Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences [1 ed.] 9781443898317, 9781443894883

Citation preview

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences Edited by

Elisabeth Kastenholz, Maria João Carneiro, Celeste Eusébio and Elisabete Figueiredo

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences Edited by Elisabeth Kastenholz, Maria João Carneiro, Celeste Eusébio and Elisabete Figueiredo This book first published 2016 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2016 by Elisabeth Kastenholz, Maria João Carneiro, Celeste Eusébio, Elisabete Figueiredo and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-9488-5 ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-9488-3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introductory Chapter ................................................................................... 1 Elisabeth Kastenholz, Maria João Carneiro, Celeste Eusébio and Elisabete Figueiredo Part I. The Visitor’s View Chapter One ............................................................................................... 21 Rural Tourist Experiences Elisabeth Kastenholz and Maria João Carneiro Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 39 Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences Dora Agapito, Hugo De Almeida and Ana Cláudia Campos Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 61 Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists in a Rural Festival using a Smartphone Application Hee Jeong Yun and Mi Hyeon Park Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 79 Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences: Connecting Tourists, Community and Local Resources Mariana Carvalho, Joana Lima, Elisabeth Kastenholz and Ana João Sousa Chapter Five ............................................................................................ 103 The Tourist in Rural Destinations: An Experiential Approach based on Relationships with Local People and Surroundings Ana María Campón-Cerro, José Manuel Hernández-Mogollón, Helena María Baptista Alves and Elide Di-Clemente Chapter Six .............................................................................................. 133 Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension Richard Sharpley and Deborah Jepson

vi

Table of Contents

Part II. Local Actors and Communities, Local Resources and Conditions Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 155 The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources in the Co-creation of Tourism Experiences Elisabete Figueiredo, Celeste Eusébio and Zélia Breda Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 177 Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector: Is the Employment Situation of Portuguese Tourism Graduates Similar in Rural and Urban Municipalities? Carlos Costa, Sandra Caçador, Zélia Breda and Marília Durão Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 201 Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development Nancy Gard Mcgehee, Whitney Knollenberg and Amy Komorowski Chapter Ten ............................................................................................. 223 The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation on the Offer of Agro-Tourist Facilities in Poland Jerzy BaĔski and Maria Bednarek-SzczepaĔska Chapter Eleven ........................................................................................ 243 Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism: How Does the Lifestyle Drive Get Along with Business Orientation? Conceição Cunha, Elisabeth Kastenholz and Maria João Carneiro Chapter Twelve ....................................................................................... 263 Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism Lúcia Pato Chapter Thirteen ...................................................................................... 287 Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists: The Perceptions of Residents in the Islands of Graciosa and São Jorge (The Azores) Luís Silveira, Paulo Espínola and Norberto Santos Chapter Fourteen ..................................................................................... 309 Endogenous and Exogenous Resource Use in Ecotourism Promotion: Evidence from Ireland Thérèse Conway and Mary Cawley

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

vii

Part III. Rural Tourism and Sustainable Destination Development Chapter Fifteen ........................................................................................ 329 Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations Celeste Eusébio, Elisabeth Kastenholz and Zélia Breda Chapter Sixteen ....................................................................................... 351 Determinant Factors of the Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism: Quantitative Evidence from Rural Japan Yasuo Ohe and Shinichi Kurihara Chapter Seventeen ................................................................................... 375 Climate Change and Adaptation in Rural Areas: An Integrated Case Study of Winter Tourism and Mountain Agriculture in the Catalan Pyrenees Gabriel Weber and Ignasi Puig-Ventosa Chapter Eighteen ..................................................................................... 391 How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism M. Isabel Sánchez-Hernández, Dolores Gallardo-Vázquez and M. Mercedes Galán-Ladero Chapter Nineteen ..................................................................................... 415 The Hierarchical Gap: Bypassing Communication Barriers to Build Collaborative Processes for Value Co-Creation in Rural Settings Ana Calapez Gomes, Idalina Dias-Sardinha and David Ross Chapter Twenty ....................................................................................... 441 Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism: Lessons from Rural Rail-based Slow Tourism Bernard Lane Contributors ............................................................................................. 459

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER ELISABETH KASTENHOLZ, MARIA JOÃO CARNEIRO, CELESTE EUSÉBIO AND ELISABETE FIGUEIREDO

Rural tourism is not very new in many parts of the world, but it has recently received increasing attention from researchers, politicians and managers alike. This is mostly due to new market trends, the growing recognition of the “rural crisis” and of the urge to solve it, as well as the belief in the potential of tourism as a development tool for rural areas (Cánoves, Villarino, Priestley, & Blanco, 2004; OECD, 1994; Sharpley, 2002; Wang & Pfister, 2008). As a matter of fact, research concerning “rural tourism” has increased substantially over the past 30 years. A search regarding articles published on the topic, indexed in the Scopus platform (www.scopus.com) (widely used for bibliometric analysis in tourism; see Hall, 2011) shows that in the year 2000 there were about 50 papers published or in press, while numbers have increased since then, reaching 264 in the year of 2014 (Lane & Kastenholz, 2015). This strong interest is related to the many economic opportunities that have been identified, but also to the need to develop new products, new formats for experience, more professional market approaches and cooperative destinationmanagement efforts. These must be based on appealing and distinctive destination resources, in an attempt to adapt to new and changing market needs, in an ever increasing competitive global business context. Investment needs to be carefully planned and successfully managed, and local actors empowered and integrated, so as to enhance sustainable rural destination development (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Lane & Kastenholz, 2015). However, there is also evidence that rural tourism is not a miraculous antidote for the previously mentioned crisis, particularly not in all places and under all circumstances (Ribeiro & Marques, 2002; Sharpley, 2002). Despite some suggestions for critical factors of success for rural tourism in the literature (e.g. Gannon, 1994; Sharpley, 2002; Wilson, Fesenmaier, Fesenmaier & Van Es, 2001), there is still a need for a more thorough

2

Introductory Chapter

understanding of the rural tourism phenomenon and the nature of the tourism experience, lived and conditioned by so many actors and factors, and also of ways to optimise it to the benefit of all, while making the best use of endogenous resources and competences, landscapes, attractions and people, yielding sustainable destination development (Gannon, 1994; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Lane & Kastenholz, 2015; Saxena, Clark, Oliver & Ilbery, 2007). This book contributes to this ongoing debate, focusing on the tourist experience, here conceptualised as “co-created” between hosts and guests, based on destination-specific elements of the “countryside capital” (Garrod, Wornell, & Youel, 2006) and aiming at sustainability (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012). It contains both conceptual and empirical chapters, with diverse and new perspectives, methodological approaches and cases from several countries, developed in three parts: Part I. The Visitor’s view This part focuses on the visitors’ perspective, considering sensorial, spatial, emotional and spiritual experience dimensions, their link to local resources and communities, but also conditioning factors, outcomes and meanings of these experiences and managerial implications, within the new paradigm of experience marketing. Part II. Local actors and communities, local resources and conditions This part highlights experience co-creation with local actors and communities, based on local resources and conditions. Relevant issues are the perspectives and involvement of local actors and communities, the debate on lifestyle entrepreneurs, leadership, social capital and networks, mobilization of endogenous resources, as well as the socio-economic context. The perceptions, attitudes and willingness of local residents to support tourism are also addressed within this part, as they are of fundamental relevance to exploring the relationship between hosts and guests in rural tourism destinations. Part III. Rural tourism and sustainable destination development The final part discusses how far rural tourism experiences may contribute to sustainable development of rural destinations, a debate stressing the complex nature and relevance of integrated and locally controlled tourism development and strategies to make the best use of the endogenous potential for the best of all stakeholders and resources involved, while simultaneously aiming at preservation of scarce and valuable resources.

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

3

All these parts start with an initial conceptual chapter, reflecting on the nature of the particular rural tourism dimension on which the subsequent chapters focus, and which have been written by several selected authors who presented their studies at the 2013 International Rural Tourism Conference “Re-inventing rural tourism and the rural tourism experience— Conserving, innovating and co-creating for sustainability” (Kastenholz, Eusébio, Cunha, et al., 2013). Authors were invited to develop their papers as chapters of the present book, based on several rounds of reviewing, considering a) the conference reviewers’ comments1 and b) the comments and suggestions made by the coordinators of this book. In the following sections, the contributions in each part will be briefly presented and connected to the overall theme of this book—the challenges which rural tourism destinations and operators need to deal with in a complex, frequently fragile and structurally disadvantaged local context, within a global, highly dynamic and competitive business environment. We start our argument with reflections and empirical evidence regarding the tourists’ or visitors’ point of view on the rural tourist experience since, without people who are interested in visiting the countryside, there would be no rural tourism. Of course, without a countryside affording a certain number and quality of resources, services, people and conditions, there would be no rural tourism either, but our argument will start with the tourist as the core of the tourism activity from a business and marketing point of view. We will then consider the perspective of the local communities and resources as equally important, however diverse the ways they adapt to market needs and opportunities, while generally aiming at maintaining their identities and distinctiveness. Finally, we will integrate the two sides of the medal (demand and supply) in a critical reflection on sustainability potentials, but also on threats, challenges and possible future avenues of research and action, yielding the achievement or approximation towards the ideal of sustainability. Elisabeth Kastenholz and Maria João Carneiro introduce the tourist perspective in their conceptual chapter about the tourist experience as lived and co-created by the tourist. The authors present, in a systematic manner, the conditioning factors, nature, dimensional structure and content of this rural tourist experience, as identified through an extensive literature review in experience marketing, tourism and rural tourism. They conclude that the rural tourist experience is “a complex whole, lived and co-created in a particular territorial, natural, social and cultural context, from which it draws main experience and symbolic elements.” Unique, “authentic” local resources, associated with a “frequently nostalgically idealised rural way of life,… sought as a way to escape stressful urban living contexts” are

4

Introductory Chapter

identified as relevant ingredients, as is the much-appreciated nature, “largely contribut[ing] to a relaxing, but also stimulating and sensory-rich experience”. A wide range of (recreational, sports, cultural) activities are important for an apparently increasing number of tourists seeking more active holidays, while also social experiences, e.g. contact with the community, are frequently sought, appreciated and positively remembered. The authors conclude that the understanding of the rural tourist experience should enhance the strategic marketing potential of rural tourism destinations and help “develop a variety of appealing, co-creative, involving, distinctive and memorable rural tourism experience opportunities”. Dora Agapito, Ana Cláudia Campos and Hugo Almeida discuss the relevance of the sensorial dimension of the tourist experience in a rural destination, which are, according to the authors “characterised by a rich and specific collection of endogenous resources, ideal for conceptualising unique sensory-informed tourist experiences involving and benefiting all destination stakeholders”. The authors point out major trends of tourist demand evolving towards “skilled consumption… to satisfy higher order needs and aspirations driven by creativity”. This chapter discusses the role of perception and co-creation in managing and marketing rural tourism experiences by focusing on its sensory dimension. It also presents methodological approaches for analysing the sensory tourist experience and finally illustrates, with three cases, how to use sensory elements in managing and marketing rural tourism experiences to enhance the overall experience quality lived at the destination. The suggestion is to bring together local stakeholders, communities and multi-sensory destination resources (e.g., fauna, flora, landscapes, handicraft, and gastronomy) that may combine to form frameworks of unique, themed experience proposals immersing visitors in the local atmosphere, potentially leading to a sustainable competitive advantage. Spatio-temporal tourist behaviour is also an experience dimension worthy of notice. Hee Jeong Yun and Mi Hyeon Park analysed this in their chapter on walking tourists at a rural festival in the Republic of Korea (the Sancheoneo Ice Festival), using time geography theory and a smartphone application based on GPS data. The authors highlight the role that festivals in rural areas may play in promoting these localities’ economic development and cultural heritage preservation, and they show the usefulness of the spatio-temporal information provided by smartphoneembedded GPS for planning successful rural festivals. Given that most rural festivals are small events, concentrated in limited spaces, but sometimes attracting significant numbers of visitors, it is important for planners and policy makers to understand tourists’ spatio-temporal

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

5

movement behaviours and experiences. The results obtained in this study show an intense temporal and spatial concentration of walking tourists. This concentration is revealed to influence, negatively, the interaction of tourists with the local community and the economic effects generated by the event. The results of this study thus give significant contributions to festival planners and policy makers, and their consideration should contribute to more sustainable tourism development in rural areas. Next, focusing on experience co-creation based on endogenous heritage resources, Mariana Carvalho, Joana Lima, Elisabeth Kastenholz and Ana João Sousa analyse the natural and cultural experience in Janeiro de Cima, a village in Central Portugal. They specifically look at the perceptions regarding this experience co-creation, from the perspective of all stakeholders involved (tourists, population, agents of tourism supply and institutions) and thereby identify the potential of co-creative experiences. A brief theoretical reflection on the role of natural and cultural resources in the tourism experience supports a case study approach, involving documentary analysis, field observation and interviews with all stakeholders. The study concludes that tourism could be improved in the village since there is the potential to set cultural and natural resources into value through the co-creation of corresponding tourism experiences. This process can lead to product innovation in the existing tourism supply system. Creativity in themed participative experience settings, involving “knowledgeable residents”, is seen as a promising concept in reshaping traditional culture through reinventing the past and reinforcing the attractiveness and distinctiveness of tourism resources. Ana Maria Campón-Cerro, José Manuel Hernández-Mogollón, Helena Alves and Elide Di-Clemente provide insights on the experience of tourists in rural destinations through an empirical study carried out in Spain. An online questionnaire was used to assess previous rural tourism practice, motivations, cognitive and affective images of rural destinations, perceived quality, perceived value and trust, place attachment, satisfaction (with destination attributes, regarding relations with residents, relations with tourism providers and overall satisfaction) and loyalty. The study provides important conclusions concerning the features to which tourism managers should pay particular attention in order to increase tourist satisfaction and loyalty and presents suggestions on strategies to improve the rural tourism experience. Apart from revealing that the tourists interviewed held a very positive cognitive and affective image of the rural destinations visited, associating high quality and value to the visited territories, visitors also show considerable attachment to the destinations.

6

Introductory Chapter

The authors observed particular tourist satisfaction regarding the relationships with residents and the chance to undergo different experiences. Finally, Richard Sharpley and Sarah Jeppson reflect on the emotional and even spiritual dimensions of the rural tourist experience, based on a qualitative study undertaken in the English Lake District, in which visitors were interviewed regarding these emotional and spiritual qualities of their experience. As relevant themes both tangible and intangible elements of the countryside were revealed as marking the experience, in a frequently emotion-loaded discourse on the contrast between the rural idyll and the modern, urban living context. This countryside experience is shaped by the area’s specific physical features, by impressive weather/light conditions, the striking experience of silence and immersion in nature, with which visitors tend to engage in particularly deeply through some form of physical and sometimes challenging activity, while for some just “being in and gazing upon the landscape and nature… was sufficient to elicit an emotional response”. Confirming an emotion-rich experience discourse, the authors conclude that “all respondents recognised that there exists a deeper, more meaningful dimension to their touristic experience of the Lake District”, which for some respondents may be termed “spiritual”, depending on their openness to religious or spiritual beliefs. There is a need to understand this potentially highly emotional, involving, and even spiritual nature of the increasingly actively co-created and rural heritage-based tourist experience which is focused on in these chapters of Part I. Thus these probably desired, valued and memorable experience dimensions can be addressed when trying to optimise the rural tourist experience. The role, relevance and need for integration of the diverse dimensions of this experience need to be understood so as to enhance the potential of a rural tourist destination providing appealing, “authentic”, involving and memorable tourist experiences. These experiences include the sensorial appreciation of so many rural destination facets, social interaction on-site, movement patterns, as well as the local resource-based active co-creation of the experience, with “authenticity” of both the resource base and the experience co-creation setting. Thereby, place attachment and visitor loyalty should increase, which may improve a destination’s attractiveness in the long run, namely through repeat visitation and positive word of mouth (Silva, Kastenholz & Abrantes, 2013). Moving from the tourist’s perspective to that of local actors, communities, resources and conditions, means emphasizing the destination as the core of the rural tourism experience opportunities—the rural territory and its human and physical essence. The next part focuses on

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

7

those who could be considered the “key stakeholders of rural areas”. This focus means addressing those living in them, working there, shaping their landscapes and social and cultural structures and focusing on all the tangible and intangible features within the rural environment making it different, special, and unique and both a challenge to live and work in and desirable for tourism consumption. In this context, Elisabete Figueiredo, Celeste Eusébio and Zélia Breda first draw the readers’ attention to the important role of rural resources and local actors in the co-creation of tourism experiences. Rural areas are recognised as territories with a wide array of cultural and natural resources that may serve as a basis for developing a large set of tourism activities and initiatives. The authors refer to these resources and highlight their relevance, but remark on the crucial role of local stakeholders— communities and supply agents (private and public)—in co-creating appealing tourism experiences. The relevance of the attitudes of these stakeholders towards tourism and of all their actions in the scope of tourism, including their interaction with visitors, to develop rewarding shared rural tourism experiences, is discussed. The creation of networks of supply agents is also pointed out as an important strategy in this context, namely for developing more attractive, varied, better integrated, articulated and coordinated tourism experiences, and to create a greater synergy between supply agents. In the background of the frequently invoked challenge of scarce qualified human resources limiting tourism development in rural areas, Carlos Costa, Susana Caçador and Zélia Breda present interesting data on the employment situation of tourism graduates living in rural municipalities, in comparison with those living in urban areas. They analyse employment rates, professional experience, fields of activity, working hours and schedules, contractual situations, entrepreneurial activity, leadership positions and salaries, and additionally consider gender differences. The results reveal that those living in urban contexts invest more in continuous learning, which should be related to correspondingly better career opportunities, as both leadership positions and higher salaries tend to be associated with urban municipalities, which may be due to diverse tourism industry structure in both contexts. Gender disparities exist in both contexts, but seem to be more accentuated in terms of career development and, thus, more difficult for women in rural municipalities to fight. On the other hand, women in rural municipalities seem to be exposed to working conditions which are more compatible with their personal and family lives. The authors advise that qualified human resources are crucial for successful development of rural tourism, calling

8

Introductory Chapter

for ongoing and deeper research on this topic, as well as regarding the conditions for badly needed entrepreneurial activity in these areas. Nancy McGehee, Whitney Knollenberg and Amy Komorowski draw our attention to the role of social capital and leadership in successful and sustainable rural tourism development. After exploring the current literature in leadership, both in general and specific to rural tourism, the authors analyse three cases of community-level rural tourism leaders: in North Carolina, USA, Virginia, USA, and Haiti. Based on the social capital framework, the sources of success of these leaders and their communities are analysed in their effort to use tourism as an economic development tool, also considering the role of social capital as an important factor for leadership development. The authors explore the questions of whether “successful rural communities [are] led by individuals that embody elements of bridging and bonding social capital”, and particularly if “one person [can] embody a blend of bridging and bonding social capital regardless of the type of leadership traits and approaches they employ”. In light of the cases studied, the authors respond positively, concluding that “it is particularly interesting that multiple leadership approaches were present, yet each individual still embodied bridging and bonding social capital”. The findings may lay a foundation and serve as a framework for future research on the potential of leadership in rural tourism development. The vital role of both bridging and bonding social capital in rural tourism leadership development is stressed, while additional research issues and approaches are outlined and recommended. Jerzy Banski and Maria Bednarek-SzczepaĔska draw our attention to the importance of landscape for the development of specific types of agrotourism accommodation facilities. Results of a survey of owners of 60 agro-tourist farms in Poland, located in four physio-geographical area categories and corresponding landscape types (mountainous, lowland, upland, and lake region), showed a connection between the type of equipment and services provided and the respective landscape integration and location of the accommodation facilities. For example, agro-tourism facilities in lakelands were most likely to provide watercraft activities, those in lowlands and in mountains had a greater tendency to organise entertainment events and activities for groups and there was more opportunity to participate in farm work in agro-tourism facilities located in lowlands and highlands. The study also reveals differences among accommodation facilities located in areas with diverse landscape specificities, concerning promotional strategies and demand. In this context, the Internet was relatively more likely to be used to promote agrotourism facilities in mountains and lakelands, compared to other

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

9

geographical areas. The findings thus suggest that geographical specificities may influence product development and promotional approaches of agro-tourism accommodation facilities and, consequently, may originate differences in demand. Conceição Cunha, Elisabeth Kastenholz and Maria João Carneiro reflect on lifestyle entrepreneurship in rural areas and the question of whether these may or not follow business ambitions and economically succeed together with pursuing lifestyle goals. After a literature review on entrepreneurship in tourism, lifestyle entrepreneurship in tourism and entrepreneurship in rural tourism, this chapter explores the entrepreneurial nature of some small-scale rural tourism businesses, located in three villages of North and Central Portugal, whose owners’ lifestyle motives impact on their management. The analysis identifies, along with lifestyle motivations (a desire to live in the countryside, family togetherness, maintenance of nostalgically valued family heritage), business-focused attitudes of entrepreneurs (such as opportunity recognition, investment decisions or the willingness to take risks). Additionally, “the entrepreneurs show attachment to the village and an understanding of the potential and desirable connections between local resources and stakeholders to create an overall more appealing tourist destination, while contributing to the village’s and community’s development”. Through their initiatives, investment in the villages, willingness to make a living there with their families (despite more appealing opportunities elsewhere), and through the attraction of tourists, these entrepreneurs stimulate heritage preservation, the local economy and a lively and thus more attractive social life in the villages. The authors conclude that “all this corroborates the perspective of small rural lifestyle-oriented tourism enterprises potentially contributing to sustainable destination development”. Lúcia Jesus in her chapter highlights the perceptions and attitudes regarding rural tourism and its impacts which residents of the Douro and Dão-Lafões regions in Portugal express. After discussing the factors underlying attitudes, perceptions and support of residents regarding tourism impacts on local communities, she relates these dimensions, stressing that support for rural tourism seems to be highly influenced by the perceived negative and positive impacts deriving from that activity, confirming results of several other studies in this field. The author also discusses the perceptions of the benefits and impacts as unbalanced and uneven. In fact, as the author argues, although residents do not develop negative perceptions regarding environmental and socio-cultural impacts of rural tourism, they seem to be extremely aware of the fact that tourism and related activities appear to benefit only a small number of residents,

10

Introductory Chapter

mainly the ones directly related to those activities. The author’s conclusions show the existence of a strong statistical relationship between the personal benefits perceived and positive and negative attitudes, as well as minor or major support regarding tourism activities in their areas of residence. The results draw our attention to the need to take into consideration residents’ perceptions and attitudes towards tourism if one intends to plan and to manage rural tourism destinations in a more suitable manner. Luis Silveira, Paulo Espínola and Norberto Santos also deal with residents of local communities and their perceptions regarding experiences with tourists in the islands of Graciosa and São Jorge, in the Azores, Portugal. Tourism in the Azores region has only recently been the object of strategic planning and Graciosa and São Jorge receive fewer tourists every year than other Azorean islands, as they are considered a secondary tourism pole in the context of the whole archipelago, yet the local population seems to value tourism activities. Results from a survey conducted on the two islands show that residents have a more positive attitude regarding the future economic development that may derive from tourism. Given the small number of tourists in the Graciosa and São Jorge islands, up to now, residents stress the scarcity of contacts and experiences, although they are given an extremely positive value. Results demonstrate that residents consider tourists as friendly and communicative, visiting the islands mainly to be in contact with nature and to appreciate the landscape. Also, the proximity to larger and better-equipped islands (in touristic terms) is perceived as a factor of attraction. Despite generally positive attitudes regarding tourism, respondents are aware of the needs in terms of tourism development, particularly related to activities and services offered. Local populations seem to be willing to invest in tourism, if there is an opportunity, again revealing their support and faith in the future of tourism and related activities on both islands. As in the previous chapter, results of the present study also demonstrate the need to accommodate residents’ perceptions and attitudes regarding tourism in respective development strategies and policies. Thérèse Conway and Mary Cawley demonstrate the opportunity for development of ecotourism products based on a combination of endogenous and exogenous resources and the problems associated with the certification of these products. They provide an analysis of three case studies—a bed and breakfast accommodation facility, a country house and a hostel—located in a specific ecotourism destination of Ireland known as the Greenbox, which received the EU Flower certification label (a certification for businesses that achieve certain environmental standards).

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

11

Data obtained by semi-structured interviews with the owners or managers of these businesses illustrates how endogenous and exogenous resources were combined to develop ecotourism products. Results highlight the relevance of integrating exogenous resources (such as expert knowledge and external funding) to support and complement the existing endogenous resources base. These cases also permit an analysis of the eco-certification process and its pros and cons. Findings show that the relevance attributed to the certification varied among businesses, with some interviewees considering it very important to increase the attractiveness of their businesses’ for tourists. However, despite the social capital gained by the owners/managers regarding principles of sustainable use of resources (education, personal experience and commitment), and the recognised importance of funding and advice obtained during the certification processes, the bureaucracy, costs and the modest contribution to the creation of employment are considered weaknesses of this process. Therefore, the authors defend a “balance between a robust method of certification and the importance of ensuring that it falls within the financial and time resources of providers”. The above-summarised chapters from Part II highlight the role of endogenous resources (natural, cultural, landscape), conditions and competences, the need to foster human capital building and improve the conditions for both entrepreneurs and qualified people to stay in these areas. Although some of these types of people may remain due to lifestyle motives, it additionally requires overall planning to improve the quality of life for local communities, in several dimensions. Tourism is identified as a potential and apparently often desired tool to enhance this type of development. It should intelligently integrate the most appealing and distinctive endogenous resources in coordinated co-creative experience proposals, while also complementing them with relevant exogenous resources to gain competitiveness and visibility. Local entrepreneurs are understood as decisive for this kind of development, as is the local community, also co-creating tourist experiences and being (more or less) affected by the activity taking place in their territories. One of the conclusions of several chapters is the need to take all local stakeholders’ interests into account when aiming at sustainable rural destination development, which is an ambitious goal, discussed in further detail in the final section of the book. In Part III, Celeste Eusébio, Elisabeth Kastenholz and Zélia Breda introduce the topic of sustainable tourism and tourism destination development in further detail, presenting an extensive literature review on the subject. The authors propose a sustainable development model for

12

Introductory Chapter

rural destinations considering the specificity of rural areas as tourism destinations (e.g. a fragile economic, social and sometimes environmental context, often impacted by the agricultural crisis, small-scale family businesses, lack of alternative economic opportunities, small, traditional communities, etc.). It focuses on five dimensions of sustainability: economic, ecological/environmental, socio-cultural, technological and political. They provide a framework for the evolution of the sustainability discussion, a debate on its particular relevance for rural territories and communities and present an analysis of each dimension, all of which are suggested for consideration in all rural tourism strategies. Focusing on the economic dimension of sustainability, Yasuo Ohe and Shinichi Kurihara provide relevant insights on the connections between two important economic activities—agriculture and tourism—for economic development of rural areas. Based on data collected via a survey of agricultural cooperatives in Japan, the authors investigate the relationship between the direct economic effects generated by local brand farm products (e.g. increases in revenue and employment) and the indirect economic effects caused by the development of tourism activity. The results of the empirical model presented in this study reveal not only the importance of traditional production aspects, such as quality control of brand products, but also a perspective on local resource management. Specifically, they suggest valorising local food heritage and the creation of partnerships between the tourism and culinary sectors. Moreover, the results of the study show that a wider and more longstanding perspective of local resource management is necessary to enhance the complementary relationship between economic gains from both local brand farm products and tourism development. Gabriel Weber and Ignasi Puig-Ventosa address the issue of climate change and adaptation in rural areas by presenting an integrated case study of winter tourism and mountain agriculture in the Catalan Pyrenees. Based on a literature review and the case study, they identify environmental, socio-cultural and economic benefits of climate change as well as the costs of this change, and the potential conflicts between rural winter tourism and mountain agriculture. Moreover, they reveal the approaches adopted for dealing with climate change in the Catalan Pyrenees. Finally, they emphasise the strategies that may be implemented in order to overcome tensions between tourism and other activities developed in rural areas and to minimise the potential negative impacts of tourism, especially those deriving from climate change adaptation. Some of these strategies are the diversification of tourism activities, adoption of environmentally friendly

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

13

policies and promoting the cooperation between farmers and tourism agents by involving farmers in tourism planning. Maria Isabel Sanchez-Hernandez, Dolores Gallardo-Vázquez and Mercedes Galán-Ladero discuss the relevance of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for the success of tourism organizations in rural areas. This study provides relevant information about the role of responsible actions of companies and about the certification of these actions to achieve sustainable development in rural tourism destinations. Through a qualitative study based on tourism managers’ attitudes and perceptions about CSR carried out in Extremadura, Spain, the authors analyse how a process of certification, verification and registration of Responsible Tourism Businesses may contribute to creating social value and regional development. The results of the empirical study show that, according to tourism managers’ perspective, CSR actions could have considerable positive impacts on tourism business and regional development in Extremadura. Results also reveal that rural managers are highly motivated towards CSR, as they expect benefits from the new CSR law in the region. The authors also provide some recommendations for promoting CSR. They conclude that tourism managers should be aware of the benefits that may derive from the certification of socially responsible tourism businesses, need to be more proactive and would benefit from creating a network under the umbrella of a “Responsible Tourism brand”, which should help promote the region abroad and gain competitive advantages. Ana Gomes, Idalina Sardinha and David Ross reflect on the importance and difficulties associated with cooperation among different community actors for successful resource value creation and sustainable destination development, largely based on bonding and bridging social capital. An empirical study conducted in the Alentejo region, where important archaeological findings have been made, reveals a difficulty in ways to “strategically connect diverse resources and a clear hierarchical communication gap between municipal authorities, resource controllers and small businesses”, visible in “top-down communication, isolated and uncoordinated actions and territorial fragmentation”. The authors present a “human and technologically assisted model specially conceived for cultural and economic value creation in high mistrust and low communication rural contexts”. They conclude that “intervention of an external coordination and mentoring agent to facilitate the value cocreation process associated with a technological device to foster information exchange and management, as well as communication” would be needed to overcome several of the barriers identified. They also suggest

14

Introductory Chapter

the application and validation of the model to this and other rural areas and resource contexts. Finally, Bernard Lane looks at the problems of co-creating rural tourism that can fulfil the triple bottom-line requirements of sustainable tourism, not to forget a major issue that has been neglected in the rural tourism debate—the way tourists move to and within these areas, i.e. related to fuel/energy consumption. Presenting the case of rail-based rural tourism, with a series of rural railway regeneration projects (both conventional community and heritage railway projects), he highlights how these projects integrate and enhance the affected region’s sustainability in terms of social, cultural, environmental and economic dimensions. The reflections presented here draw on many years of experience working in rural tourism, as researcher and consultant, and with rural transport providers in the UK, Poland and elsewhere and concludes with a 10-point list of lessons to be learned for sustainable tourism from the experience of implementing rail-based rural tourism. We may conclude that all these approaches highlighted in the chapters included in Part III, with the aim of contributing to sustainable development of rural territories and communities through a diversity of rural tourism initiatives, need to be carefully adapted to each area’s specificities, resource-base, economic structure, local communities, entrepreneurs and institutions. They must simultaneously be aware of the tourist market’s profile, desires and evolution as well as the wider competitive destination context, thus requiring an integrated view of all issues discussed in all parts of this book. Even if numerous unique resources, landscapes, attractions, traditions, stories and environments may be identified in rural areas that would apparently make a perfect fit with the new market trends of experiencefocused co-creative tourism, local communities and actors cannot be neglected in planning and implementing these tourism-based rural development strategies (Figueiredo, Kastenholz & Pinho, 2014; Kastenholz, Eusébio, Carneiro & Figueiredo 2013; Saxena et al, 2007). They should not only be recognised as central players in this strategy, responsible for keeping these areas alive and decisively conditioning the tourist experience, they are also primary stakeholders of the territories which they live in and have shaped for generations, as well as being those most affected by tourism impacts. However, these communities are, according to the studies presented here (of rural tourism in its developing phase), mainly favourable towards this activity, due to expectations regarding sustainable development opportunities.

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

15

Whether local players realise these opportunities largely depends on their capacity to develop appealing rural tourist experience products that match the desires of those visitors that may most value the particularities of each territory (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Kastenholz, 2004). Therefore, they need continuous market research and a thorough understanding of the nature of the experience desired by diverse market groups. It also requires the ability to coordinate the many features and facets of the destination and the tourism activity to articulate the latter with other local activities, and to develop social capital and communication capacity that may help build effective networks both within and reaching out of the community and territory. Aspects such as social responsibility, sustainability, governance and leadership are at stake here, but many other issues will continue to deserve attention in a search for new and better rural tourism experiences, experiences that take all stakeholders’ interests into account, while not only preserving but also setting into value local/regional heritage and resources and that, last but not least, may contribute to a countryside where people not only like to travel to but also enjoy living in. Last but not least, we want to thank all reviewers (including the Scientific Board of the 2013 International Conference) and all authors for their interest in participating in this project, contributing to the overall quality of a book which we hope will be useful to all those interested in rural tourism, both from an academic and a professional stance.

Notes 1. We acknowledge the effort of the invited reviewers included in the International Scientific Board of the conference (see Kastenholz, Eusébio, Cunha et al., 2013).

References Cánoves, G., Villarino, M., Priestley, G. K., & Blanco, A. (2004). Rural tourism in Spain: an analysis of recent evolution. Geoforum, 35(6), 755-769. Figueiredo, E., Kastenholz, E., & Pinho, C. (2014). Living in a rural tourism destination: Exploring the views of local communities. Revista Portuguesa de Estudos Regionais, 36, 4-11. Gannon, A. (1994). Rural tourism as a factor in rural community economic development for economies in transition. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1-2), 51-60.

