International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks

journal homepage: http://www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/
international-journal-of-geoheritage-and-parks/

Identification of geodiversity and evaluation of geosites

to determine geopark themes of the Karangsambung-
Karangbolong National Geopark, Kebumen, Indonesia
Chusni Ansori a,b, Nugroho Imam Setiawan b,⁎, I. Wayan Warmada b, Herry Yogaswara c
a
Geotechnology Research Centre, National Research and Innovation Agency, Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Sangkuriang, Bandung 40135, Indonesia
b
Geological Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia
c
Directorate of Human Development, Population and Culture, National Research and Innovation Agency Republic of Indonesia, Jl. MH Thamrin No. 8, Jakarta 10340, Indonesia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Karangsambung-Karangbolong National Geopark (KKNG) is located in Kebumen, Central Java,
Received 23 August 2021 Indonesia, and was designated as such in 2018 by the Indonesian Ministry of Energy and Min-
Received in revised form 29 December 2021 eral Resources, based on recommendations from the Indonesian National Geopark Committee
Accepted 4 January 2022
(INGC). The INGC made many recommendations before proposing KKNG as a candidate to be-
Available online 12 January 2022
come a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Global Geopark
(UGGp), for example, proposing the main theme of KKNG. This study aims to identify geodiver-
Keywords: sity, and assess and analyze geosites to determine the history and geological evolution of the
Geodiversity
geopark area, which are used to determine the geopark's theme. Geosite assessment methods
Geosites
using government regulatory standards in Indonesia demonstrated that KKNG has 41 geologi-
Geopark
Karangsambung cal sites: 29 geosites are in the northern area and 12 geosites are in the southern area. Further-
Karangbolong more, 12 geosites have high values (301–400), and 28 geosites have moderate values
Indonesia (201–300). Based on the assessment and identification, the northern part of the KKNG sub-
theme is the ancient oceanic floor and subduction zone, and the southern part is a conical
karst landscape. The proposed main theme geopark is the best evidence of plate tectonic the-
ory in Southeast Asia and karstic landscape, with its primary mission to realize a sustainable
global geopark for the welfare of society.
© 2022 Beijing Normal University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi
Communications Co. Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction

Global and national geoparks exhibit an increasing trend in line with the development of sustainable tourism. According to the
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), there are 169 UNESCO Global Geoparks (UGGp) in 44 coun-
tries. China has 41 UGGp, the most of any country. Indonesia has 6 global and 13 national geoparks (Fig. 1). The six global geoparks are
Batur, Rinjani-Lombok, Gunung Sewu, Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu, Toba Caldera, and Belitong UGGp (UNESCO, 2021). The thirteen national
geoparks are Ijen, Bojonegoro, Karangsambung-Karangbolong, Pongkor, Merangin, Silokek, Sawahlunto, Sianok Maninjau, Natuna,
Meratus, Maros-Pangkep, Tambora, and Raja Ampat (Fig. 1). Many locations across the Indonesian archipelago have the potential to
be national or global geoparks. Karangsambung-Karangbolong National Geopark (KKNG) was designated as such in 2018.
As aforementioned, Indonesia has two levels of geoparks: national and global. National geoparks are established
by the Indonesian Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, based on recommendations from the Indonesian National Geopark

⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: nugroho.setiawan@ugm.ac.id (N.I. Setiawan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgeop.2022.01.001
2577-4441/© 2022 Beijing Normal University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Fig. 1. Location of the Karangsambung-Karangbolong National Geopark (KKNG) in Kebumen Regency, Central Java, Indonesia, and the other locations of Indonesian
global and national geoparks.
Note: The location of geoparks in Indonesia was provided by the Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas Republic of Indonesia (2020). The topog-
raphy data and base map were provided by BIG (http://tides.big.go.id/DEMNAS/ and http://basemap.big.go.id/rbi/).

Committee (INGC). Global geoparks are designated by UNESCO based on a proposal from the INGC after the designated area is
designated a National Geopark for at least one year (Presidential Decree of Republic Indonesia, 2019).
According to UNESCO (2021), global geoparks are single, unified areas where sites and landscapes of international geological
significance are managed with a holistic concept to protect, educate, and approach sustainable development. Their bottom-up ap-
proach of combining conservation with sustainable development while involving local communities is being adopted increasingly
(Samodra, 2016). The main elements are geological, biological, and cultural diversities, with the ultimate goals of protecting the
earth's diversity, preserving the environment, and broadening earth science education. Geoparks aim to protect geodiversity, pro-
mote geological heritage to the public, and support the sustainable economic development of geopark territories primarily
through geotourism (Alexandrowicz, 2006; Alexandrowicz & Wimbledon, 1999; Dingwall, 2000; Farsani, Coelho, Costa, &
Amrikazemi, 2014; Newsome & Dowling, 2005).
Geotourism activities implemented by a community in a geopark are essential for ensuring the success of geopark manage-
ment. Geotourist attractions differ in their physical visibility, interpretation, and aesthetic interest, which are the parameters
used to determine visitors' perception and, therefore, their importance as a tourist resource (Mikhailenko & Ruban, 2019).
Thus, essential to the successful development and management of geoparks for the community to actively participate and have
a comprehensive understanding of geoparks.
Geopark areas must contain many notable geological heritage sites with a certain beauty and scarcity appeal that can be de-
veloped to integrate conservation, education, and local economic development (Brilha et al., 2018). Local communities and young
adults are the main drivers of conservation. Promotional and educational activities increase citizen awareness of geosite conser-
vation to achieve policy implementation in conservation areas (Wang et al., 2015). The purpose of establishing a geopark is to
explore, develop, and celebrate the relationship between geological heritage and all aspects of protected areas, culture, and intan-
gible heritage (Samodra, 2016). Local communities and landowners will support the idea of a geopark if a community-based dis-
cussion process is conducted (Fepuleai et al., 2021).
Geoparks exhibit geological, cultural, archeological, and biodiversity heritages. The diversity of geology, biology, and culture
has relationships and linkages (Ansori, 2018). Geodiversity is the uniqueness of geological components, such as minerals, rocks,

2
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

fossils, geological structures, and landscapes, that become the intrinsic wealth of an area (Ansori, 2018; Gray, 2013; Nieto, 2001;
Ollier, 2012); their existence, richness of distribution, and conditions describe the geological evolution of the region. Biodiversity
represents organisms from all sources, including the land, sea, and other aquatic ecosystems and ecological complexes (Ansori,
2018). Cultural diversity is the tangible and intangible characteristics of diverse cultures in the past and present.
Before an area is designated as a geopark, inventory and identification must be conducted to prove the geological, biological,
and cultural diversity (Brilha, 2016; Presidential Decree of Republic Indonesia, 2019). Geological diversity can be used to identify a
geoheritage, an essential record of the natural processes that have occurred or are occurring on earth. Geological heritage gener-
ally has high scientific value: it is sufficiently rare, unique, and beautiful to be used for earth research, education, and geotourism.
Geoscience and geoeducation are essential natural resources for geotourism (de Oliveira, 2006, 2007; Moreira, 2010). Geoheritage
as part of the geosystem is crucial in maintaining a balance among abiotic, biotic, and cultural elements and sustainable develop-
ment. Furthermore, Brilha (2009) stated that geology is an essential aspect of planning projects because geology is a part of all
natural systems. When using the space of geological areas, the importance of geological sites and their use and maintenance
must be considered. Therefore, in spatial planning, geological aspects are essential aspects that must be considered and protected.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Study area

Karangsambung-Karangbolong National Geopark (KKNG) covers 543,599 km2 in 12 subdistricts and 118 villages (Fig. 2). The
INGC has many recommendations of KKNG as a candidate for becoming a UGGp. One of the recommendations is to determine the
main theme of KKNG, which should not overlap with the coexisting UGGps in Indonesia, that is, the Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu and
Gunung Sewu UGGps. Therefore, the research objective is to identify the main theme and the vision and mission of KKNG by de-
termining the geological evolution in the KKNG area. To achieve this objective, this study attempts to identify the geological di-
versity and evaluate the geosites and geoheritage of the research area.

