water, and of the human environment has been studied. It has become clear that tourism contributes to Cd pollution (particularly, by hotel wastewater and increased traffic), and, vice versa, Cd pollution of beaches, coastal waters, food, urban parks, etc. creates risks for tourists and increases human exposure to this toxic metal. Both mechanisms have received equal attention. Examples concern many places worldwide, with the Mediterranean and Central and Eastern Europe as apparently critical regions. Our significantly incomplete knowledge of the relationships between cadmium and tourism must be ascribed to the common oversimplification of these relationships and to the scarcity or even absence of information supplied by the most important tourist destinations. The present review demonstrates that more studies of heavy metals and, particularly, Cd in the tourism environment are needed.

Geological heritage (geo-heritage) is a resource for geoscience, geo-education, and geo-tourism. Geo-tourist attractions differ in their physical visibility, interpretation (clarity), and aesthetic attractiveness. These three characteristics determine perception of visitors and, thus, the importance of attractions. An integrative parameter, namely specific visibility, is proposed for qualitative geo-tourism resource evaluation. This parameter is examined for all geo-heritage types, and some relevant examples from southwest Russia are considered. The geo-heritage types differ in their specific visibility. For instance, when landforms like the Granite Gorge in the Western Caucasus (geomorphological type) are well-visible, geochemical processes like the heavy metal cycling in the Don River delta and the Pelenkino mud lake (geo-chemical type) are not as visible. Such a difference should be taken into account when geo-tourism resources of any area or a geopark are evaluated. The lower the specific visibility, the higher the costs for professional interpretation and demand for advanced infrastructure solutions.

Accessibility is an important property of geoheritage sites (geosites), which is commonly considered in their assessment. A new method, which refers partly to previous developments, is proposed to assess this property semiquantitatively. Inner (on-site) and outer accessibility are distinguished, and each is measured depending on the opportunities to reach unique geological features. Distant visibility and entrance fees/required permissions are also taken into account. On the basis of the scores, three grades of geosite accessibility (excellent, moderate, and low) are delineated. The proposed method is applied to 15 geosites of Mountainous Adygeya (southwestern Russia), and the outcomes prove its efficacy. This application also helps to establish within-site and territorial spatial heterogeneity of geosite accessibility and to propose some managerial implications.

Viewpoint geological and geomorphological heritage sites (geosites and geomorphosites) offer panoramic views over unique geological features and landscapes dominated by significant features. The environmental context is of crucial importance for these sites. Three components of a viewpoint geosite environment are proposed: standpoint environment, transitional environment, and target environment. Each can be evaluated with a set of criteria such as presence of geological and geoheritage elements, presence and type of vegetation cover, anthropogenic intervention, and degree of fragmentation and contrast. Three examples of viewpoint geosites from the Western Caucasus are analyzed. It is shown that all three demonstrate differences between the noted components of viewpoint geosite environment. Moreover, the differences between these geosites result from their environmental differences and less from differences of their displayed geoheritage. Broad applications and further justifications of the environmental evaluation method of viewpoint geosites are recommended.

River deltas boast ecosystem richness, but their efficient conservation and management require consideration of the full spectrum of natural phenomena, including those which are geological. Few specialists have explored the issue of deltaic geological heritage (geoheritage), and the relevant knowledge remains scarce and non-systematised. This paper proposes the first classification of this geoheritage. Five categories are distinguished: entire-delta geological phenomenon, delta-associated “purely” geological features, delta-associated features resulting from geology–ecosystem interactions, geological features occasional to deltas, and geoarchaeological localities in deltas. Chosen as a case example, the Don River delta in the southwestern part of Russia possesses geoheritage of these categories, except for the latter. The relevant unique geological features differ by their types and ranks. Of particular interest is the phenomenon of a self-cleaning environment which prevents mercury concentration in the soil despite pollution from natural and anthropogenic sources. The complexity of the deltaic geoheritage, its co-existence with the rich biodiversity, and the aesthetical issues make geopark creation in river deltas a sensible venture. Relevant proposals have been made for Malaysia and the Netherlands–Belgium border, and the Don River delta in Russia also presents an appropriate location for geopark creation.

Geological heritage sites (geosites) are subject to conservation and exploitation for science, education, and tourism. Some geosites are big and comprise diverse phenomena. Concentration of the latter in some parts of these geosites makes them disproportionate. A typical example is the Granite Gorge in SW Russia that is of recognizable tourism importance. It stretches for ~5 km and represents a deep valley of the Belaya River and Late Paleozoic granitoids of the Dakh Crystalline Massif. However, the full spectrum of unique features is much wider. Their inventory permits the establishment of geomorphological, igneous, metamorphic, sedimentary, mineralogical, paleogeographical, tectonic, economic, engineering, and hydrological and hydrogeological types of geological heritage. Spatial distribution of these types and the relevant features indicates their significant concentration near the northern entrance to the gorge and a less important concentration near the southern entrance. This is evidence of geosite disproportion. Apparently, the latter implies the need to focus geoconservation and geotourism activities on the noted loci of concentration. However, this would ’disrupt’ the geosite integrity, and, thus, management of the Granite Gorge geosite requires attention to all its parts, including those with lower heritage value.