16

Introductory Chapter

Garrod, B., Wornell, R., & Youel, R. (2006). Re-conceptualising rural resources as countryside capital: The case of rural tourism. Journal of Rural Studies, 22(1), 117-128. Hall, C. M. (2011). Publish and perish? Bibliometric analysis, journal ranking and the assessment of research quality in tourism. Tourism Management, 32, 16-27. Kastenholz, E. (2004). «Management of Demand» as a Tool in Sustainable Tourist Destination Development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5), 388-408. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Marques, C. P. (2012). Marketing the rural tourism experience. In R. H. Tsiotsou & R. E. Goldsmith (Eds.), Strategic Marketing in Tourism Services (pp. 247-264). Bingley: Emerald. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Peixeira Marques, C., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience—The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M. J., & Figueiredo, E. (2013). Host-guest relationships in rural tourism: evidence from two Portuguese villages. Anatolia, 24(3), 367-380. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Cunha, C., Figueiredo, E., Carneiro, M. J., Breda, …Sousa, A. J. (Coords.). (2013). International Conference on Rural Tourism: “Re-inventing rural tourism and the rural tourism experience—Conserving, innovating and co-creating for sustainability”. Programme & Book of Abstracts. 4th-7th September 2013, University of Aveiro, Portugal. Retrieved from http://cms.ua.pt/orte/sites/default/files/book_abstracts_27ago.pdf Lane, B., & Kastenholz, E. (2015). Rural Tourism: the evolution of practice and research approaches—towards a new generation concept? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(8&9), 1133-1156. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (1994). Tourism strategies and rural development. Paris: OECD/GD. Ribeiro, M., & Marques, C. (2002). Rural tourism and the development of less favoured areas: Between rhetoric and practice. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(3), 211-220. Saxena, G., Clark, G., Oliver, T., & Ilbery, B. (2007). Conceptualizing integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment, 9(4), 347-370. Sharpley, R. (2002). Rural tourism and the challenge of tourism diversification: the case of Cyprus. Tourism Management, 23(3), 233244.

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

17

Silva, C., Kastenholz E., & Abrantes, J. L. (2013). Place attachment, destination image and impacts of tourism in mountain destinations. Anatolia, 24(1), 17-29. Wang, Y., & Pfister, R. E. (2008). Residents’ Attitudes Toward Tourism and Perceived Personal Benefits in a Rural Community. Journal of Travel Research, 47(1), 84-93. Wilson, S., Fesenmaier, D. R., Fesenmaier, J., & Van Es, J. C. (2001). Factors for Success in Rural Tourism Development. Journal of Travel Research, 40(2), 132-138.

PART I. THE VISITOR’S VIEW

CHAPTER ONE RURAL TOURIST EXPERIENCES ELISABETH KASTENHOLZ AND MARIA JOÃO CARNEIRO

Introduction What makes rural tourism attractive to tourists and should, therefore, be recognised as its primary market driver is the experience lived and cocreated by visitors and local actors in rural areas, taking advantage of most appealing and distinctive endogenous resources (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012), local competences, identities and passions. This is not only true for rural tourism. Nowadays, many academics and practitioners recognise the tourist experience as the main competitive advantage a destination may provide (Mossberg, 2007; Stamboulis & Skayannis, 2003). Even in the general marketing context, a paradigm shift was suggested from products, over services to experiences (Pine & Gilmore, 1998; Schmitt, 1999). The marketing focus has shifted from a narrow view concentrated on the tangible features of goods, to broader perspectives encompassing more intangible product and consumption dimensions, such as the services provided and, particularly, the consumer experience as a whole (Schmitt, 1999; Sumathisri, Veerakumar & Prabhakaran, 2012). The design and management of this experience have thus become crucial (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Mossberg, 2007; Sumathisri et al., 2012), requiring a sound understanding of its nature in the first place. In this context, despite the very recently increasing interest in the rural tourism experience (e.g. Agapito, Valle & Mendes, 2014; Carmichael, 2005; Carneiro, Lima & Silva, 2015; Dong, Wang, Morais & Brooks, 2013; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Eusébio & Figueiredo, 2013; Lee & Chang, 2012; Park & Yoon, 2009; Popp & McCole, 2014; Quadri-Felitti & Fiore, 2012), there is still little research analysing the features, dimensions and determinants of visitors’ rural tourism experience.

22

Chapter One

Moreover, several of these studies are restricted to a particular area of rural tourism—such as wine tourism (e.g. Carmichael, 2005; Popp & McCole, 2014; Quadri-Felitti & Fiore, 2012). The present chapter aims at identifying, in a holistic and systematic manner, the most relevant factors that determine the co-creation of this experience as well as the several dimensions of visitors’ tourist experience at rural destinations. It additionally recognises the multiplicity of tourist experiences that distinct visitor groups may have in diverse rural areas (Clemenson & Lane, 1997; Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz, Davis & Paul, 1999; Park & Yoon, 2009). This presentation, anchored in a literature review on the general consumption and the specific tourist experience, on the one hand, and on the rural tourist experience, in particular, on the other, may serve as theoretical background and guideline to more holistic and systematic empirical research regarding the rural tourist experience.

The Nature of Rural Tourist Experiences In the general marketing context, Schmitt (1999) proposes a multidimensional perspective of experience with five dimensions: (i) affective—related to feelings triggered by consumption of products; (ii) sensory—associated with consumption perceptions through the five senses; (iii) thinking—referring to the cognitive consumption experiences of reflecting and “sensemaking”; (iv) act—corresponding to consumption activities and behaviours; (v) relate—regarding the way one relates to others and establishes one’s social identity through consumption. Pine and Gilmore (1998), probably the most cited authors in defending a paradigm shift towards the “experience economy”, suggest four “experience realms”, as a consequence of intersection of two dimensions. According to more or less active participation in an experience, and depending on either absorption or immersion in the external environment (or “experience setting”), they suggest four types of experience: (i) entertainment experiences—with passive participation, while absorbed by the environment; (ii) aesthetic experiences—still marked by passive participation but being immersed in the environment; (iii) educational experiences—one actively participates in activities being absorbed; (iv) the arguably most involving escapist experiences—characterised by active participation and immersion in the environment. In the leisure and tourism field, several researchers (e.g. Hosany & Witham, 2010; Quadri-Felitti & Fiore, 2012) adopt the approaches suggested by Pine and Gilmore (1998), while some (e.g. Lee, Chang, Hou & Lin, 2008; Li, 2008) follow the suggestions of Schmitt (1999) and still

Rural Tourist Experiences

23

others (e.g. Hosany & Gilbert, 2010; Otto & Ritchie, 1996) develop their own scale or approach for assessing the tourist experience. When considering the rural tourist experience, in particular, there is no doubt that the rural and natural landscape plays an important role as one of its main elements. It is frequently identified as one of the major attractors of rural tourism, with a wide plethora of sensory appeals that make the rural tourism experience very attractive (Carmichael, 2005; Carneiro et al., 2015; Popp & McCole, 2014). Hence, the “servicescape” (Fisk, Grove & John, 2000), corresponding to the whole environmental context where services are provided or, more broadly and probably more appropriately, the “experiencescape” (Agapito et al., 2014; Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012; Mossberg, 2007; O’Dell, 2010) where tourist experiences occur, assumes a prominent role in the rural tourist experience, due to the specific characteristics of the rural areas’ landscape. Garrod, Wornell and Youel (2006) advocate the prominent role of “countryside capital” that is composed of a wide range of material features that include natural and cultural elements such as the rural, man-shaped, landscape, the biodiversity of flora and fauna, historical buildings, rural settlements, but also of immaterial features like customs and traditions. These components represent the core product of rural tourism, explaining the main appeal of the countryside to its visitors. This landscape with both material features, assessed through the five senses, and immaterial, mainly social and cultural references, provides the basis for much of the aesthetic rural tourist experience. It additionally presents educational experience opportunities when integrating information on the nature and evolution of these elements of countryside capital and their role for the community, i.e. also conferring a cognitive and relational dimension to the experience, and even escapist opportunities, when permitting tourists (who are ready and looking for this) to immerse in this living context. It seems, however, that the visual, aesthetic rural tourist experience or tourist gaze (Urry, 2002) is still the predominant way rural tourism is presented (Figueiredo & Raschi, 2013) and consumed or at least referred to by tourists when reporting on tourist experiences in rural areas (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012). As also stressed by several authors, rural tourism has important specificities. It should be: a) of small size communities, companies and buildings (Lane, 1994)—which should enhance more intense relational opportunities for visitors to these communities; b) based on the endogenous resources of rural areas, with experience elements sought responding to a quest of traditions, cultural

24

Chapter One

identity and “authenticity” explicitly linked to and, ideally, controlled by the local communities (Ilbery, Saxena & Kneafsey, 2007; Lane, 1994; Saxena, Clark, Oliver & Ilbery, 2007). Also, these features should permit cognitively oriented, educational and meaningful experiences, sometimes nostalgically referring to a person’s own or family past or to an idealized past of humanity in more “authentic” relationships within small-scale, traditional social structures as well as in balance with nature. These characteristics highlight the significant role that two components of rural areas may play when developing rural tourism experience opportunities: the physical territory, including nature and all tangible heritage, and the rural population, also encompassing a major intangible heritage of customs and traditions. Carmichael (2005) corroborates this perspective emphasising two geographical elements of the wine tourism experience: (i) the “physical and built environment” that integrates the landscape and the infrastructure of the region, as well as the servicescape where the service is provided (e.g. the winery setting); and (ii) the “human and social environment” related to several stakeholders—the service providers, the residents and other tourists—and to the interactions between visitors and these stakeholders. Kastenholz, Carneiro and Marques (2012, p. 246) underline the complexity of the rural tourism experience, conceptualizing it as a complex reality for “tourists and local residents alike, shaped by local resources and infrastructure, as well as by the specific rural tourism supply and eventually coordinated by a destination management/marketing organization, within a larger system of economic, cultural and social forces”. Similarly, and specifying some experience elements, Dissart and Marcouiller (2012) advocate that the rural experience is co-created, not only by the traditional tourism sectors (e.g. transportation, accommodation, intermediaries) but also by the following factors: x Rural tourism recreation services: including rural tourism services that may serve as attractions (e.g. rural parks, ski areas, rural cultural sites) as well as supporting services (e.g. equipment rental or repair services, interpretation);\ x Indirect joint producers: including agricultural producers, forest managers, tangible and intangible governance; x The experience-scape: encompassing the other tourists, and some features of the territory of the rural areas such as the local culture and history, natural and built amenities, the lack of congestion.

Rural Tourist Experiences

25

If small scale development helps to ensure a development based on traditions and controlled by the local communities, on the other hand, it may also constrain the development of attractive rural tourism experiences due to the scarce resources and lack of competences of some rural, frequently family-based, companies (Getz & Carlsen, 2000; Lane, 2009; Sharpley, 2002). Therefore, rural tourism often requires the creation of specific dynamics among residents, especially among providers of rural tourism services. In this context, partnerships, including networks, should be encouraged, since they permit the creation of synergies and the development of coordinated action (Sharpley, 2005; Tolstad, 2014) that allow increased competitiveness and delivering more attractive, involving and memorable experiences (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012). In any case, the central role of the tourist in this experience co-creation cannot be neglected, as already suggested for the general service context (Dong, Evan & Zou, 2008; Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2000). Grove and Fisk (1983) introduced the metaphor of services as theatre for explaining the specificity of the service, including the elements: actors, an audience, a setting, a front stage, a backstage and a performance, as one possible framework for conceptualizing the service experience and suggesting implications for interactive services marketing (see also Fisk et al., 2000). The tourist having the experience is, in fact, not just a passive observer or receiver of a service or tourist product, but increasingly recognised as an active co-producer of his/her own personally shaped experiences, central to the value creation process, its interpretation, emotional outcomes, meaningfulness and impact on future travel behaviour, both regarding their own future holiday choices and those of others. As Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques and Lima (2012, p. 247) point out, “the tourist lives the experience subjectively, marked by primarily affective and symbolic facets”. It differs from person to person, as a consequence of each individual’s socio-demographic and travel conditions, behaviours, motivations, expectations, resulting from prior experiences, but also in accordance with the specific place and human context in which it occurs, additionally “integrating a diversity of pre-, onsite and post-experiences related to visiting the rural area” (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012, p. 249). As a matter of fact, the experience already starts with its planning and dreamlike imagination and is prolonged after the trip through frequently (nowadays on-line) shared-remembering (Aho, 2001), and may be understood as being integrated into a flow of more or less significant life experiences. Others stress the role of peak experiences or at least those

26

Chapter One

that are desired as markedly different from “everyday experiences” (Uriely, 2005; Walls, Okumus, Wang & Kwun, 2011). Fig. 1-1. The rural tourist experience from the visitors’ perspective

Rural Tourist Experiences

27

Figure 1-1 presents a suggestion of an approach regarding the cocreation and composition of visitors’ rural tourism experience. This approach, based on a literature review, suggests that the following factors, amongst others, shape the rural tourism experience: (i) the rural destination, with its tangible dimension (e.g. natural and cultural landscape elements, infrastructure and facilities) as well as its intangible dimension (e.g. history, culture, traditions); (ii) the local community of that territory—both supply agents and other residents; (iii) and the visitors themselves. The approach also proposes that the rural tourism experience of visitors is highly complex; being composed of several dimensions that mirror specific benefits sought at a rural destination and that connect distinctly to the experience dimensions suggested in the general marketing/management literature (Schmitt, 1999; Pine & Gilmore, 1998). The next section will discuss these dimensions in further detail.

Dimensions of the Rural Tourist Experience As a matter of fact, there are groups of visitors with heterogeneous motivations seeking diverse rural territories (Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz et al., 1999; Park & Yoon, 2009; Rid, Ezeuduji & Pröbstl-Haider, 2014). Therefore, the subjective rural tourist experience may differ according to the type of visitor, the purpose and context of the trip, and to the specificities of the destination visited. However, the approach presented in Figure 1-1 identifies a set of dimensions that, according to the literature reviewed, correspond to the main facets of the rural tourism experience sought by visitors, as explained in further detail next. This proposal regarding the composition of the rural tourist experience is based on research published on the specific contents of the rural tourism experience (e.g. Agapito et al., 2014; Carneiro et al., 2015; Clemenson & Lane, 1997; Figueiredo, 2004; Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Musa, Kayat & Thirumoorthi, 2010; Park & Yoon, 2009; Rid et al., 2014, Rodrigues, Kastenholz & Morais, 2012; Sidali, Kastenholz & Bianchi, 2013). It additionally considers the general experience dimensions suggested by Schmitt (1999) and Pine and Gilmore (1998). As may be observed, this proposal encompasses the several dimensions proposed by Schmitt (1999), namely: (i) affective—related to the pleasure, arousal and relaxation felt; (ii) sensory, corresponding, approximately, to the aesthetic dimension of Pine and Gilmore (1998)—referring to the appreciation of the rural environment through the five senses; (iii) thinking, a dimension also highly present in the educational dimension proposed by Pine and Gilmore (1998)—associated with the opportunities

28

Chapter One

to learn about rural areas, but also transversal to other dimensions of our model, in so far as it is connected to “experiencing the rural way of life” by learning about it in a more active way—and to nostalgia—thinking about the past; (iv) relate—corresponding to the social dimension of the experience, mirrored by interactions during the stay, referring to bonding within the travel group, but also outside it, getting to know other tourists at the destination as well as interacting and bonding with local residents, while also referring to the visitor’s social identity. This dimension also refers, more broadly, to the social meaning of the journey, also in its past dimension—nostalgia—and the extension of the lived experience into the future, by sharing it with others. Dimension (v), the “act dimension”, may refer to distinct behaviours being reflected in the domains of escaping the stress of daily life by doing certain things as well as abstaining from others, of interacting with others and of participating in outdoor activities, corresponding, approximately, to the rather active experience realms suggested by Pine and Gilmore (1998): education and escapism permitting visitors to learn about and immerse in the “rural way of life”, in nature, in new or refreshed social relations and to escape simultaneously from negatively perceived daily experience environments. A nostalgia dimension was also included, given that previous research shows that rural tourism tends to raise memories from past times associated with these areas (Figueiredo, 2004; Kastenholz & Lima, 2013; Rodrigues et al., 2012), which should be included here as enhancing the meaningfulness of the tourist experience, connecting it to one’s life experience, personal, social and cultural identity. As may be observed, the approach proposed involves dimensions that differ in the type of participation and the level of immersion in the environmental context, as happens in Pine and Gilmore’s (1998) model, with the dimension of experiencing the rural way of life being one of the dimensions that may imply more immersion. Also, most dimensions overlap, like those presenting the social, sensorial, cognitive or affective dimensions of the experience, since most human experiences involve several of these dimensions. Last but not least, more benefits may be associated with rural tourism experiences, which are not specified here, but may be derived from a combination of the dimensions suggested before. A deeper analysis and discussion of each of the proposed dimensions is presented next. One of the main drivers underlying tourism visits to rural areas is, usually, the desire to escape from the routine of the daily, generally urban, life, a stressful lifestyle, from congested, polluted, noisy and artificial environments (Kastenholz & Lima, 2011; Kastenholz, 2013; Lane, 2009;

Rural Tourist Experiences

29

Marques, 2005; Park & Yoon, 2009). The calm and uncrowded environment of the countryside is often the perfect setting for a relaxing experience outside the usual context of daily life (Dissart & Marcouiller, 2012). The contact with nature seems to be important for achieving this goal (Figueiredo, 2009; Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz & Lima, 2013; Kastenholz & Rodrigues, 2007; Molera & Albaladecho, 2007; Sharpley & Jeppson, 2011), either through outdoor activities, like hiking or fishing (Clemenson & Lane, 1997; Dong et al., 2013; Popp & McCole, 2014; Rodrigues et al., 2012) or through more passive nature appreciation, e.g. by enjoying the aesthetics of natural scenery. These pursuits all lead to both relaxing and stimulating, highly emotional, sometimes even spiritual nature-based experiences. That is, tourists may have not only low-arousal relaxing experiences in rural areas but also highly arousing, “escape” experiences, as suggested by Pine and Gilmore (1998). These are possible, for example, in the context of an occidental post-modern tourist hiking in the Himalayas or exploring the Amazon, staying in indigenous village communities and being immersed in their local culture, with both nature and cultural contexts potentially presenting challenges and terrain for exploration (of the Other and Self). The contrast with the busy, noisy and crowded environments of cities seems to be a common theme in these nature experiences (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Marques, 2005). Nature has also been found to be connected to a series of sensorial impressions (e.g. sounds of birds, of wind and silence, sounds of water, rivers or the sea, the views of landscapes, natural light, the combination of colours such as the green of the fields and the grey and brown of stones and the earth, the smell of wild flowers, pine trees and in coastal rural areas, views and smells of the sea), as identified in diverse studies (Agapito et al., 2014; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Musa et al., 2010; Popp & McCole, 2014). The quality of countryside resources and the peaceful quietness perceived are highly valued by visitors, who tend to memorise and emphasise, from their rural tourism experiences, the silence and the fresh air that can be found in the rural contexts (Agapito et al., 2014; Kastenholz & Lima, 2011; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Musa et al., 2010). Tasting local gastronomy and wines is also a frequent activity reported in rural areas, with its sensorial dimension highly appreciated and leaving positive marks on the rural tourists’ memories (Kastenholz & Lima, 2011), which applies, in particular, to wine tourism wine tourism (Carmichael, 2005; Lee & Chang, 2012; Quadri-Felitti & Fiore, 2012). Most rural visitors are not satisfied by only passively appreciating a beautiful rural setting; they also desire to actively expand their knowledge

30

Chapter One

of the territory visited and its culture, either in an educational or a more intense, escapist manner (Pine & Gilmore, 1998). Many studies reveal that some visitors are very interested in knowing the specificities of the natural environment of rural areas, as well as rural life agriculture, customs, legends and the built heritage of these communities (Dong et al., 2013; Kastenholz & Lima, 2011; Kastenholz, 2013; Popp & McCole, 2014; Rid et al., 2014), frequently associated with the quest for authenticity of the “typically urban-tourist looking for signs of lost identities in a standardised world, signs of ‘authenticity’, in the context of interactions and tensions between the global and the local, images of the past and demands of the present” (Kastenholz, 2013, p. 373). This nostalgically embellished rural idyll, corresponding to an idealised, romantic idea of “the good old days”, with pure, simple relationships between People and between Mankind and Nature (Clary, 1993), an antidote to the anomie of urban life (Cawley & Gillmor, 2008), is arguably increasingly sought by the post-modern tourist (Urry, 2002) and conferring significance to the experience (Chambers, 2009). Local residents, and particularly hosts in rural tourism establishments, play a particularly important role in helping tourists have a richer and more significant experience, first because they often act as “cultural brokers” (Cohen, 1988), facilitating the discovery of the territory through information about its specific tangible and intangible features and by transmitting the history, culture and local traditions to their guests. This contact with local residents, particularly if perceived as welcoming, caring and authentic, is highly appreciated by rural tourists (Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009; Kastenholz et al., 2013) and may contribute to some visitors’ desired immersion in the above described idealised “rural way of life”. However, the type, quality and intensity of the host-guest interaction varies according to diverse geographical, social and travel contexts, particularly depending on length of stay, with excursionism tending to produce rather brief and superficial contacts (Kastenholz et al., 2013), but more research is needed to understand better the social dimension of the rural tourism experience and its determinants. It is interesting to note that many rural visitors desire to experience the rural way of life, which can be achieved through a series of more or less involving activities. For example, contacts with local residents may be stimulated, e.g. involving them in new, co-creative tourist activities based on local heritage with an active involvement of both visitors and residents (Carvalho, Lima & Kastenholz, 2013). Thereby more socially engaging experiences may occur, where residents serve as authentic guides leading visitors through their village or surroundings or as instructors of handicraft

Rural Tourist Experiences

31

and agriculture workshops or traditional food cooking sessions. In this context, co-creative experience opportunities should be developed, based on the resources valued by many visitors, such as typical rural landscapes, cultural performances and local products that “tell” something about the territory, and are perceived as distinctive, unique and authentic (Carneiro et al., 2015; Dong et al., 2013; Musa et al., 2010; Sidali et al., 2013). Local handicraft exhibitions and visits to farms are activities usually carried out to appreciate local products. However, many visitors already demand more involving experiences, including “hands-on activities” where people can participate in the production of rural products (Carneiro et al., 2015; Carvalho et al., 2013; Flanigan, Blackstock & Hunter, 2014; Lee & Chang, 2012; Musa et al., 2010; Park & Yoon, 2009; Quadri-Felitti & Fiore, 2012; Rid et al., 2014; Sims, 2009). The active participation in food production, in agriculture and handicraft production is much appreciated, not only because it is a unique opportunity for learning, but also because it permits a different, more sensory-rich and extremely rewarding connection with rural resources and customs. The tourist experience may also be prolonged in time through tangible elements taken home (Hu & Yu, 2007), that may be either produced by the tourist him/herself in the previously mentioned experience contexts or purchased from local residents as souvenirs, additionally stimulating other sectors of the local economy. Nevertheless, it is important to recognise that the rural tourism market is heterogeneous, including groups of people that may prefer an indirect or more passive contact with the rural environment (Flanigan et al., 2014; Rid et al., 2014) and less social interaction (Kastenholz et al., 2013), and that some forms of immersion in the rural culture are not so much appreciated in some contexts (e.g. learning the local language and staying among the population in some rural areas of Gambia) (Rid et al., 2014), where travel context, cultural distance as well as personality traits of both visitors and hosts should play a role. Despite a relative consensus regarding the positive emotional outcomes resulting from rural tourism experiences, some research suggests that high levels of arousal are not so important in rural tourism (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Park & Yoon, 2009). This pleasant, low arousal experience frequently permits not only a desired escape from negatively perceived, stressful, high arousal living contexts but also evokes, as previously mentioned, nostalgic feelings regarding rural life, one’s personal and family memories, as well as cultural roots.

32

Chapter One

Conclusion The rural tourist experience is, without any doubt, a complex whole, lived and co-created in a particular territorial, natural, social and cultural context, from which it draws main experience and symbolic elements. Here, distinct, unique local resources are clearly desired as authentic features of a frequently nostalgically idealised rural way of life, very much sought as a way to escape stressful urban living contexts. Also, nature is a major attractor in this contrasting environment and largely contributes to a relaxing, but also stimulating and sensory-rich experience. A multiplicity of activities may be pursued in diverse rural destination contexts (Clemenson & Lane, 1997), which may be more or less active and more or less enhancing immersion in nature or local culture. The social dimension of the experience was identified as also potentially enriching, with local residents and hosts in service contexts acting as cultural brokers and stimulating more authentic co-creative rural tourism experiences that may be appreciated and positively remembered by all involved (Kastenholz et al., 2013). Finally, material signs of the non-ordinary experience, namely memorabilia taken home after the trip as souvenirs, enhance vivid memories over time (Hu & Yu, 2007; Kastenholz, 2013). The recognition that a variety of experiences may be lived and are sought in rural tourist destinations suggests the careful development of cocreative experience opportunities, targeted with different approaches to appeal to different rural tourist segments. The understanding of the nature, features and main ingredients of the rural tourist experience, resulting from both a literature review on rural tourism, and the integration of recent conceptual models in the experience marketing field, should enhance the strategic marketing potential of rural tourism destinations in an attempt to systematically develop a variety of appealing, co-creative, involving, distinctive and memorable rural tourism experience opportunities and to successfully promote these to the most interested and interesting target markets (Kastenholz, 2004). Simultaneously, an integrated destination planning and management approach, involving all local stakeholders and mobilizing most valuable and valued elements of the countryside capital (Garrod et al., 2006) in the careful design and promotion of these experience opportunities, should enhance sustainable rural tourism development benefitting all involved in the long run (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Saxena et al., 2007).

Rural Tourist Experiences

33

References Agapito, D., Valle, P., & Mendes, J. (2014). The sensory dimension of tourist experiences: Capturing meaningful sensory-informed themes in Southwest Portugal. Tourism Management, 42, 224-237. Aho, S. K. (2001). Towards a general theory of touristic experiences: Modelling experience process in tourism. Tourism Review, 56(3/4), 3337. Carmichael, B. (2005). Understanding the wine tourism experience for winery visitors in the Niagara region, Ontario, Canada. Tourism Geographies, 7(2), 185-204. Carneiro, M. J., Lima, J., & Lavrador Silva, A. (2015). Landscape and the rural tourism experience: Identifying key elements, addressing potential, and implications for the future. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 23(8-9), 1217-1235. Carvalho, M., Lima, J., & Kastenholz, E. (2013). Rural Tourism and cultural creativity—new opportunities for rural destinations. Proceedings of the International Conference on Rural Tourism: Reinventing rural tourism and the rural tourism experience—Conserving, innovating and co-creating for sustainability, 4th-7th September 2013 (pp. 251-266). University of Aveiro, Portugal (ISBN: 978-989-204016-5). Cawley, M., & Gillmor, D. A. (2008). Integrated rural tourism: Concepts and practice. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 316-337. Chambers, E. (2009). From authenticity to significance: Tourism on the frontier of culture and place. Futures, 41(6), 353-359. Clary, D. (1993). Le tourisme dans l’espace français. Paris: Masson Géographie. Clemenson, H. A., & Lane, B. (1997). Niche Markets, Niche Marketing and Rural Employment. In R. D. Bollman & J. M. Bryden (Eds.), Rural Employment: An International Perspective (pp. 410-426). Wallingford: CAB International. Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and Commoditization in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 371-386. Dissart, J. C., & Marcouiller, D. W. (2012). Rural tourism production and the experience-scape. Tourism Analysis, 17, 691-704. Dong, B., Evans, K. R., & Zou, S. (2008). The Effects of Customer Participation in Co-Created Service Recovery. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 123-137.

34

Chapter One

Dong, E., Wang, Y., Morais, D., & Brooks, D. (2013). Segmenting the rural tourism market: The case of Potter County, Pennsylvania, USA. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 19(2), 181-193. Figueiredo, E. (2004). Imagined rural—tourism and the social (re)construction of rural spaces. Paper read at XI World Congress of Rural Sociology—Globalization, Risks and Resistance in Rural Economies and Societies. Trondheim, Norway. —. (2009). One rural, two visions—environmental issues and images on rural areas in Portugal. Journal of European Countryside, 1, 9-21. Figueiredo, E., & Raschi, A. (2013). Introduction. In E. Figueiredo & A. Raschi (Eds.), Fertile Links? Connections between tourism activities, socioeconomic contexts and local development in European Rural Areas (pp. 7-16). Florence/ Italy: Florence University Press. Fisk, R. P., Grove, S. J., & John, J. (2000). Interactive Services Marketing. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Flanigan, S., Blackstock, K., & Hunter, C. (2014). Agritourism from the perspective of providers and visitors: a typology-based study. Tourism Management, 40, 394-405. Frochot, I. (2005). A benefit segmentation of tourists in rural areas: A Scottish perspective. Tourism Management, 26(3), 335-346. Garrod, B., Wornell, R., & Youel, R. (2006). Re-conceptualising rural resources as countryside capital: The case of rural tourism. Journal of Rural Studies, 22(1), 117-128. Getz, D., & Carlsen, J. (2000). Characteristics and goals of family and owner-operated businesses in the rural tourism and hospitality sectors. Tourism Management, 21(6), 547-560. Grove, S. K., & Fisk, R. P. (1983). The Dramaturgy of Services Exchanges: An Analytical Framework for Services Marketing. In L. L. Berry, G. L. Shostack & G. D. Upah (Eds.), Emerging Perspectives on Services Marketing (pp. 45-49). Chicago: American Marketing Association. Hosany, S., & Gilbert, D. (2010). Measuring Tourists’ Emotional Experiences toward Hedonic Holiday Destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 49(4), 513-526. Hosany, S., & Witham, M. (2010). Dimensions of Cruisers’ Experiences, Satisfaction, and Intention to Recommend. Journal of Travel Research, 49(3), 351-364. Hu, B., & Yu, H. (2007). Segmentation by craft selection criteria and shopping involvement. Tourism Management, 28(4), 1079-1092.

Rural Tourist Experiences

35

Ilbery, B., Saxena, G., & Kneafsey, M. (2007). Exploring tourists and gatekeepers’ attitudes towards integrated rural tourism in the England—Wales border region. Tourism Geographies, 9(4), 441-468. Kastenholz, E. (2004). Management of Demand as a Tool in Sustainable Tourist Destination Development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5), 388-408. Kastenholz, E. (2013). Living, sharing and marketing the overall rural tourism experience—a conceptual discussion and first results from a research project in 3 Portuguese villages. In N. Santos & F. Cravidão (Coords.), Turismo e Cultura: Destinos e Competitividade (pp. 371394). Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M. J., & Figueiredo, E. (2013). Host-guest relationships in rural tourism: evidence from two Portuguese villages. Anatolia, 24(3), 367-380. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Marques, C. P. (2012). Marketing the rural tourism experience. In R. H. Tsiotsou & R. E. Goldsmith (Eds.), Strategic Marketing in Tourism Services (pp. 247-264). Bingley: Emerald. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C. P., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience—The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Kastenholz, E., Davis, D., & Paul, G. (1999). Segmenting tourism in rural areas: The case of north and central Portugal. Journal of Travel Research, 37(4), 353-363. Kastenholz, E., & Lima, J. (2011). The integral rural tourism experience from the tourist’s point of view—a qualitative analysis of its nature and meaning. Tourism & Management Studies, 7, 62-74. Kastenholz, E., & Lima, J. (2013). Co-creating quality rural tourism experiences—the case of a Schist Village in Portugal. International Journal of Management Cases, 05/2013, 193-204. Kastenholz, E., & Rodrigues, A. (2007). Discussing the potential benefits of hiking tourism in Portugal—an exploratory study of the market profile and its expenditure levels. Anatolia, 8(1), 5-22. Kastenholz, E., & Sparrer, M. (2009). Rural Dimensions of the Commercial Home. In P. Lynch, A. MacIntosh & H. Tucker (Eds.), Commercial Homes in Tourism: An international perspective (pp. 138149). London: Routledge. Lane, B. (1994). What is rural tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1), 7-21.

36

Chapter One

—. (2009). Rural tourism: An Overview. In M. Robinson & T. Jamal (Eds), The SAGE Handbook of Tourism Studies (pp. 354-370). London: Sage Publications. Lee, S. H., Chang, S. C., Hou, J. S., & Lin, C. H. (2008). Night market experience and image of temporary residents and foreign visitors. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 2(3), 217-233. Lee, T. H., & Chang, Y. S. (2012). The influence of experiential marketing and activity involvement on the loyalty intentions of wine tourists in Taiwan. Leisure Studies, 31(1), 103-121. Li, Y. C. (2008). A discussion of applying experiential marketing to leisure agriculture. Journal of American Academy of Business, 13(1), 98-102. Marques, C. P. (2005). Emotions, motivations and destination positioning. Paper presented at the international conference on destination branding and marketing for regional tourism development (8-10 December), Macau, China. Molera, L., & Albaladejo, I. P. (2007). Profiling segments of tourists in rural areas of South-Eastern Spain. Tourism Management, 28, 757-767. Mossberg, L. (2007). A Marketing Approach to the Tourist Experience. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(1), 59-74. Musa, G., Kayat, K., & Thirumoorthi, T. (2010). The experiential aspect of rural home-stay among Chinese and Malay students using diary method. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 10, 25-41. Otto, J. E., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). The service experience in tourism. Tourism Management, 17(3), 165-174. O’Dell, T. (2010). Experiencescapes: Blurring Borders and Testing Connections. In T. O’Dell & P. Billing (Eds.), Experiencescapes, Tourism, Culture, and Economy (pp. 11-33). Koge: Copenhagen Business School Press. Park, D. B., & Yoon, Y. S. (2009). Segmentation by motivation in rural tourism: A Korean case study. Tourism Management, 30, 99-108. Pine, J. B., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, 76(4), 97-105. Popp, L., & McCole, D. (2014). Understanding tourists’ itineraries in emerging rural tourism regions: the application of paper-based itinerary mapping methodology to a wine tourism region in Michigan. Current Issues in Tourism. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2014.942259 Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Co-opting Customer Competence. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 79-88.