2.2. Methods

KKNG was designated as such in 2018. This research was conducted by performing several activities, namely, a review of the
geology and geopark literature, fieldwork, data analysis, and synthesis. Fieldwork was conducted to observe and describe geolog-
ical, biological, and cultural sites in the KKNG area by taking photographs and collecting rock samples (if needed) from each site.
The process including inventory and identification of geodiversities to evaluate geoheritages, and finally assess the geosites.
The analysis assessed rock and outcrops to reconstruct the geological history of the KKNG area. In Indonesian geoparks, geosite
assessment is based on weighting and scoring methods with variables of scientific value (SV), the potential value for education
(EV), the potential value for tourism (TV), and degradation risk (DV) by following the Technical Guidelines for the Assessment
of Geological Heritage Resources, based on the Geological Survey Center of Indonesia (2017a, 2017b) (Table S1: supplementary
material). Thematic maps were drawn using ArcGIS and other drawing software to simplify the written information and thus fa-
cilitate analysis. Moreover, the analysis of the general geological conditions of KKNG was compared with the global geopark
theme of the Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu and Gunung Sewu UGGps. A synthesis of the results in the literature from studies, field re-
search, and data analysis was performed to reconstruct the geological history and compile the theme, vision, and mission of
KKNG.

3. Karangsambung-Karangbolong National Geopark

3.1. Geodiversity

This study's geodiversity terminology comprises rocks, fossils, geological structures, and landscapes that provide an overview
of the unique geological processes and represent the evolution of the research area. Geodiversity is associated with the economic
use of local communities and is related to the unique geological process for educational and conservation purposes.

3.1.1. Paleo-subduction of oceanic and continental plates

The Karangsambung area is an excellent natural geological laboratory where various types of rocks with different formation
environments are found, and the concept of plate tectonics can be learned and proven. Subduction and collision in this area
were developed during the Cretaceous-Paleocene era (119–55 Ma) (Alfing et al., 2021; Hall, 1996; Hall, 2002; Hall, 2012;
Hamilton, 1979; Hoffmann et al., 2019; Parkinson et al., 1998). Types of igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic rocks with dif-
ferent environments and ages were mixed into the Luk Ulo Mélange Complex (Fig. 2; Asikin et al., 2007). The Karangsambung
area is similar to a textbook with many pictures and models. Notably, this area directly provides geological field evidence of
the plate tectonic concept in the form of outcrops and morphology (Ansori, 2018; Ansori et al., 2016).
Traces of past subduction processes are recorded in groups of rocks in which seafloor and continental rocks are mixed (Asikin,
1974; Asikin et al., 2007). Ophiolite rocks, which represent the upper mantle and oceanic crust, were cropped out in this area
(Suparka, 1988). Magmatic rocks consist of oceanic crust and upper mantle rocks that are ultramafic to felsic rocks and protected
during subduction to obduction (Dilek & Furnes, 2011). Winter (2014) described a complete ophiolite sequence of four rock layers

3
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Fig. 2. Map distribution of 41 geosites, 10 culturesites, and 8 biosites with the Karangsambung Geoheritage (in the north) and the karst geoheritage (in the south)
marked by using a geological base map of Asikin et al. (2007).
Note: The stratigraphy of this area includes older rock groups resulting from the subduction process (Luk Ulo Mélange Complex) in the north and the younger karst
morphology (Kalipucang Formation) in the south area, Kebumen, Central Java, Indonesia. The topography data and base map were provided by the Geospatial In-
formation Agency of Indonesia (BIG) (http://tides.big.go.id/DEMNAS/ and http://basemap.big.go.id/rbi/.

based on the ophiolite sequence in Semail, Oman (Fig. 3). The first layer is deep-sea sedimentary rock chert rich in Fe–Mn, shale,
and limestone. Thickened deep-sea sediments are old crust that is far from oceanic plate fissures. The second layer is pillow lava
basaltic rock with a sheet-like structure or diabase intrusion, which is formed in an extensional environment. The third layer is

4
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Fig. 3. Ophiolite rocks in Karangsambung area compared with ophiolite model of Winter (2014). (a) Alternating between chert and red clay at Wagir Sambeng (ca.
109°39′09″ E, 7°32′51″ S), (b) pillow lava and chert at Muncar River (ca. 109°42′28″ E, 7°30′36″ S), (c) granitoid rock at Luk Ulo River (ca. 109°47′04″ E, 7°29′03″
S), (d) gabbro layer, and (e) harzburgite at Lokidang River (ca. 109°41′36″ E, 7°29′29″ S).
Note: For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.

composed of a foliated anisotropic gabbro and a layered cumulative gabbro. At the top of the gabbro, relatively small, and
fragmented bodies of diorite and tonalite (plagiogranite) were also found. The fourth layer is the lowest layer, composed of cu-
mulate wehrlite and gabbro. Dunite and harzburgite xenoliths and chromite lenses are often found at the base of wehrlite as
unmelted refractory material from mantle magma sources that remain after basaltic magma has been extracted.
From top to bottom, the ophiolite sequence in Karangsambung is composed of chert (Fig. 3a), which is deep-sea sedimentary
rock with a pillow lava structure (Fig. 3b); plagiogranite (Fig. 3c); diabase, and gabbro (Fig. 3d); peridotite, lherzolite,
clinopyroxene, harzburgite, websterite; and serpentinite (Fig. 3e), which are incomplete ophiolite rocks resulting from a normal
mid-ocean ridge (NMORB) (Ansori, 2007; Suparka, 1988). Based on K–Ar dating, the age of ophiolite rocks, such as basalt and di-
abase were 81 ± 4.06 and 85.03 ± 4.25 Ma, respectively, and dacite blocks were 67.71 ± 3.39 Ma (Suparka, 1988). Blocks of
granitoid rocks and dacite outcrops are found in this area at any location (Ansori, 2007; Isyqi et al., 2019; Soesilo et al., 2015).
The Luk Ulo Mélange Complex is a chaotic mixture of types of sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rocks overlapped un-
conformably by the Eocene Karangsambung Formation (Kadarusman et al., 2007; Parkinson, Miyazaki, Wakita, Barber, & Carswell,
1998; Wakita et al., 1994). High-pressure rocks, such as eclogite and blueschist, are exposed in narrow areas within the low-grade
schist and serpentinite zones (Kadarusman, Massonne, Roermund, Permana, & Munasri., 2007; Setiawan et al., 2013; Setiawan
et al., 2020). Greenschist facies rocks in the Karangsambung area are derived from pelitic (e.g., garnet–muscovite–tourmaline–
quartz schist), metabasic (e.g., garnet–chlorite–epidote–muscovite schist), and calc-silicate protoliths (e.g., garnet–zoisite–
muscovite schist) (Setiawan et al., 2013). Karangsambung in Central Java and Meratus in South Kalimantan have a similar
trend of NE–SW, which might have been derived from a single subduction zone during the Cretaceous period (Alfing, Bröcker,
& Setiawan, 2021; Hoffmann et al., 2019; Ketner et al., 1976; Parkinson, Miyazaki, Wakita, Barber, & Carswell, 1998; Setiawan
et al., 2013; Setiawan et al., 2020), with the position of the Meratus Complex being more proximal than that of the Luk Ulo
Mélange Complex (Alfing, Bröcker, & Setiawan, 2021; Parkinson, Miyazaki, Wakita, Barber, & Carswell, 1998).
K–Ar and Rb–Sr radiometric dating of the metamorphic rocks yielded an Early Cretaceous age of 119–101 Ma (Alfing, Bröcker,
& Setiawan, 2021; Hoffmann et al., 2019; Parkinson, Miyazaki, Wakita, Barber, & Carswell, 1998; Suparka, 1988), whereas radio-
larian fossils yielded the Early Cretaceous (Wakita et al., 1994). Nanofossils from sediments on the mélange complex are a mixture

5
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

of Paleocene to Eocene fauna (Asikin, 1974; Sapri et al., 1998). These data assume that the mélange complex ages range from
Early Cretaceous to Paleocene. Coarse and fine blocks of rocks are tectonically mixed with a scaly clay matrix and irregular
shear joint directions (Asikin, 1974; Prasetyadi, 2007; Sapri et al., 1998).

