The purpose of this review is, initially, to emphasize the importance of geoenvironmental education for the promotion and preservation of geological heritage and geoethical values, and based on these, to present the current situation in Greece. Geoeducation is a broader component of environmental education which aims to promote the geological heritage of a place and its geoconservation. It is a key integral tool for tackling environmental issues and therefore further assisting in sustainable development. Greece is known for its exceptional and rare natural beauty, as well as for the abundance of natural resources and its remarkable geological features. For this reason, six global geoparks have already been established in this country. However, its nature protection is mainly considered as the protection of biodiversity, while the term “geodiversity” is almost absent in Greek law. The importance of establishing a legal framework for the protection of geotopes is underlined by the fact that their promotion and rational management create opportunities for sustainable development, as well as to become quality tourist destinations (geotourism) through nature protection and education. Geodiversity can gain public attention and have a positive impact on geotopes protection. Such initiatives can not only improve the protection of geological sites, but also play an important role in their sustainable development.

In this study, the geoeducational value of five geosites, located in the aspiring geopark of the volcanic island of Nisyros, SE Aegean Sea, was assessed by means of two methods: the G-P method of Brilha (2016) and the M-GAM method. The first method takes into account 12 criteria belonging to the educational potential. The M-GAM method, on the other hand, takes into account the opinions of visitors who, as non-experts, express a different point of view that is rarely calculated or evaluated in different geosite assessment methods. For the better and more objective comparison of the two methods of evaluation of the educational potential of the study areas, the results were converted to a percentage scale (%). The first G-P method clearly highlights the high geological value of the studied geosites, which have a relatively high score and can be used for geotourism and geoeducation. The second method, on the other hand, yields a moderate score in areas with objectively high geological value. This is clearly evident, as this method considers the opinions of visitors who lack the necessary cognitive geological background, thereby underestimating the significance and potential of certain geological features due to lack of formal training.