Rural Tourist Experiences

37

Quadri-Felitti, D., & Fiore, A. M. (2012). Experience economy constructs as a framework for understanding wine tourism. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 18(1), 3-15. Rid, W., Ezeuduji, I. O., & Pröbstl-Haider, U. (2014). Segmentation by motivation for rural tourism activities in The Gambia. Tourism Management, 40, 102-116. Rodrigues, Á., Kastenholz, E., & Morais, D. (2012). Travel constraints and nostalgia as determinants of cross-Atlantic legacy tourism. In H. Pechlaner, T. J. Lee & G. D. Bò (Eds.), New Minorities and Tourism— Proceedings of the International Scientific Workshop on New Minorities and Tourism (pp. 75-92). Bozen: Europaeische Akademie Bozen. Saxena, G., Clark, G., Oliver, T., & Ilbery, B. (2007). Conceptualizing integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment, 9(4), 347-370. Schmitt, B. (1999). Experiential marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(1/3), 53-67. Sharpley, R. (2002). Rural tourism and the challenge of tourism diversification. Tourism Management, 23(3), 233-244. —. (2005). Managing the countryside for tourism: a governance perspective. In L. Pender & R. Sharpley (Eds.), The Management of Tourism (pp. 175-186). Sage Publications. Sharpley, R., & Jepson, D. (2011). Rural tourism: A spiritual experience? Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 52-71. Sidali, K., Kastenholz, E., & Bianchi, R. (2013). Food tourism, niche markets and products in rural tourism: combining the intimacy model and the experience economy as a rural development strategy. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(8-9), 1179-1197. Sims, R. (2009). Food, place and authenticity: local food and the sustainable tourism experience. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(3), 321-336. Stamboulis, Y., & Skayannis, P. (2003). Innovation strategies and technology for experience based tourism. Tourism Management, 24(1), 35-43. Sumathisri, B., Veerakumar, K., & Prabhakaran, G. (2012). Customer experience management: An absolute way to delight. International Business Management, 6(4), 502-506. Tolstad, H. K. (2014). Development of rural-tourism experiences through networking: An example from Gudbrandsdalen. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift—Norwegian Journal of Geography, 68(2), 111-120.

38

Chapter One

Uriely, N. (2005). The Tourist Experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 199-216. Urry, J. (2002). The tourist gaze (2nd ed.). London: Sage. Walls, A. R., Okumus, F., Wang, Y. R., & Kwun, D. J. W. (2011). An epistemological view of consumer experiences. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(1), 10-21.

CHAPTER TWO SENSATIONS, PERCEPTION, AND CO-CREATION IN RURAL TOURISM EXPERIENCES DORA AGAPITO, HUGO DE ALMEIDA AND ANA CLÁUDIA CAMPOS

Introduction Sensations have been posed as prerequisites for human perception of the surrounding environment, with sensory stimuli being suggested as facilitators of unique, positive, and memorable consumer experiences (Carù & Cova, 2003; Goldstein, 2010; Krishna, 2012). Recently, tourism studies have recognised that destination experiences can be associated with particular sensory qualities pertaining to specific resources that can be explored in the process of carefully marketing rural tourist experiences (Agapito, Valle & Mendes, 2014; Dann & Jacobsen, 2003; Mossberg, 2007; Tung & Ritchie, 2011). Indeed, rural destinations are characterised by a rich and specific collection of endogenous resources, ideal for conceptualising unique sensory-informed tourist experiences involving and benefiting all destination stakeholders (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012). Furthermore, the activity of exploring the sensory dimension of rural tourist experiences is relevant because of the growth of competition among destinations and tourists increasingly demanding a variety of experiences. This context calls for rural destinations to develop creative and cooperative offerings, as well as communication strategies that are effective in attracting visitors that fit the destination identity and boost that area’s sustainable development (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012; Lane, 2009). As research on consumer behaviour develops, new findings on the main trends show that tourists have evolved towards ways of skilled

40

Chapter Two

consumption that enable them to satisfy higher order needs and aspirations driven by creativity and creative action potential (Morgan, Elbe & de Esteban Curiel, 2009; Richards, 2010). In the process, technological developments in the sphere of information and communication have been shaping the digital era and have transformed not only the tourism industry but, more importantly, the consumption of tourism experiences (Neuhofer, Buhalis & Ladkin, 2012). Tourists no longer see themselves as passive recipients of service propositions. They are in search of experiences that contribute to self-development and appeal to their sense of personal identity (Cohen, 2010), and therefore pay greater attention to offerings that meet their desire to be in charge and actually do things (Binkhorst & Dekker, 2009; Mkono, 2013; O’Dell, 2010; Ryan, 2002). This desire could be satisfied by presenting them with opportunities to apply and develop skills, improve knowledge, and explore multi-sensory environments. Against this background, this chapter aims to discuss the importance of perception and co-creation in the managing and marketing of rural tourism experiences by focusing on the sensory dimension. Additionally, it presents major methodological approaches that have been used to analyse the sensory tourist experience. Finally, using three cases, the chapter illustrates how to use sensory elements in managing and marketing rural tourism experiences to enhance the overall experience quality at the destination.

Senses: Sensations, Perception, and Memory Human perception, sensations, recognition, encoding, and retention of information are apparently easily explainable phenomena of daily experience in the natural world (Gibson, 1950; Mesulam, 2000). The complex nervous system absorbs the information captured by our senses (vision, hearing, smell, taste, and touch), shaping our perception and the way we think and act (behaviour and human movement) (Keysers, Kaas & Gazzola, 2010). The recognition of perception as a product of complex attribution depends on the possible coding of certain stimuli (upper perceptive functions) over others, with an endogenous ability to assign a coherent link between these stimuli and information we already hold about the environment. The properties of perception and its analytical power are highly consistent and adaptable. Even a significant change of an environment’s perception triggers an assignment to the new category identified and a stabilising mechanism for effective future recognition (Norwich & McConville, 1991). Back in 1869, Christopher Columbus Graham postulated

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

41

that sensation can be regarded as something innate to the human being that is experienced not only through the sense organs but also through cognition and memory. Earlier, Thomas Reid (1785) referred to sensation as a primary process of gathering information. In turn, perception occurs in a sequence of secondary processes that allow interpreting the sensations, thus determining the reaction to a particular stimulus (Goldstein, 2010) and giving it meaning. For Goldstein (2007), perception results from a complex, dynamic, and changing process which is influenced not only by the absorption of information from the external natural world but also by complex properties of the sensation process. For the same reason, the experiences conducted by Wundt on introspection were not successful, since the description of the sensations is influenced by primary, albeit unconscious, processes (Esteves & Öhman, 1993, cited in Phillips, Wayne, Rauch & Lane, 2003) and also by previously acquired experiences (Read & Loewenstein, 1999). According to Goldstein (2007), there are four categories to consider when these processes occur, namely: (1) the external stimulus received; (2) the electrical signals between neurons that transmit information; (3) the perception, recognition, and reaction to the stimulus; (4) the previously obtained knowledge stored in the memory that an individual brings to a situation conditioning perception. According to studies carried out so far (Canli, Zhao, Breweer, Gabrieli & Cahill, 2000; Taylor, Liberzon & Koeppe, 2000), information processing takes place in specific neuronal regions, including the ventral system. In turn, the ventral system includes the amygdala, which is responsible for activating the affective state of fear and salient information, the insula, which is responsible for activating the perception of nausea and unpleasant flavours, as well as the ventral striatum, anterior cingulate gyrus, and prefrontal cortex, which are important for identifying emotional states and the selection of appropriate behavioural and emotional responses, respectively (Phillips et al., 2003). For example, let us look at the perception of a particular object, a cake. To perceive this cake, we use the sensory organs, including smell, taste, sight, and touch (in this case, we would not need to use the sense of hearing). For each of these senses, we unconsciously seek particular information: if the aroma is pleasant, the taste is sweet, the colours are attractive, and the touch is soft. All this information is then processed by specific brain regions which, in turn, will activate the ventral system. After that, the individual should be able to perceive external stimuli emotionally and react through vocalisations and behaviours. As mentioned earlier, all these processes are accomplished without the awareness of the individual; therefore, activation of saliva occurs even

42

Chapter Two

before the individual perceives that the cake is attractive (see also Croner & Albright, 1999). Hence, the way information is processed and encoded can predict future responses to the same or similar sensations, a process that also occurs unconsciously and with the recurrence of memory. Let us then consider the fourth category postulated by Goldstein (2007): the knowledge we bring to the perceived situation can affect different parts of the previous process, i.e. the top-down process (a process that allows combining expectations and predicting future stimuli in the face of changes in the environment). The perception is closely connected with the memory process, with the recognition of a specific stimulus triggering a complex recognition and meaning-associating process operating from visual to auditory memories according to the complexity of the range of possibilities (Murray & Wise, 2004).

Tourism Experience, Management of Attention, and Co-creation While perception derives from a sequence of processes that determine our experience of the surrounding environments, experiences can be approached as ephemeral events lived by an individual in a particular spatially organised environment, whether it is a city, tourist attraction, store, park, or rural setting (O’Dell, 2010). As they involve the individual’s being in its sensory (sensations and perception), affective (emotions and feelings), cognitive (thoughts, beliefs, aspirations, expectations, memories), and behavioural (task performance, physical activity) dimensions, they are very personal (O’Dell, 2010; Ooi, 2010), holistic (Verhoef et al., 2009), and meaningful phenomena (Cutler & Carmichael, 2010). Particularly, tourism experiences have been described as travel-related events and activities (Fesenmaier & Gretzel, 2004) which take place out of the ordinary environment and are pursued for a wide variety of motives (Beard & Ragheb, 1983; Ryan, 2002), but both escapism and experience-seeking have been thought of as key drivers of tourism demand (Cohen, 2010; Crompton, 1979). From another perspective (Clawson & Knetsch, 1966; O’Dell, 2010), the tourism experience involves different stages, including anticipation (pre-trip phase), travel to the destination, activities and interactions at the destination, travel back home, and recollection (Cutler & Carmichael, 2010). During these different stages, activities are performed and interactions occur between the tourist and the multiple experience environments (Binkhorst & Dekker, 2009; Tan, Kung & Luh, 2013),

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

43

including interactions with tourism providers, the local population, and other tourists (Mossberg, 2007).

The Management of Attention in Tourism Considering the subjective nature of experiences and the selective nature of human perception, Ooi (2010) suggests that the role of tourism mediators is to compete for tourists’ scarce attention (Davenport & Beck, 2001) by offering cues that help tourists to frame their experiences. These cues can be made tangible and turned into sensory markers, through which tourist experiences are sculpted (Ooi, 2010). In fact, sensory stimuli have already been used as central elements in the planning and marketing of consumer experiences (Krishna, 2012; Pine & Gilmore, 1998; Schmitt, 1999). In this regard, empirical studies on consumption experiences emphasise the importance of the sensory dimension when compared with other dimensions of consumption experiences (Brakus, Schmitt & Zarantonello, 2009; Gentile, Spiller & Noci, 2007). Accordingly, the experiential marketing approach stresses the importance of hedonic consumption, resulting in the proposal that attention should be paid to providing the right multi-sensory environment aiming to optimise and contribute to value creation for both customers and companies (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982; Pine & Gilmore, 1998). Indeed, with the increasing focus on the experiential and symbolic aspects of consumption, the aesthetic dimension of consumption has boosted its relevance, particularly in the tourism field (Oh, Fiore & Jeoung, 2007; Williams, 2006). The study of attention in the organisational context is not new. In fact, early studies date back to the 1940s, when organisational theory started exploring the relation between decision-making and attention allocation (Ocasio, 2011). Attention is a scarce resource (Davenport & Beck, 2001; Dijksterhuis & Aarts, 2010) in the face of the overload of environmental stimuli (attention scarcity), and it is directed to those stimuli which are perceived as particularly relevant in a specific situation (Ocasio, 2011); as individuals cannot focus on two different focal points at the same time, one of them is chosen at a time (attention selection, see Driver, 2001). Attention is also diverted according to changes in the environment that may be felt as important and require a temporary mental engagement in a different direction (attention shifting). These changes influence behaviour and choice, and thus outcomes resulting from decision-making. In other words, attention can be influenced and controlled, either by the individual him/herself or by external sources (attention management).

44

Chapter Two

In the tourism context, the management of attention is related to the notion that the tourism experience, although an event lived by the individual tourist, is mediated by persons and organisations that guide his/her choices, behaviours, and interpretations, as well as the environments in which he/she temporarily moves. Thus, attention management is also a matter of competitiveness in this context. The levels of competition in the field of attention may involve competing products, destinations, social and individual interpretations, and different dimensions of the experiencescape (O’Dell, 2010). Experiencescapes include attractions (attention attractors) but also distractions (attention distractors), social constructions of places, and interactions, which are sources of competition among organisations and destinations that relate to the co-presence of divergent stimuli presented to tourists. The implication of tourists in co-creative experiences —in the sense that these motivate them to engage in either physically or mentally demanding activities which may be either more focused on goal achievement (push factors) or driven by strong environmental stimuli (pull factors)—requires the management of their attentional behaviour, be it in terms of capture/selection, vigilance, or control (Bitgood, 2010; Ocasio, 2011).

Co-creation in Tourism The literature reveals that greater attention is being paid to the cocreation concept (Etgar, 2008; Füller, Hutter & Faullant, 2011; Kristensson, Matthing & Johansson, 2008; Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2000). Earlier focuses were mostly concerned with a managerial perspective on co-creation, in line with the need of rethinking business strategy to compete in the market and gain a competitive edge by means of company investment in innovation (Füller & Matzle, 2007; Potts et al., 2008), product development, or the provision of excellent customer service and experience (Dong, Evan & Zou, 2008; Gentile et al., 2007; Pine & Gilmore, 1998). As a consequence, there was a need to understand better the processes of service customisation and customer collaboration as a source of both company and customer value. Prosumption, coproduction, active customer collaboration, and participation (Auh, Bell, McLeod & Shih, 2007; Bendapudi & Leone, 2003; Etgar, 2008; Ritzer & Jurgenson, 2010; Tan et al., 2013) are all words that have been used to capture a generalised agreement on consumers’ new role in the business arena and the growing influence of the customer in the process of value creation (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2000).

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

45

Concurrent views on co-creation argue that tourism is made up of complex environments connecting all actors of the tourism system which are all contributing to the tourist experience (Bertella, 2014; Binkhorst & Dekker, 2009). This line of reasoning recognises the importance of the environment in which tourism experiences take place as a space comprising networks, actors, and interactions but whose meaningfulness is derived from the key player of tourism: the tourist. In this sense, the cocreation approach encompasses all influencers within the experiencescape (O’Dell, 2010). However, the tourist’s perspective of co-creating experiences goes beyond managerial concerns related to the need to include cocreation as a means to design compelling, memorable, and personally meaningful experiences (Scott, Laws & Boksberger, 2009). In this context, emergent research emphasises the tourist’s social (Rihova, Buhalis, Moital & Gouthro, 2013) and psychological perspectives (Tan et al., 2013) as a way to understand processes of creation of tourist experience, enhancing both meaning and the tourist’s involvement (Bertella, 2014; Prebensen & Foss, 2011). In recent decades, the consumer involvement construct has received considerable attention from consumer behaviour and marketing researchers (Kyle, Kerstetter & Guadagnolo, 2002; McGehee, Yoon & Cárdenas, 2003). Their findings point to a consensus on its high relevance for understanding and predicting consumers’ information searching and processing, product identification, decision-making, and brand loyalty. Generally speaking, research on involvement is important because this variable assists in the explanation of changes in the consumer’s behaviour and attitudes (Hwang, Lee & Chen, 2005), either considering the type or level of involvement (Kyle et al., 2002). Involvement has been defined as the perceived personal relevance individuals experience in relation to objects or consumption contexts (Celsi & Olsen, 1988), “the (…) perceived interest consumers attach to the acquisition, consumption, and disposition of a good, service or an idea” (Gross & Brown, 2008, p. 1141), or “the degree to which consumers engage in different aspects of the consumption process” (Gursoy & Gavcar, 2003, p. 907). In tourism studies, involvement has been assessed for different tourist groups, in the context of distinct destinations, and travel context, such as international travel (Gursoy & Gavcar, 2003). It has been analysed as a determinant of travel behaviour associated with lifestyle or with place attachment (Gross & Brown, 2008; Hwang et al., 2005). In the current experience economy paradigm, where consumers demand experiences to explore higher order needs and generate personal meaning through creative activities, the involvement construct continues to prove its

46

Chapter Two

usefulness, especially in the tourism context. Particularly, experiences in rural environments are increasingly capturing tourists’ attention and at the same time present great opportunities for involvement with nature-based activities, which are highly appealing from a sensory point of view (Campos, Agapito & Valle, 2014).

The Sensory Dimension of Rural Tourism Experiences Sensescapes and Tourist Experiences in Rural Environments By extending the focus on the relationship between the body and people to places, the geographer Porteous (1985) conceptualised the concept of sensescapes, arguing that, similar to the notion of landscape with its primarily visual connotations, other senses can be place-related, resulting in soundscapes, smellscapes, tastescapes, or hapticscapes (Dann & Jacobsen, 2003; Urry, 2002). Hence, multiple sensory experiences emerge during geographical encounters (Crouch, 2002; Rodaway, 1994; Tuan, 1977). Whilst previous tourism studies have been centred systematically on the visual component of the tourist experience (Adler, 1989), current research aims to take a holistic approach to the sensory dimension by implicating the so-called five senses, with a view to understanding their role in the global tourist experience (Agapito et al., 2014; Gretzel & Fesenmaier, 2003; Isacsson, Alakoski & Bäck, 2009; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Pan & Ryan, 2009). Accordingly, existing frameworks for marketing and managing tourist experiences have highlighted the importance of stimulating the five external senses—sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch—in order to reach the hearts and minds of tourists (Mossberg, 2007; Schmitt, 1999). In this context, sensory stimuli integrate the external factors (environment, products, and human interactions) influencing the perceptions of tourist experiences that can be partially staged and coordinated around a theme (main idea) to facilitate the integration of an experiential offering and, subsequently, to achieve positive outcomes (Agapito, Mendes & Valle, 2013; Cutler & Carmichael, 2010; Ellis & Rossman, 2008; Mossberg, 2007). Particularly, sensory stimuli are addressed as environmental factors, shaping the physical/virtual setting in which the consumption of products (tangibles and intangibles) takes place (Bitner, 1992; Neuhofer et al., 2012). Moreover, research suggests that the surrounding environment is a facilitator of social interactions (human factors) (Walls, Okumus, Wang & Kwun, 2011). From this perspective, research on tourism using the experiential approach stresses the crucial

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

47

role of sensory stimuli in designing the experiencescape, i.e. the environment of the destination experience, leading to tourists’ positive emotions, satisfaction, long-term memory, and loyalty (Heide & Grønhaug, 2006; Larsen, 2007). Notably, the variety of natural and cultural resources available in rural areas contributes to an environment in contrast to urban settings and which is valued for that very same reason. Indeed, the countryside is well known as comprising a collection of diverse undeveloped resources, such as vegetation, soil, wildlife, water, and natural landscapes, and for being associated with cultural values related to handicrafts, gastronomy, and local traditions (Roberts & Hall, 2001). In addition, countryside environments relate to traditional economic activities, some of which are linked to agriculture and fishing; these areas attract tourists, whether seeking the rural idyll or wishing to experience diverse outdoor tourist activities offered in rural settings (Butler, Hall & Jenkins, 1998; Lane, 1994). As a result, the countryside provides not only rich visual stimuli but also other multi-sensory environments/contexts/settings that can be experienced by tourists and consequently analysed and managed by the destination in order to boost tourists’ overall experience (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012).

Methods for Analysing Sensory Tourist Experiences in Rural Areas Empirical research adopting a holistic approach to the senses in tourist experiences uses methodologies varying from qualitative methods (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Markwell, 2001; Richards, Pritchard & Morgan, 2010) to a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods (Agapito et al., 2014; Dann & Dann, 2011; Govers, Go & Kumar, 2007; Gretzel & Fesenmaier, 2003, 2010; Pan & Ryan, 2009; Small, Darcy & Packer, 2012). Qualitative Methods Research adopting qualitative methods focuses on in-depth analysis, particularly with exploratory studies using small groups in responsible tourism research, aiming, for example, at drawing the attention of researchers and the tourism industry to ethical concerns, addressing the issue of accessible tourist experiences for all individuals (Agapito et al., 2013). These qualitative studies use semi-structured interviews (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012), focus groups, and in-

48

Chapter Two

depth interviews (Richards et al., 2010; Small et al., 2012). In other cases, they complement in-depth interviews with participants’ diaries, postcards, photographs, and other textual and visual material, such as tour brochures, published tour guides, and interpretive signs (Markwell, 2001). Observation and personal experience are also indicated as crucial in interpreting data (Dann & Dann, 2011; Markwell, 2001; Richards et al., 2010; Small et al., 2012). Some of these studies pose that multi-sensory elements related to rurality and nature should be included carefully in the design of appealing and memorable rural tourist experiencescapes (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012) and should thus be important categories to assess in qualitative studies. Qualitative tourist experience research stresses the idea that industry and academics should approach tourist experiences also from the point of view of deaf-blind individuals, since their motivations relate to senses other than the visual sense (Dann & Dann, 2011), thus contributing to the emergence of an agenda for tourism research on disability and citizenship. With this view, non-visual stimuli can be addressed responsibly by national and local agencies in charge of tourism management, in order to facilitate quality tourist experiences, both accessible and positive, not only for impaired people but for all individuals (Richards et al., 2010; Small et al., 2012). Mixed Methods Research that takes a managerial perspective and uses mixed methods to analyse sensory tourist experiences provides empirical evidence that sensory themes can be found in the articulation of different sensory impressions (Agapito et al., 2014; Gretzel & Fesenmaier, 2003, 2010; Pan & Ryan, 2009). These empirical studies take into account the phenomenological nature of the experience concept, first by suggesting a content analysis of reported sensory experiences (e.g. through open-ended questions, or travelogues), effectively drawing out embedded knowledge. In a second phase, a multivariate analysis (e.g. correspondence analysis or factor analysis) of the coded sensory categories derived from content analysis permits the intersection of the sensory variables identified to capture sensory themes. Moreover, the confrontation of registered sensory impressions and variables related to the visitor (e.g. motivations) allows finding associations between the sensory themes and the individuals’ profiles (cluster analysis). In order to assess information that is not easily accessible in the consumer’s mind, like that pertaining to sensory experiences, and to use

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

49

large samples yielding the extraction of the dominant bundles necessary to develop targeted marketing strategies, Gretzel and Fesenmaier (2010) created the Sensory Experience Elicitation Protocol (SEEP). This instrument consists of a self-administered questionnaire containing openended questions. In a similar vein, Govers et al. (2007) argue for a phenomenographical post-positivist approach using a narrative format in an online survey to obtain sensory information regarding destination images and employing artificial neural network software to perform a content analysis, followed by the construction of perceptual maps. By analysing tourist travelogues, Pan and Ryan (2009) found shifts in senses in the perception of different destinations in New Zealand mainly induced by spatial changes, showing that it is possible to associate different destinations with specific sensescapes and to manage sensory stimuli conveyed in destination experiences. Gretzel and Fesenmaier (2010) conclude that multi-sensory information extracted from perceived tourist experiences is suitable for theming experiences in a rural destination in northern Indiana in the Midwestern United States. This finding was confirmed in Agapito et al.’s study (2014), which was conducted in a village context in Southwest Portugal, marked by both rural/nature and beach features. After performing a content analysis of sensory tourist experiences, as reported by visitors, the researchers conducted a multiple correspondence analysis using the coded sensory impressions. The results indicate the existence of four meaningful sensory-informed themes/segments with respect to the destination under study: generic beach-related experience, nature-based experience, balanced experience, and rural experience. These findings suggest that the countryside embraces local resources rich in multi-sensory stimuli that could be utilised in the planning and marketing of appealing tourist experiences addressed to segments of tourists while fitting sustainable local development.

Managerial Implications for Rural Destinations Following the experience economy paradigm, sensory appeals are suitable for marketing tourist experiences, since analysing sensory experiences perceived as meaningful allows understanding which endogenous resources are highlighted by specific groups of tourists. The segmentation of tourists based on sensory-informed themes followed by the procedure of profiling tourists according to motivations and activities performed in the destination can help policy makers and tourism providers adapt destination offerings and communication strategies to specific groups of tourists. These market segments are more likely to value

50

Chapter Two

particular experiences the destination is able to provide and also show more responsible behaviour and have a globally more positive impact while at the destination (Kastenholz, 2004). As a result, specifically targeted experience marketing approaches could be undertaken, with sensory-informed themes used to conceptualise and creatively promote rural tourist experiences to reference tourist profiles. These approaches could explore both the idea of the multi-phase nature of tourist experiences and the potential of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) (Agapito et al., 2014). Specifically, the process of combining Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Global Positioning System (GPS) technologies with the Internet could enable sensory-informed advergames, geocaching activities, or physical and virtual routes to be mapped interactively. This combining of technologies would facilitate ease of access to up-to-date and reliable information that is adapted to the different phases of the trip and to diverse visitors’ needs and motivations (Briedenhann & Wickens, 2004; Hyun, Lee & Hu, 2009). Moreover, the efforts in matching sensory experience-based tourists’ profiles to destinations encourage the integration of the local community and the optimal use of local resources in the planning of the overall rural destination experience, benefiting the stakeholders involved and boosting the destinations’ sustainability. This idea is in harmony with the win-win strategies related to community-based tourism that, if properly managed, can stimulate the conservation of endogenous resources and increase local benefits through participation in tourism activities while enhancing the global rural tourism experience (Saxena, Clark, Oliver & Ilbery, 2007; Sebele, 2010). In addition, since small local tourism organisations usually have insufficient budgets to develop marketing strategies with significant impact, neighbouring regions associated with specific sensescapes may conceptualise offerings to different profiles of tourists together, particularly exploring niche markets (Morgan, 2010; Pan & Ryan, 2009; Roberts & Hall, 2004). Networked co-creative management based on specific themes calls for creative industries (e.g. films, architecture, and music) to assemble unparalleled experiences in rural destinations (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012; Mossberg, 2007). In particular, creative activities related to wine, gastronomy, handicraft, and local traditions can stimulate involved learning and creativity (Richards, 2010). Also, the institution of a destination management organisation is crucial for encouraging cooperation between private and public sectors and assuring that a destination has a coherent system of offerings (Manente & Minghetti, 2006). Some examples of how to manage the sensory

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

51

dimension of the rural tourist experience are presented next with the cases of Aldeia da Pedralva in Portugal, Geocaching in Finland, and Withlocals in Asia. The identification of themes through sensory information related to destination experiences has been explored both academically and in practice. The Aldeia da Pedralva is a rural tourism village project concretised in 2010 in Southwest Portugal after a process of rebuilding a deserted village. This tourism unit focuses on nature-based experiences (biking, fishing, hiking, bird-watching, and surfing), benefiting from the natural resources existing in the surrounding Southwest Alentejo and Vicentina Coast Natural Park. The Aldeia da Pedralva’s brand is visualised in a logo with the representation of the five human senses, consisting of an eye encircled by elements related to the senses of hearing, touch, taste, and smell (http://www.aldeiadapedralva.com/). All the programmes available are based on the idea that staying overnight in the village and engaging with specific natural resources stimulates various sensory experiences. Particularly, in the trekking programme, four thematic routes can be experienced, integrating different nature scenarios, such as mountains, woods, pinewood, dunes, agricultural areas, cliffs, and rock caves, with each scenario corresponding to diverse types of fauna, flora, and geology. Given the fact that many resources are endemic to the region, the goal is to create conditions for visitors to live unique sensoryinformed place experiences with specific visual impressions, sounds, textures, smells, and tastes (e.g. gastronomic-related activities) (Agapito, Mendes & Valle, 2012). Ihamäki (2012) reports a study conducted on geocaching in 2009 with Finnish practitioners. Geocaching is an outdoor recreational activity that is gaining everyday fans and practitioners all over the world and is seen as an activity in which creativity, active participation, and natural environments mix to generate positive and memorable experiences. The findings resulting from this case study research show relevant dimensions of this practice proving multi-sensoriality as a most relevant experience dimension, profoundly related to the experience’s memorability (http://www.geocaching.com). Withlocals is an online platform designed to facilitate the development of initiatives connecting visitors and host communities of Southeast Asia. The main aim of the platform is to serve as a marketplace where both parties can join to create “unique travel experiences and home dining opportunities”, with the slogan “You won’t just be observing, you’ll be doing” revealing the co-creative focus of the experiences. Withlocals is based on the premises that travel brings learning of the host culture by

52

Chapter Two

means of a close relationship with locals and that this closeness is strengthened through the sharing of moments spent in practices that highlight the uniqueness of these places and cultures. Food and gastronomy are advertised as experience highs that provide “a taste of a country”, and traditional activities, such as crafting jewellery or carving a musical instrument, show that senses other than vision are involved in the propositions presented to tourists (https://www.withlocals.com).

Conclusion This chapter discusses the potential of the sensory dimension of tourist experiences in the managing and marketing of rural tourism experiences, suggesting that sensory stimuli can be purposely used to provide appealing and satisfying environments, whether physical or virtual, encouraging positive and engaging consumption of tourism products and services. Indeed, there is nowadays a greater awareness of the importance of senses in tourism experiences beyond vision, visual stimuli, and the gaze. Concurrently, such awareness increasingly relates multi-sensoriality with the involvement of the tourist in experiences with a high degree of active participation, i.e. in a co-creation context. Against the tendency to evaluate resources in an individualistic manner, a holistic approach to the overall tourist experience in the countryside follows from the idea that it is important to generate synergies with different resources and stakeholders within the rural destinations (Cawley & Gillmor, 2008). As part of the character of rural destinations, communities should be involved in the process of co-creating sensory-rich quality rural tourism offerings, which helps increase tourists’ interest and confidence in taking longer rural holidays in which they take a more participatory role. Rural destinations can effectively use their multi-sensory resources (e.g. fauna, flora, landscapes, handicraft, and gastronomy) to conceptualise quality themed experiences that immerse visitors in the local atmosphere and to generate a sustainable competitive advantage. Tourist profiles should be sustainably matched to the potential of destinations’ multisensory resources, aiming at providing long-term benefits to destination stakeholders. This process is expected to increase the levels of satisfaction of both visitors and the destination community, mitigating the gap between expectations and in situ experiences. Against this background, the body can be seen as the vehicle of the travel art (Adler, 1989). The senses are in direct contact with the rural destination environment by contributing to the construction of a mental map of the environment through which the tourist

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

53

travels, shaped by the perception of local resources and people and assisted by memories and expectations.

Acknowledgment This paper is financed by National Funds provided by FCTFoundation for Science and Technology through project UID/SOC/04020 /2013.

References Adler, J. (1989). Origins of sightseeing. Annals of Tourism Research, 16(1), 7-29. Agapito, D., Mendes, J., & Valle, P. (2012). The rural village as an open door to nature-based tourism in Portugal: The Aldeia da Pedralva case. Tourism—An International Interdisciplinary Journal, 60(3), 325-388. Agapito, D., Mendes, J., & Valle, P. (2013). Conceptualizing the sensory dimension of tourist experiences. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 2(2), 62-73. Agapito, D., Valle, P., & Mendes, J. (2014). The sensory dimension of tourist experiences: Capturing meaningful sensory-based themes in Southwest Portugal. Tourism Management, 42(June), 224-237. Auh, S., Bell, S. J., McLeod, C. S., & Shih, E. (2007). Co-production and customer loyalty in financial services. Journal of Retailing, 83(3), 359370. Beard, J. G., & Ragheb, M. G. (1983). Measuring Leisure Motivation. Journal of Leisure Research, 15(3), 219-228. Bendapudi, N., & Leone, R. P. (2003). Psychological Implications of Customer Participation in Co-production. Journal of Marketing, 67, 14-28. Bertella, G. (2014). The Co-creation of Animal-based Tourism Experience. Tourism Recreation Research, 39(1), 115-125. Binkhorst, E., & Dekker, T. D. (2009). Agenda for Co-Creation Tourism Experience Research. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2), 311-327. Bitgood, S. (2010). An Attention-Value Model of Museum Visitors. Center for the Advancement of Informal Science Education. Retrieved from http://informalscience.org/images/research/VSA_Bitgood.pdf Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57-71.