3.1.2. Oceanic gravitational slumping (olistostrome)

Gravitational slumping occurs after the collision process as a product of various older rocks (olistoliths) slumping with a scaly
clay matrix, which is known as olistostromal mélange or sedimentary mélange (Festa et al., 2016). These rocks are claystone,
sandstone, conglomerate, schist, phyllite, fossilized limestone, quartzite, basalt, marble, chert, and polymict breccias (Asikin
et al., 2007; Prasetyadi, 2007). The large olistolith produced isolated morphology, namely the Jatibungkus and Pesanggrahan
Hills (Fig. 4c).
The sedimentary mélange or olistostrome composed predominantly of a scaly clay matrix with various rock blocks is known as
the Karangsambung and Totogan Formations (Fig. 4a and b; Asikin, 1974). Fragments of sedimentary rocks, for example,
nummulitic limestone (Fig. 4d) and polimict conglomerate from centimeters to hundreds of meters, were scattered randomly
over the scaly clay matrix (Fig. 4a). The Karangsambung and Totogan Formations were deposited unconformably above the Luk

Fig. 4. Geodiversity of the research area. (a) Scaly clay of Karangsambung Formation (ca. 109°40′23″ E, 7°32′55″ S), (b) slump structure at Totogan Formation (ca.
109°44′24″ E, 7°30′42″ S), (c) isolated Jatibungkus hill (olistolith) of Karangsambung Formation (ca. 109°40′56″ E, 7°34′03″ S), (d) nummulitic limestone olistolith
(ca. 109°40′18″ E, 7°32′43″ S), (e) volcanic breccia of Waturanda Formation (ca. 109°40′37″ E, 7°34′27″ S), (f) columnar joint at lava of Gabon Formation (ca.
109°24′39.9″ E, 7°46′32.2″ S), (g) calcarenite at Penosogan Formation (ca. 109°41′40″ E, 7°35′32″ S) (h) conical hill of Kalipucang Formation, (i) speleothems at
Barat caves (ca. 109°26′08″ E, 7°39′58.3″ S), (j) tuffaceous rock of Halang Formation (ca. 109°38′02.9″ E, 7°34′47.6″ S), (k) volcanic rock of Peniron Formation
(ca. 109°38′07.9″ E, 7°35′05.7″ S), (l) alluvial sediment, and iron sand in coastal sediment (ca. 109°29′00.1″ E, 7°45′17.1″ S).

6
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Ulo Mélange Complex with limited structural contact (Asikin, 1974). These formations have an Early Oligocene age based on the
presence of foraminifera fossils in the form of Globoquadrina praedehincens and Globigerina binaensis (Asikin et al., 2007).

3.1.3. Old andesite formation (OAF) volcanic rock group

There are two formations of the Waturanda and Gabon Formations members of this volcanic rock group. The Waturanda For-
mation was deposited above the Totogan Formation during Late Oligocene to Early Miocene (Asikin, 1974; Asikin et al., 2007). At
the bottom of this formation, the Waturanda Formation member comprises tuffaceous rocks with vitric tuff, crystal tuff, carbona-
ceous sandstone, and tuffaceous marl (Asikin, 1974; Asikin et al., 2007) (Fig. 4e). The bottom of the Waturanda Formation com-
prises coarse sandstones and increasingly turns into breccias with components of andesite, basalt, sandstone, and tuff upward
(Asikin et al., 2007).
The Gabon Formation consists of volcanic breccia, lapilli tuff, and agglomerates with intercalated sandstone (Fig. 4f). The vol-
canic breccias has dark gray to black in color; angular fragments of gravel to pebble size; poorly sorted; closed to open fabric with
fine tuff; and tuffaceous sand matrix are hard, and dense. The observed agglomerate outcrops are generally weathered, gray in
color, and poorly sorted with a gravel-to-granule fragment size. These rocks are generally exposed in the south, such as in the
area of Karangbolong and Menganti Villages (Asikin et al., 2007). Furthermore, the Gabon Formation is intruded by andesitic to
dioritic rocks. The Kalipucang Formation is unconformably deposited above the Gabon Formation.

3.1.4. Carbonate rock group

The OAF arc in Java ceased its activities related to the Australian continent approaching the Banda Arc region, resulting in a
collision effect that rotates the OAF subduction path during Middle Miocene (Hall, 1996; Hall, 2002; Hall, 2012; Hamilton,
1979). The volcanic inactivity was followed by massive deposition of carbonate rock units above the OAF rocks, resulting in the
Penosogan (Fig. 4g) and Kalipucang Formations (Prasetyadi, 2007). The Middle Miocene carbonate rock consists of alternating
limestone, sandstone, claystone, tuff, marl, and calcarenite formed by turbidity currents (Asikin et al., 2007).
The Kalipucang Formation at Karangbolong High formed a karst landform in Middle Miocene, which overlays unconformities
above the Gabon Formation (Asikin et al., 2007). The karstification process forms a unique morphology, above ground level
(i.e., exokarstic phenomena) and below ground level (i.e., endokarstic phenomena) (Fig. 4h and i). The exokarstic phenomena
formed conical hills, doline, terra rosa, and lakes (Fig. 4h). The exokarst feature has strategic value for groundwater recharge
areas, learning facilities, and scientific development. The endokarst karstification phenomenon (Fig. 4i) includes caves, under-
ground rivers, and speleothems (i.e., flowstone, stalactite, stalagmite, pillars, gourdam, and helictite). The speleothem feature
has strategic value for science, hydrological and ecosystem functions, mineral resources, tourism, archeology, and spirituality in
this region. Fifty-four water caves and 49 fossil caves were scattered throughout this karst region (Ansori, 2018).

3.1.5. Volcanic rock group of Halang formation (Late Miocene–Pliocene)

The Halang Formation was continually deposited after the Penosogan Formation in Late Miocene–Early Pliocene (Asikin et al.,
2007). Breccia members of the Halang Formation comprise breccia with andesite, basalt, and limestone fragments embedded in a
matrix of coarse tuffaceous sandstone (Fig. 4j) with an interlayer of sandstone and basaltic lava. Furthermore, the Halang Forma-
tion consists of alternating sandstones, limestone, marl, and tuff with breccia intercalation. The deposition of this formation is in-
fluenced by turbidity currents and underwater slumping (Asikin et al., 2007).
The Peniron Formation, also a member of this volcanic group, was deposited continually above the Halang Formation during
Pliocene (Asikin et al., 2007). This formation consists of polymict breccias with volcanic (Fig. 4k), claystone, and limestone frag-
ments within the tuffaceous sandstone matrix.

3.1.6. Alluvium and coastal deposition groups

Alluvium is the youngest sedimentary deposit, which is unconformably deposited in all formations in this basin (Asikin et al.,
2007). The two types of alluvium deposits are river and coastal deposits. River deposits consist of gravel, sand, and mud, which
are soft and loose; generally, this deposit occupies low-lying areas in the eastern and western hills of the karst. Coastal deposits
generally consist of loose, fine-grained black sand, with a narrow distribution along the southern coast, and form sand dunes that
extend west–east (Fig. 4l). Coastal deposits generally comprise loose sand that is disaggregated and well to moderately sorted in
coastal areas (Asikin et al., 2007).

3.2. Geoheritage

3.2.1. Karangsambung geoheritage

KKNG has two established geoheritage areas: the Karangsambung Geological Protected Area in the north and the karst land-
scape in the south. Based on the regulations of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia (2006), the
21,150 Ha area in the Kebumen, Banjarnegara, and Wonosobo districts is a protected geological area because of its unique rock
and fossils (Fig. 2). This geoheritage area was established based on the regulations of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral
Resources Republic of Indonesia (2020).

7
 Table 1
Resume of geosite assessment at Karangsambung-Karangbolong National Geopark (KKNG) based on the Technical Guidelines for the Assessment of Geological Heritage Resources issued by the Geological Survey Center of Indonesia
(2017a, 2017b).

No KKNG geosite Long. Lat. Scientific Potential Potential Degradation Final value* Global National Local
(E) (S) value education tourism risk (DV) (SV + EV + TV + DV)/4
(SV) value value
(EV) (TV)

Northern region (Karangsambung)

1 Layered of red chert and limestone, Sadang Wetan 109° 44′ 16″ 7° 29′ 45″ 322 300 280 265 291.75 v
2 Claystone, Cangkring 109° 44′ 24″ 7° 30′ 42″ 296 260 280 265 275.25 v
3 Micaceous-Schist, Brengkok River, Sadang 109° 43′ 28″ 7° 30′ 59″ 282 305 295 295 294.25 v
4 Pillow lava and red chert, Muncar River, Seboro 109° 42′ 28″ 7° 30′ 36.2″ 353 305 295 270 305.75 v
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al.

5 Serpentinite, Pucangan 109° 41′ 30″ 7° 31′ 16″ 299 310 310 315 308.50 v
6 Gabbro and Basalt, Lokidang River 109° 39′ 51″ 7° 30′ 25″ 277 240 275 265 264.25 v
7 Marble, Totogan 109° 40′ 26″ 7° 31′ 28″ 225 305 325 295 287.50 v
8 Phylite, Sipako Hill, Wonotirto 109° 39′ 56″ 7° 32′ 14″ 279 280 325 295 294.75 v
9 Brecciated Basalt, Mandala River 109° 40′ 02″ 7° 32′ 25″ 230 310 305 315 290.00 v
10 Diabase, Parang Hill, Karangsambung 109° 40′ 08″ 7° 32′ 28″ 301 330 325 295 312.75 v
11 Nummulitic limestone, Karangsambung 109° 40′ 18″ 7° 32′ 43″ 301 335 335 315 321.50 v
12 Polimict Conglomerate, Pesanggrahan 109° 40′ 04″ 7° 32′ 48″ 220 285 300 295 275.00 v
13 Diabase, Bujil Hill, Banioro 109° 41′ 08″ 7° 33′ 02″ 271 250 240 180 235.25 v
14 Reef limestone, Jatibungkus, Langse 109° 40′ 56″ 7° 34′ 03″ 327 295 300 265 296.75 v
15 Volcanic breccia, Waturanda Fm, Kaligending 109° 40′ 37″ 7° 34′ 27″ 280 325 325 280 302.50 v
16 Calcarenite sandstone, Kalikudu 109° 41′ 40″ 7° 35′ 32″ 309 290 285 295 294.75 v
17 Chert and red limestone, Wagirsambeng Hill 109° 39′ 09″ 7° 32′ 51″ 330 260 270 270 282.50 v

8
18 Krakal Hot Water 109° 41′ 58.7″ 7° 36′ 53.4″ 271 390 370 225 314.00 v
19 Pentulu Indah Natural Tourism, Karangsambung 109° 41′ 19.2″ 7° 34′ 06.7″ 298 375 355 210 309.50 v
20 Brujul Tourism Adventure Park, Peniron 109° 39′ 45.0″ 7° 34′ 37.5″ 238 280 280 250 262.00 v
21 Pesona Kayangan, Karanggayam 109° 34′ 10.1″ 7° 35′ 46.0″ 173 300 295 250 254.50 v
22 Pranji Hill, Watulawang 109° 37′ 55.8″ 7° 35′ 30.4″ 208 270 240 240 239.50 v
23 Mélange Museum, LIPI 109° 40′ 18.0″ 7° 32′ 43.0″ 276 340 345 225 296.50 v
24 Sindaro Waterfall, Wadasmalang 109° 43′ 33.6″ 7° 33′ 33.5″ 202 290 265 285 260.50 v
25 Kalianget, Wadasmalang 109° 43′ 26.6″ 7° 34′ 10.9″ 209 265 260 320 263.50 v
26 Cangkring morphology, Reservoir 109° 45′ 49.5″ 7° 30′ 19.5″ 139 280 270 265 238.50 v
27 Sikempul and Silodong Caves, Langse 109° 40′ 58.8″ 7° 34′ 02.3″ 261 265 255 275 264.00 v
28 Sudimoro Waterfall, Somagede 109° 31′ 40.4″ 7° 31′ 44.5″ 187 280 260 270 249.25 v
29 Sempor Dam 109° 29′ 04.0″ 7° 33′ 36.1″ 277 330 335 225 291.75 v

Southern region (Karangbolong)

30 Karst landscape, Tugu Village 109° 27′ 09.6″ 7° 38′ 32.7″ 323 315 310 255 300.75 v
31 Barat Cave, Kalisari 109° 26′ 08.0″ 7° 39′ 58.3″ 292 300 300 260 288.00 v
32 Jatijajar Cave, Jatijajar 109° 25′ 34.6″ 7° 40′ 06.1″ 253 290 285 275 275.75 v
33 Petruk Cave, Redisari 109° 23′ 52.9″ 7° 42′ 14.7″ 268 300 310 275 288.25 v
34 Logending Beach 109° 23′ 38.5″ 7° 43′ 40.0″ 226 320 310 280 284.00 v
35 Wanalela Hill, Argopeni 109° 23′ 40.1″ 7° 44′ 06.6″ 315 315 310 260 300.00 v
36 Menganti Beach, Karangduwur 109° 24′ 46.8″ 7° 46′ 13.9″ 313 335 315 275 309.50 v
37 Sawangan Adventure Park, Karangduwur 109° 23′ 49.8″ 7° 45′ 27.2″ 272 290 305 295 290.50 v
38 Wana Bahari Pasir Indah 109° 26′ 11.0″ 7° 46′ 14.6″ 274 350 340 295 314.75 v
39 Watubale Beach 109° 26′ 28.5″ 7° 45′ 58.3″ 207 325 320 265 279.25 v
40 Hud Hill, Karangbolong 109° 27′ 43.1″ 7° 45′ 41.8″ 298 300 295 245 284.50 v
41 Karangbolong Beach 109° 28′ 05.1″ 7° 45′ 31.3″ 274 305 315 315 302.25 v

Note: Final value* : <200 (Low); 201–300 (Moderate); 301–400 (High). Detailed assessment is presented in Supplementary Material Table S2.
International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

3.2.2. Karangbolong geoheritage

The Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia (2012) defined the karst area as an area of carbonate
rocks (limestone and dolomite), which shows the karst morphology in hills and valleys, dolines, and caves. Limestone distribution
is observed in the South Gombong area, which is indicated by the conical hill karst of the landscape (Fig. 4h). The Karangbolong
karst area has high scientific and economic value, forming a mountain range with a dominant cone-shaped hill and is partially
rounded. In the valley, a basin is formed in dolines and uvalas, which is filled with water from a lake. Several caves and springs
in this area have been used to benefit residents and communities.
Based on the Ministry of Energy and Minerals Republic of Indonesia (2014), the karst landscape in Karangbolong is considered
a geological heritage site. The limestone of the Kalipucang Formation reef forms a karst landscape. The karst landscape in the
South Gombong area consists of exokarstic phenomena, such as cone hills, dolines, ponds, and permanent springs. The endokarstic
phenomena are underground rivers, 171 caves, and springs. The total area is 101.02 Ha, distributed in the Ayah (54.08 Ha),
Buayan (35.20 Ha), and Rowokele (11.74 Ha) subdistricts (Fig. 2).

3.2.3. Geosite and non-geological site

Geosites are geopark regions with specific characteristics, namely individual and multiple objects, and an inseparable part of
the evolutionary story of the formation of an area (Brilha, 2016; Presidential Decree of Republic Indonesia, 2019). Furthermore,
geosites are of scientific interest because of their geology and geomorphology, which may serve multiple purposes, including re-
search, conservation, education, and sustainable development due to tourism development (Sánchez-Martín et al., 2019). A geo-
site is the most crucial component of a geopark, that is, without a geosite, there is no geopark. A geosite is a geoheritage site; thus,
all activities that damage the site should be avoided. Geosites are the main attractions of geoparks (Brilha, Gray, Pereira, & Pereira,
2018). Therefore, the surrounding community must manage the geosite well to obtain the main benefit of the existence of a ge-
opark, which is to preserve the earth's heritage and improve the community (Wang et al., 2015). The welfare of the community
will improve if the economic activities are in line with conservation through geotourism activities, which are the essence of a ge-
opark (Fepuleai et al., 2021).
Forty-one geosites in KKNG were assessed using the Technical Guidelines for the Assessment of Geological Heritage Resources
issued by the Geological Survey Center of Indonesia (2017a, 2017b, Supplementary Material Table S1). Among the 41 geosites, 29
were in the northern region and 12 were in the southern KKNG area (Fig. 2 and Table 1). A detailed assessment is presented in
Supplementary Material Table S2, and the results of the assessment are presented in Table 1. High (301–400), medium
(201–300), and low (<200) values of a geosite indicate that it is more feasible to develop and geosite after considering scientific,
educational, tourism values, and the level of degradation risk (Table 1). On the basis of the assessment, 12 geosites are high value,
28 geosites are moderate value, and no geosites are low value. International, national, and local values were included in the as-
sessment of scientific values. Furthermore, the geosite has international value (weight 3) if there are international journal publi-
cations related to the location, national value (weight 2) when the geosite has national journal publications, and local values
when no publication (Table 1). Based on the assessment, 15 geosites are global values, which are 11 in the northern area and
8 in the sourthern area, 19 geosites are national values (11 geosites in northern areas, 8 geosites in southern areas), and 7 geosites
are local values in the northern areas (Table 1). Moreover, the KKNG area also has 9 biological and 10 cultural sites (Fig. 2).
The main activity in geoparks is geotourism, which influences economic dynamics, evolving and incorporating new features
that complement and convert it into a type of tourism where cultural aspects are one more enticement. Geotourism is a novel
concept in tourism and is based on the conservation of geological heritage and geodiversity when managed sustainably
(Dowling, 2013; Sánchez-Martín, Rengifo-Gallego, & Martín-Delgado, 2019). Geotourism begins with an understanding of the abi-
otic (nonliving) environment, to increase the awareness of plants and animals (i.e., the biotic [living] environment), and individ-
uals' cultural environment, both past and present. Geotourism offers a new form of sustainable tourism that is more holistic than
the prior form of tourism (Dowling, 2013). Despite the importance of geoparks and, consequently, geosites as pillars supporting
endogenous tourism development, as reflected in numerous publications, few studies have analyzed these high-demand areas
(Sánchez-Martín, Rengifo-Gallego, & Martín-Delgado, 2019).