54

Chapter Two

Brakus, J. J., Schmitt, B. H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand experience: What is it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52-68. Briedenhann, J., & Wickens, E. (2004). Tourism routes as a tool for the economic development of rural areas—vibrant hope or impossible dream? Tourism Management, 25(1), 71-79. Butler, R. W., Hall, C. M., & Jenkins, J. (1998). Tourism and recreation in rural areas. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Campos, A. C., Agapito, D., & Valle, P. (2014). Clustering Tourist Involvement in a Rural Destination. Revista Turismo & Desenvolvimento, 21/22, 245-246. Canli, T., Zhao, Z., Breweer, J., Gabrieli, J., & Cahill, L. (2000). Eventrelated activation in the human amygdala associates with later memory for individual emotional experiences. Journal of Neuroscience, 20, 1-5. Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2003). Revisiting consumption experience—a more humble but complete view of the concept. Marketing Theory, 3(2), 267-286. Cawley, M., & Gillmor, D. A. (2008). Integrated rural tourism: Concepts and practice. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 316-337. Celsi, R. L., & Olson, J. C. (1988). The Role of Involvement in Attention and Comprehension Processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 210-224. Clawson, M., & Knetsch, J. L. (1966). Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press. Cohen, S. (2010). Searching for Escape, Authenticity and Identity: Experiences of «Lifestyle Travellers». In M. Morgan, P. Lugosi & J. R. B. Ritchie (Eds.), The Tourism and Leisure Experience (pp. 27-42). Bristol: Channel View Publications. Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for Pleasure Vacations. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(4), 408-424. Croner, L. J., & Albright, T. D. (1999). Seeing the big picture: integration of image cues in the primate visual system. Neuron, 24, 777-789. Crouch, D. (2002). Surrounded by place: Embodied encounters. In S. Coleman & M. Crang (Eds.), Tourism between Place and Performance (pp. 207-218). New York: Berghahn Book. Cutler, S. Q., & Carmichael, B. A. (2010). The Dimensions of the Tourist Experience. In M. Morgan, P. Lugosi & J. R. B. Ritchie (Eds.), The Tourism and Leisure Experience (pp. 3-26). Bristol: Channel View Publications. Dann, E., & Dann, G. M. S. (2011). Sightseeing for the sightless and soundless: Tourism experiences of the dual sensory impaired. Studies

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

55

& Reports, Série L., Centre International de Recherches et D’Etudes Touristiques, 16, 1-36. Dann, G. M. S., & Jacobsen, J. K. S. (2003). Tourism smellscapes. Tourism Geographies, 5(1), 3-25. Davenport, T. H., & Beck, J. C. (2001). The Attention Economy: Understanding the new currency of business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Dijksterhuis, A., & Aarts, H. (2010). Goals, Attention, and (Un)Consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 467-490. Dong, B., Evans, K. R., & Zou, S. (2008). The Effects of Customer Participation in Co-Created Service Recovery. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 123-137. Driver, J. (2001). Selective Review of Selective Attention Research from the Past Century. British Journal of Psychology, 92, 53-78. Ellis, G. D., & Rossman, J. R. (2008). Creating value for participants through experience staging: Parks, recreation, and tourism in the experience industry. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 26(4), 1-20. Esteves, F., & Öhman, A. (1993). Masking the face: Recognition of emotional facial expressions as a function of the parameters of backward masking. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 34(1), 1-18. Etgar, M. (2008). A Descriptive Model of the Consumer Co-production Process. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 97-108. Fesenmaier, D. R., & Gretzel, U. (2004). Searching for Experience: Technology-Related Trends Shaping the Future of Tourism. In K. Weiermair, & C. Mathies (Eds.), The Tourism and Leisure Industry: Shaping the Future (pp. 285-299). Binghamton: The Haworth Hospitality Press. Füller, J., Hutter, K., & Faullant, R. (2011). Why Co-Creation Experience Matters? Creative Experience and Its Impact on the Quantity and Quality of Creative Contributions. R&D Management, 41(3), 259-274. Füller, J., & Matzler, K. (2007). Virtual Product Experience and Customer Participation—A Chance For Customer-Centred, Really New Products. Technovation, 27(6-7), 378-387. Gentile, C., Spiller, N., & Noci, G. (2007). How to sustain the customer experience: An overview of experience components that co-create value with the customer. European Management Journal, 25(5), 395410. Gibson, J. J. (1950). The Perception of the Visual World. Cambridge, MA: The Riverside Press.

56

Chapter Two

Goldstein, E. B. (2007). Sensation and perception (7th ed.). Canada, Thomson. —. (2010). Sensation and perception (8th ed.). Belmonte: Wadsworth. Govers, R., Go, F. M., & Kumar, K. (2007). Virtual destination image: a new measurement approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(4), 977997. Graham, C. C. (1869). The true philosophy of mind. Louisville, Kentucky: JP Morton and Company. Gretzel, U., &. Fesenmaier, D. R. (2003). Experience-based internet marketing: An exploratory study of sensory experiences associated with pleasure travel to the Midwest United States. In A. J. Frew, M. Hitz & P. O’ Connor (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism (pp. 49-57). Viena: Springer Verlag. Gretzel, U., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2010). Capturing sensory experiences through semi-structured elicitation questions. In M. Morgan, P. Lugosi & J. R. B. Ritchie (Eds.), The tourism and leisure Experience: Consumer and managerial perspectives (pp. 137-160). Bristol: Channel View Publications. Gross, M. J., & Brown, G. (2008). An Empirical Structural Model of Tourists and Places: Progressing Involvement and Place Attachment into Tourism. Tourism Management, 29(6), 1141-1151. Gursoy, D., & Gavcar, E. (2003). International Leisure Tourists’ Involvement Profile. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(4), 906-926. Heide, M., & Grønhaug, K. (2006). Atmosphere: Conceptual issues and implications for hospitality management. Scandinavian Journal for Hospitality and Tourism, 6(4), 271-286. Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132-140. Hwang, S.-N., Lee, C., & Chen, H. J. (2005). The Relationship Among Tourist’s Involvement, Place Attachment and Interpretation Satisfaction in Taiwan’s National Parks. Tourism Management, 26(2), 143-156. Hyun, M. Y., Lee, S., & Hu, C. (2009). Mobile-mediated virtual experience in tourism: Concept, typology and applications. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 15(2), 149-164. Ihamäki, P. (2012). Geocachers: the creative tourism experience. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 3(3), 152-175. Isacsson, A., Alakoski, L., & Bäck, A. (2009). Using Multiple Senses in Tourism Marketing: The Helsinki Expert, Eckerö Line and

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

57

Linnanmäki Amusement Park Cases. Tourismos: An international Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism, 4(3), 167-184. Kastenholz, E. (2004). «Management of Demand» as a Tool in Sustainable Tourist Destination Development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5), 388-408. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Marques, C. P. (2012). Marketing the rural tourism experience. In R. H. Tsiotsou & R. E. Goldsmith (Eds.), Strategic marketing in tourism services (pp. 247-264). Bingley: Emerald. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C. P., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience—The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Keysers, C., Kaas, J., & Gazzola, V. (2010). Somatosensation in social perception. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(6), 417-428. Krishna, A. (2012). An integrative review of sensory marketing: Engaging the senses to affect perception, judgment and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 332-351. Kristensson, P., Matthing, J., & Johansson, N. (2008). Key Strategies for the Successful Involvement of Customers in the Co-Creation of New Technology-Based Services. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 19(4), 474-491. Kyle, G. T., Kerstetter, D., & Guadagnolo, F. B. (2002). Market Segmentation Using Participant Involvement Profile. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 20(1), 1-21. Lane, B. (1994). What is rural tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1/2), 7-21. —. (2009). Rural tourism: An overview. In T. Jamal & M. Robinson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of tourism studies (pp. 354-370). London: Sage Publications. Larsen, S. (2007). Aspects of a psychology of the tourist experience. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(1), 7-18. Manente, M., & Minghetti, V. (2006). Destination management organizations and actors. In D. Buhalis & C. Costa (Eds.), Tourism business frontiers: Consumers, products and industry (pp. 228-237). Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann. Markwell, K. (2001). Mediating the tourist-nature experience at three tourist sites in Borneo. Tourist Studies, 1(1), 39-57. McGehee, N. G., Yoon, Y., & Cárdenas, D. (2003). Involvement and Travel for Recreational Runners in North Carolina. Journal of Sport Management, 17(3), 305-324.

58

Chapter Two

Mesulam, M.-M. (2000). Principles of behavioral and cognitive neurology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mkono, M. (2013). Using Net-Based Ethnography (Netnography) to Understand the Staging and Marketing of “Authentic African” Dining Experiences to Tourists at Victoria Falls. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 37(2), 184-198. Morgan, M. (2010). The experience economy 10 years on: Where next for experience management? In M. Morgan, P. Lugosi & J. R. B. Ritchie (Eds.), The tourism and leisure Experience: Consumer and managerial perspectives (pp. 218-230). Bristol: Channel View Publications. Morgan, M., Elbe, J., & de Esteban Curiel, J. (2009). Has the Experience Economy Arrived? The Views of Destination Managers in Three Visitor-dependent Areas. International Journal of Tourism Research, 11(2), 201-216. Mossberg, L. (2007). A marketing approach to the tourist experience. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(1), 59-74. Murray, E., & Wise, S. P. (2004). What, if anything, is the medial temporal lobe, and how can the amygdala be part of it if there is no such thing? Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 82(3), 178-198. Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2012). Conceptualising technology enhanced destination experiences. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 1(1-2), 36-46. Norwich, K. H., & McConville, K. M. V. (1991). An informational approach to sensory adaptation. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 168(2), 151-157. Ocasio, W. (2011). Attention to Attention. Organization Science, 22(5), 1286-1296. O’Dell, T. (2010). Experiencescapes: Blurring Borders and Testing Connections. In T. O’Dell & P. Billing (Eds.), Experiencescapes, Tourism, Culture, and Economy (pp. 11-33). Koge: Copenhagen Business School Press. Oh, H., Fiore, A. M., & Jeoung, M. (2007). Measuring experience economy concepts: Tourism applications. Journal of Travel Research, 46(2), 119-132. Ooi, C.-S. (2010). A Theory of Tourism Experiences. In T. O’Dell & P. Billing (Eds.), Experiencescapes, Tourism, Culture and Economy (pp. 51-68). Koge: Copenhagen Business School Press. Pan, S., & Ryan, C. (2009). Tourism sense-making: The role of the senses and travel journalism. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 26(7), 625-639.

Sensations, Perception, and Co-Creation in Rural Tourism Experiences

59

Phillips, M. L., Wayne, C. D., Rauch, S. L., & Lane, R. (2003). Neurobiology of emotion perception I: The neural basis of normal emotion perception. Society of Biological Psychiatry, 54(5), 504-514. Pine, J. II, & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, 76(4), 97-105. Porteous, J. D. (1985). Smellscape. Progress in Physical Geography, 9, 356-378. Potts, J. D., Hartley, J., Banks, J. A., Burgess, J. E., Cobcroft, R., Cunningham, S. D., & Montgomery, L. (2008). Consumer Co-creation and Situated Creativity. Industry and Innovation, 15(5), 459-474. Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Co-opting Customer Competence. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 79-88. Prebensen, N., & Foss, L. (2011). Coping and Co-creating in Tourist Experiences. International Journal of Tourism Research, 13(1), 54-67. Read, D., & Loewenstein, G. (1999). Enduring pain for money: decisions based in the perception and memory of pain. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 1-17. Reid, T. (1785). Essays on the intellectual powers of man. Edinburgh: John Bell. Richards, G. (2010). Tourism Development Trajectories—From Culture to Creativity? Tourism and Management Studies, 6, 9-15. Richards, V., Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N. (2010). Re(Envisioning) tourism and visual impairment. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(4), 1097-1116. Rihova, I., Buhalis, D., Moital, M., & Gouthro, M. B. (2013). Social Layers of Customer-To-Customer Value Co-Creation. Journal of Service Management, 24(5), 553-566. Ritzer, G., & Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, Consumption, Prosumption: The Nature of Capitalism in The Age of the Digital «Prosumer». Journal of Consumer Culture, 10(1), 13-36. Roberts, L., & Hall, D. (2001). Rural tourism and recreation: principles to practice. UK: CABI Publishing. Roberts, L., & Hall, D. (2004). Consuming the countryside: Marketing for “rural tourism”. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10(3), 253-263. Rodaway, P. (1994). Sensuous geographies: Body, sense and place. London: Routledge. Ryan, C. (2002). The Tourist Experience. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd. Saxena, G., Clark, G., Oliver, T., & Ilbery, B. (2007). Conceptualizing integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment, 9(4), 347-370.

60

Chapter Two

Schmitt, B. (1999). Experiential marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(1-3), 53-67. Scott, N., Laws, E., & Boksberger, P. (2009). The Marketing of Hospitality and Leisure Experiences. Journal of Hospitality Marketing, 18(2-3), 99-110. Sebele, L. (2010). Community-based tourism ventures, benefits and challenges: Khama Rhino Sanctuary Trust, Central District, Botswana. Tourism Management, 31(1), 136-146. Small, J., Darcy, S., & Packer, T. (2012). The embodied tourist experiences of people with vision impairment: Management implications beyond the visual gaze. Tourism Management, 33(4), 941-950. Tan, S.-K., Kung, S.-F., & Luh, D.-B. (2013). Model of “Creative Experience” in Creative Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 41(April), 153-174. Taylor, S. F., Liberzon, I., & Koeppe, R. A. (2000). The effect of graded aversive stimuli on limbic and visual activation. Neuropsychology, 38(10), 1415-1425. Tuan, Y.-F. (1977). Space and Place: The perspective of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Tung, V. W. S., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (2011). Exploring the essence of memorable tourism experiences. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1367-1386. Urry, J. (2002). The Tourist Gaze (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications. Verhoef, P. C., Lemon, K. N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M., & Schlesinger, L. A. (2009). Customer Experience Creation: Determinants, Dynamics and Management Strategies. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 31-41. Walls, A., Okumus, F., Wang, Y., & Kwun, D. J.-W. (2011). Understanding the consumer experience: An exploratory study of luxury hotels. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 20(2), 166-197. Williams, A. (2006). Tourism and hospitality marketing: fantasy, feeling and fun. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(6), 482-495.

CHAPTER THREE TRACKING THE MOVEMENT BEHAVIOUR OF WALKING TOURISTS IN A RURAL FESTIVAL USING A SMARTPHONE APPLICATION HEE JEONG YUN AND MI HYEON PARK

Introduction Tourists’ spatio-temporal distribution patterns are complex and not random (Luberichs & Wachowiak, 2010)1. Understanding tourists’ behaviour in time and space would make it possible for tourism-related facilities to achieve an appropriate carrying capacity, adjust how attractions are run, improve marketing strategies, maximise tourism’s positive economic effects and support more sustainable development in the region (Shoval & Isaacson, 2007b; Thornton, Williams & Shaw, 1997; Van der Knaap, 1999). Tourists’ time-space movement patterns can be used as a basis on which to monitor and understand their activities, forecast their behaviour, propose space-planning guidelines and develop guiding behaviour systems for tourism development and management (Helbing, Molnár, Farkas & Bolay, 2001; Mill & Morrison, 1985; Millonig & Gartner, 2007; Millonig & Schechtner, 2007; O’Connor, Zerger & Itami, 2005). For this reason, many studies have analysed tourists’ spatial movements at a particular time and space using new theories and new methodologies. Among these theories, time geography is one of the most useful because it was adopted in an effort to understand time and space simultaneously, as they exist in the real world, and because it presents new methodologies. Time geography began with the study of Hägerstand (1970), which focused on the constraints and trade-offs that occur when people must divide a limited amount of time among various activities in space (Shoval & Isaacson, 2007a). In other words, time geography deals with human activities that occur in specific locations and in limited time

62

Chapter Three

periods. Gren (2001) indicated that time geography is the representation of space and time in a single diagram that consists of a time axis and a space axis. This diagram makes it possible to trace time and space in graphic terms simultaneously. Each person’s range is described by a prism whose shape depends on capability constraints, and every pause causes the prism’s or subprism’s range to shrink in direct proportion to the length of the pause (Gren, 2001; Shovel & Issacson, 2007a). In the same vein, Kwan (2000) developed the three-dimensional space-time aquarium, which makes it possible to visualise both the space-time data used for sequence alignment and the aggregated results of the alignment (Shoval & Isaacson, 2007a). However, the tourism field has paid little attention to the spatial and temporal behaviour of tourists (Dietvorst, 1995; Shoval & Isaacson, 2007b). Tourists’ spatio-temporal behaviour can be either a continuous process or a discrete process (Xia, Zeephongsekul & Arrowsmith, 2009), so it is not easy to analyse and present it using the usual methodologies in the field of social science. However, technological developments, including global positioning systems (GPS) and smartphone embedded GPS, have made a spatio-temporal tourist survey possible, and several studies have developed time-space movement patterns. The development of digital information technologies has also improved the spatio-temporal resolutions of empirical data, enabling the analysis of very detailed time and space data (Kwan, 2000, 2002, 2004; Miller, 2005; Raubal, Miller & Bridwell, 2004; Shoval & Isaacson, 2006). The purpose of this study is to track and analyse the continuous and concrete movement behaviours of tourists in terms of both time and space using time geography theory and new tracking technology in order to contribute to more sustainable rural tourism development. For this purpose, this research project selected as a case study the Sancheoneo Ice Festival, one of the “Seven Wonders of Winter” in Hwacheon Gun, Kangwon Province, Republic of Korea. The Sancheoneo Ice Festival is the most successful rural festival in Korea, with more than 1.5 million tourists visiting in 2015. Most of the visitors are walking tourists because the festival space is not large, and it is located near local residents’ homes. Walking tourists at rural festivals have a tendency to communicate directly with these residents, and planners of rural festivals hope to encourage community-based tourism or sustainable tourism by extending festivals evenly around the region and giving visitors diverse experiences with local people and culture. The results of this study can help to clarify the time and space patterns of walking tourists at rural festivals and the structure of visitors’ experience with rural tourism. Festival planners and policy

Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists

63

makers can use these results to understand visitors’ spatio-temporal behaviour and the scope of their experience, which should contribute to more sustainable tourism development in their regions.

Tourists’ Spatio-temporal Behaviour at Rural Festivals Successful rural festivals may help develop the tourism industry in rural areas, thereby contributing to rural economic development and regional regeneration (Getz, 2008; Pettersson & Getz, 2009; Pettersson & Zillinger, 2011). Festivals produce unique experiences that are situated at a particular time and in a particular place (Getz, 2007; Pine & Gilmore, 1999). In order to organise successful festivals in rural areas, festival planners should understand tourists’ spatial and temporal movements so they know where and when the tourists’ experiences take place and how concentrated or dispersed these experiences are in terms of both space and time (Pettersson & Zillinger, 2011). Getz (2004) indicated that the knowledge of spatial processes during festivals can aid in both forecasting the effect and potential of events and clarifying event-related trends. Therefore, the spatial and temporal movement patterns of visitors to rural festivals can be used as a foundation from which to understand their experience and analyse the effects of and trends related to rural festivals. Although technological developments have enabled spatio-temporal surveys and analyses of tourists’ movements, studies of festival visitors’ time and space patterns are, despite their importance, rare. An exception is Pettersson and Zillinger’s (2011) study of the Alpine Ski Championships in Östersund, Sweden. However, Östersund is a small city, not a rural area, and the event differed markedly from rural festivals that are based on a sense of place. Raybould, Mules, Fredline and Tomljenovic (2000) used aerial photography to estimate the number of visitors at events but did not reveal the relationship between time and space at the event. Any of several methods can be used to investigate tourists’ behaviour in time and space, including direct observation, remote observation using video-based analysis (Hartmann, 1988; Hill, 1984; McKercher, Shoval, Ng & Birenboim, 2012; Millonig & Gartner, 2007; Shoval & Isaacson, 2007b), trip diaries (Anderson, 1971; Shoval & Isaacson, 2007b; Thornton et al., 1997), questionnaires and surveys, interviews (Asakura & Iryo, 2007; Hallo, Beeco, Goetcheus, McGee, McGehee & Norman, 2012; Harder, Bro, Tradisauskas & Nielsen, 2008; McKercher et al., 2012; Millonig & Gartner, 2007; Shoval & Isaacson, 2007b; Shoval, 2008), localization technologies based on digital technologies like GPS (Asakura & Iryo, 2007; Hallo et al., 2012; Harder et al., 2008; McKercher et al.,

64

Chapter Three

2012; Millonig & Gartner, 2007; Shoval & Isaacson, 2007b; Shoval, 2008) and smartphone-embedded GPS. However, most of the tracking methods are time-consuming, costly and labour-intensive, and they do not provide sufficiently detailed information about the specific sites visited within districts or nodes. Some of these methods also suffer from memory decay, observation effects, low levels of voluntary participation and ethical problems. GPS devices are superior to land-based tracking methods in obtaining accurate, successive data in detail. In addition, a global infrastructure of cellular phones as mobile communication tools has been established that can regularly communicate with the antennae in their immediate vicinity, allowing for tourist tracking (Shoval, 2008). These methods cover pedestrian and motorised vehicles, intra-destination flows and those directed to end destinations and a variety of spatial scales, such as global, national, regional and local scales (Lau & McKercher, 2006). Some studies have examined the effectiveness of a travel-data collection system using GPS-equipped cellular phones (Hato, 2006; Itsubo & Hato, 2006; Ohmori, Nakazato, Sasaki, Nishii & Harata, 2006). Smartphone applications based on GPS, which are among the newer localization technologies, are very useful in tourism research because i) they can be used to track tourists easily because most travellers carry mobile phones; ii) there is no need to adopt additional devices to survey tourists’ spatiotemporal patterns; iii) they can create large, detailed databases of human activities in time-space; iv) they offer increasingly useful and practical information about time and space (Shoval & Isaacson, 2007b; Shoval, 2008); v) they collect real-time information. The downside of this method is that knowing that their phones are being used to track their activities could influence tourists’ behaviour (Winters, Barbeau & Georggi, 2008). Each of these empirical methods has advantages and drawbacks, and human behaviour is never fully replicated by verbal or written structures, and never fully revealed by verbalised written materials alone. Several combination approaches have been tried to minimise these limitations (Millonig & Gartner, 2007), such as combining video and behaviourmapping techniques (Hartmann, 1988); GPS, overview cameras and questionnaires (Pettersson & Zillinger, 2011); trip diaries and interviews (McKercher & Lau, 2008; Zillinger, 2007); trip diaries and maps (Haldrup, 2004; Lau & McKercher, 2006; Oppermann, 1995; Van der Knaap, 1999); participant observation, interviews and photography (Pettersson & Gets, 2009); shadowing, tracking and interviews (Millonig & Gartner, 2008); GPS-based mobile phones and questionnaires (Pettersson & Zillinger, 2011).

Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists

65

Methods Study Area This study analyses walking tourists’ movement patterns in time and space at the Sancheoneo [mountain trout] Ice Festival in Hwacheon Gun, Kangwon Province, one of the smallest rural countries in South Korea. Hwacheon Gun runs parallel to the southern side of the Korean Demilitarised Zone (DMZ), near North Korea, and has approximately 25,000 inhabitants. Hwacheon Gun is known for its clean river and cold winter weather (Fig. 3-1), but since the region’s economic condition has stagnated because of its small population and the climate, the local government depends heavily on the local military and agriculture. Therefore, the leader of the local government chose in 2003 to rejuvenate the regional economy and give the residents a boost by drawing on the region’s unique characteristics with the Sancheoneo Ice Festival. In December 2011, CNN and Lonely Planet selected the Sancheoneo Ice Festival as one of the Seven Wonders of Winter, and Korea’s Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (MCST) designated it as one of the country’s official cultural tourism festivals. The Sancheoneo Ice Festival occurs during three weeks every January and takes place throughout all of Hwacheon Gun, although the main festival spaces are on the frozen Bukhan River and the residential area along the river. The total area covered by the main festival space is approximately 1,700 m2 (http://www.narafestival.com) and consists of a fishing area (for mountain trout), an ice entertainment area and food court near the frozen Bukhan River and event plazas and streets in the residential areas (Fig. 3-3). Every January in Hwacheon, the prolonged sub-zero temperatures and harsh winter conditions cause the Bukhan River to be covered with a thick layer of ice. During the three weeks of the festival, more than 1,4 million people—more than fifty times the number of Hwacheon residents—visit the area for the festival. The festival provides traditional shows and about forty experience programs, such as ice-fishing, ice sledding, snow sledding, an ice and snow train, ice sculptures and ice soccer, providing the visitors with many rural village experiences. Festival visitors buy an entrance ticket (USD 10) and an exchange coupon to use for the main festival attractions and ice-fishing programs (USD 5), so the total entrance fee is approximately USD 15 per person. Visitors can exchange their coupons for agricultural products or use them at the traditional markets in the local commercial districts near the festival space. This policy

Chapter Three

66

contributes to regional economic revitalization in stagnant regions, but there is little research that has examined that effect. Fig. 3-1. Hwacheon Gun

Source: Own elaboration

Tourist tracking using a smartphone application The data aligned in the study was collected through a combination of smartphone applications based on GPS and simple questionnaires. The smartphone application is a suitable device for tourist-tracking because it is small, passive, commercial, low-cost and widely used. The GPS capabilities embedded in each smartphone can gather highly accurate, successive positioning data and communicate this information wirelessly back to a server (Shoval & Isaacson, 2007b; Winters et al., 2008). While the GPS system has limitations related to accuracy when satellite signals are obstructed by tall buildings and other impediments (Pettersson &

Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists

67

Zillinger, 2011), this study area is an outdoor space, and there are no buildings higher than five stories in Hwacheon Gun. TranGGle GPS, one of the most frequently used smartphone applications related to outdoor leisure activities in Korea, was chosen for the study and was tested at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival on 21 January 2013. The use of an application like TranGGle GPS allows high-resolution time and space data to be collected and instantly transferred to a server. There are only a few studies on tourist-movement tracking using a smartphone application, so this study is novel in verifying the usefulness of this mobile application in the study area. Data was gathered from 23 January to 27 January (Wednesday to Sunday). The target population was independent walking tourists who visited the main ticket booth between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on any of those days. The team of researchers approached potential participants selected randomly in front of the main ticket booth, explained the goal and method of the study and asked them whether they were willing to participate. Researchers also informed potential participants that they could choose to opt out whenever they wanted just by turning off the mobile application or not coming back to the researchers. When a visitor agreed to participate, researchers confirmed the battery life of his or her mobile phone and provided an extra battery (in response to limitations related to the battery life raised by McKercher et al. (2012)). Participating visitors were then given an activated TranGGle GPS application (http://www.tranggle.com) and asked to come back to the starting point after visiting the festival space. When participants came back, researchers confirmed that their moving patterns were accurate and sequential and conducted a simple questionnaire regarding their socio-economic characteristics, including sex and age, transportation mode, area of origin, expenditure in the festival space, arrival time at the festival and number of companions. The researchers added the day of the week and the weather conditions. A total of ninety-five tourists agreed to participate in the study; sixtynine participants came back and sixty-six viable spatio-temporal sequence data units were suitable for final analysis. This study extracted spatial data (GPS point data) and time data (every six seconds) from the TranGGle GPS website (http://www.tranggle.com) after participants uploaded their tracking records and agreed that their spatio-temporal data could be used for the study.

68

Chapter Three

Results and Discussion Profile of Survey Participants The sample distribution of participating visitors at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival in Hwacheon Gun is summarised as follows. Among the sixty-six valid survey responses, there were more males (69.7%) than females (30.3%). The largest age category was from 20 to 39 years old (75.8%), while the rest were over 40 years old (24.2%). Weekday participation at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival was 57.6 percent, while weekend participation (Saturday and Sunday) was 42.4 percent. Participation on sunny days was 63.6 percent, and participation on rainy or snowy days was 36.4 percent. The most frequently used form of transportation was their own car (75.8%), while the frequency of public transportation use (e.g. bus) to Hwacheon was only 24.2 percent. Almost half (48.5%) of the respondents began the walking tour before noon in the festival venue, while the remaining 51.5 percent began their tours after noon. Most (97.0%) ended their festival participation after noon. Most (75.8%) of the survey participants did not spend time in the central commercial area of Hwacheon, outside the festival space, and did not consume any local products, so the frequency of contact between local residents and survey participants was low, and the walking tourists’ experience of the rural festival in this region was limited. This lack of interaction with the local commercial area may be one of the main reasons for the Sancheoneo Ice Festival having a poor multiplier effect on Hwacheon’s economy. The average number of the study participants’ companions was 2.64 persons, and the average travel time to Hwacheon from their place of origin was 157 minutes. The average staying time, average moving time and average stopping time of survey participants in the festival spaces were 178 minutes, 49 minutes and 129 minutes respectively. Average moving distance in the festival space was 1.57 km, and the average moving speed was 1.71 km/h, a low speed compared to people’s average walking speed. In other words, survey participants at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival were moving 27.5 percent of the time and stationary 72.5 percent of the time.

Thickness-of-Time Axis The most important consideration in space-time analysis is aggregating space-time paths to create generalised types while extracting patterns that quantitatively consider sequential elements (Shoval & Isaacson, 2007a).

Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists

69

Fig. 3-2. Sixty-six survey participants’ thickness-of-time records at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival

Note: The number over each line refers to the number of survey participants whose presence the line reflects.

Using this sequence analysis method to analyse human activities in time and space would help to identify and clarify patterns of human behaviour (Shoval & Isaacson, 2007a). This study depicts the thickness-of-time axis—referring to the accumulated expenditure of time spent at the festival—from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., the hours that the festival is open, based on the time data extracted from the sixty-six participants’ spatiotemporal data (Fig. 3-2). The walking tourists who participated in the survey were at the festival most often between 2:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. (2,519 minutes by 42 survey participants), followed by 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. (2,310 minutes by 39 participants), 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. (2,295 minutes by 38 participants) and noon to 1:00 p.m. (1,814 minutes by 30

70

Chapter Three

participants). The least amount of time was spent near the opening time, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., and near closing time, from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., so the festival visitors’ temporal use was limited during these times. The temporal concentration level and accumulated time spent at the festival space were higher in the afternoon and lower in the morning. In addition, the amount of time tourists spent was unrelated to weather or day of the week, perhaps because of warmer afternoon temperatures, late starts from the market of origin and the time spent moving to the festival space from where they were staying. The results of the time-thickness analysis suggest some useful policy guidelines for local festival planners and policy makers. For example, festival participants at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival should be deconcentrated or distributed, so they do not converge during a few time periods, leaving festival spaces empty during other periods. Event planners and policy makers should find ways to attract visitors in the morning, such as through discounted entrance fees and inducements to move from main festival spaces to peripheral spaces in the afternoon.

Thickness-of-Space Axis Based on the GPS point data—that is, the spatial data—extracted from the TranGGle GPS website, the frequency of the survey participants’ spatial movement or spatial use was counted according to the node points. Irregular movement patterns on the frozen river were ruled out because these patterns would not have meaning after the ice melts, and back-andforth movements on the same path were double-counted. The frequency of the walking tourists’ spatial use is described as the thickness of spatial movement—that is, the thickness of the spatial axis in this study refers to the accumulated spatial use of all participants along the paths in the space of the Sancheoneo Ice Festival (Fig. 3-3). The highest frequency of spatial use along each path was in path 1 (frequency 127), which adjoins the starting point, followed by path 2 (frequency 120), path 23 (frequency 87), path 41 (frequency 77) and paths 4, 5 and 14 (frequency 33). The lowest frequency of spatial use was in paths 12, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 38, 39, 44 and 47 (frequency 1), followed by paths 25, 26, 37, 46 and 48 (frequency 2) (Fig. 3-3). In summary, the spatial movement of visitors at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival was concentrated in the entrance spaces around the main ticket booth and the main commercial area, including the food court. Most walking tourists only visited the entrance and central spaces, walking along the same paths. Although their tickets allowed them to do so, only a

Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists

71

Fig. 3-3. Survey participants’ thickness of spatial movement at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival

Note: The number near each path is the path number.

small number of visitors visited the Hwacheon commercial area—its traditional market, the main streets in the downtown area, the opposite side of the river, event spaces or public spaces like local schools and country offices. Based on the community-based tourism theory, the spatial concentration of festival visitors indicates that the socio-economic effects of this festival and the scope of walking tourists’ experiences are limited in terms of, for example, authentic communication between residents and visitors. According to these results, rural festival planners and policy makers need to adopt policies that will encourage more efficient use of the festival space by inducing tourists to go to the local commercial districts or the areas where residents live. Such dispersion of festival visitors could contribute to regional revitalization and socio-economic sustainability in the local area and to diverse authentic experiences that result from direct communication. Therefore, rural event policy makers should verify tourists’

72

Chapter Three

spatio-temporal patterns and adopt appropriate methods to ensure spatial dispersion.

Movement Behaviour at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival Fig. 3-4. Time-space aquarium for walking tourists at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival

The time-space aquarium for walking tourists in the Sancheoneo Ice Festival was drawn using Hägerstand’s (1970) and Kwan’s (2000) theories, based on the time thickness and spatial thickness addressed in the two previous sections. This aquarium is expressed as a three-dimensional image, making it possible to visualise the aggregated time-space data for the time used for the sequence alignment. As Figure 3-4 shows, the aggregated spatio-temporal movement of walking tourists at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival is similar to an inverted triangle: narrow in the morning and wide in the afternoon. Most nodes of walking tourists’ movements are located in the centre of the festival space, so the walking tourists at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival spend time there, but pass quickly to other spaces. The time-space aquarium shows the visitors’ spatio-temporal concentration

Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists

73

and the limited effect of using rural festivals to boost socio-economic development and sustainability. Therefore, festival planners and policy makers involved with the Sancheoneo Ice Festival should consider these limited spatial movement patterns and temporal concentration in the afternoon, as well as the inefficiency of the exchange coupons in encouraging community-based tourism. Policies should be adopted that would extend tourists’ spatio-temporal movements to include local communities and off-peak time by, for example, disallowing the use of exchange coupons in the central food court to encourage visiting the local commercial area.

Conclusion The purpose of this study is to analyse walking tourists’ spatiotemporal behaviour at a rural festival using the theory of time geography and a smartphone application based on GPS data. Festivals in rural areas are important as a way to preserve tradition and accelerate rural economic development by enhancing regional socio-cultural and economic sustainability in lagging rural areas and facilitating regional regeneration. In order to organise successful festivals in rural areas as a means of revitalization and sustainable development through community-based tourism, rural event planners and policy makers must understand tourists’ spatio-temporal movement behaviours and experiences. Visitors to rural festivals are usually walking tourists because of the small festival spaces and because visitors tend to be interested in the community and enjoy interacting with local residents. This study analyses walking visitors’ movement patterns in time and space at the Sancheoneo Ice Festival in Hwacheon Gun in Kangwon Province, South Korea. The analysis determined that the temporal concentration level and time spent at the festival were higher in the afternoon and that visitors’ spatial movements were concentrated in the entrance spaces around the main ticket booth and the main commercial area along the river. However, only a small number of visitors visited the Hwacheon commercial area, main streets in the downtown area or Hwacheon’s other event spaces and public spaces. The time-and-space analysis of the festival visitors’ behaviour and the time-space aquarium based on Kwan (2000) indicated excessive temporal and spatial concentration and resulting limitations in terms of the festival’s socioeconomic effects and the scope of walking tourists’ experiences and communication with local residents.

74

Chapter Three

The study also provides some significant methodological implications for researchers that are related to tourists’ spatio-temporal behaviours, as well as practical implications for policy makers and planners and developers of rural festivals. The study demonstrates the efficiency of an innovative tracking methodology in clarifying tourists’ spatio-temporal movement patterns, as the use of a smartphone application based on GPS devices provides significant time and space information for touristbehaviour studies. More important, making up for the weak points of other tracking methodologies, the time and space data (GPS data) extracted from the smartphone application is accurate and successive, so researchers who use this technology can determine tourists’ movement patterns and information about their experiences based on time and space. This information can also be associated easily with other advanced technologies, such as GIS (QGIS) and Google Earth. In addition, this study’s verification of walking visitors’ spatial movement patterns and temporal flows helps festival planners and developers determine how to distribute tourists’ movements into residential areas in order to help sustain the local economy and give the tourists more diverse experiences. Finally, the study has some specific implications for policy makers in the Hwacheon Gun local government regarding exchange coupons. The study found that there is limited advantage in including coupons in the entrance ticket price if they can also be used in the food court in the main festival space, as tourists will choose this use instead of using the coupons as they were intended, to buy agricultural products from the region or something at the traditional markets in the local commercial district. Most festival visitors use these exchange coupons at the food court in the main festival space and do not move into the local commercial area and downtown area to use them. Therefore, policy makers in Hwacheon Gun should adopt more powerful strategies to spread out tourists’ spatiotemporal movements and consumption spaces. Despite the usefulness of the spatio-temporal information provided by the smartphone-embedded GPS, this tracking technique has some limitations in that it is often only the young and/or technology-savvy visitors who agree to participate, and the battery life of some mobile phones is prohibitively short. Therefore, researchers should provide some incentives to encourage participation by other types of visitors. Finally, ethical problems may emerge related to tracking tourists and retaining their time and space information, even though participants agree to participate in the survey. Additional research is needed to determine the relationship between time-and-space information and the characteristics of longitudinal and

Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists

75

spatio-temporal clustering using advanced technologies of time geography in the tourism field. A geographic information system that accumulates continuous and accurate time-space data about tourists’ movements is also needed, which can be applied to diverse tourism fields.

Funding This study was supported by a research grant from the National Research Foundation of the Republic of Korea (Grant number: NRF-20110014120).

Notes 1. This chapter is an adapted version of Yun and Park (2015).

References Anderson, J. (1971). Space-time budgets and activity studies in urban geography and planning. Environment and Planning, 3, 353-368. Asakura, Y., & Iryo, T. (2007). Analysis of tourist behavior based on the tracking data collected using a mobile communication instrument. Transportation Research Part A, 41, 684-690. Dietvorst, A. (1995). Tourist behavior and the importance of time-space analysis. In G. Ashworth & A. Dietvorst (Eds.), Tourism and Spatial Transformations (pp. 163-181). Wallingford: CABI. Getz, D. (2004). Geographic perspectives on event tourism. In A. Lew, C. M. Hall & A. M. Williams (Eds.), A Companion to Tourism (pp. 410422). Malden: Blackwell Publications. —. (2007). Event Studies. Theory, Research and Policy for Planned Events. Amsterdam: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. —. (2008). Event tourism: Definition, evolution and research. Tourism Management, 29, 403-428. Gren, M. (2001). Time-geography matters. In J. May & N. Thrift (Eds.), Timespace. Geographies of Temporality (pp. 208-225). London/New York: Routledge. Hägerstand, T. (1970). What about people in regional science? Papers of the Regional Science Association, 24(1), 7-21. Haldrup, M. (2004). Laid back mobilities: Second home holidays in time and space. Tourism Geographies, 6(4), 435-454. Hallo, J. C., Beeco, J. A., Goetcheus, C., McGee, J., McGehee, N. G., & Norman, W. C. (2012). GPS as a method for assessing spatial and

76

Chapter Three

temporal use distributions of nature-based tourists. Journal of Travel Research, 51(5), 591-606. Harder, H., Bro, P., Tradisauskas, N., & Nielsen, T. A. S. (2008). Tracking visitors in public parks-experiences with GPS in Denmark. Research in Urbanism Series, 1, 65-77. Hartmann, R. (1988). Combining field methods in tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 15, 88-105. Hato, E. (2006). Development of MoALs (mobile activity loggers supported by GPS-phones) for travel behavior analysis. Paper presented at Transportation Research Board 85th Annual Meeting. Helbing, D., Molnár, P., Farkas, I. J., & Bolay, K. (2001). Self-organizing pedestrian movement. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28, 361-383. Hill, M. (1984). Stalking the urban pedestrian: A comparison of questionnaire and tracking methodologies for behavioral mapping in large scale environments. Environment and Behavior, 16, 539-550. Itsubo, S., & Hato, E. (2006). Effectiveness of household travel survey using GPS-equipped cell phones and web diary: Comparative study with paper-based travel survey. Paper presented at Transportation Research Board 85th Annual Meeting. Kwan, M.-P. (2000). Interactive geovisualization of activity-travel patterns using three-dimensional geographical information systems: A methodological exploration with a large data set. Transportation Research C, 8, 185-203. —. (2002). Feminist visualisation: Re-envisioning GIS as a method in feminist geographic research. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92(4), 645-661. —. (2004). GIS methods in time-geographic research: Geocomputation and geovisualization of human activity patterns. Geografiska Annaler B, 86(4), 267-280. Lau, G., & McKercher, B. (2006). Understanding tourist movement patterns in a destination: A GIS approach. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(1), 39-49. Luberichs, J., & Wachowiak, H. (2010). GIS supported segmentation study of visitors to Majorca Island. Advances in Hospitality and Leisure, 6, 135-166. McKercher, B., & Lau, G. (2008). Movement patterns of tourists within a destination. Tourism Geographies, 10(3), 355-374. McKercher, B., Shoval, N., Ng, E., & Birenboim, A. (2012). First and repeat visitor behaviour: GPS tracking and GIS analysis in Hong Kong. Tourism Geographies, 14(1), 147-161.

Tracking the Movement Behaviour of Walking Tourists

77

Mill, R. C., & Morrison, A. M. (1985). The Tourism System. An Introductory Text. London: Prentice-Hall International. Miller, H. J. (2005). A measurement theory for time geography. Geographical Analysis, 37(1), 17-45. Millonig, A., & Gartner, G. (2007). Monitoring pedestrian spatio-temporal behaviour. Workshop on Behaviour Monitoring and Interpretation BMI ‘07. Technical Report, 42, 29-42. Millonig, A., & Gartner, G. (2008). Shadowing-tracking-interviewing: How to explore human spatio-temporal behaviour patterns. Workshop on Behaviour Monitoring and Interpretation BMI ‘08. Technical Report, 48, 1-14. Millonig, A., & Schechtner, K. (2007). Developing landmark-based pedestrian navigation systems. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 8(1), 43-49. O’Connor, A., Zerger, A., & Itami, R. (2005). Geo-temporal tracking and analysis of tourist movement. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 69, 135-150. Ohmori, N., Nakazato, M., Sasaki, K., Nishii, K., & Harata, N. (2006). Activity diary surveys using GPS mobile phones and PDA. Paper Presented at Transportation Research Board 85th Annual Meeting. Oppermann, M. (1995). A model of travel itineraries. Journal of Travel Research, 3(4), 57-61. Pettersson, R., & Getz, D. (2009). Event experiences in time and space: A study of visitors to the 2007 World Alpine Ski Championships in Åre, Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 9(2/3), 308-326. Pettersson, R., & Zillinger, M. (2011). Time and space in event behavior: Tracking visitors by GPS. Tourism Geographies, 13(1), 1-20. Pine, B., & Gilmore, J. (1999). The Experience Economy: Work Is Theatre and Every Business a Stage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Raubal, M., Miller, H. J., & Bridwell, S. (2004). User-centered time geography for location-based services. Geografiska Annaler B, 86(4), 245-265. Raybould, M., Mules, T., Fredline, E., & Tomljenovic, R. (2000). Counting the herd: Using aerial photography to estimate attendance at open events. Event Management, 6(1), 25-32. Shoval, N. (2008). Tracking technologies and urban analysis. Cities, 25, 21-28. Shoval, N., & Isaacson, M. (2006). The application of tracking technologies to the study of pedestrian spatial behaviour. The Professional Geographer, 58(2), 172-183.

78

Chapter Three

Shoval, N., & Isaacson, M. (2007a). Sequence alignment as a method for human activity analysis in space and time. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97(2), 282-297. Shoval, N., & Isaacson, M. (2007b). Tracking tourists in the digital age. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(1), 141-159. Thornton, P., Williams, A., & Shaw, G. (1997). Revisiting time-space diaries: An exploratory case study of tourist behavior in Cornwall, England. Environment and Planning A, 29, 1847-1867. Van der Knaap, W. G. M. (1999). Research report: GIS-oriented analysis of tourist time-space patterns to support sustainable tourism development. Tourism Geographies, 1(1), 56-69. Winters, P. L., Barbeau, S. J., & Georggi, N. L. (2008). Smart phone application to influence travel behaviour (TRAC-IT Phase 3). Report no. 549-35. Xia J., Zeephongsekul, P., & Arrowsmith, C. (2009). Modelling spatiotemporal movement of tourists using finite Markov chains. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 79, 1544-1553. Yun, H. J., & Park, M. H. (2015). Time-space movement of festival visitors in rural areas using a smart phone application. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 20(11), 1246-1265. Zillinger, M. (2007). Tourist routes: A time-geographical approach on German car-tourists in Sweden. Tourism Geographies, 9(1), 64-83.

CHAPTER FOUR CO-CREATIVE RURAL TOURISM EXPERIENCES: CONNECTING TOURISTS, COMMUNITY AND LOCAL RESOURCES MARIANA CARVALHO, JOANA LIMA, ELISABETH KASTENHOLZ AND ANA JOÃO SOUSA

Introduction The potential of natural and cultural endogenous resources in rural areas should be integrated into a unique, yet diversified overall rural tourism experience, with a tourism offer that satisfies different visitors’ motivations. It should also enhance the wellbeing of local communities, the protection of valuable resources and, last but not least, the sustainable tourism development of these destinations (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012). On the other hand, tourists reveal an increasing interest in being an active part, co-producers of their holiday experience, which implies that agents should start understanding the role of co-created experiences for enhancing a destination’s appeal (Richards, 2011). New demands require new tourism products, linking authenticity, innovation and creativity, recreating cultural tourism by offering a variety of tourism products permitting tourists to express themselves, learn and understand the identity of places (sometimes even their own identity), thereby adding value and meaning to their experiences, and ideally their lives. These destination experience opportunities may also be enhanced through interaction with the community (the vehicle of excellence of culture) and other tourists (Binkhorst, 2007; Richards, 2011; Richards & Wilson, 2007a); this is

80

Chapter Four

particularly relevant for rural tourism (Kastenholz, Eusébio, Carneiro & Figueiredo, 2013). This chapter presents results from an exploratory, qualitative study developed in a three-year research project (ORTE1) aimed at understanding the tourist experience in a Portuguese Schist Village, Janeiro de Cima. It particularly focuses on its dimensions of nature and cultural heritage and identifying elements of the endogenous heritage base that could be integrated in the co-creative tourism experience as well as ways to do so. Natural and cultural resources, as the bases of the tourism experience, creative tourism and co-creation in rural tourism are related themes discussed at the beginning of this chapter. The case study revealing the relevance of local resources in this context is presented next. Implications for possible co-creative tourism strategies are also discussed.

Cultural and Natural Resources—The Basis for Integral Tourism Experience Based on a variety of endogenous natural and cultural resources, of both tangible and intangible quality, diverse types of experiences may be designed in rural areas, yielding attraction and satisfaction for a heterogeneous rural tourist market. Tourists typically desire appealing, unique and memorable experiences, with expectations much associated with the search for authenticity, simplicity, nature and a context contrasting with the urban way of life (Figueiredo, 2009; Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz, 2002; Kastenholz, 2004; Kastenholz & Lima, 2011; Molera & Albaladejo, 2007; Rodrigues & Kastenholz, 2010). Other important motivations for choosing a rural area as a tourism destination are the interest in socializing with friends and family in a different environment, getting to know new people, the interest in exploring a region in an independent way, the search to widen one’s horizons, including a general interest in traditional culture and the “rural way of life” (Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz, Davis & Paul, 1999; Kastenholz & Lima, 2011; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Park & Yoon, 2009). Additionally, several studies suggest an increasing demand for “different holiday experiences” associated with a change in the tourists’ profile (e.g. increasing levels of education, growing travel experience). These trends suggest that destinations should design diversified integrated products, including both natural and cultural elements typical to rural territories that have still maintained their individual identities (Chambers, 2009; Kastenholz & Lima, 2011; Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 1994; Poon, 1993; Todt & Kastenholz, 2010), despite the

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

81

pressures of globalization (Pereiro & Conde, 2005). Urban societies look at some rural areas as symbolic places representing the so-called “rural idyll” (Daugstad, 2008), comprising elements such as nature, romanticism, authenticity and nostalgia (Bell, 2006), a kind of “naturalization” of the countryside, i.e., the perception of these areas as a scenario of “back to nature”, providing a place to rest and recover from stressful and unhealthy urban environments (Figueiredo, 2008; Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012) and even to experience spirituality, frequently in relation to outstanding natural scenery (Sharpley & Jeppson, 2011). According to Garrod, Wornell and Youell (2006), one of the components comprising “countryside capital” is natural resources—e.g. landscape, wildlife populations, vegetation and forests, geology, watercourses, etc.— along with socio-cultural resources. Natural resources may, indeed, be considered the core of much of the rural tourism experience (Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz et al., 1999; Sharpley, 2009), also complementing and providing the context for cultural attractions (Hall, 2004). Simultaneously, local culture is perceived by tourists as an integral element of the tourism experience. According to Richards and Wilson (2006), in the cultural tourism context, tourists have become more demanding and seek holiday experiences that permit skills development as well as playing an active role, being part of a community and experiencing the “real culture of a place”, while learning about heritage and local identity (Chambers, 2009; Fernández, 2010). The link between tourism and culture, particularly in a co-creative context, has originated one of the most attractive tourist segments, contributing to successful positioning of cultural tourist destinations (Richards & Wilson, 2007b). The emphasis on a place’s identity through its culture is indeed most relevant for a destination’s distinctiveness and competitiveness (Richards, 2011), with culture-based differentiation reinforcing the cultural assets of a destination and its overall appeal (Richards & Wilson, 2006). However, the growth of cultural tourism as a destination strategy has also resulted in mass tourism phenomena, which raises questions regarding sustainability, particularly concerning the so-called “serial reproduction” of culture (Richards, 2011). The massification of demand, standardization of tourism products and lack of creativity in using culture elements without distorting their core meanings has become a challenge to local culture. However, the preservation of uniqueness and inner qualities of a place is as important as enhancing the dynamic role of culture in destination development (Richards & Wilson, 2007b).

82

Chapter Four

Creative Tourism and Co-creation—A New Destination Marketing Approach According to Richards and Raymond (2000, cited by Richards & Wilson, 2006, p. 1215), creative tourism may be defined as “tourism which offers visitors the opportunity to develop their creative potential through active participation in courses and learning experiences which are characteristic of the holiday destination where they are undertaken”.

Raymond (2007, p. 145) suggests that creative tourism is “a more sustainable form of tourism that provides an authentic feel for a local culture through informal, hands-on workshops and creative experiences”.

The co-creation of experiences is linked to the concept of the “experience economy” (Pine & Gilmore, 1998), suggesting creative processes at the destination through themed and staged experiences in symbolic co-production settings (Lash & Urry, 1994). Pine and Gilmore (1998) advocate that experiences should be personalised and memorable instead of common and repetitive (Neuhofer, Buhalis & Ladkin, 2013). The potential role of creativity as a driver of innovation and thus transformation of the socio-economic structure of a given place is undeniable (Richards & Marques, 2012), as is its potential as a tool for fighting “serial reproduction of culture” (Richards, 2011; Richards & Wilson, 2006) through potentially more innovative, flexible, harder to copy forms of tourism experience (Alvarez, 2010). Thereby, creativity helps a destination achieve a competitive advantage (Richards & Wilson, 2006). As the tourism experience implies the active involvement of tourists, the concept of co-creation should be considered in the design of these experiences (Grissemann & Stokburger-Sauer, 2012; Prebensen, Vittersø & Dahl, 2013). According to Binkhorst and Dekker (2009, p. 313), cocreation is “the process through which customers interact with the company and generate their own experience”. As Richards (2011) points out, tourists want not only to develop their skills but also to enjoy the possibility of expressing themselves through tourist activities where they may become active in the production and consumption of co-creation experiences (Pine & Gilmore, 1998; Prebensen et al., 2013). Binkhorst and Dekker (2009) consider that the co-creation of experiences and value

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

83

should be implemented through networking of agents of culture creation and consumers. Culture is thereby viewed as the “raw material” for creative products, ranging from heritage and historical buildings to “the ordinary and everyday qualities of the areas that make a difference”, as interesting experience elements (Maitland, 2007, p. 80). Tourism providers take advantage of these raw materials for tourists who may integrate them when “producing” their own experiences (Richards, 2011). Also, local people play a crucial role assisting them with “specific local skills” (Richards, 2011, p. 1238) and knowledge transfer (Fernández, 2010) in this co-creative process. In rural areas, creative products may also flourish, based on local culture and traditions, highly valued in rural tourism (Bell, 2006; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Lane, 1994; Silva, 2009). The potential of rural areas should also take into account creative tourism opportunities (Cloke, 2007), which may be the basis for small-scale, distinctive tourism businesses, particularly important in rural areas (Lane, 1994). Activities linked to photography, gastronomy or handicraft production, particularly suitable for rural tourism, can promote interaction between residents and tourists and significantly enrich the overall tourism experience (Binkhorst, 2007). Diverse economic activities may additionally be linked in these co-creative offerings to enhance local development (Cloke, 2007). New relationships between urban and rural areas have transformed social and cultural realities, imposing constant reconstruction, adaptation and change on rural territories (Figueiredo, Kastenholz & Lima, 2011). Rural spaces are now considered consumption spaces, with tourism assuming increasing importance, both due to its potential as a development tool and as response to the post-modern tourists’ continuous quest for new experiences in diverse natural and cultural contexts, perceived as “authentic” (Figueiredo et al., 2011; Walmsley, 2003). Creative tourism in rural destinations suggests that tourists have the opportunity to experience local culture and develop their own skills based on the territory’s endogenous resources (Fernández, 2010). On the supply side, local agents need to develop synergies (creative networks) to identify and combine resources and select adequate creative strategies to design experience settings that may reinforce local identity, ensure appealing, distinctive and memorable tourist experiences, while simultaneously adding economic value and contributing to sustainable local development (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012). Tourists are effectively consumers and co-creators of their own experience. The local community, as the main effective vehicle of local culture, should actively participate as

84

Chapter Four

producers of “authentic” tourism experiences and help transmit knowledge to tourists, serving as “cultural brokers” (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Richards, 2011). Initiatives, such as workshops in gastronomy, art, dancing, photography, or language courses, demonstrate new experience approaches responding to diverse new tourist needs (Binkhorst, 2007; Cloke, 2007) while permitting “the interaction of an individual at a specific place and time and within the context of a specific art” (Binkhorst & Dekker, 2009, p. 315). The tourism experience is, indeed, complex and not restricted to functional aspects, including social, emotional, hedonic and symbolic dimensions, mediated by the senses (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012). In the context of creative activities, the sensorial experience is particularly important, permitting a deeper involvement and enhancing memorability (Agapito, Valle & Mendes, 2014; Richards & Wilson, 2007a). Smell and taste are strongly associated, for example, with gastronomy reflecting important local identity values and presenting a rich basis for co-creative rural cultural tourism experiences. The visual, tactile and hearing dimensions permit tourists to be part of a community or place, in an ordinary life context (Richards, 2011), which in rural areas could be enhanced in multi-sensorial contexts. Examples are opportunities for tourists to watch and listen to residents working in the fields, to feel the textures of diverse agricultural products or handicraft in workshop contexts or to listen to the sounds of nature or those related to traditional activities (e.g. animals on the farm) (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012). The multifaceted character of both rural and creative tourism experiences calls for an integrated development of co-creative cultural and natural tourism experiences in rural areas, based on interaction with hosts, endogenous resources and environments, encouraging an active engagement with or immersion within the so-formed experience contexts (Pine & Gilmore, 1998). This resource-based co-creation may improve the tourism experience while also promoting successful and sustainable rural tourism development, particularly through articulated network approaches (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Mossberg, 2007). All these strategies first require a full understanding of the experience context as well as of the community’s place identity, which we try to illustrate with the rural destination case study presented here.

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

85

Empirical Study—A Portuguese Schist Village Methodology The present study analyses several dimensions of the complex and subjective phenomena of tourist experiences: cultural and natural destination resources, the experience of tourists, residents, agents of tourism supply and the institutional context conditioning this experience. Considering the limited empirical scientific research on the co-creative rural tourism experience, an exploratory, qualitative study2 in the form of a case study approach was chosen for gaining rich, in-depth information (Mitchell & Fisher, 2010) that may help understand the cultural experience in Janeiro de Cima of all stakeholders involved, and the potential for developing cocreative alternatives for improving the overall tourist experience. The village’s tourism resources were identified and characterised through documental analysis and on-site observation and different stakeholders’ perceptions (tourists, population, agents of tourism supply and institutions) of the experience in the village (specifically regarding its natural and cultural dimensions) assessed through semi-structured interviews (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012). The sample includes eight institutional agents, seven local supply agents, 11 residents and 12 visitors (nine tourists and three excursionists) who were interviewed about local resources, their views on the experience which tourists seek and have and how it could be improved. All interviews were recorded, transcribed and subjected to content analysis (Denzin, 1978). A comparative analysis was carried out to identify consistencies and contradictions amongst observations, and also links between our results and those reported in the literature were examined (McCracken, 1988; Mitchell & Fisher, 2010).

The Village Context Janeiro de Cima is a Schist Village located in Portugal’s Central inland (Fig. 4-1). This village is one of the most populated schist villages, with 306 inhabitants in 2011 (National Institute of Statistics [INE], 2011). Similar to other inland villages, its population is ageing and approximately 40% of residents are over 65 years old (INE, 2011). In terms of economic activities, the secondary and the tertiary sector are the most relevant in the village (INE, 2011). The primary sector is important, although not reflected in statistics, since it is mainly subsistence agriculture, occupying many retired residents.

86

Chapter Four

Janeiro de Cima is surrounded by pinewoods and located by the river Zêzere, with a long tradition of river boat construction and a river park which is very popular in summer and which is worthy of note (Fig. 4-2). These interesting natural conditions have permitted the development of numerous thematic paths crossing the village, which mix natural and cultural resources accessible on foot, by mountain bike, car, or off-road vehicles (Agency for Tourism Development of the Schist Villages [ADXTUR], n.d.). The schist3 gives this territory a unique look and is also the origin of the name of the public funding program supporting the preservation of corresponding villages’ heritage—The Schist Villages Network (SVN4), also a distinctive tourism brand. Janeiro de Cima presents an additional distinctiveness by using schist mixed with river stones in traditional construction (Fig. 4-3). In this particular village, the connection between natural and cultural resources is clearly visible, for example, in the old typical houses, with walls built of schist plates mixed with rounded river stones; in the abandoned water mills, used for grinding cereals; in the wooden boats, used for transportation of people, cattle and other products along the river; and in the traditional techniques and tools used to cultivate and work the linen—one of the important crops in the Zêzere valley. These elements, symbols of a recent past, constitute distinctive natural-cultural resources which should be preserved and promoted as relevant features of the village’s cultural identity, with large potential to be integrated into the cocreation of distinct and memorable tourism experiences. Another important village attraction is The Weavers’ House (Fig. 4-4), a thematic establishment including a museum, tea room, craft workshop and shop, where visitors can experience weaving and learn about its history and traditional techniques and tools used to cultivate and work the linen, without paying any entrance fee. Other important cultural elements of the village are its gastronomy and local products (handicrafts, linen, and agricultural products, such as cherries, olive oil, chestnuts). A religious festival also assumes a central role in the village’s community life, for both present and former residents (some living outside the country)—Festa de São Sebastião. This event takes place on the 20th of January and has its origins in a tribute the community pays to Saint Sebastian, who, according to legend, helped combat the plague in the village. Another legend that is worthy of note is the one that gave the village its name. A gentleman owned a large amount of land on both sides of the river Zêzere and before dying he decided to bequeath the properties to his two sons, both named Januário, and thus

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences Fig. 4-1. Location of Janeiro de Cima

Source: adapted with permission of © Portuguese Directorate General for Territorial Development (DGT) (2015).

Fig. 4-3. Architecture of the village

Fig. 4-2. The river and traditional river boat

Source: authors (November 2010)

Fig. 4-4. The Weavers’ House

Source: authors (November 2010)

Source: authors (November 2010)

87

88

Chapter Four

emerged two different localities, one called Janeiro de Cima (upper), located on the left bank, and Janeiro de Baixo (lower), on the right bank of the river. The river itself, the beautiful landscape it helps to shape and the river park with a natural swimming pool, most popular in summer, is one of the main attractions and has undoubtedly also contributed to a particular history and traditions marking village life. Clearly, the natural features of the environment, as well as the small-scale agriculture, are also relevant landscape elements that increase the village’s appeal, together with a network of hiking routes. Three official units of rural tourism accommodation, as well as a restaurant, bar and a pub, are other elements that support and may enrich the tourist experience.

Co-creation of Tourism Experiences in Janeiro de Cima Agents of Tourism Planning and Development Different agents of tourism planning and development (ATPD) were interviewed5 separately: two representatives of the Municipality’s tourism department, two representatives of the Regional Entity of Tourism, the Parish president, two agents responsible for ADXTUR and one responsible for a Regional Association for Rural Development (an ex-Leader of a local action group). These agents emphasise intangible heritage (local culture, traditions, gastronomy) and some physical characteristics (architecture, the mix of schist/river stones) as valuable resources differentiating this village from others in the SVN. They consider the rebuilding and preservation of architectonic heritage essential for attracting visitors, as well as the river park, the Weavers’ House and local handicrafts. Some agents also identify the river boat as a local resource that should be preserved and introduced into tourism experiences as “something that makes a difference” (ATPD2) and possibly enhancing tourists’ involvement with local culture. The natural surroundings also seem to be one of the village’s key attractive elements, mainly due to “that wonderful framework […] [of] the river Zêzere”, which is “perhaps the [village’s] factor of greatest value” (ATPD2). This important natural resource helps shape the singular character of the village’s built heritage, characterised by buildings where the river stones fit harmoniously within the schist walls. In the words of an agent, Janeiro de Cima “is unique in terms of [...] [construction] techniques” (ATPD2).

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

89

The relevance of both natural and cultural resources as key attractions within the region was highlighted by one ATPD, who stated: “The natural resources [e.g. forests, rivers, streams, mountains and mines], in an initial phase of tourist attraction, are the main [motives for a visit] and then issues like traditional activities and traditions related to the agricultural calendar are of great importance” (ATPD4).

Another agent corroborates this viewpoint, stressing the relevance of the village’s “relationship with nature, with a non-urban landscape” as key drivers of tourist attraction, followed by “the authentic product, the genuine gastronomy” (ATPD2). In general, they recognise that these resources are an extraordinary base for developing different kinds of experiences, “through [a] reinvention and articulation of products… always with strong connections to the land, traditions and the community’s identity” (ATPD3). ATPDs also believe that visitors expect to experience contact with an “authentic way of life”, with welcoming people, good food and proximity to nature: “Tourists also value discovery, active tourism and nature, family tourism… and good gastronomy” (ATPD3). These elements may be integrated into diversified dynamic and genuine experiences, involving tourists and residents. Agents recognise that some village features would help improve the quality of the tourism experience and suggest innovative approaches, recognizing the relevance of creative and innovative concepts: “we revolutionised all that was being done in the cultural field in this region: we merged very traditional approaches with much more contemporary ones, resulting in new, different and differentiating products and interpretations” (ATPD2).

Also promoting local gastronomy as an identity feature, the improvement of service provider training as well as awareness building amongst local residents regarding the promotion of local attractions, are suggested as important improvements. One of the agents points out the need to link all village services to promote an “entrepreneurial corporate culture” (ATPD3). This culture may be crucial for developing new creative products, reinventing the past based on local identity and thus reinforcing the quality and distinction of the whole experience in this village. Here the role of ADXTUR stands out as a quality-focused tourism development network. Also within strategic planning the outstanding role of local culture is recognised, yielding integrative development and differentiation, since “the governance models implemented relate to

90

Chapter Four

networking and integrated planning, and creativity applied to rural resources” (ATPD2). Local culture is thus seen as key to the success of the tourism strategy. ATPDs are optimistic regarding the region’s future when strategically using distinctive resources “to enlarge supply and create new products” (ATPD3).

Tourism Supply Agents Supply agents (SA) also stress the distinctive role of architecture and materials used in differentiating the village from others. The Weavers’ House is considered a historically important village element, permitting interaction between local producers, community and visitors as well as knowledge transmission, active learning and the (re-)discovery of local identity. The agents view this thematic space as most important for distinguishing the village through linen products, which are, in their view, very much sought after by tourists. They further agree that tourists look for regional cheese, traditional smoked sausages and honey. The traditionally produced river boat is also mentioned, although it is not used for tourism purposes or even promoted as an attraction. These agents also mentioned that visitors in Janeiro de Cima usually engage in more or less physically demanding outdoor activities, seeking contact with nature, e.g. when engaging in: “canoeing in the summer, mountain biking, […] hiking” (SA7); “river [activities], [riding] the river boat” (SA2); “walking routes, mainly for photographic safaris, and sometimes even other more extreme sports like paintballing, rappel” (SA1). According to these agents, tourists expect to be close to the local community, want to learn about and experience local traditions, understand the locals’ way of living, look for genuineness, simplicity and closeness to nature. One agent states: “This couple told me that they spent all day in the village, visited the São Sebastião sanctuary, where the traditional celebration takes place, and talked to the farmers, asking about farming… they don’t have this type of contact where they live and were impressed with the local people’s excitement and pride in producing their local products… it’s a life fulfilment” (SA1).

Within the nature experience context, educational activities linked to environmental education or workshops about the use of endogenous resources seem to make sense: “the tourist is increasingly interested […] in workshops about aromatic herbs… [there] is a whole area that is not yet

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

91

being explored” (SA7). Some agents also suggest “horse riding” (SA3) or “walking routes with different degrees of difficulty” (SA1), as a way of improving tourism supply. These agents stress the lack of information about local attractions as one crucial improvement required, considering the complaints they receive: “the problem is that there is no information here in the village” (SA5); “[…] no printed leaflet or route map” (SA1). They also suggest revitalizing the river park as a village attraction all year long (not only in summer), suggesting its use for water sports, enabling tourists to participate in activities in contact with nature, for example, using the traditional river boat. In the opinion of some agents, the river Zêzere, a singular natural resource, should be better exploited and promoted for tourism experiences, since: “the river is very underutilised. [And also] the river beach” (SA4); “the river has many conditions for undertaking [activities]” (SA7). One agent emphasised the better use of elements like: “[the] set of water resources, streams, fountains […] [and] the river boat”, the need to “put the barges in motion in the water” and “to create some kind of program, with a guide” (SA1). They also recognise the role of networking to gain visibility in the market, referring to experience packages (e.g. Smartbox) that help local accommodation get market access and even networking with local farmers to promote agriculture and local products.