4. Discussion

4.1. Geological evolution

Based on geological diversity and geosite distributions, the geological history of KKNG can be simplified into several phase
(Fig. 5).

4.1.1. Early Java/pre-tertiary formation (119–55 Ma)

This phase was initiated by the collision of East Java with the southeastern margin of Sundaland, which can be proven by the
deposition of deep-sea trenches, forming a mélange complex with various types of rocks resulting from the unification of two
microcontinents (Asikin et al., 2007; Hall, 2002; Hall, 2012; Hamilton, 1979; Prasetyadi, 2007). The rock consists of typical oceanic
floor rocks in the mélange, such as pillow lava, chert, gabbro, and ultramafic, combined with typical continental rocks, such as
sandstone, conglomerate, and claystone. The initial phase of this collision is called the subduction phase. After the oceanic crust
surceased, the two microcontinental plates collided, which led to enormous compression recorded in low- to high-grade

9
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Fig. 5. Phases of the geological history of KKNG.

Note: From bottom to top: Phase of Early Java or Subduction zone (119–55 Ma), phase of deep-sea avalanche sedimentation or olistostrome (55–25 Ma), phase of
old andesite volcanic activity (25–16 Ma), Phase of carbonate sedimentation (16–10 Ma), phase of Halang volcanic activity (10–2 Ma), and phase of Alluvial and
beach sedimentation (<2 Ma), respectively. The stratigraphy of KKNG is modified from Asikin et al. (2007).

metamorphic rocks (i.e., phyllite, schist, gneiss, amphibolite, serpentinite, blueschist, and eclogite), forming mélange complex
rocks. This phase is suggested to be the collision phase.

4.1.2. Sedimentation phase of deep-sea avalanches (55–25 Ma)

After plate subduction and collision approximately 65 million years ago, Java Island was lifted (Prasetyadi, 2007). During this
phase, ancient volcanoes and sedimentary basins in Java began to form. In the Karangsambung area, the sedimentary basin is a
deep-sea trench (Asikin et al., 2007). All the rocks from the prior period were deposited in the Karangsambung area through

10
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

the process of deep-sea gravity-driven avalanches (olistostrome) to form the Karangsambung and Totogan Formations (Asikin
et al., 2007; Prasetyadi, 2007).

4.1.3. Ancient volcano phase OAF (25–16 Ma)

The increasing rate of the northward movement of the Australian continent is estimated to continue as far as Middle Oligocene
(Hall, 2002; Hall, 2012). This event triggered volcanic activities related to the emergence of the OAF volcanic zone in southern
Java, forming the southern mountain zone in the form of the Waturanda and Gabon Formations (Setijadji et al., 2006). The vol-
canic activity in this phase began at approximately 25–16 Ma (Setijadji et al., 2006; Soeria-Atmadja et al., 1994). This event was
the main event in the history of Java Island, during which a series of volcanic formations spread over southern Java. Evidence of
the existence of these ancient volcanoes can be observed in the formation of volcanic rocks in the Waturanda Formation in the
Karangsambung area and the Gabon Formation in the Karangbolong area.

4.1.4. Carbonate formation phase (16–10 Ma)

During Late Oligocene to Middle Miocene, the rate of subduction of the Indo-Australian Plate in the Sunda Trench was dras-
tically reduced. In southern Java, Oligocene volcanic activity became inactive and lifted (Prasetyadi, 2007). This event is evidenced
by insufficient recorded volcanic eruptions during 16–10 Ma (Setijadji et al., 2006). The deceased ancient volcanoes were inun-
dated by rising sea levels, which were characterized by marine sedimentary rock as carbonate and bioclastic limestones. This ap-
pointment is marked by massive carbonate deposition, such as the Wonosari Formation in Central Java and the Punung Formation
in East Java, and active inversion development of Neogene formations in the northern part of the Rembang and Kendeng Zones.
The carbonate formations in the KKNG area are known as the Penosogan Formation in Karangsambung and the Kalipucang For-
mation in Karangbolong.

4.1.5. Ancient Halang volcano phase (10–2 Ma)

As a result of the inactivity of the OAF, the Australian plate is moving northward, the Java volcanic path shifts to the north to
form the Pliocene volcanic arc located in the central part of Java Island (Setijadji, Kajino, Imai, & Watanabe, 2006; Soeria-Atmadja
et al., 1994). This volcanic activity at approximately 10–2 Ma produced thick marine sedimentary rocks alternating between the
tuffaceous sandstone and tuffaceous clay of the Halang and Peniron Formations' volcanic member breccias (Prasetyadi, 2007). The
repetition of volcanic rock groups proves the reactivation of tectonic and magmatic processes in Java. The activity was not as mas-
sive as in the First Ancient Volcano Phase because evidence of ancient volcanic rocks in Phase 2 was uneven or local, only found in
several areas, one of which was in Kebumen. The presence of the Ancient Halang Volcano marks the Pliocene volcanic arc. This
volcano's path has continued until recently as the Modern Volcanic Arc (e.g., Mount Merapi).

4.1.6. Phase of alluvial and coastal deposits (<2 Ma)

This is the present phase of Java Island, where alluvial and coastal deposits, karst morphology, and recent volcanoes were
formed. There are many active volcanic clusters in the middle of Java, such as Mount Merapi, and Mount Lawu. The status of
Java as a volcanic island, which is included in the ring of fire or a cluster of active volcanoes in the world, continues to the present
day.
The KKNG geological history is part of a convergent history associated with the subduction of the Indo-Australian Plate and the
Eurasian Plate, which is geologically complex, exciting different topography (mélange, karst, cave, beach) with value to all people,
not merely geologists. A simple understanding of the community geological process is expected to promote a sense of love for the
motherland to sustainably preserve regional geoheritage.

4.2. Geosite and geopark theme

The KKNG area is the result of a series of geological events that occurred from Cretaceous to the present, which is divided into
six periods of geological history (Fig. 5). The northern geopark area is in Karangsambung, which covers nine districts and has 29
geosites (Fig. 2 and Table 1). The uniqueness of this area is the existence of the Karangsambung Geoheritage, with evidence of
rocks resulting from subduction processes and ancient ocean floor rock groups. This area was mapped by (Verbeek & Fennema
(1896)), who published a geological map of Java-Madura, where one of them contained a sheet of Loh Oelo terrain map scale
of 1:100,000. Harloff (1933) remapped on sheet 67 Banjarnegara, which was later updated by Tjia (1966), who performed struc-
tural mapping on pre-Tertiary rocks in the north. Asikin (1974) remapped the area using the concept of plate tectonics to produce
new findings with the term Luk Ulo Mélange Complex, which is used today. The uniqueness of the Karangsambung region makes
this region a reference for the geological mapping methods of earth science education by various universities in Indonesia since
1964. Based on its diversity, history, and geological uniqueness, the best subtheme for the northern area of KKNG is the ancient
oceanic floor and subduction zone.
The southern area covers three districts that contain 12 geosites (Fig. 2 and Table 1). This area is the Karangbolong Height,
composed of the Kalipucang Formation with a karst landscape and the Gabon Formation with ancient volcanic rocks. The southern
area is included in the southern Gombong geoheritage site. Karst landscapes with conical shapes controlled by cracks and faults
form underground rivers and caves with beautiful exokarstic features. Along the coast of this area, volcanic rocks and karst are
subjected to abrasion and long-shore current processes, producing a beautiful morphosite. Based on its diversity, history, and geo-
logical uniqueness, the best subtheme for the southern area of KKNG is the Conical Karst Landscape.

11
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Based on UNESCO's assessment guidelines, if the distance between prospective global geoparks is less than 100 km, the score
decreases. The theme of each UGGp must be different if several UGGps are located on the same island. There are two UGGps and
three national geoparks on Java Island. The Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu UGGp is in the western part of Java and its theme is The First
Land of the Western Java Island; Gunung Sewu UGGp is in the eastern part of Java and its theme is The Phenomenal Tropical
Conic Karst Hill Landscape. A comparison of these three locations is presented in Table 2.
The geology of Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu UGGp is composed of ophiolite groups (i.e., peridotite, gabbro, and basalt), metamorphic
(i.e., schist, phyllite, gneiss, and serpentinite), deep-sea sediments (shale and chert), and continental sediments (i.e., graywacke
sandstone, limestone, and polymict breccias) (Satyana et al., 2021). Its geomorphology shows a horseshoe (amphitheater) forma-
tion that opens toward the Indian Ocean. The Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu area consists of tectonic fossils, that is, rocks from the oceanic
and continental plates formed due to the subduction of the two plates. The rock outcrops are chaotic and mixed (mélange), with
the age of Cretaceous (65–55 Ma) (Rosana et al., 2006). The subduction system generated Jampang Formation with an age of sub-
duction of Eocene–Miocene (55–38 Ma) (Rosana et al., 2006; Satyana et al., 2021). Furthermore, no radiolarian chert has been
recognized in this area (Table 2) (Satyana et al., 2021). The geological condition of the Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu UGGp resembles
the northern region of KKNG, which is the Karangsambung area. However, the Karangsambung area has more varieties of
rocks and geological conditions that are more complete and older than those of the Ciletuh area (Table 2).
Gunung Sewu is the name of the karst region in Java, which predominantly consists of limestone (Table 2). This area is dom-
inated by Miocene limestone of the Wonosari Formation, underlying mostly Miocene volcaniclastic sedimentary rocks of the
Sambipitu, Semilir, Nglanggran, and Nampol Formations (Barianto et al., 2017). Coral reef limestone is lithologically highly vari-
able but dominated by rudstones, packstones, and framestones (Haryono & Day, 2004; Haryono & Trijuni Putro, 2017). The overall
karst assemblage in Gunung Sewu is a cone or kagelkarst. A detailed investigation revealed three subtypes of karst: labyrinth-
cone, polygonal, and residual cone karst (Zhu et al., 2013). At the central Gunung Kidul karst, where hard rocks, thick limestone,
and intensive deformation occur in the labyrinth-cone. Polygonal karst developed in the western perimeter of hard but thinner
limestone beds (Zhu, Zhu, Zhang, & Lynch, 2013). The residual cone occurs in the weaker, more porous limestones (wackestones
or chalks), despite the considerable bed thickness (Haryono & Day, 2004). The Gunung Sewu UGGp's theme is The Phenomenal
Tropical Conic Karst Hill Landscape and resembles the southern area of KKNG.
The Karangbolong karst in KKNG has sharper peaks of conical karst morphology than the Gunung Sewu UGGp does. The mor-
phology of the Karangbolong karst generally resembles the typical karst of high-intensity rainfall areas, which are typified by
cockpit karst with conical residual hills. The area exhibits slightly different morphological characteristics governed by the jointing
system, topographical position, and uplift history and type. There is no evidence that lithological facies play an influential role in
the morphological differentiation within the area (Haryono & Trijuni Putro, 2017). Depression density of the Karangbolong karst is
lower (5.78 depression/km2) than that of Gunung Sewu (6.43 depression/km2) (Haryono & Day, 2004). Both areas have the same
general physiography, climate, and carbonate facies. However, the major joints in the Karangbolong area are more closely spaced
than those in the Gunung Sewu Karst (Haryono & Day, 2004). Regarding karst development, the morphological characteristics of
Karangbolong karst appear to be in the stage of mature karst, where karst development starts from joint-controlled dissolution
within the plateau (Haryono & Day, 2004). The mature development of Karangbolong karst is also shown by the development
of karst aquifers and the mapping of cave passages in the area. Karangbolong karst areas do not exhibit an ideal cockpit karst

Table 2
Comparison of Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu UGGp, Karangsambung-Karangbolong National Geopark (KKNG), and Gunung Sewu UGGp.

Criteria Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu UGGp KKNG Gunung Sewu UGGp

Rock assemblages Ophiolite (peridotite, gabbro, diabase, pillow Ophiolite (pillow basalt, diabase, gabbro, –
(mélange) basalt), greywacke, limestone, tuff, red shales, serpentinized peridotite); quartz
serpentinite, phyllite, greenschist. Ophiolite is porphyry-rhyolitic tuff; chert, siliceous shale, red
mostly not mid oceanic ridge but limestone; sandstone, pebbly shale, basaltic
subduction-generated. Badak Mt. pillow basalt is conglomerate; phyllite, blueschist, eclogite,
considered not ophiolite but it could be Jampang gneiss, quartzite, marble
volcanism (22.4 Ma)
Nature of rocks Tectonic blocks, mélange Tectonic blocks, mélange –
Age of subduction 55–38 Ma (on greenschist) 119–117 Ma –
Age of Radiolaria No radiolarian chert is found Early Cretaceous-late Latest Cretaceous –
Overlying Slope deposits, Ciletuh Fm (?), middle Eocene Slope deposits, Karangsambung Fm, Totogan Fm –
formations, age (?) – mid-Miocene (Middle Eocene-Oligocene)
Bayah Fm, Jampang Fm Waturada Fm, Gabon Fm, Penosogan Fm (Early Nglanggran Fm, Sambipitu Fm,
Miocene) Oyo Fm, Nampol Fm (Early
Miocene)
Karst landscape – Poligonal/Cockpit Karst, Kalipucang Fm (Middle Kagel Kars: labyrinth-cone,
Miocene) polygonal or cockpit, and
residual cone karst, Wonosari
Fm, (Middle Miocene)
Other formation – Halang Fm (Late Miocene–Pliocene) Kepek Fm (Late
Miocene–Pliocene)

Note: Data are based on Satyana et al. (2021), Haryono and Day (2004), and this study.

12
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

morphology. Not all karst areas are occupied by enclosed depressions (cockpit), but some portion of the karst area is occupied by
aligned valleys (Table 2) (Haryono & Trijuni Putro, 2017).
The geological condition of KKNG is a combination of that of Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu UGGp (subduction zone) and Gunung
Sewu UGGp (karst landscape). Considering the representation of geological process (subduction process) in Early Cretaceous,
there are similarities in the geological process in Ciletuh-Palabuhanratu UGGp, and cockpit karst similarities in Gunung Sewu
UGGp. KKNG proposed a theme for UGGp application—The Best Evidence of Plate Tectonic Theory in Southeast Asia and Karstic Land-
scape—which is in line with the tagline of this geopark.
Each year, more than 13,000 geoscientists and students visit the Karangsambung geology field camp. The community is also
increasingly stretched to manage local potential through environment-based tourism activities at several geosites. In KKNG, before
the COVID-19 pandemic (pre-March 2020), 1,910,532 tourists had visited, resulting in IDR 8,700,000,000 in revenue (Cahyadi &
Newsome, 2021). However, based on a survey conducted by Statistics Indonesia (2021), Kebumen Regency is the poorest subdis-
trict in Central Java Province. Some of the main problems related to KKNG are the high poverty level, low human resources, high
unemployment, and illegal mining activities in this region. The comparative advantage is that KKNG is close to New Yogyakarta
International Airport and the southern ring road, which facilitates access. Per the guidance of UNESCO, the aim of developing ge-
oparks is to ensure sustainable development according to Sustainable Development Goals Category Nos. 1 (poverty reduction and
disaster vulnerability), 4 (quality education, educating local communities, and cultural appreciation), 5 (gender equality and
women empowerment), 8 (encouraging economic growth through sustainable tourism), 11 (protecting and preserving cultural
and natural heritage), 12 (sustainable consumption and production patterns), 13 (combating climate change and its effects),
and 17 (global partnership for sustainable development). Therefore, the vision of KKNG is to realize a sustainable global geopark
for the welfare of society, and its mission comprises three aspects: (1) preserve geological, biological, and cultural diversity
through the concept of sustainable development; (2) develop sustainable tourism by enhancing human resources and
empowering the local economy; and (3) develop KKNG as a center for geodiversity and geoheritage study and its connection
with biodiversity and cultural diversity within the geopark region.