The Community Eight of the eleven interviewees are women, aged between 20 and 34 or 40 and 59 years, half with medium level education and seven being professionally active, most working in the service sector, outside the village (there are also three unemployed and one student). Residents agree with the other agents regarding the main village attractions: the architecture, the schist, the river and its park, as well as the overall village atmosphere, where typical products and the Weavers’ House are also relevant, revealing the village’s tradition of handicrafts, which they consider especially attractive for urban visitors. They further refer to rich and diversified gastronomy as a valuable asset, which is however not taken advantage of fully. Most residents mention agricultural products as increasingly sought after by visitors, but not well enough promoted and integrated into the tourism offer. They suggest a network between farmers, the restaurant and other village services to enhance the use and sales of local farm products. This network would also help the aged residents, who live on low pensions.

92

Chapter Four

Residents stress some distinctive natural and cultural resources in the village related to traditional practices, which could be better valorised. Some residents suggest the revitalization of ancient communitarian elements like: “the [water] mill […] [and] the old fountain, where people went to [collect] the water […] [the] threshing floor where they beat and thresh the corn…the other is the olive oil mill…” (R6);

“in former times [...] people used to ride the [traditional] river boat [but] that has been a bit abandoned […]. I think it is one of the village’s potentials [for stimulating tourist experiences]” (R2).

Most residents consider the development of activities to complement visits crucial to get tourists more involved and make them spend more time in the village. Residents’ perceptions are mainly that “there is nothing for them [to do]” (R4), and it is therefore “necessary to create some tourist entertainment in the village” (R9). Regarding the development of outdoor activities some suggest: “[the offer of] bikes […] [that could be] rented to people” (R2); the revitalization of some “sports equipment” located near the river beach (R5); the promotion of “rock climbing” in the rocks near the river beach (R6); the investment in more and better signposted “trails […] [and walking] routes” (R7), considering the large existing demand as also confirmed by some SAs. Also residents consider the river and the park important assets that should be used to permit more dynamic leisure experiences, e.g. around water sports, integrating the traditional river boats, in order to avoid the seasonality of this resource, especially relevant in the summer season: “in summer, we have the river beach, which is a spectacular site, where people can spend some beautiful afternoons. Now, in winter, there only [remains] […] the landscape” (R7).

Residents thereby show their awareness of local identity elements that may be dynamically integrated into tourist activities and may involve tourists and residents alike. Most residents confirm the already mentioned lack of visitor information, particularly regarding walking trails and village traditions and thus suggest more promotion: “the tourists who come also do not have information [...], for example, about the rides or walks they can do, the things they can visit” (R3). Some respondents suggest that access to

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

93

information could be facilitated through a Tourism Office, which does not exist in the village nor in the near surroundings. Considering the tourists interest in genuine and authentic products, residents further consider that the restaurant should offer more traditional meals. They explain that they used to go to the restaurant frequently, but then they stopped going there due to the fact that the meals were “too expensive and non-traditional” (R8).

The Visitors The majority of the twelve visitors interviewed were between 22 and 39 years old (five of them above 50), mostly travelling as a couple and for two days (only three were excursionists). Most come from medium-sized cities on the country’s coastline and have higher education levels (a bachelor or master’s degree). Visitors were specifically motivated to visit Janeiro de Cima by “nature” and the “cultural brand associated” (the Schist Villages’ brand), as visible in the following excerpts: “[we came] looking for [...] the Zêzere [river environment]” (T2); “the Schist Villages’ […] I saw it belonged to the network and that’s how we came” (T5). Both natural and cultural features, as well as their connection, seem to be main “pull” motivators attracting them to the village: “what attracts me here is the […] vegetation, the land relief, […] the kind of architecture and buildings, […] [the] materials used in the houses’ construction…and also […] [the] type of products we found in these regions” (T8).

Visitors perceive the distinctiveness of Janeiro de Cima from other schist villages through the additional use of river stones, reflecting the village’s identity, very much connected to the river: “this is a Façade that borrows from [the here present] nature” (T2). Visitors reveal their wish to get to know the rural community’s way of life, as well as to enjoy the village atmosphere, reflecting their interest in getting involved with local people, in emerging in a distinct reality, i.e. living a kind of “escape experience” (Pine & Gilmore, 1998). Visitors refer to the kindness of local people in receiving them as a distinctive element contributing to the genuinely pleasant atmosphere characterizing this village. The only three foreign tourists interviewed revealed an interest in participating in a festival taking place every year in the river park (Raízes d’Aldeia), in workshops and dancing, reflecting the new tourists’ wishes

94

Chapter Four

for active involvement and interaction. One stressed the pleasure of being close to the river: “the main attraction is having water nearby [allowing swimming]…and the festival” (T11). The view of these tourists suggests a preference for less demanding physical, social and cultural activities, of a more informal nature, corroborating results obtained in other studies on rural tourism, like Frochot’s (2005). The visitors’ sensorial experience is also very important, with the most remarkable flavours associated with this village being chestnuts, maranhos (typical dish) and goat. Flavours from pumpkin jelly and quince jam as well as homemade bread were also mentioned. The smell of nature, flowers, vegetation and fresh air are strongly associated with the experience in this village, closely linked to a “sensation of pure air, of being in a non-polluted environment” (T8). The sounds of nature (in contrast with city sounds), including the river and birds singing, the familiar conversations in the village streets, the church bell and, interestingly, silence as the “most pleasant” (T2) sound, are highlighted. Visitors’ visual images mostly refer to the green of landscapes and the orange-brown of the architecture, as well as to the river and vegetation. Interestingly, visitors highlight that, in Janeiro de Cima, “the richness of nature” (T5) can be appreciated, which is designated as “beautiful, harmonious and well framed by the human hand” (T8). Most visitors’ sensorial perceptions encompass, again particular natural and cultural features of the village and its environment, e.g.: “the quietness of the river, peacefully flowing between the banks, the houses speckled with pebbles and the clear light of dawn” (T3); “[the rolled stones in the houses’ walls are] typical, it is connected to the river” (T2); “the river, the trees, the houses” (T12). These quotes describe scenarios that the visitor may take home as emotionally rich and also symbolically significant memories of the village experience, reflecting an ideal of harmony between Man and Nature, of peace, serenity and beauty, which may come close to what Sharpley and Jepson (2011) describe as the spiritual rural tourism experience. Most visitors showed interest in buying local products, especially local food, like jam, honey, smoked sausages, and local handicrafts, particularly linen products from the Weavers’ House, praised by one tourist as exceptionally good-quality linen. Linen is a natural resource, previously abundant in the region (nowadays of less importance, though), much appreciated by some visitors as a distinctive local element. Concerning the type of activities carried out in Janeiro de Cima, most visitors referred to short walks through the village, usually including the river park. Only a few visitors engaged in more demanding hiking, exploring the trails surrounding the village. Distinctive features of this

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

95

village, linked to natural resources, reveal that engagement with “nature” is essentially based on visual consumption experiences or the “tourist gaze” (Urry, 1992), as seen in the following statements: “the contact with the river […] the peaceful environment, a sense of integration with nature” (T2); “I took a lot of photos of the [cultivated] fields […] in the middle of nowhere near the river […] [The] landscape is […] gorgeous!” (T5). Visitors also identify aspects that might be improved for enhancing the visitor experience, particularly emphasizing information to guide them: “there […] is no brochure anywhere [about the walking trails], no one could tell us anything […] there should be a better service in terms of information: brochures or people who can give us that information” (T5); “even the trails […] we have here one map that is not very detailed, and we do not find it easy to ask someone the way […] [there are] no signs […] nowhere we can ask [for directions]” (T1).

They even noticed that local people were not always able to help them, and thus suggest training to service providers regarding all types of information on the village and surroundings. Some also missed access to the Internet in the village, actually revealing a somehow contradictory expectation of “typical rural life” with modern, urban standards.

Conclusions and Implications for the Destination The perspectives of all stakeholders interviewed in Janeiro de Cima reveal that an integrative approach to tourism development has already been implemented, while there is still great potential to explore existing tangible and intangible cultural resources to improve the tourist experience offered by this village. The active involvement of stakeholders in the cocreation tourism experience in the village allows memorable and unique experiences that contribute to the promotion of heritage and improvement of the tourism experience (Binkhorst & Dekker, 2009). Against this background, the potential to develop co-creative tourist experiences for enhancing the overall village experience and differentiating this particular Schist Village must be stressed (Richards & Wilson, 2006). Unique cultural and natural elements in the village show the possibility of enhancing various activities related to agriculture or handicrafts and of promoting the value of endogenous resources. All local stakeholders recognise that culture and nature are relevant elements for these cocreative experiences (Richards, 2011). Results corroborate Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques and Lima (2012) and Richards and Wilson’s (2007a)

96

Chapter Four

assumptions, showing that visitors also seek a more active role in the production of their own experiences. The Weavers’ House mirrors one possibility of transforming a traditional cultural product into a co-creative one that attracts visitors by its unique features, facilitates knowledge transmission and promotes the production of quality linen products as an identity feature of this village. The role that local community and visitors play in this process is crucial to develop creative tourism experience environments (Binkhorst & Dekker, 2009) and to fulfil the tourists’ desire of getting to know and being involved in local culture (Cloke, 2007; Fernández, 2010; Kastenholz et al., 2013; Richards, 2011). The relevance of these products in the tourist experience in Janeiro de Cima reflects the role of a co-creative use of The Weavers’ House, which also promotes the combination of traditions with more contemporary design and uses. Unexpectedly, all groups interviewed recognise this mix between traditional and modern as a major attraction value, which is perceived as a factor of local pride by supply agents and residents. Similar initiatives, using existing and under-exploited resources, may have potential in Janeiro de Cima, as visitors show interest in discovering and appreciating nature, small-scale agriculture and all the local products they encounter. It would also be important to promote activities related to the agricultural calendar of the village, enhancing activities related to olives and medronho (the fruit of Arbutus unedo, commonly called “strawberry tree”) picking and weaving activities. Information about resources and attractions seems paramount, as recognised by supply agents, residents and tourists. However, also an appealing form of transmitting it, not only through traditional print material but also through co-creative experiences, involving visitors and residents, acting as “cultural brokers”, may be an attractive avenue for success (Cloke, 2007; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012). Themed, participative activities may thus be developed, with the active involvement of knowledgeable residents and considering natural and cultural resources, like agricultural workshops explaining farming techniques as well as revealing the challenges of life as a farmer and gastronomy courses based on local/regional agro-products. Workshops about aromatic and medicinal herbs used in the village/region, the local/regional flora and fauna or about environmental education (e.g. getting to know some good environmental practices or, for example, how to identify and combat invasive species, such as the trees of the genus Acacia) could be also interesting initiatives. Theatre plays, in which the visitor may be included, based on the village’s legends (São Sebastião and Januários—resources not mentioned by the interviewed stakeholders) could be a cultural promotion activity. Also, the river park could be better

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

97

used as a stage of dynamic activities close to nature, in connection with two traditional resources identified by local agents and residents: the river boat and the water mills. For example, guided river tours with the river boat may be offered, with a local resident talking about the river’s importance for village life and answering tourists’ questions in a personalised host-guest interaction. Having a resident, possibly selected by the community, assuming functions similar to a tourist guide and explaining the village history and legends to visitors, and who is prepared to receive these, even in more than one language, may in fact substantially add to the tourist experience. Considering local materials in architectural buildings, the transmission of knowledge in workshops about the local use of schist, pinewood and rolled rocks from the river in the village architecture could also be an interesting way of promoting local identity. Local history and traditions may thus be valorised by co-creative tourism proposals, which may help develop more involving, meaningful and memorable tourism experiences while simultaneously contributing to the village’s sustainable development (Cloke, 2007; Mitchell & Fisher, 2010; Richards, 2011).

Notes 1. The ORTE Project (PTDC/CS-GEO/104894/2008) is financed by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (co-financed by COMPETE, QREN and FEDER). See also http://cms.ua.pt/orte. 2. As mentioned before, this study is part of a larger project. In this context, the adopted methodology is integrated into the qualitative approach undertaken in the ORTE Project. 3. Schist is a metamorphic rock used in traditional buildings in the village. 4. The Schist Villages Network Program (SVN) was created in 2000 in Portugal’s Central region. It began in the context of the III EU Community Support Framework. It takes its name from the local geology: schist is a metamorphic rock, widely used in traditional building in the Schist Villages, giving them a distinctive streetscape. SVN is a sustainable development project of regional scope, which developed from an initial partnership of 16 municipalities. It now comprises 27 villages, 19 municipalities and over 100 operators with tourism-related businesses in this territory. 5. The interviews with ATDPs were conducted between December 2010 and June 2012.

98

Chapter Four

References Agapito, D., Valle, P., & Mendes, J. (2014). The sensory dimension of tourist experiences: Capturing meaningful sensory-based themes in Southwest Portugal. Tourism Management, 42, 224-237. Agency for Tourism Development of the Schist Villages (ADXTUR). (n.d.). Janeiro de Cima. Aldeias do Xisto [Schist Villages]. Retrieved from http://aldeiasdoxisto.pt/aldeia/janeiro-de-cima Alvarez, M. D. (2010). Creative cities and cultural spaces: New perspectives for city tourism. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 4(3), 171-175. Bell, D. (2006). Variations on the rural idyll. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. H. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of rural studies (pp. 149-160). London: SAGE Publications. Binkhorst, E. (2007). Creativity in tourism experiences: The case of Sitges. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), Tourism, creativity and development (pp. 124-144). London: Routledge. Binkhorst, E., & Dekker. T. D. (2009). Agenda for co-creation tourism experience research. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2/3), 311-327. Chambers, E. (2009). From authenticity to significance: Tourism on the frontier of culture and place. Futures, 41(6), 353-359. Cloke, P. (2007). Creativity and tourism in rural environments. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), Tourism, creativity and development (pp. 37-47). London: Routlege. Daugstad, K. (2008). Negotiating landscape in rural tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 402-426. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill. Fernández, M. T. (2010, September 30 to October 2). More than sun, beach and heritage: Innovating Mediterranean tourism through creative tourism. Interactions, co-operation, competitiveness and economic development. Paper presented at the RESER Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden. Figueiredo, E. (2008). Imagine there’s no rural: The transformation of rural spaces into places of nature conservation in Portugal. European Urban and Regional Studies, 15(2), 159-171. —. (2009). One rural, two visions—Environmental issues and images on rural areas in Portugal. Journal of European Countryside, 1(1), 9-21. Figueiredo, E., Kastenholz, E., & Lima, J. (2011). Recreating rurality— Visions of hosts and guests in two Portuguese villages. Paper presented

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

99

at the XXIV European Congress for Rural Sociology (August 22-25), Chania, Crete, Greece. Frochot, I. (2005). A benefit segmentation of tourists in rural areas: A Scottish perspective. Tourism Management, 26(3), 335-346. Garrod, B., Wornell, R., & Youel, R. (2006). Re-conceptualising rural resources as countryside capital: The case of rural tourism. Journal of Rural Studies, 22(1), 117-128. Grissemann, U., & Stokburger-Sauer, N. (2012). Customer co-creation of travel services: The role of company support and customer satisfaction with the co-creation performance. Tourism Management, 33(6), 14831492. Hall, D. (2004). Rural tourism development in South-Eastern Europe: Transition and the search for sustainability. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6(3), 165-176. Kastenholz, E. (2002). The role and marketing implications of destination images on tourist behavior: The case of Northern Portugal (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal. —. (2004). Management of demand as a tool in sustainable tourist destination development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5), 388408. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Marques, C. P. (2012). Marketing the rural tourism experience. In R. H. Tsiotsou & R. E. Goldsmith (Eds.), Strategic marketing in tourism services (pp. 247-264). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C. P., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience—The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Kastenholz, E., Davis, D., & Paul, G. (1999). Segmenting tourists in rural areas: The case of North and Central Portugal. Journal of Travel Research, 37, 353-363. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M. J., & Figueiredo, E. (2013). Host-guest relationships in rural tourism: evidence from two Portuguese villages. Anatolia, 24(3), 367-380. Kastenholz, E., & Lima, J. (2011). The integral rural tourism experience from the tourist’s point of view—A qualitative analysis of its nature and meaning. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Lane, B. (1994). What is rural tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1/2), 7-21. Lash, S., & Urry, J. (1994). Economies of signs and space. London: Sage.

100

Chapter Four

Maitland, R. (2007). Tourists, the creative class and distinctive areas in major cities—The roles of visitors and residents in developing new tourism areas. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), Tourism, creativity and development (pp. 73-86). London: Routledge. McCracken, G. (1988). The long interview. California: Sage. Mitchell, P., & Fisher, R. (2010). From passenger to driver: Creativity and culture in rural communities. Tourism, Culture and Communication, 10(3), 187-200. Molera, L., & Albaladejo, I. P. (2007). Profiling segments of tourists in rural areas of South-Eastern Spain. Tourism Management, 28(3), 757767. Mossberg, L. (2007). A marketing approach to the tourist experience. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality & Tourism, 7(1), 59-74. National Institute of Statistics (INE). (2011). Resultados provisórios dos Censos 2011 [Provisional results of the 2011 Census]. Lisboa: Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE). Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2013). Experiences, co-creation and technology: A conceptual approach to enhance tourism experiences. Paper presented at the 23rd CAUTHE Conference (February 11-14), Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (1994), Tourism strategies and rural development. Paris: OECD/GD. Park, D.-B., & Yoon, Y.-S. (2009). Segmentation by motivation in rural tourism: A Korean case study. Tourism Management, 30(1), 99-108. Pereiro, X., & Conde, S. P. (2005). Turismo e oferta gastronómica na comarca de Ulloa (Galiza): Análise de uma experiência de desenvolvimento local [Tourism and gastronomic offer in the region of Ulloa (Galicia): Analysis of a local development experience]. Pasos— Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 3(1), 109-123. Pine, J., & Gilmore, J. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. [Harvard Business Review]. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/1998/07/welcome-to-the-experience-economy Poon, A. (1993). Tourism, technology and competitive strategies. Wallingford, UK: C.A.B. International. Portuguese Directorate General for Territorial Development (DGT). (2015). Mapas on-line [On-line maps]. Retrieved from http://mapas.dgterritorio.pt/viewer/index.html Prebensen, N., Vittersø, J., & Dahl, T. (2013). Value co-creation significance of tourist resources. Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 240261.

Co-Creative Rural Tourism Experiences

101

Raymond, C. (2007). Creative tourism New Zealand: The practical challenges of developing creative tourism. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), Tourism, creativity and development (pp. 145-157). London: Routledge. Richards, G. (2011). Creativity and tourism—The state of the art. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1225-1253. Richards, G., & Marques, L. (2012). Exploring creative tourism: Editors introduction. Journal of Tourism Consumption and Practice, 4(2), 111. Richards, G., & Wilson, J. (2006). Developing creativity in tourist experiences: A solution to the serial reproduction of culture? Tourism Management, 27(6), 1209-1223. Richards, G., & Wilson, J. (2007a). Creativities in tourism development. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), Tourism, creativity and development (pp. 255-288). London: Routledge. Richards, G., & Wilson. J. (2007b). Tourism development trajectories— From culture to creativity? In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), Tourism, creativity and development (pp. 1-33). London: Routledge. Rodrigues, A., & Kastenholz, E. (2010). Sentir a Natureza—Passeios pedestres como elementos centrais de uma experiência turística [Feeling Nature—Hiking trails as central elements of a tourist experience]. Revista de Turismo & Desenvolvimento, 2(13/14), 719728. Sharpley, R. (2009). Tourism development and the environment: Beyond sustainability? London: Earthscan. Sharpley, R., & Jepson, D. (2011). Rural tourism: A spiritual experience? Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 52-71. Silva, L. (2009). Heritage building in the ‘Historic Villages of Portugal’: social processes, practices and agents. Journal of Ethnology and Folkloristics, 3(2), 75-91. Todt, A., & Kastenholz, E. (2010). Tourists as a driving force for sustainable rural development—A research framework. Paper presented at the IV Rural Studies Congress (February 4-6), University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal. Walmsley, D. J. (2003). Rural tourism: A case of lifestyle-led opportunities. Australian Geographer, 34(1), 61-72.

CHAPTER FIVE THE TOURIST IN RURAL DESTINATIONS: AN EXPERIENTIAL APPROACH BASED ON RELATIONSHIPS WITH LOCAL PEOPLE AND SURROUNDINGS ANA MARÍA CAMPÓN-CERRO, JOSÉ MANUEL HERNÁNDEZ-MOGOLLÓN, HELENA MARÍA BAPTISTA ALVES AND ELIDE DI-CLEMENTE

Introduction Unlike traditional studies on the profile and behaviour of rural tourists, this chapter tries to adopt a different approach. It focuses on perceptions related to the tourism experience, using variables such as image, quality, value, trust, attachment, satisfaction and loyalty. Moreover, the present analysis considers not only the tourist environment but also the relationships that can emerge between the tourism service providers and the local communities that are indispensable elements of the rural tourism product itself. A better understanding of the tourist profile, tourists’ attitudes and judgements of their experience will help in the development of new marketing strategies, improving the management, growth and promotion of rural destinations and enterprises. The main aim of this work is to study rural tourists and their tourism experience, focusing on the value they attribute to the relationships established with the environment and residents of the destination they visit. Therefore, beyond their socio-demographic and behavioural characteristics, rural tourists were studied from the perspective of the relationship experiences with places and people they refer to.

104

Chapter Five

Results from an exploratory study are presented. An online survey was carried out using a non-probabilistic sample of rural tourists. The data collected permits analysis of the before-mentioned variables and also discussion of some management and marketing implications for rural tourism entrepreneurs and destination managers. The chapter is structured in four sections. After the introductory section that presents the study’s purpose, the first section deals with the theoretical context, addressing rural tourism and tourist experience and defining the variables selected for the present study. The second section explains the methodology used to collect the data. The third section corresponds to the analysis and discussion of the results. Finally, some reflections and conclusions are presented.

Rural Tourism from an Experiential Approach Rural Tourism: the Tourist Profile and the Tourist Experience Articles dealing with a new tourism trend in rural areas started to appear during the eighties (Hernández, Campón & Alves, 2011). At that time, Middleton (1982) highlighted the power that rural areas have on attracting tourists, mainly in northern Europe. Nowadays, statistics confirm the increasing growth of rural tourism and that it is a wellestablished phenomenon, resulting from the value recognised in rural and natural resources. The strongest development trends have been recorded in Austria, France and Italy, and, more recently, Spain, the United States and Australia. Important advances have been observed over the last two decades in Latin American countries like Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Costa Rica and Honduras (Vera, López, Marchena & Clavé, 2011). Concerning the Spanish experience, Grande (2006) differentiates between old and new paradigms of rural tourism. The former started to develop from the beginning of the eighties until the end of the nineties. At that time, rural tourism had been conceived of as an economic complement to agricultural incomes, particularly attractive for women and, at the same time, a diversification opportunity for the Spanish tourism industry. Rural culture, natural environment and the tranquillity of these areas represent their main attractions. Local tourism offerings are characterised by warm and familiar relationships, based on quality and customer satisfaction. In addition, a complementary offer has emerged with the enhancement of local productions and handicraft. Moreover, rural offerings have started to be properly organised and promoted. The latter dates back to the end of the

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

105

nineties and is characterised by the stronger presence of owners and urban promoters in rural destinations. The objectives of diversification and complementarity of touristic and agrarian activities have started to converge, with the product losing its identity and its specific nature, and accommodation becoming the defining element. This development provoked a distancing from the authentic essence of rurality. Together with conceptual evolution, rural tourism has also undergone changes on the demand side. One may differentiate between the traditional rural tourists, who travel to rural destinations to go back to their native village or their parents’ villages, and the modern rural tourists, who appear from the nineties onwards. These tourists usually come from the city and seek open spaces, high-quality environment, authentic and sparsely populated areas. Their age is in the range of 25-45 years; they look for good value for money, and their economic and cultural level is middle or middle-high. Modern rural tourists find in rurality a suggestive content for their touristic experience (Cánoves, Herrera & Villarino, 2005; García, 1996; García, 2005; Mediano, 2004; Yagüe, 2002). Nowadays, rural tourism is being influenced by the experience economy, a new trend proposed and defined by Pine and Gilmore (1999). According to these authors, the service market has given way to the emotions markets. The experiences associated with the consumption of a specific product/service represent the real valuable offer. Rural tourism is a tourism typology that confers a unique strategic and competitive value to emotions and experiential relationships (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012). In order to develop a proper offer, in line with modern expectations of rural tourism, it is necessary to have an in-depth knowledge of the rural tourism demand, its specificities, attitudes, behaviours and motivations. These are all functional elements that have to be well managed to achieve customer satisfaction through the tourism experience (García, 2003; Mediano, 2004). Thus, even if scientific literature has sometimes focused on the rural tourists’ profile, it seems necessary to continue deepening our understanding of their knowledge and experience, with the aim of providing rural areas with enhanced tools, capable of improving tourism performance, and maximising tourists’ satisfaction and loyalty through impressive and memorable experiences. These improvements will make tourism flows more profitable for rural areas over the long term.

106

Chapter Five

Experience Assessment concerning the Rural Space and its Elements A literature review carried out by Hernández et al. (2011) shows that rural tourism needs further study from the marketing and market research perspective. In this scope, only a few analyses have dealt with the study of rural tourism demand, service quality measurement, relationship marketing and tourist loyalty, destination image or tourist satisfaction. Recently some authors have highlighted the importance of delving into the marketing and management of rural areas, making particular reference to the multisensory nature of rural tourism experiences and the emotional involvement between hosts and guests during rural tourism practices (Agapito, Valle & Mendes, 2014; Kastenholz et al., 2012). Emotions and the feeling of attachment and identification with a destination are critical determinants of tourist satisfaction and are among those that positively impact on the success of the destinations and local community wellbeing (Kastenholz et al., 2012). Based on the ideas mentioned above, this work looks at developing our knowledge of the rural tourist profile, focusing not only on traditional variables but also on those related to behavioural and experiential issues, resulting from the interaction between the tourist, the rural space and its elements. Image, quality, value, trust, attachment, satisfaction and loyalty are interpreted as crucial variables to carry out this analysis, as they provide a new perspective and relevant information about the experiential and sensory value of rural tourism practices (Agapito et al., 2014). A brief discussion on these variables in the context of tourism is presented as follows. Destination image can be defined as a “subjective interpretation of reality made by the tourist” (Bigné, Sánchez & Sánchez, 2001, p. 607), encompassing a cognitive and an affective judgement (Baloglu & McCleary, 1999). The cognitive image is related to functional attributes while affective image deals with feelings or emotions that a destination inspires (Hernández, Solis, Moliner & Sánchez, 2006). Destination image has an influencing power on the decision process of selecting destinations, the evaluation of the destination and tourists’ future behavioural intentions (Bigné et al., 2001). Thus, a destination with a strong positive image will have a better chance of being selected by tourists than a destination with a weak image (Echtner & Ritchie, 1991). Murphy, Pritchard and Smith (2000) emphasise the importance of quality in the tourism context, which, according to Žabkar, Brenþiþ and Dmitroviü (2010, p. 538), is “created by the processes of service delivery

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

107

(e.g., friendliness, courtesy, efficiency, reliability, staff competence) and outcomes of services (e.g., accommodation, food, leisure facilities)”. Murphy et al. (2000) assert that its relevance relies on the “moments of truth”; the encounter with the destination and its infrastructures provokes the final perception that the traveller has of the service quality. The more positive the encounter with the service is, the higher the perceived quality will be. The authors also argue that quality and value assessment can show how to reinvent and reposition tourism products; thus destination managers have to consider both elements as strategic tools to revitalise the sector. Within the tourism sector analysis, Chen and Tsai (2007, p. 1116) define value as “the visitor’s overall appraisal of the net worth of the trip, based on the visitor’s assessment of what is received (benefits), and what is given (costs or sacrifice)”. However, quality and value are frequently confused with satisfaction (Bigné et al., 2001; Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). Hernández et al. (2006) define satisfaction with a destination as the degree of fulfilment of tourists’ needs and desires, on the basis of the broad range of services and activities a destination can offer. Satisfaction can be approached at an overall level (Oliver, 1980) or an attribute level, so that overall satisfaction can be conceived of as a function of the single attributes’ evaluation (Oliver, 1993). For the purpose of this work, it appears interesting to know the level of satisfaction with tourism service providers. Authors such as Choo and Petrick (2012) and Yen, Liu and Tuan (2009) recognise the importance of this issue, but also of evaluating satisfaction with security, the treatment and the hospitality of residents. These aspects have been treated by Alegre and Cladera (2006, 2009). Therefore, satisfaction with the relationships that emerge with service providers and residents are important elements of the touristic experience and can enhance the emotional nature of the trip (Agapito et al., 2014; Kastenholz et al., 2012; Mossberg, 2007). In the context of relational factors, trust is also studied. Trust and its application to a tourist destination are defined as “the feeling of trust, confidence and security induced by the visiting experiences in the destination” (Tsai, 2012, p. 144). Trust in a specific tourism destination is a relevant topic to be investigated, as Chen and Phou (2013) and Tsai (2012) assert. Additionally, Mechinda, Serirat, Anuwichanont and Gulid (2010) and Yen et al. (2009) demonstrate that trust in tourism service providers also has to be considered. Moreover, attachment refers to the emotional and symbolic relationships that people develop with recreational resources. It consists of two components: place identity, which refers to an emotional attachment, and place dependence, which deals with a functional attachment (Williams & Vaske, 2003). Place attachment can

108

Chapter Five

evoke a strong feeling of security, trust, attractiveness, joy, and tourists’ self-expression, so it is conceived of as a competitive tool within tourism marketing (Tsai, 2012). Achieving loyalty is a strategic goal due to the impact on the profitability of having a base of loyal customers. Loyalty is defined as “a deeply held commitment to rebuy or repatronise a preferred product/service consistently in the future” (Oliver, 1999, p. 34). Repetition of the visit is the strongest challenge that rural tourist destinations have to face, with other tourists’ recommendation being one of the most effective marketing tools to attract new visitors and to create a positive destination image (Phillips, Wolfe, Hodur & Leistritz, 2013). Within rural tourism, loyalty is seen as a relevant topic which still needs more research (Loureiro & Kastenholz, 2011; Polo, Frías & Rodríguez, 2012b). The empirical study was designed to shed light on the variables cited, not only on their individual importance but also on the relationships between several constructs—image, quality, value, trust, attachment and satisfaction with several dimensions of the rural tourism experience—and both overall satisfaction with the experience and loyalty. Next, methodology and results of the study are presented.

Methodology Measurement Scales Selection To measure the variables described in the previous section, scales already tested and supported by the scientific literature have been identified and considered as a reference. Motivations for practising rural tourism have been identified in the studies of Devesa, Laguna and Palacios (2010) and Molera and Albaladejo (2007) and used in this study. For the assessment of the cognitive image, a scale has been created based on the one proposed by Echtner and Ritchie (1991), attempting to apply general items for the measurement of the image of a rural destination’s elements. A similar approach has been adopted for the measurement of the perceived quality, taking as a reference the renowned scale of SERVQUAL proposed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988). The measurement of the affective image is based on the inventory used by authors such as Rodríguez del Bosque and San Martín (2008) and Wang and Hsu (2010). The scale proposed by Mechinda, Serirat and Gulid (2009) and Mechinda et al. (2010) has been considered as a reference in the measurement of the perceived value.

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

109

Satisfaction has been measured with reference to different aspects. Satisfaction with the attributes of rural destinations has been covered with the elaboration of items from Campón, Hernández and Alves (2010), using a similar process to the one adopted for the development of the scales assessing image and quality. Relationships with tourism services providers have been measured with the scale proposed by De Wulf, OdekerkenSchröder and Iacobucci (2001), while the measurement of satisfaction with the relationship with residents was based on the work by Alegre and Cladera (2006, 2009) and Campo and Garau (2010). The overall satisfaction measurement considered the scales proposed by Oliver (1997), Rodríguez del Bosque and San Martín (2008), Tse and Wilton (1988), Wang and Hsu (2010), Williams and Soutar (2009) and Žabkar et al. (2010). Trust has been measured on the basis of the scales of Chen and Phou (2013) and Tsai (2012) and completed with other items from the results of Ganesan (1994) and Tsai (2012). The scale adopted for the assessment of trust in providers of tourism services has been developed by Verhoef, Franses and Hoekstra (2002), and the scale assessing attachment is based on the instrument proposed by Williams and Vaske (2003). The contribution of Mechinda et al. (2009) has been considered relevant for loyalty measurement. All the scales applied in this work have been tested and validated by experts: researchers and professors belonging to different Spanish universities and professionals operating in the rural tourism sector, in the tourism industry in general, and in the marketing field.

Research Design and Fieldwork This research was conducted in Spain, a country where rural tourism has had exceptional growth in recent years, from the point of view of both supply and demand (Hernández et al., 2011). This work adopts an exploratory study approach through an online survey. For that reason, a structured questionnaire was developed using the measurement scales described above. The indicators of each variable were measured with 7point Likert scales, where 1 is the most unfavourable rating and 7 is the most favourable. The ratings were assigned in reference to the last rural tourism destination that the surveyed tourists had visited. Before the final release of the questionnaire, a pilot proof was developed, selecting a small subsample of the target population. The questionnaire was disseminated through e-mail, social networks, website and blog, seeking to generate a snowball effect to obtain more answers. The fieldwork was carried out

Chapter Five

110

between April and June 2013, collecting 464 questionnaires, using a nonprobabilistic convenience sample technique (see Table 5-1). Table 5-1. Technical specifications of the empirical study

Universe Scope Data collection method Population size Sampling Fieldwork Valid responses

People who practise rural tourism with some frequency (at least once every two or three years). Spain Online survey Unknown Non-probabilistic convenience sample From 22 April to 18 June 2013 464 (completed questionnaires)

Source: Own elaboration

A descriptive analysis of the data was developed, with the aim of knowing the centrality and dispersion of the collected data, and a correlation analysis was carried out in order to shed light on relationships between the variables under study. A scale reliability analysis with Cronbach’s alpha was also undertaken. The analyses were conducted using the statistical program SPSS Statistics Version 21.

Results Characterization of the Sample Profile The collected sample (n=464) is composed of 41.2% men and 58.8% women. The most representative age group is “26 to 35 years” (53.9%) with the age group between 26 and 55 years comprising 85.6% of the sample, corresponding to the classic age profile of rural tourists (García, 2005; Mediano, 2004). The results of the profile found in this sample are shown in Table 5-2. With respect to the respondents’ profile as rural tourists, 49.8% practise this type of tourism “once or twice a year”, which means that half of the sample indulges in rural tourism regularly. It is for this reason that they qualify for this study as adequate in terms of their loyalty to rural tourism and their level of knowledge of it. The primary motivation for practising rural tourism is “to search for peace and tranquillity” (5.88), followed by “to enjoy life in rural environments” (5.63) and “to practise cultural activities and activities in nature” (5.54). Regarding behavioural loyalty to

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

111

rural tourism destinations in general, expressed by rural tourists surveyed, 68.3% of respondents report returning to the rural tourism destinations that they visit, while 99.1% recommend them to others. This fact could indicate that rural tourism destinations are capable of generating repeated visits and recommendations almost 100% of the time. Table 5-2. Sample profile Variable Frequency of practising rural tourism Once every two or three years Once or twice a year Three or four times a year More than four times a year Motivation indicators To search for peace and tranquillity To enjoy life in rural environments To practise cultural activities and activities in nature To find great prices and short trips To be with family To visit friends and relatives Behavioural loyalty to rural tourism destinations Do you return to rural tourism Yes destinations that you visit? No Do you recommend the rural Yes tourism destinations that you No visit?

Responses Frequency Percentage 142 30.6% 231 49.8% 46 9.9% 45 9.7% Standard Mean deviation 5.88 1.327 5.63 1.308 5.54

1.387

5.21 5.09 3.74

1.521 1.863 1.975

Frequency 317 147 460

Percentage 68.3% 31.7% 99.1%

4

0.9%

Source: Own elaboration

Once the profile of these tourists is known, the descriptive analysis of the variables of interest will be presented.

Analysis of Variables Referring to the Last Rural Tourism Experience The results of the analyses regarding the rural tourism experience and image dimensions under study are shown below. However, it is necessary to reflect on the reliability of the selected scales. It can be shown that the

112

Chapter Five

scales used have adequate reliability values. The minimum recommended limit for Cronbach’s alpha is 0.7 (Sarabia-Sánchez & Cañadas-Osinski, 2013). The values obtained for this parameter in the scales studied here ranged from 0.944 (trust in tourism services providers) to 0.744 (affective image). Therefore, it can be asserted that the scales are reliable. Regarding the cognitive image, the highest-rated item was “it reflects the authenticity of the rural environment” (5.53), followed by “the conditions are good for engaging in rural tourism” (5.52), and “it offers good rural tourism experiences” (5.47). Thus, in these destinations, mainly authenticity is valued, and the existence of good conditions for the practice of this type of tourism, as well as the possibility of generating experiences. It is for this reason that it becomes necessary to enhance the touristic use of these areas while preserving their authenticity and sustainability. With respect to the affective image, these tourists qualify the rural tourism destination as “pleasant” (6.01), which is intensified by the value of its standard deviation (0.938), and “relaxing” (5.97), which coincides with the fact that the main motivation is to search for “peace and tranquillity” (see Table 5-3; n=464). Table 5-3. Characterization of the image indicators (n=464) Dimensions

Cognitive image (Į=0.825)

Indicators Min. Max. Mode Mean St. Dev. [CIM3] It reflects the authenticity 2 7 6 5.53 1.201 of the rural environment [CIM1] The conditions are good for engaging in rural tourism (tourism 2 7 6 5.52 1.208 resources, infrastructures, accommodation, restaurants, etc.) [CIM2] It offers good rural 2 7 5 5.47 1.147 tourism experiences

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

Dimensions

Affective image (Į=0.744)

113

Indicators Min. Max. Mode Mean St. Dev. [CIM4] It offers possibilities to find out and learn 2 7 5 5.15 1.295 things about the rural environment [CIM5] It offers unique experiences in 2 7 6 4.98 1.424 the rural environment [AIM4] It is a 2 7 6 6.01 0.938 pleasant place [AIM2] It is a 2 7 6 5.97 1.022 relaxing place [AIM3] It is an 2 7 5 5.06 1.415 exciting place [AIM1] It is an 2 7 5 4.93 1.315 arousing place

Source: Own elaboration

Table 5-4 shows the results regarding quality (n=464; Cronbach’s Į=0.855). The highest rated sample value was the indicator “the visit was worth the effort” (6.02); followed by “it makes me feel good there” (5.95), with very close standard deviations. These results corroborate, conjointly with the importance of authenticity, the assertions of Hernández, Campón, Folgado and Di Clemente (2012), who claim that the success of rural tourism is based on getting a satisfied demand, through an authentic and quality tourism offer. Table 5-4. Characterization of the quality indicators Indicators [QUA2] The visit was worth the effort [QUA3] It makes me feel good there [QUA1] It has what I was looking for

Min.

Max.

Mode

Mean

St. Dev.

2

7

7

6.02

1.015

2

7

7

5.95

1.028

2

7

6

5.72

1.100

Chapter Five

114

Indicators [QUA4] It offers quality experiences

Min.

Max.

Mode

Mean

St. Dev.

2

7

6

5.40

1.215

Source: Own elaboration

In the case of “perceived value”, the most highly rated indicator was “it offers good value for money” (5.34), followed by “it gives me great value” (5.31), with an agreement in the responses (see Table 5-5; n=464; Cronbach’s Į=0.806). In view of the results, the understanding of a global “great value” perceived from the rural tourism experience (including the experiential value and reflecting a high level of involvement) must be stressed, even though “good value for money” is the most valued item. Table 5-5. Characterization of the value indicators Indicators [VAL4] It offers good value for money [VAL1] It gives me great value [VAL2] It has good prices [VAL3] It offers tourism services above my expectations

Min.

Max.

Mode

Mean

St. Dev.

2

7

6

5.34

1.15

2

7

5

5.31

1.214

2

7

6

5.22

1.246

2

7

4

4.67

1.279

Source: Own elaboration

Trust valuations are quite homogeneous, judging by their means and standard deviations, revealing a moderate-high importance for this variable (see Table 5-6; n=464). Concerning “trust in the destination”, the best-valued item is “confidence and security” (5.69), which is consistent with the fact that seeking tranquillity and relaxation is the main motivation. The next most important indicator is “security to enjoy a pleasant experience” (5.65), which reveals that the rural tourist has confidence that the rural environment is adequate for the enjoyment of experiences, a feature which links to the considerations about value and quality mentioned above. With regards to “trust in tourism services providers”, the most valued indicator is “they provide a good service” (5.34), followed by “they keep the promises that they make to me” (5.27). These results show that rural tourism enterprises, according to Polo, Frías

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

115

and Rodríguez (2012a), tend to focus on customer orientation, due to their strategy of specialization in a market niche. Table 5-6. Characterization of the trust indicators Dimensions Indicators [TRS1] Sense of trust [TRS2] Confidence and security [TRS3] Security to find everything I need Trust in the in my stay destination [TRS4] Security (Į=0.901) to find all the information needed for my trip [TRS5] Security to enjoy a pleasant experience [TRP1] They keep their promises [TRP2] They put the customer’s Trust in interests first tourism services [TRP3] They providers keep the (Į=0.944) promises that they make to me [TRP4] They provide a good service

Min. Max. Mode Mean St. Dev. 2

7

6

5.47

1.153

2

7

6

5.69

1.068

2

7

5

5.32

1.127

2

7

6

5.12

1.211

2

7

6

5.65

1.077

2

7

5

5.20

1.220

2

7

5

5.19

1.230

2

7

5

5.27

1.237

2

7

6

5.34

1.169

Source: Own elaboration

Within the place attachment construct, in the “destination identity” dimension, the most valued indicator was “it is very special to me” (4.71),

116

Chapter Five

followed by “I strongly identify with it” (4.58). With regard to “destination dependence”, the highest rated item is “it is the best place for practising rural tourism” (5.56), and then “it is an irreplaceable place” (4.59) (see Table 5-7; n=464). The similarity of the scores of both dimensions reveals that rural tourism destinations are capable of generating both a functional and emotional attachment, but on a more moderate level due to the relatively low mean values and a lower grade of homogeneity in opinions given the standard deviation values. Only the item “it is the best place for practising rural tourism” stands out with an average value above 5, denoting a high perceived place dependency regarding rural tourism practice. Table 5-7. Characterization of the attachment indicators Dimensions Indicators [ATI2] It is very special to me [ATI3] I strongly identify with it [ATI5] Visiting it Destination says a lot about who I am identity (Į=0.933) [ATI6] It means a lot to me [ATI1] I feel it is a part of me [ATI4] I am very attached to it [ATD1] It is the best place for practising rural tourism Destination [ATD5] It is an dependence irreplaceable (Į=0.831) place [ATD3] I prefer to visit that destination than any other

Min. Max. Mode Mean St. Dev. 2

7

5

4.71

1.473

2

7

4

4.58

1.498

1

7

4-5

4.56

1.530

2

7

5

4.56

1.586

2

7

5

4.54

1.514

1

7

4

4.42

1.590

2

7

6

5.56

1.223

1

7

7

4.59

1.836

2

7

4

4.56

1.695

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

Dimensions Indicators [ATD2] No other rural tourism destinations can compare to it [ATD6] I don’t have the same enjoyment in a similar place [ATD4] For me it is more important to do rural tourism in it than in any other place

117

Min. Max. Mode Mean St. Dev. 2

7

4

4.55

1.478

2

7

7

4.52

1.867

2

7

7

4.44

1.781

Source: Own elaboration

Next, the results related to satisfaction are shown. With regard to the “satisfaction with the destination attributes”, the item “I can satisfy my motivations as a rural tourist” receives the highest evaluation (5.29). Within the “satisfaction with the relationships with tourism service providers” dimension, the highest value has been assigned to “I am satisfied with the relationship I have with tourism enterprises” (4.97). In relation to “satisfaction with the relationship maintained with residents”, the most valued item was “I am satisfied with the local people’s hospitality” (5.61). These results show the importance of the relationships with local agents, both tourism service providers and residents, highlighting that these elements are a fundamental part of the rural tourism product. Within “overall satisfaction”, the item that received the highest value was “I have had a good experience” (5.77), which shows the capability of rural areas to create favourable experiences. Standard deviations show some agreement in the responses (see Table 5-8; n=464). The relatively higher importance of “satisfaction with relationships with residents” over other forms of satisfaction has to be taken into account in rural tourism destination management, as active involvement of residents in this tourism product seems necessary.

Chapter Five

118

Table 5-8. Characterization of the satisfaction indicators Dimension Indicators

Satisfaction with destination attributes (Į=0.905)

Satisfaction with relations with tourism providers (Į=0.851)

Satisfaction with relations with residents (Į=0.908)

[DAS3] I can satisfy my motivations as a rural tourist [DAS2] I find everything I need to have a satisfying experience [DAS4] I receive the services that I expected to receive [DAS1] I find all the services needed for my stay [RPS3] I am satisfied with the relationship I have with tourism enterprises [RPS1] I have a highquality relationship with the tourism enterprises [RPS2] The tourism enterprises treat especially regular customers [RRS2] I am satisfied with the local people’s hospitality [RRS1] I receive kind treatment as a customer by residents [RRS4] I am satisfied with the residents’ willingness to offer information

Min. Max. Mode Mean

St. Dev.

2

7

6

5.29

1.172

2

7

5

5.22

1.154

2

7

5

5.22

1.143

2

7

5

5.08

1.238

2

7

6

4.97

1.278

2

7

5

4.95

1.313

2

7

5

4.88

1.323

2

7

6

5.61

1.106

2

7

6

5.55

1.130

2

7

6

5.49

1.172

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

Dimension Indicators [RRS3] I am pleased with the residents’ willingness to solve problems, incidents or setbacks that I could have [OVS1] I have had a good experience [OVS4] I feel satisfied with my decision to visit [OVS2] I made a wise choice Overall [OVS5] My satisfaction expectations have been (Į=0.916) fulfilled at all times [OVS3] I found exactly the rural tourism destination that I was looking for [OVS6] I feel close to an ideal destination

119

Min. Max. Mode Mean

St. Dev.

2

7

6

5.38

1.197

2

7

6

5.77

1.051

2

7

6

5.74

1.093

2

7

6

5.73

1.105

2

7

6

5.50

1.146

2

7

6

5.44

1.191

2

7

5

4.88

1.348

Source: Own elaboration

Finally, Table 5-9 (n=464, Cronbach’s Į=0.770) shows the results about loyalty. The values recorded in relation to the likelihood of recommending were higher than those related to the intention to revisit the destination in the next rural tourism trip (4.58), with the items “I will tell other people positive things about it” (referring to the last destination visited) (5.99) and “I will recommend it to other people who ask my advice” (5.94) clearly standing out. People included in the sample proved to be more reluctant to revisit a destination during their “next rural tourism trip” (4.58). However, the item “I will visit the destination again in the future” received a higher evaluation (5.43). Therefore, it can be concluded that rural tourists surveyed are not likely to repeat the visit to the same destination in their next rural holidays, but they would travel back to the same destination after a period. Furthermore, the agreement in considerations relating to recommendations, according to standard deviation, is higher than in revisit intention, which enhances the value of recommendation as an indicator of loyalty to rural tourism destinations,

Chapter Five

120

and reveals some disparity in opinions about the probability of returning to the destination. These results are similar to other studies regarding rural tourism destinations. For example, the findings of Kastenholz, Carneiro and Eusébio (2006) identified two groups of rural tourists: most loyal visitors, who manifested a highest likelihood of returning to the destination; and least loyal visitors, who expressed the least probability of doing so. Table 5-9. Characterization of the loyalty indicators Indicators [LOY5] I will tell other people positive things about it [LOY4] I will recommend it to people who ask my advice [LOY3] I will visit the destination again in the future [LOY1] I consider myself a loyal visitor [LOY2] I will visit it in my next rural tourism trip

Min.

Max.

Mode

Mean

St. Dev.

2

7

7

5.99

1.112

2

7

7

5.94

1.159

2

7

7

5.43

1.390

2

7

4

4.70

1.625

2

7

7

4.58

1.736

Source: Own elaboration

The analysis of these variables allows for a better understanding of the rural tourism demand, focusing on the tourists’ assessment of the experience. This will help develop new successful tourism products, and shape experiential proposals for rural destinations, where relationships with local people and surroundings are shown to be relevant.

Correlation analyses between variables In order to get a better comprehension of the variables under study and their interrelationships, correlation analyses were conducted (see Table 510). The objective was to analyse the relationship of several constructs— image, quality, value, trust, attachment and several dimensions of satisfaction—with the tourist overall satisfaction and loyalty to rural tourism destinations. The interpretation of these analyses may offer the key drivers to generate satisfaction and loyalty in this kind of tourists. If

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

121

rural tourism destination managers take into account these key drivers within tourism planning, it may be possible to foster the benefits tourists generate to rural destinations and their small tourism companies. Although it would be important to analyse correlations between all variables, the relationship of each variable with the overall satisfaction and loyalty to rural tourism destinations stood out. As overall satisfaction and loyalty have a lot of indicators, to simplify the analysis and the tables, the three best-rated indicators of each of these constructs were chosen for analysis. Pearson’s coefficient is presented in italics. The correlation coefficients above 0.4 were highlighted in bold, and above 0.6 were underlined for better identification. The indications of Trespalacios, Vázquez and Bello (2005) were followed to report on the correlation analysis results. The association between the two image dimensions measured— cognitive image and affective image—with overall satisfaction and loyalty can be considered positive and moderate. This implies that better cognitive or affective images can foster better overall tourist satisfaction with and loyalty to rural tourism destinations. The coefficient of determination (R2) reveals the percentage of conjoint variation (Trespalacios et al., 2005). On the one hand, the cognitive image can explain up to 27.0% of the variance of overall satisfaction (CIM2-OVS2) and 25.1% of loyalty (CIM2-LOY5). On the other hand, the affective image can explain up to 30.4% of overall satisfaction (AIM4-OVS2) and 29.7% of loyalty (AIM4-LOY4). Table 5-10. Correlations between variables

Cognitive image

Affective image

Overall satisfaction OVS1 OVS2 CIM1 0.462** 0.444** CIM2 0.478** 0.520** CIM3 0.443** 0.476** CIM4 0.386** 0.435** CIM5 0.387** 0.450** AIM1 0.346** 0.397** AIM2 0.491** 0.504** AIM3 0.412** 0.408** AIM4 0.542** 0.551**

Loyalty OVS4 0.416** 0.471** 0.458** 0.410** 0.419** 0.376** 0.487** 0.400** 0.511**

LOY3 0.295** 0.380** 0.419** 0.380** 0.477** 0.395** 0.437** 0.347** 0.464**

LOY4 0.348** 0.468** 0.445** 0.403** 0.412** 0.373** 0.498** 0.341** 0.545**

LOY5 0.369** 0.501** 0.454** 0.415** 0.403** 0.385** 0.478** 0.354** 0.541**

Chapter Five

122

QUA1 QUA2 Quality QUA3 QUA4 VAL1 VAL2 Value VAL3 VAL4 TRS1 Trust in TRS2 the TRS3 destination TRS4 TRS5 Trust in TRP1 tourism TRP2 services TRP3 providers TRP4 ATI1 ATI2 Destination ATI3 identity ATI4 ATI5 ATI6 ATD1 ATD2 Destination ATD3 dependence ATD4 ATD5 ATD6 DAS1 Destination DAS2 attributes DAS3 satisfaction DAS4 Relations RPS1 with RPS2 tourism providers RPS3 satisfaction

0.382** 0.418** 0.455** 0.403** 0.451** 0.272** 0.310** 0.339** 0.421** 0.383** 0.374** 0.360** 0.432** 0.316** 0.346** 0.323** 0.355** 0.377** 0.450** 0.407** 0.389** 0.370** 0.368** 0.478** 0.322** 0.346** 0.316** 0.260** 0.248** 0.363** 0.443** 0.467** 0.384** 0.289** 0.326**

0.546** 0.558** 0.622** 0.456** 0.422** 0.369** 0.337** 0.452** 0.551** 0.613** 0.513** 0.459** 0.607** 0.466** 0.510** 0.530** 0.533** 0.326** 0.336** 0.355** 0.349** 0.307** 0.299** 0.587** 0.274** 0.198** 0.186** 0.202** 0.234** 0.527** 0.615** 0.627** 0.555** 0.416** 0.382**

0.562** 0.614** 0.660** 0.498** 0.485** 0.389** 0.334** 0.460** 0.545** 0.554** 0.532** 0.470** 0.588** 0.465** 0.499** 0.501** 0.518** 0.350** 0.364** 0.369** 0.382** 0.312** 0.316** 0.637** 0.302** 0.210** 0.198** 0.249** 0.211** 0.540** 0.637** 0.661** 0.589** 0.407** 0.388**

0.531** 0.574** 0.595** 0.486** 0.474** 0.384** 0.307** 0.452** 0.506** 0.516** 0.498** 0.454** 0.573** 0.490** 0.511** 0.511** 0.528** 0.357** 0.354** 0.360** 0.359** 0.318** 0.306** 0.619** 0.293** 0.232** 0.212** 0.191** 0.243** 0.539** 0.608** 0.653** 0.550** 0.427** 0.394**

0.520** 0.575** 0.578** 0.410** 0.420** 0.269** 0.335** 0.445** 0.490** 0.498** 0.462** 0.438** 0.545** 0.418** 0.460** 0.434** 0.479** 0.300** 0.357** 0.301** 0.330** 0.288** 0.251** 0.612** 0.304** 0.202** 0.185** 0.190** 0.224** 0.459** 0.517** 0.582** 0.483** 0.300** 0.351**

0.522** 0.574** 0.585** 0.428** 0.434** 0.287** 0.289** 0.412** 0.501** 0.488** 0.473** 0.440** 0.550** 0.453** 0.488** 0.456** 0.511** 0.293** 0.342** 0.264** 0.286** 0.273** 0.237** 0.595** 0.322** 0.207** 0.181** 0.203** 0.222** 0.480** 0.532** 0.604** 0.498** 0.316** 0.342**

0.473**

0.466**

0.476** 0.318** 0.375** 0.363**

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

Relations with residents satisfaction

RRS1 RRS2 RRS3 RRS4 OVS1 Overall OVS2 satisfaction OVS4

0.619** 0.616** 0.592** 0.672**

0.613** 0.614** 0.554** 0.627**

0.609** 0.579** 0.556** 0.602**

0.409** 0.401** 0.352** 0.411** 0.433** 0.469** 0.474**

123

0.447** 0.448** 0.423** 0.489** 0.608** 0.630** 0.628**

0.476** 0.472** 0.430** 0.501** 0.606** 0.646** 0.657**

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). NOTE: Pearson’s coefficient is presented in italics. The correlation coefficients above 0.4 are highlighted in bold, and above 0.6 are underlined. Source: Own elaboration

Both quality and value are positively and moderately associated with overall tourist satisfaction and loyalty. Then quality and value positively influence overall tourist satisfaction and loyalty. Also, we can estimate that quality can explain up to 43.6% of overall satisfaction variation (QUA3-OVS2) and loyalty up to 34.2% (QUA3-LOY5). Value reaches 23.5% of overall satisfaction variation (VAL1-OVS2) and 20.3% of loyalty (VAL1-LOY3). Trust in the destination and its service providers exert a moderate, positive impact on tourist overall satisfaction and loyalty. The variation of overall satisfaction could be explained up to 37.6% by trust in the destination (TRS2-OVS1) and up to 28.4% by trust in service providers (TRP4-OVS1). Loyalty could be explained, with 30.2%, by trust in the destination (TRS5-LOY5) and, with 26.1%, by trust in services providers (TRP4-LOY5). Although both dimensions of attachment have a significant impact, destination identity has a lower influence on overall tourist satisfaction and loyalty than destination dependence. Moreover, destination dependence generates more overall tourist satisfaction with and loyalty to rural tourism destinations than destination identity. Destination identity can only explain up to 14.6% of overall satisfaction (ATI4-OVS2) and up to 20.2% of loyalty (ATI2-LOY3). Destination dependence can explain 40.6% of overall satisfaction (ATD1-OVS2) and 37.5% of loyalty (ATD1-LOY4). It is necessary to highlight that destination attributes satisfaction and satisfaction regarding relations with residents have an important contribution to overall tourist satisfaction. This contribution is smaller in the case of relations with tourism providers’ satisfaction. These relationships are positive and significant. Destination attributes satisfaction can explain up to 43.7% of overall satisfaction (DAS3-OVS2) and relations with residents’ satisfaction can explain up to 45.2% (RRS4-OVS1). Therefore, it is interesting to note the relevance of tourism services and

124

Chapter Five

infrastructures, as well as the relationships tourists establish with local people who live in the rural areas. The impact of satisfaction regarding relations with tourism providers is also noteworthy, although being less important than the other dimensions of satisfaction. Its R2 is 22.7% (RPS3OVS4). Loyalty can be explained by satisfaction with destination attributes, with 36.5% (DAS3-LOY5), by satisfaction with relations with residents, with 25.1% (RRS4-LOY5), and finally by satisfaction regarding relations with tourism providers, up to 14.1% (RPS3-LOY4). As overall satisfaction is the major determinant of loyalty in the tourism context (Campón, Hernández & Alves, 2012), it is interesting to observe that the relationship between them is very strong. It is noteworthy that the correlation is stronger in the case of loyalty indicators related to the intention to recommend (LOY4 and LOY5) than the intention to return (LOY3). R2 of these variables reaches 43.2%, a good value to explain the association between these constructs. The analyses undertaken show that the variables under study are important not only due to the high values of their means but also because the correlation analyses corroborate that they are key drivers for understanding overall tourist satisfaction and loyalty to rural destinations. Quality, destination dependence, satisfaction with destination attributes and satisfaction regarding relations with residents are the variables most related to overall satisfaction. Quality, trust in the destination, destination dependence and satisfaction with destination attributes are the most related to loyalty. It is also important to highlight the relevance of the relationship between overall satisfaction and loyalty. Consequently, it can be asserted that it is not only important to manage tourism resources, infrastructures and services, but it is also necessary to involve tourism providers, local people and tourists in the rural tourism cocreation development, with the aim of creating overall satisfaction and loyalty to rural tourism destinations. In that sense, rural tourism managers could foster the socio-economic benefits that rural tourists generate in those areas through their overall satisfaction and loyalty.

Conclusions and Final Reflections The present work adds a complementary analysis to traditional studies on rural tourists’ profile and behaviour. The focus here has been on the experiential value of the rural trip and the tourists’ judgements of the relationships they have to the destination’s features and its environment. Results show that tourists seek tranquillity and relaxation, confirming other studies (Devesa et al., 2010; Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz, Davis &

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

125

Paul, 1999; Molera & Albaladejo, 2007). The perceived image of the rural tourism destinations visited is mainly based on the authenticity and quality of rural areas, and also on their ability to generate experiences. The tourists interviewed here, who are already, to a certain degree, experienced rural tourists, believe that rural destinations are worth visiting and good value for money. In relation to trust, tourists assert that rural areas offer quietness and security and that local tourism providers offer a good quality service. Rural destinations have apparently succeeded in developing both a functional and emotional attachment to the places, considering the moderate values reached by the dimensions of the attachment variables, destination identity and dependence. The satisfaction level reported is high, especially the satisfaction with the relationships with residents and the chance to live experiences. This result is consistent with the findings of Kastenholz, Carneiro, Eusébio and Figueiredo (2013), who assert that social interaction between tourists and local people is one of the most important aspects of rural tourism experiences. However, behavioural loyalty to rural areas is moderate in terms of intention to repeat the visit, but it is high in relation to the intention of recommending the destination. This result confirms other findings on rural tourism (e.g. Loureiro & Kastenholz, 2011) and tourism in general (e.g. Chi, 2011; Žabkar et al., 2010; Zhou, Zhang & Edelheim, 2013). The analysis of the assessment that the rural tourists make of the environment and the relationships developed with tourism providers shows the need to consider not just rational or cognitive elements, but also experiences, feelings and emotions evoked during the stay, additionally enhanced by interaction with the local community. Regarding the results of the correlation analyses, given that rural tourists value variables such as image, quality and value, and establishing relationships with residents and tourism services providers, as well as developing attachment to the place, we can state that it is important to take these variables into account to manage rural tourism destinations, because these key drivers are associated with overall tourist satisfaction and loyalty. Managers have to take into account that authenticity of rural areas needs to be preserved because rural tourists like engaging with the rural environment. They also need to take special care with quality. In order to achieve better quality at the destination level, it is necessary to involve all elements of the tourism value chain. Rural tourists need to feel safe and secure, and confident with the destination and with the rural agents for a better tourism experience that promotes overall satisfaction and loyalty. Managers could foster attachment by developing events and activities based on the rural environment to promote identity or dependence of these

126

Chapter Five

areas. Relationships with local agents are revealed to be especially important. It is also necessary to integrate them into the local tourism development, where they should have a leading role. We can add that experiences and emotions play an important role in rural tourism (Sharpley & Jepson, 2011). Sensory elements of the destinations are responsible for delivering positive experiences to tourists (Agapito et al., 2014). Therefore, rural destinations have to enhance their experiential potential and provide the tourist with a physical and human environment capable of inspiring unique and memorable experiences (Tung & Ritchie, 2011). Some limitations to the research must be recognised, e.g. in the use of a convenience sample and the neglection of other variables that could be of interest. In future studies, it may be useful to identify the causal relationships existing between the variables considered, for example, with structural equation modelling, in order to reach a deeper understanding of rural tourism demand and of the experiences that can potentially arise during a rural holiday and lead to most satisfaction and loyalty. With this information, it would be possible to manage, develop and promote highquality and highly competitive tourism products, aimed at improving the rural tourism destinations’ success and socio-economic benefits.

References Agapito, D., Valle, P., & Mendes, J. (2014). The sensory dimension of tourist experiences: Capturing meaningful sensory-informed themes in Southwest Portugal. Tourism Management, 42, 224-237. Alegre, J., & Cladera, M. (2006). Repeat visitation in mature sun and sand holiday destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 44(3), 288-297. Alegre, J., & Cladera, M. (2009). Analysing the effect of satisfaction and previous visits on tourist intentions to return. European Journal of Marketing, 43(5-6), 670-685. Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), 868-897. Bigné, J. E., Sánchez, M. I., & Sánchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase behaviour: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22(6), 607-616. Campo, S., & Garau, J. B. (2010). The generation of tourism destination satisfaction. Tourism Economics, 16(3), 461-475. Campón, A. M., Hernández, J. M., & Alves, H. M. (2012). Identifying the major determinants of loyalty in tourism. In R. H. Tsiotsou & R. E.

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

127

Goldsmith (Eds.), Strategic Marketing in Tourism Services (pp. 163183). United Kingdom: Emerald. Campón, A. M., Hernández, J. M., & Alves, H. M. (2010). Marketing relacional e turismo: A fidelização de clientes no turismo rural, proposta de um modelo para o seu estudo. Revista Turismo & Desenvolvimento, 13/14(1), 231-241. Cánoves, G., Herrera, L., & Villarino, M. (2005). Turismo rural en España: Paisajes y usuarios, nuevos usos y nuevas visiones. Cuadernos de Turismo,15, 63-76. Chen, C., & Tsai, D. (2007). How destination image and evaluative factors affect behavioral intentions. Tourism Management, 28(4), 1115-1122. Chen, C. F., & Phou, S. (2013). A closer look at destination: Image, personality, relationship and loyalty. Tourism Management, 36, 269278. Chi, C. G. Q. (2011). Destination loyalty formation and travelers’ demographic characteristics: A multiple group analysis approach. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 35(2), 191-212. Choo, H., & Petrick, J. F. (2012). Comparison between firstǦtimers and repeaters for relationship marketing implications. International Journal of Tourism Research, 14(3), 298-302. De Wulf, K., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Iacobucci, D. (2001). Investments in consumer relationships: A cross-country and crossindustry exploration. The Journal of Marketing, 65(October), 33-50. Devesa, M., Laguna, M., & Palacios, A. (2010). The role of motivation in visitor satisfaction: Empirical evidence in rural tourism. Tourism Management, 31(4), 547-552. Echtner, C. M., & Ritchie, J. B. (1991).The meaning and measurement of destination image. Journal of Tourism Studies, 2(2), 2-12. Frochot, I. (2005). A benefit segmentation of tourists in rural areas: A Scottish perspective. Tourism Management, 26(3), 335-346. Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 58(2), 1-19. García, B. (2005). Características diferenciales del producto turismo rural. Cuadernos de Turismo, 15, 113-133. García, B. (2003). Marketing del turismo rural. Madrid: Pirámide, Esic. García, J. L. (1996). El turismo rural como factor diversificador de rentas en la tradicional economía agraria. Estudios Turísticos, 132, 45-60. Grande, J. (2006). La evolución del turismo rural en España y las nuevas oportunidades del turismo de naturaleza. Estudios Turísticos, 169-170, 85-102.

128

Chapter Five

Hernández, J. M., Campón, A. M., & Alves, H. M. (2011). The state of the art in research into rural tourism in Spain: An analysis from the perspective of marketing. Enlightening Tourism, A Pathmaking Journal, 1(1), 31-61. Hernández, J. M., Campón, A. M., Folgado, J. A., & Di Clemente, E. (2012). Turismo rural: concepto, evolución y nuevas tendencias. In F. J. Ortega, E. Pérez & P. Milanés (Eds.), Estudios de investigación sobre turismo y medioambiente. Nuevas líneas de trabajo y tendencias actuales (pp. 65-88). Saarbrücken, Germany: Editorial Académica Española. Hernández, L., Solis, M. M., Moliner, M. A., & Sánchez, J. (2006). Tourism destination image, satisfaction and loyalty: A study in IxtapaZihuatanejo, Mexico. Tourism Geographies, 8(4), 343-358. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Eusébio, C. (2006). Studying visitor loyalty to rural tourist destinations. In M. Kozak & L. Andreu (Eds.), Progress in Tourism Marketing, Advances in Tourism Research Studies (pp. 239-253). Oxford, Amsterdam: Elsevier. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M. J., & Figueiredo, E. (2013). Host-guest relationships in rural tourism: evidence from two Portuguese villages. Anatolia, 24(3), 367-380. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C. P., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience—The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Kastenholz, E., Davis, D., & Paul, G. (1999). Segmenting tourism in rural areas: The case of North and Central Portugal. Journal of Travel Research, 37(4), 353-363. Loureiro, S. M. C., & Kastenholz, E. (2011). Corporate reputation, satisfaction, delight, and loyalty towards rural lodging units in Portugal. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(3), 575-583. Mechinda, P., Serirat, S., & Gulid, N. (2009). An examination of tourists´ attitudinal and behavioral loyalty: Comparison between domestic and international tourists. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 15(2), 129-148. Mechinda, P., Serirat, S., Anuwichanont, J., & Gulid, N. (2010). An examination of tourists´ loyalty towards medical tourism in Pattaya, Thailand. The International Business and Economic Research Journal, 9(1), 55-70. Mediano, L. (2004). La gestión del marketing en el turismo rural. Madrid: Pearson, Prentice Hall.