5. Conclusions

KKNG is a national geopark with more unique and complex geological conditions than two others global geoparks in Java
(Table 2). KKNG is an integral part of the evolutionary history of Southeast Asian tectonic plates. This region has enormous geo-
diversity because of the development of its long geological history with varied biological and cultural diversity, with a total of 41
geosites. The geopark's geological history covers six geological phase, from the trace of the ocean floor spreading and subduction
zone to the formation of karst landscapes and quarterly deposits.
Based on the two geoheritage areas with geological process differences, KKNG can be divided into two subregions: the
Karangsambung area in the north and the Karangbolong area in the south. The Karangsambung area is a structural mountain,
which is a product of the Cretaceous oceanic spreading and subduction zone. The subtheme of this area is the ancient oceanic
floor and subduction zone. The Karangbolong area has a conical karst landscape above old volcanic rocks with many underground
rivers and caves. The subtheme of Karangbolong is the Conical Karst Landscape. The geopark's theme describes the geological pro-
cesses and conditions in the region. By understanding the theme, the geological conditions and uniqueness can be known; there-
fore, the main theme of KKNG is the best evidence of plate tectonic theory in Southeast Asia and karstic landscape.

Author contributions

For this research article, the main contributors is Chusni Ansori, and the co-contributors are Nugroho Imam Setiawan, I Wayan
Warmada, and Herry Yogaswara.

Funding

This research was funded by the Research Program LIPI (since Sept 1, 2021, LIPI has a new name, National Research, and In-
novation Agency [BRIN]), Kebumen Regional Government, and RTA Program UGM.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest, and the funders had no role in the design of the study; the collection, analyses, or
interpretation of the data; the writing of the manuscript; or the decision to publish the results.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Geopark Karangsambung-Karangbolong Management Agency, Research Center for Geotechnology-
BRIN, and Kebumen Regional Government. The topographic data and base map were provided by BIG (http://tides.big.go.id/
DEMNAS/ and http://basemap.big.go.id/rbi/, last accessed October 2021).

13
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgeop.2022.01.001.

References

Alexandrowicz, Z. (2006). Geopark: Nature protection category aiding the promotion of geoturism (Polish perspectives). Geoturystyka, 2, 3–12.
Alexandrowicz, Z., & Wimbledon, W. A. (1999). The concept of world lithosphere reserve. Memorie Descrittive Della Carta Geologica d’Italia, 54, 347–352.
Alfing, J., Bröcker, M., & Setiawan, N. I. (2021). Rb–Sr geochronology of metamorphic rocks from the Central Indonesian Accretionary Collision Complex: Additional age
constraints for the Meratus and Luk Ulo complexes (South Kalimantan and Central Java). Lithos, 388, 1–20.
Ansori, C. (2007). Petrogenesa Basalt Sungai Medana Karangsambung, Berdasarkan Analisa Geokimia. Jurnal RISET Geologi dan Pertambangan, 17(1), 37–50.
Ansori, C. (2018). Geosite identification in Karangbolong High to support the development of Karangsambung–Karangbolong Geopark candidate, Central Java. IOP
Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 118(1), Article 012014.
Ansori, C., Kumoro, K., Hastria, D., & Kristiawan, W. (2016). Panduan geowisata, menelusuri jejak dinamika bumi pada rangkaian Pegunungan Serayu dan Pantai Selatan
Jawa [Geographical guides, tracking Earth's dynamic footprints on the serial mountains and the southern shores of Jawa]. Jakarta, Indonesia: LIPI Press, 158.
Asikin, S. (1974). Evolusi geologi Jawa Tengah dan Sekitarnya Ditinjau Dari Segi Tektonik Dunia yang Baru [The geological evolution of the middle and the around is re-
viewed from a new world technical point] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Bandung: Institut Teknologi Bandung, 103.
Asikin, S., Handoyo, A., Busono, H., & Gafoer, S. (2007). Geological map of Kebumen quadrangle, Jaw a (scale 1:100,000). Bandung, Indonesia: Geological Research and
Development Center of Indonesia.
Barianto, D. H., Husein, S., Novian, M. I., & Margono, U. (2017). Geological map of Wonosari quadrangle (scale 1:50,000). Indonesia: Geological Survey Center of
Indonesia.
Brilha, J. (2016). Inventory and quantitative assessment of geosites and geodiversity sites: A review. Geoheritage, 8(2), 119–134.
Brilha, J., Gray, M., Pereira, D. I., & Pereira, P. (2018). Geodiversity: An integrative review as a contribution to the sustainable management of the whole of nature.
Environmental Science & Policy, 86, 1928.
Brilha, J. B. (2009). Geological heritage and geoconservation in Portugal. In C. N. de Carvalho, & J. Rodrigues (Eds.), New challenges with geotourism (pp. 31–35) Pro-
ceedings of the VIII European Geoparks Conference.
Dilek, Y., & Furnes, H. (2011). Ophiolite genesis and global tectonics: Geochemical and tectonic fingerprinting of ancient oceanic lithosfer. Geological Society of America
Bulletin, 123(3–4), 387–411.
Dingwall, P. R. (2000). Legislation and international agreements: The integration of the geological heritage in nature conservation policies. In D. Barettino, W. A. P.
Wimbledon, & E. Gallego (Eds.), Geological heritage: Its conservation and management. Marid: Instituto Tecnológico Geominero de España.
Dowling, R. K. (2013). Global geotourism: An emerging form of sustainable tourism. Czech Journal of Tourism, 2(2), 59–79.
Farsani, N. T., Coelho, C. O., Costa, C. M., & Amrikazemi, A. (2014). Geo-knowledge management and geoconservation via geoparks and geotourism. Geoheritage, 6(3),
185–192.
Fepuleai, A., Németh, K., & Muliaina, T. (2021). Geopark impact for the resilience of communities in Samoa, SW Pacific. Geoheritage, 13(3), 1–23.
Festa, A., Ogata, K., Pini, G. A., Dilek, Y., & Alonso, J. L. (2016). Origin and significance of olistostromes in the evolution of orogenic belts: A global synthesis. Gondwana
Research, 39, 180–203.
Geological Survey Center of Indonesia (2017a). Technical standards for inventory of geological diversity and identification of geological geritage (p. 11). Indonesia:
Indonesian Geological Agency
Geological Survey Center of Indonesia (2017b). Technical guidelines for the assessment of geological heritage resources (p.25). Indonesia: Indonesian Geological Agency.
Gray, M. (2013). Geodiversity: Valuing and conserving abiotic nature. London, England: John Wiley & Sons.
Hall, R. (1996). Reconstructing Cenozoic SE Asia. In R. Hall, & D. Blundell (Eds.), Tectonic evolution of southeast Asia (pp. 153–184). London, England: Geological Society
of London. http://searg.rhul.ac.uk/pubs/hall_1996%20Reconstructing%20Cenozoic%20SE%20Asia.pdf.
Hall, R. (2002). Cenozoic geological and plate tectonic evolution of SE Asia and the SW Pacific: Computer-based reconstructions, model and animations. Journal of Asian
Earth Sciences, 20(4), 353–431.
Hall, R. (2012). Late Jurassic–Cenozoic reconstructions of the Indonesian region and the Indian Ocean. Tectonophysics, 570, 1–41.
Hamilton, W. B. (1979). Tectonics of the Indonesian region (Report Series No.72–1978). Reston, Virginia: Geological Survey (U.S.).
Haryono, E., & Day, M. (2004). Landform differentiation within the Gunung Kidul Kegelkarst, Java, Indonesia. Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, 66(2), 62–69.
Haryono, E., & Trijuni Putro, S. (2017). Polygonal karst morphology of Karangbolong area, Java-Indonesia. Acta Carsologica, 46(1), 63–72.
Hoffmann, J., Bröcker, M., Setiawan, N. I., Klemd, R., Berndt, J., Maulana, A., & Baier, H. (2019). Age constraints on high-pressure/low-temperature metamorphism and
sedimentation in Luk Ulo Complex (Java, Indonesia). Lithos, 324, 742–762.
Isyqi, I., Ansori, C., Hastria, D., Wardhani, F. A., Al’Afif, M., Hidayat, E., & Puswanto, E. (2019). Petrologi dan geokimia batuan dasit Komplek Mélange Luk Ulo [Petrology
and geochemistry of the Mélange Luk Ulo complex foundation stone]. RISET Geologi dan Pertambangan, 29(1), 27–41.
Kadarusman, A., Massonne, H. J., Roermund, H. V., Permana, H., & Munasri. (2007). PT evolution of eclogites and blueschists from the Luk Ulo Complex of central java,
Indonesia. International Geology Review, 49(4), 329–356.
Ketner, K. B., Modjo, S., Naeser, C. W., Obradovich, J. D., Robinson, K., & Suptandar, T. (1976). Pre-Eocene rock of Java, Indonesia. Journal of Research, United States Geo-
logical Survey, 4, 605–614.
Mikhailenko, A. V., & Ruban, D. A. (2019). Geo-heritage specific visibility as an important parameter in geo-tourism resource evaluation. Geosciences, 9(4), Article 146.
Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia (2006). Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia Regulation No. 2817 K/40/MEM/
2006 on determination of the Karangsambung geological reserve area. Jakarta, Indonesia: Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia.
Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia (2012). Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia Regulation No. 17, 2012 on de-
termination of Karst landscape area. Jakarta, Indonesia: Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia.
Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia (2014). Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia Regulation No. 3043 K/40/MEM on
designation of the Gombong Karst landscape area. Jakarta, Indonesia: Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia.
Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia (2020). Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia Regulation No. 1, 2020 on guide-
line for determining geological heritage (Geoheritage). Jakarta, Indonesia: Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia.
Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas Republic of Indonesia (2020). Ministry of National Development planning/Bappenas Republic of Indonesia Regula-
tion No. 15, 2020 on National Action Plan for the development of Indonesia’s Geopark in 2021–2025. Jakarta, Indonesia: Ministry of National Development planning/
Bappenas Republic of Indonesia.
Moreira, J. C. (2010). Geoturismo: uma abordagem histórico-conceitual [Geotourism: A historic-conceptual approach]. Turismo e Paisagens Cársticas, 3(1), 5–10.
Newsome, D., & Dowling, R. (2005). The scope and nature of geoturism. In R. Dowling, & D. Newsome (Eds.), Geoturism (pp. 3–25). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Nieto, L. M. (2001). Geodiversidad: Propuesta de una definición integradora [Diversity of the earth: Proposals for a comprehensive definition]. Boletin geológico y
minero, 112(2), 3–11.
Cahyadi, H. S., & Newsome, D. (2021). The post COVID-19 tourism dilemma for geoparks in Indonesia. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks, 9(2), 199–211.
de Oliveira, C. D. M. (2006). Do estudo do meio ao turismo geoeducativo: Renovando as práticas pedagógicas em Geografia [From environment study to geo-
educational tourism: Renewing pedagogical practices in geography]. Boletim Goiano de Geografia, 26(1), 31–47.
de Oliveira, C. D. M. (2007). Turismo geoeducativo e integração municipal no Ceará [Geo-educational tourism and municipal integration in Cehera]. Caderno Virtual de
Turismo, 7(1), 41–51.
Ollier, C. (2012). Problems of geotourism and geodiversity. Quaestiones Geographicae, 31(3), 57–61.

14
C. Ansori, N.I. Setiawan, I.W. Warmada et al. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks 10 (2022) 1–15

Parkinson, C. D., Miyazaki, K., Wakita, K., Barber, A. J., & Carswell, D. A. (1998). An overview and tectonic synthesis of the pre-tertiary very-high-pressure metamorphic
and associated rocks of Java, Sulawesi, and Kalimantan, Indonesia. Island Arc, 7(1–2), 184–200.
Prasetyadi, C. (2007). Evolusi Tektonik Paleogen Jawa Bagian Timur [Eastern Paleogene response technical evolution] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Bandung:
Institut Teknologi Bandung.
Presidential Decree of Republic Indonesia (2019). Presidential decree of Republic Indonesia No. 9, 2019 on the development of Geopark. Jakarta, Indonesia: Presidential
decree of Republic Indonesia.
Rosana, M. F., Mardiana, U., Syafri, I., Sulaksana, N., & Haryanto, I. (2006). Geologi kawasan Ciletuh Sukabumi: Karakteristik, keunikan, dan implikasinya [Geology of the
Ciletuh Sukabumi area: Characteristics, techniques, and implications]. Workshop on Excellent Research and Development of Universitas Padjadjaran Graduate
Program, Bandung.
Samodra, H. (2016). Pedoman membangun dan mengembangkan geopark [Pedomans build and develop geopark]. Bandung, Indonesia: Geological Agency of Indonesia,
Ministry for Energy and Mineral Resources (Badan Geologi).
Sánchez-Martín, J. M., Rengifo-Gallego, J. I., & Martín-Delgado, L. M. (2019). Characterization of the tourist demand of the Villuercas–Ibores–Jara Geopark: A destination
with the capacity to attract tourists and visitors. Geosciences, 9(8), Article 335.
Sapri, H., Djoehanah, S., & Mulyadi, D. (1998). Nanoplankton Paleogen dari sedimen olistostrome di daerah Luk Ulo Jawa Tengah [Paleogen nanoplankton from olistotrome
sediment in Luk Ulo Jawa Central]. Bandung, Indonesia: Laporan hasil penelitian Puslitbang Geoteknologi-LIPI, 32.
Satyana, A. H., Prasetyo, A., & Rosana, M. F. (2021). Ciletuh subduction, southwest Java-new findings: Nature, age, and regional implications. Proceedings Indonesian
Petroleum Association 45th Annual Convention & Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Setiawan, N. I., Osanai, Y., Nakano, N., Adachi, T., Hendratno, A., Sasongko, W., & Ansori, C. (2020). Peak metamorphic conditions of garnet amphibolite from Luk Ulo
complex, central Java, Indonesia: Implications for medium-pressure/high-temperature metamorphism in the central Indonesian accretionary collision complex.
Indonesian Journal on Geoscience, 7(3), 225–239.
Setiawan, N. I., Osanai, Y., Nakano, N., Adachi, T., Yonemura, K., Yoshimoto, A., ... Mamma, K. (2013). An overview of metamorphic geology from central Indonesia: Im-
portance of South Sulawesi, Central Java, and south-West Kalimantan metamorphic terranes. Bulletin of the Graduate School of Social and Cultural Studies, Kyushu
University, 19, 39–55.
Setijadji, L. D., Kajino, S., Imai, A., & Watanabe, K. (2006). Cenozoic island arc magmatism in Java Island (Sunda Arc, Indonesia): Clues on relationships between
geodynamics of volcanic centers and ore mineralization. Resource Geology, 56(3), 267–292.
Soeria-Atmadja, R., Maury, R. C., Bellon, H., Pringgoprawiro, H., Polve, M., & Priadi, B. (1994). Tertiary magmatic belts in Java. Journal of Southeast Asian Earth Sciences, 9
(1–2), 13–27.
Soesilo, J., Schenk, V., Suparka, E., & Abdullah, C. I. (2015). The Mesozoic tectonic setting of Se Sundaland based on metamorphic evolution. Proceedings Indonesian Pe-
troleum Association 39th Annual Convention & Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Statistics Indonesia (2021). Jawa Tengah Province in figures. Semarang, Indonesia: BPS- Statistic of Jawa Tengah Province, Indonesia.
Suparka, M. E. (1988). Studi Petrologi dan Pola Kimia Komplek Ofiolit Karangsambung Utara Luh Ulo, Jawa Tengah [Studies of petrology and chemical pole complete of-
ficials of the north Pole Luh Ulo, midway] (Unpublished dissertation). Bandung: Institut Teknologi Bandung.
Tjia, H. D. (1966). Structural analysis of the pre-tertiary of the Luk Ulo area, Central Java (Unpublished dissertation). Bandung, Indonesia: Institut Teknologi Bandung.
UNESCO (2021). List of UNESCO Global Geoparks (UGGp). Retrieved fromhttp://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/earth-sciences/unesco-
global-geoparks/list-of-unesco-global-geoparks/.
Verbeek, R. D. M., & Fennema, R. (1896). Geologische beschrijving van Java en Madoera (Dutch Edition) [Geological description of Java and Madoera]. Los Angeles, CA:
University of California Libraries.
Wakita, K., Munasri, & Widoyoko, B. (1994). Cretaceous radiolarians from the Luk Ulo complex in the Karangsambung area, Central Java, Indonesia. Journal of Asian
Earth Sciences, 9(1), 29–43.
Wang, L., Tian, M., & Wang, L. (2015). Geodiversity, geoconservation and geotourism in Hong Kong Global Geopark of China. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association,
126(3), 426–437.
Winter, J. D. (2014). Principles of igneous and metamorphic petrology (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.
Zhu, X. W., Zhu, D. H., Zhang, Y., & Lynch, E. M. (2013). Tower karst and cone karst. In J. F. Shroder (Ed.), Treatise on geomorphology (pp. 327–340). San Diego, CA: Ac-
ademic Press.
Harloff, C. E. (1933). Toelichting bij Blad 67 (Bandjarnegara), Geologische kaart van Java 1:100,000 [Lighting at Blad 67 (Bandjarnegara), geological map of Java 1:
100,000]. Bandung, Indonesia: Bandung Dienst.

15