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

129

Middleton, V. T. C. (1982). Tourism in rural areas. Tourism Management, 3(1), 52-58. Molera, L., & Albaladejo, I. P. (2007). Profiling segments of tourists in rural areas of South-Eastern Spain. Tourism Management, 28(3), 757767. Mossberg, L. (2007). A marketing approach to the tourist experience. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(1), 59-74. Murphy, P., Pritchard, M. P., & Smith, B. (2000).The destination product and its impact on traveller perceptions. Tourism Management, 21(1), 43-52. Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, XVII(November), 460-469. Oliver, R. L. (1993). Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(December), 418-430. Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63(Special Issue), 33-44. Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction. A behavioral perspective on the consumer. Boston, Massachusetts: McGraw-Hill. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40. Phillips, W. J., Wolfe, K., Hodur, N., & Leistritz, F. L. (2013). Tourist word of mouth and revisit intentions to rural tourism destinations: A case of North Dakota, USA. International Journal of Tourism Research, 15(1), 93-104. Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The experience economy, work is theatre and every business a stage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Polo, A. I., Frías, D. M., & Rodríguez, M. A. (2012a). Validation of a market orientation adoption scale in rural tourism enterprises. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), 139-151. Polo, A. I., Frías, D. M., & Rodríguez, M. A. (2012b). Validation of cognitive image dimensions for rural tourist destinations. A contribution to the management of rural tourist destinations. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 18(4), 261-273. Rodríguez del Bosque, I., & San Martín, H. (2008). Tourism satisfaction, a cognitive-affective model. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 551573.

130

Chapter Five

Sarabia-Sánchez, F. J., & Cañadas-Osinski, I. (2013). Fiabilidad del instrumento de medida. In F. J. Sarabia (Ed.), Métodos de investigación social y de la empresa (pp. 367-385). Madrid: Ediciones Pirámide. Sharpley, R., & Jepson, D. (2011). Rural tourism: A spiritual experience? Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 52-71. Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203220. Trespalacios, J. A., Vázquez, R., & Bello, L. (2005). Investigación de mercados. Métodos de recogida y análisis de la información para la toma de decisiones en marketing. Madrid: Paraninfo. Tsai, S. P. (2012). Place attachment and tourism marketing: Investigating international tourists in Singapore. International Journal of Tourism Research, 14(2), 139-152. Tse, D. K., & Wilton, P. C. (1988). Models of consumer satisfaction formation: An extension. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2), 204212. Tung, V., & Ritchie, J. R. (2011).Exploring the essence of memorable tourism experiences. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1367-1386. Vera, J. F., López, F., Marchena, M. J., & Clavé, S.A. (2011). Análisis territorial del turismo y planificación de destinos turísticos. Colección Crónica. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch. Verhoef, P. C., Franses, P. H., & Hoekstra, J. C. (2002). The effect of relational constructs on customer referrals and number of services purchased from a multiservice provider: Does age of relationship matter? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3), 202-216. Wang, C. Y., & Hsu, M. K. (2010). The relationships of destination image, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: An integrated model. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 27(8), 829-843. Williams, D. R., & Vaske, J. J. (2003). The measurement of place attachment: Validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science, 49(6), 830-840. Williams, P., & Soutar, G. N. (2009). Value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in an adventure tourism context. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(3), 413-438. Yagüe, R. M. (2002). Rural tourism in Spain. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(4), 1101-1110. Yen, T. F, Liu, H. H., & Tuan, C. L. (2009). Managing relationship efforts to influence loyalty: an empirical study on the sun ling sea forest and

The Tourist in Rural Destinations

131

recreational park, Taiwan. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 2(2), 179-194. Žabkar, V., Brenþiþ, M. M., & Dmitroviü, T. (2010). Modelling perceived quality, visitor satisfaction and behavioural intentions at the destination level. Tourism Management, 31(4), 537-546. Zhou, Q. B., Zhang, J., & Edelheim, J. R. (2013). Rethinking traditional Chinese culture: A consumer-based model regarding the authenticity of Chinese calligraphic landscape. Tourism Management, 36, 99-112.

CHAPTER SIX RURAL TOURISM EXPERIENCES: THE EMOTIONAL-SPIRITUAL DIMENSION RICHARD SHARPLEY AND DEBORAH JEPSON

Introduction The notion that there exists a deeper, spiritual dimension to contemporary tourism is not new.1 Indeed, since MacCannell (1976) first suggested that the modern tourist is a secular pilgrim seeking meaning and authenticity in an anomic world, many have come to view tourism as a potentially spiritual experience or, as Allcock (1988, p. 37) puts it, a “secular substitute for organised religion”. In other words, it is argued that not only has leisure time in contemporary secular society become “a space for the contemplative and the creative, a unity of thought and action” (Vukoniü, 1996, p. 8) but also that tourism, as a specific and increasingly popular use of such leisure time, is a sacred or spiritual journey. Frequently likened to the practice of pilgrimage (Laing & Crouch, 2011; Smith, 1992; Timothy & Olsen, 2006), tourism is considered to be “functionally and symbolically equivalent to other institutions that humans use to embellish and add meaning to their lives” (Graburn, 1989, p. 22), whether as a secular ritual (the annual vacation), a personal transition or rite of passage (Nash, 1996) or, more generally, a source of spiritual meaning or refreshment. Equally, rural areas have, as tourist destinations, long been considered to possess spiritual meaning. In response to the industrialisation and urbanisation of late eighteenth and early nineteenth century society, not only did the “naturalness” of nature and the countryside lie in increasingly stark contrast to the “unnaturalness” of the burgeoning urban centres; it also came to be seen as epitomising goodness and purity (Burchardt, 2002). As a consequence, the countryside was viewed as the “antidote to the supposed vices of the working people” (Burchardt, 2002, p. 47), a

134

Chapter Six

place for reverie, self-contemplation and emotional refreshment, an escape from the ugliness of urban life (Barsham & Hitchcock, 2013). Indeed, de Botton (2003, p. 171) observes that “It is no coincidence that the Western attraction to sublime landscapes developed at precisely the moment when traditional beliefs in God began to wane. The landscape offered [travellers] an emotional connection to a greater power”. In other words, the countryside was endowed with a spiritual significance; it came to be perceived as a “source of spiritual renewal” (Harrison, 1991, p. 21) offering “soul-stirring encounters with nature”, exemplified by feelings of “wonder, awe, wholeness, harmony, ecstasy, transcendence and solitude” (Timothy, 2013, p. 38). And, according to Timothy (2013), contemporary tourism in natural environments continues to be driven by the continuing search for solace and communion with nature. It is, then, perhaps surprising that limited attention has been paid to the spiritual dimension of the rural tourism experience. That is, few attempts have been made to explore empirically the extent to which rural tourism is motivated by or offers the opportunity for spiritual or transcendental experiences, or if indeed the touristic experience of rural areas may, in the context of contemporary understandings of the term, be considered to be specifically “spiritual” or more generally “emotional”. This is not to say that the ability of natural areas to offer emotional or spiritual experiences has been completely overlooked. Not only have a number of studies revealed the potential spiritual benefits of experiencing certain places, such as forests or coastal areas (for example, Ashley, 2007; Bull, 2006; Fredrickson & Anderson, 1999), but the restorative effects of nature/the outdoors more generally have attracted increasing academic attention (Burls, 2007; Darker, Larkin & French, 2007; Heintzman, 2009; Kaplan, 1995; Korpela & Hartig, 1996). However, rural tourism, in particular, has, by and large, not benefitted from such attention. The purpose of this chapter is to begin to address this gap in the literature. Specifically, it first sets out to consider from a conceptual perspective the potential spiritual or emotional dimension of the rural tourism experience, focusing, in particular, on the nature and determinants of that experience. That is, it considers why and in what manner tourists may seek or attach a deeper, emotional significance to their rural tourism experiences. It subsequently draws briefly on the outcomes of a study into the extent to which tourists to the English Lake District are motivated by or experience emotional or spiritual fulfilment through their visits, thereby providing an empirical underpinning to the preceding conceptual discussion. The first task, then, is to review briefly understandings and the significance of spirituality in contemporary society.

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

135

Perspectives on Contemporary Spirituality As noted above, MacCannell (1976) describes the tourist as a kind of secular pilgrim seeking meaning and reality in an inauthentic modern world. In so doing, he locates his analysis of tourism within broader debates surrounding the concept of spirituality in general and the search for spiritual meaning, in particular. Brown (1998, p. 1), for example, suggests that the contemporary focus on spirituality “describes what is felt to be missing rather than specifying what is hoped to be found. The spiritual search has become a dominant feature of late twentieth-century life; a symptom of collective uncertainty”. Conversely, Vukoniü (1996) argues that spirituality has always been a subjective element of human existence and, within traditional religious practices, a belief in a higher being. Either way, however, many commentators suggest that modern Western societies have, over the last half century or so, witnessed what Heelas and Woodhead (2005, p. 2) describe as a “shift in the sacred landscape” or, more succinctly, a “spiritual revolution”. This revolution has been defined, on the one hand, by the widely recognised secularisation of modern societies as evidenced by the rejection of traditional religious institutions and practices and, in particular, a weakening of the role and influence of the church (Houtman & Aupers, 2007; Lambert, 2004; Pargament, 1999). An institution that historically demanded moral and social responsibility of the community, the church in return offered stability, cohesion and spiritual guidance to its followers (Heelas & Woodhead, 2005). Hence, as Wuthnow (1998) observes, the rejection of the church and traditional religious rituals has opened up a religious/spiritual void that, in turn, has triggered a complex quest to find spiritual satisfaction through other means. On the other hand, some argue that although there has been an evident decline in adherence to religious rituals and practices, there has not been a commensurate decline in “religion” in the traditional sense of the word. Rather, reflecting Vukoniü’s (1996) assertion that spirituality is innate to human existence, religion is taking on a different form; modern societies remain religious, but religion has become increasingly de-institutionalised (Harvey, 2003). As Pargament (1999, p. 3) summarises, spirituality is “in, religion is out”. In other words, religious institutions and collective adherence to prescribed theologies and rituals are being superseded by the individual search for spiritual nourishment through the pursuit of an enormous variety of beliefs and practices, such as holism, feng shui, yoga or New Age (Drury, 2004), all “concerned with things of the spirit as opposed to the material” (Stark, Hamberg & Miller, 2005, p. 7).

136

Chapter Six

Spirituality has become a “dynamic process” (Pargament, 1999, p. 4), with individuals seeking to define their own private faith and adopting a patchwork quilt or bricolage of flexible beliefs and practices (de Vries, 2008; Wuthnow, 1998). Moreover, the search for spirituality is not necessarily confined to those who hold religious beliefs. That is, not only does contemporary secular spirituality offer individuals the freedom to choose their own path of faith without the condemnation and constraints exerted by ecclesiastical mandates; they are also able to have spiritual experiences without religious faith. Indeed, recent research has found that, in Britain at least, “it is clear that spiritual beliefs are not the preserve of the religious… a majority of non-religious people hold spiritual beliefs. This is particularly evident when it comes to non-traditional forms of religious beliefs, where it seems to make very little difference whether someone considers themselves religious or not” (Theos, 2013, p. 25). Yet, although the above discussion goes some way to explaining the contemporary focus on spirituality manifested in the quest for meaning in a (post)modern world where the certainties provided by traditional religious institutions and rituals no longer exist, it does not define what spirituality “is”. In other words, spirituality is a widely used and understood term but there remains a lack of consensus over what it means. Commonly, for example, commentators draw on the definition provided by the Oxford English Dictionary (OED, 2014): “The quality or condition of being spiritual; attachment to or regard for things of the spirit as opposed to material or worldly interests”, yet this is sufficiently broad to be variously interpreted. What is clear is that contemporary spirituality is concerned with the individual. More precisely, it is concerned with the individual quest for spiritual nourishment and personal identity in (post)modern societies where such identity is no longer established or predetermined by social institutions (Teasedale, 1999), hence the claim that tourism, in particular, is a sacred or spiritual journey, a means of achieving such identity and meaning (Laing & Crouch, 2009; Little & Schmidt, 2006). Importantly, however, this individualistic character of contemporary spirituality is also manifested in distinctive perspectives on the meaning of the concept. Most typically, for example, the emergence of contemporary spirituality is considered within a theological framework; not only is it placed in opposition to traditional religious practice but also there remains an emphasis on “faith” in a broader sense with many commentators suggesting, as already noted, that contemporary spirituality is simply a deinstitutionalised, individualistic form of religion. Equally, many definitions of spirituality supplement the recognised individual search for

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

137

meaning or purpose with the “condition” that it includes belief in a higher or supreme power (Kale, 2004; Zinnbauer, Pargament & Scott, 1999). But, again as already observed, it is increasingly accepted that it is possible to be spiritual without being religious, that “faith” or belief in a higher power is not a prerequisite to spiritual experiences. Thus, Hay and Socha (2005, p. 607) argue that “spiritual awareness [is] natural and universal within the human species”; it has a “firm basis in the physical nature of human beings” and, therefore, spirituality “cannot be related only to members of a particular religion or even to religious people in general”. Putting it another way, a humanistic approach to spirituality, as hinted at by Hay and Socha (2005), views it as a relationship between the individual and both the subjective and the material (Elkins, Hedstrom, Hughes, Leaf & Saunders, 1988). For example, Fisher, Francis and Johnson (2000, p. 135) identify four domains within which harmonious (humanistic) relationships are necessary for the achievement of spiritual well-being: i. The personal domain, with a focus on the self (meaning, purpose and values in life), creating self-awareness, identity and esteem; ii. The communal domain, focusing on interpersonal relationships between the self and others based on morality and culture; iii. The environmental domain, with a concern for caring and nurturing the natural environment drawing on a sense of awe, wonder and connectedness with the environment; iv. The transcendental domain, focusing on a relationship between the self and “some-thing or some-One beyond the human level” (Fisher et al., 2000, p. 135). The important point made by Fisher et al. (2000) is that although each of the above four domains may be considered fundamental to spiritual health, they are not collectively necessary. Rather, individuals will typically prioritise one domain over the others, reflecting the fact that well-being is individually determined, is perceived according to personal experiences, characteristics and values and, thus, may be more generally considered an emotional response to harmonious relationships in one or more of the above domains that, only in particular circumstances, may be defined as transcendental or spiritual in a traditional theological sense. Of particular relevance to this chapter, for example, Fisher et al. (2000, p. 136) suggest that environmentalists possess “at least, a sense of awe and wonder about the environment. They go beyond responsible management of the physical, eco-political, and social

138

Chapter Six aspects of the environment to a sense of connectedness of the individual or group with it”.

Such connectedness and consequential well-being, however, is more likely to be emotional than strictly spiritual. To summarise thus far, then, there is general consensus that owing to the anomic condition of contemporary society in general, and the rejection of traditional religious institutions and rituals, in particular, individuals now seek personal identity and meaning not by acceding to a prescribed set of (religious) practices but proactively and individualistically engaging in activities, including tourism, within one or more of the identified domains relevant to the achievement of well-being. However, the extent to which that well-being may be considered “spiritual” as opposed to more generally emotional appears to be dependent on a variety of personspecific factors, thereby challenging the claim that contemporary society is defined by the search for spiritual fulfilment, as opposed to identity and emotional well-being more generally, and the more specific assertion that tourism, in particular, is a sacred or spiritual journey. Indeed, as the research discussed shortly reveals, particular rural tourism experiences are described in different ways by different people; for some, such experiences are “spiritual”, for others they are more materially emotional. First, however, it is useful to contextualise that research within a brief review of the nature of the rural tourism experience more generally.

Tourism and the Rural Experience It is probably true to state that an emotional, if not spiritual, dimension to rural tourism (and, indeed, to all forms of tourist experience) has always existed. In other words, since tourists first began to visit the countryside some two centuries ago, they have been attracted as much by what it represents as by the opportunity to gaze upon or interact with it; tourists have been drawn to rural places not only by their physical attributes and intrinsic qualities, such as open space, fresh air or peace and quiet, but also by the potential to experience a sense of what is termed “rurality” (Halfacree, 1993; Horton, 2008; Woods, 2011). Certainly, the contrast between the perceived goodness/purity of the countryside and the ugliness/unnaturalness of the new industrial centres, as discussed in the introduction to this chapter, established a rural context for spiritual renewal. However, since the early 1800s there has also been a fundamental and continuing shift in the aesthetic and cultural appreciation of rural places; their romanticisation through artistic images, poetry, folksongs and

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

139

tourist literature has transformed them from “desolate and culturally empty spaces” into “desirable culturally laden places” (Darby, 2000, p. 54). That is, the countryside has become a socially constructed place, an idyllic or imagined “refuge from modernity” (Short, 1991, p. 34) representative of restful landscapes, an unhurried, traditional rhythm to life, a romanticised pre-industrial era of innocence (Bunce, 1994). In short, images of the countryside that have been manipulated through art, poetry and literature have given rise to a socially constructed, atavistic rurality that has as much if not more to do with the “otherness” of the countryside as a counterpoint to the urban than with its own defining characteristics. Inevitably, not all rural tourists seek “rurality” to the same extent (Kastenholz, 2000); moreover, nor is the rural tourism experience defined only by a sense of rurality. Tourists visit rural places for a variety of purposes, some actively engaging with the physical environment, others passively immersing themselves in it. Equally, the countryside might be a setting for individual encounters with nature or a backdrop to family or social experiences. Irrespective of their motivation or purpose, however, rural tourists are drawn to the “place” that is the countryside. Place is, in general, a marker of human existence; as Casey (1993, p. 13) observes, “To exist at all… is to have a place… To ‘be’ is to be in place…”. Thus, for (rural) tourists, in particular, their relationship to place—the destination—is fundamental to their experience. In other words, place is both the objective destination and the subjective reason for the visit and, as a consequence, rural tourism can only be understood on the basis of the social, cultural and psychological interactions that visitors have with the place (Morgan, 2009). All places have meaning. Indeed, what defines a space as a place is the meaning that people ascribe to it. In turn, that meaning may be rooted, in part, in the “shared cultural understandings of the terrain” (Gieryn, 2000, p. 473) or, more simply stated, in the socially-constructed image of a place. At the same time, however, people make conscious choices according to their particular desires and needs with respect to how they select and use places (Manzo, 2003). In other words, the meaning that people attach to a particular place will be manifested in the ways in which they individually use or interact with it. Therefore, the rural tourist’s experience can be thought of as comprising three elements, the first, of course, being the physical attributes, both tangible and intrinsic, of the countryside; the more attractive it is and/or the more opportunities it offers for particular desired activities, the more satisfying will be the experience. Secondly, the socially-constructed meaning of the countryside, or its “rurality”, is a significant factor. Certainly, research has demonstrated that

140

Chapter Six

rural tourists’ interpretation of the countryside is socially constructed, manifested in clichéd descriptions of place and experience (Sharpley & Jepson, 2011). And thirdly, how tourists use/experience the countryside, both in the past and the present, will determine the nature of their experience. For example, some may visit the countryside for the express purpose of experiencing moments of solitude (see Coble, Selin & Erickson, 2003; Stringer & McAvoy, 1992) whilst, conversely, rural places are increasingly seen as an effective context for “place social bonding” (Ramkissoon, Weiler & Smith, 2012, p. 264), or the development of social relationships through the shared experience of place. The extent to which these three elements are collectively or separately influential in determining the touristic experience of rural places remains debatable. Some might argue that the search for a utopian rurality, a “green and pleasant land” (Newby, 1979), is dominant while others highlight other factors. Stedman (2003), for example, argues that the contribution of the physical environment to the experience and meaning of place remains underestimated. There can be little doubt, however, that rural tourism offers the opportunity of experiences that are deeper or more meaningful than just being in (rural) place, experiences that, as discussed earlier, may be defined as or perceived to be emotional or, more specifically, spiritual. Understanding of these experiences and, indeed, the extent to which they occur, however, remains limited. Hence, the following section summarises the outcomes of an empirical study of the extent to which tourists to the English Lake District experience emotional or spiritual fulfilment through their visits (Jepson & Sharpley, 2015), thereby beginning to address this gap in the literature.

Tourists’ Emotional Experience of the Lake District The Lake District, covering an area of some 880 square miles in northwest England, has long been endowed with a cultural image created through literary and artistic representation. It has also, since 1951, enjoyed national park status. Renowned for its unique juxtaposition of lakes, valleys and mountains, as well as its towns and villages, it continues to be one of the most popular rural tourism destinations in the country, in particular, attracting many tourists engaging in active pursuits such as fell walking, climbing or mountain-biking. It was amongst this category of “active” tourists that this study was undertaken. Specifically, unstructured interviews were conducted with twelve purposefully selected respondents, all regular visitors to the Lake

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

141

District engaging in active pursuits. Aged between thirty and seventy-five, seven respondents were male and five female; significantly, they were also selected according to their self-categorisation of being religious, spiritual or non-religious/spiritual. That is, from their participation in an earlier study, it was evident that people considered themselves to be religious and/or spiritual to varying extents. Therefore, the respondents were purposefully selected to reflect their contrasting belief systems. Consequently, seven respondents claimed to experience or be seeking a spiritual dimension to their lives, two held strong religious/spiritual affiliations defined by regular church attendance and a stated belief in God, one was unsure or was unwilling to refer to emotional feelings as spiritual, and two considered themselves to be non-religious/non-spiritual. Of course, the manner in which spiritual or emotive feelings are understood or interpreted varies from one individual to another, whilst emotive responses to particular places or experiences may be influenced by the broader context of an individual’s social existence. It is not surprising, therefore, that no consistency emerged from the interviews with respect to respondents’ interpretation, definition or experience of spirituality, reflecting the well-documented complexity and nebulousness of the concept. Nevertheless, “spiritual” respondents typically referenced spirituality against religion, “religious” respondents associated spirituality with religion whilst the “non-spiritual” respondents either could not identify with the concept of spirituality or specifically denied it. Importantly, however, most if not all respondents revealed that, when considering spirituality as a concept, emotional engagement with the countryside was a significant element of their experience. Moreover, for those who did not acknowledge spirituality, the terminology used to describe their powerful emotional feelings was not dissimilar to phrases described as spiritual by those who acknowledge their spirituality. For example, one “non-spiritual” respondent stated that: “Sometimes just sitting there with great views down a valley and thinking to myself that I am part of something but I am only a small part of something that is really big of an area that has so much power…”

In other words, it became evident that those who rejected the notion of spirituality nevertheless experienced powerful emotive feelings akin to spiritual experiences, whilst the situations in which these feelings occurred were almost identical for non-spiritual and spiritual respondents. In short, for many respondents, the distinction between emotional and spiritual experiences was not always clear, reflecting the argument of some that spirituality is simply an emotional phenomenon (Flanagan & Jupp, 2007).

142

Chapter Six

Immediately, then, the study revealed that all respondents experienced and described a deeper, emotional engagement with the Lake District through their touristic activities; how they understood this, however largely depended on their acceptance or rejection of spirituality/religion more generally. The question then addressed by the study was: what particular aspects or elements of their experience of the Lake District elicited emotional feelings or responses. Inevitably, a wide variety of factors and experiences were discussed during the interviews although two key themes emerged: (i) emotional responses to both the tangible and intangible elements of the countryside, and (ii) emotional responses to the physical activity itself.

Countryside: Tangible and Intangible Elements Given the basis on which all respondents were selected, it is not surprising that they claimed to be motivated primarily by the opportunity to engage actively with the Lake District landscape. However, a number of factors emerged from the interviews that augmented their touristic experience with an emotional dimension.

Rural vs. Urban Visiting the Lake District offered the majority of respondents an emotional escape from their home towns and normal life; that is, the slower pace of life away from urban areas was emotionally significant to them. Equally, the physical rural environment, in contrast to the urban environment, was also identified as fundamental to their experience, particularly at an emotional level.

The Physical Environment As discussed earlier, the physical rural environment has long been, and remains, a powerful enticement for tourists, whether to be simply gazed upon or for more proactive engagement. The respondents all referred to a number of conceptually similar attributes when referring to the tangible qualities of the countryside, in particular, the scenery and the landscape, indicating that they benefitted from positive emotional experiences when looking upon the scenic qualities of the landscape. At the same time, however, actively engaging with the landscape added a different quality to their emotional experience. Indeed, for some, physical engagement was more significant than simply gazing at scenery whilst, for others, enjoying

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

143

the scenery was the dominant factor although, for most participants, some combination of the two was required for more intense emotional experiences. That is, active engagement with the physical environment, in effect becoming part of the landscape, was identified as a key factor in the complex affective and cognitive process of place experience. For example, the physical effort of climbing a mountain combined with the reward of the view from the top elicited particularly emotive responses: “I sit there and I am in awe of the surroundings and feel that I am just one person who is so insignificant in comparison to my surroundings. When I look down a ridge and the power of the land, the rock, the formation…I am just in awe.”

For some respondents, the experience was explicitly spiritual: “It refreshed my soul! All I can say is that when I am out in the mountains (walking) I can look at the wonder of it and I can say that there is more to life than this. There is a creator out there who has created this.”

The relevance of active engagement with the physical environment is returned to shortly, but a number of other specific themes related to the physical environment also emerged from the interviews.

Weather and Light Conditions Weather and light conditions not only contribute to the visual quality of the countryside; for many respondents, particular weather conditions were a contributory factor in emotional experiences: “In a bizarre way, I enjoy the weather changing so much… it brings you back down to earth sometimes and makes you realise that there are greater things out there… nature and it is a lot greater than mankind.”

Nature It is recognised that encounters with nature give rise to feelings and emotions most commonly linked to spirituality, such as awe, inspiration, reverence, connectedness and timelessness whilst, according to Mannell (1996), altered states of consciousness, such as flow and peak experiences, are typical human experiences of nature. Inevitably, therefore, nature and the outdoors rated very highly in respondents’ emotional and spiritual

144

Chapter Six

experience, reference being made to the importance of nature not only to their touristic experiences but, in many cases, to their overall well-being: “My emotional well-being is more to do with being outside and in nature. I love going to castles and abbeys… but I get a much nicer and more contented feeling from just being outside.”

Reference was also made to deeper spiritual feelings associated with nature: “Spirituality… whatever it is, it is more than just this material existence and you do get in touch with it out in nature. I think when you are out in nature you are probably doing what human beings were meant to do.”

For many, experiencing nature represented a return to a simpler existence, acting as a catalyst for explicit spiritual experiences: “I certainly actively seek out natural rather than man-made environments. I do find that emotionally and spiritually these environments do help me and my mental health improves as a result of being immersed in such places.”

Again, however, respondents’ communion with nature was emotionally more powerful when being physically active in particular places.

Silence/Solitude For some respondents, silence predisposed them to emotional or spiritual experiences: “When you get to a place that you can listen to silence… because I think that is totally missing from our modern lives… silence.” However, more significant for them was the opportunity to enjoy solitude, which was identified by all respondents as not only an essential element of the rural experience but fundamental to their lives more generally. A number of different terms were used to express the condition of solitude, such as, “alone time”, referring explicitly to time on one’s own, an opportunity to think or “be” uninterrupted by others, whilst “getting away” was a commonly used phrase indicating the desire to be removed from large numbers of people, perhaps enjoying communal solitude—or communitas—with a group. Irrespective of the terminology used, however, respondents perceived solitude to be a vital part of the total experience, reflecting the findings of previous studies that have revealed silence/solitude to be conducive to

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

145

emotional well-being or spirituality (Coble et al., 2003; Stringer & McAvoy, 1992). Moreover, the physical environment combined with physical activity and solitude defined the emotiveness of their experiences. Indeed, reflecting Roberts (1996, p. 71) assertion that “the need to remove ourselves from the familiar, the predictable, the human, in order to hear the voice of the spirit is perhaps the most well-documented use of nature for spiritual encounter”, many respondents indicated that, for them, solitude encourages a state of mind conducive to possible spiritual experience. For example: “I like going to the more wild, quiet places, away from other people because the further you are from the built environment the closer to that other side of things you are and it is that I like.”

Thus, not only did the respondents reveal that they frequently sought solitude, whether to be physically on their own or, within a group context, to retreat briefly within themselves, but also that their sense of solitude could be enhanced by physical activity, reflecting, as now discussed, the importance more generally of physical activity to emotional or spiritual experiences.

Physical Activity It has long been recognised that spiritual well-being may result from physical activities that focus attention completely on the task, attributed to a state of “flow” in which “internal and external worlds are fused into a single stream of being” (Williams & Harvey, 2001, p. 250). Therefore, it was not surprising that respondents claimed that being physically active in the rural environment was an important element of their touristic experience, using a variety of words and phrases to describe the emotional outcomes of their activity in the countryside including: contentment, satisfaction, achievement, joy, restorative, therapeutic, challenging, meditative, stress release, enjoyment, escape, freedom, peaceful and mentally healthy. Fell walking was one of the most common activities undertaken by the respondents and, reflecting Drury’s (2004, p. 105) assertion that “across nearly all spiritual traditions and throughout many lands, walking plays a central role in spiritual practice, texts disciplines and customs”, many referred explicitly to the emotional/spiritual dimension of their walking experiences:

146

Chapter Six “The spirituality thing is something that builds as you go along because you start off and you are still anchored in the built environment and all the hang-ups of work and the rest of it but as you go on walking—it’s a journey—you gradually get to the point where you feel a lot better. At the end of it, you’ve done a physical journey and a mental journey.” “Walking puts me in touch with my spiritual side.”

For some, spiritual fulfilment arose from overcoming the challenge of physical activity, from physical achievement, whereas for others, positive emotional benefits were achieved without the need to overcome a challenge: “It’s never about accomplishing anything when I go walking. It is never really about getting to the top. The feelings for me are probably… peaceful. It definitely refreshes me.”

Thus, the individual experience of emotional or spiritual feelings was determined by individual circumstances, yet it was apparent that the elements of views, challenge and achievement were a common theme in spiritual responses to physical activity.

Conclusion As established in the introduction, the purpose of this chapter has been to consider how and to what extent a deeper, emotional dimension can be identified in the rural tourism experience and, correspondingly, whether such experiences may be referred to as broadly “emotional” or more specifically “spiritual”, as is widely claimed in the literature. Undoubtedly, the potential for rural tourism to engender an emotional response on the part of visitors exists. Not only has the countryside long stood in opposition to the modernity and inauthenticity of urban centres, offering the physical and spiritual refreshment of nature; it has also been endowed with cultural significance as a rural idyll. Thus, if indeed the search for spiritual meaning is a defining characteristic of contemporary society, then rural tourism has the potential to satisfy that need. And from the evidence of the study, reviewed in this chapter, that potential is realised. Indeed, two clear conclusions can be drawn. First, it is evident that participating in specific forms of rural tourism elicits deeper, emotional experiences, such experiences emanating from varying combinations of being in the physical environment and engaging with it through some form of physical activity. For some respondents,

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

147

being in and gazing upon the landscape and nature, experiencing its tangible and intrinsic qualities, was sufficient to elicit an emotional response whereas, for others, it was the physical activity and, perhaps, achievement, that was dominant. Either way, being in and engaging with the landscape is fundamental to emotional responses, suggesting that more passive and “urban” forms of rural tourism are less likely to elicit emotional experiences amongst visitors. Second, the experiences described by the respondents in the study may be referred to as “spiritual”; equally, they may be referred to as “emotional”. Similar words and phrases were used by the respondents to describe their responses to particular factors, such as the view, the weather or the activity, the only distinction being whether they considered themselves to be religious, spiritual or non-religious/spiritual. In other words, all respondents recognised that there exists a deeper, more meaningful dimension to their touristic experience of the Lake District, their understanding of this being determined by their predisposition or openness to religious or spiritual beliefs. Thus, it may be concluded that it is more appropriate to refer to the “emotional”, as opposed to “spiritual” dimension of rural tourism, with implications for the understanding of tourism more generally as a sacred journey or spiritual experience. Of course, it must be recognised that it is not possible to isolate people’s emotional responses to rural tourism experiences from their lives more generally. Human existence reflects a series of interconnected events and, hence, spiritual or emotional experiences of touristic encounters with the countryside may, in fact, be responses to influences or events beyond the rural tourism context (Heintzman, 2009). Moreover, the study described in this chapter focuses on a specific category of tourist in a specific location, suggesting further research is necessary to support or, indeed, challenge the conclusions presented here. Nevertheless, this chapter has demonstrated that rural tourism has the potential to arouse responses amongst tourists which are best defined as emotional but, depending on the individual concerned, may alternatively be termed spiritual.

Notes 1. This chapter is an abridged and adapted version of a study by Jepson and Sharpley (2015). See also Sharpley and Jepson (2011).

148

Chapter Six

References Allcock, J. (1988). Tourism as a sacred journey. Loisir et Société, 11(1), 33-48. Ashley, P. (2007). Toward an understanding and definition of wilderness spirituality. Australian Geographer, 38(1), 53-69. Barsham, D., & Hitchcock, M. (2013). Prophets of nature: Romantic ideas of nature and their continuing relevance for tourism today. In A. Holden & D. Fennell (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and the Environment (pp. 54-64). Abingdon: Routledge. Brown, M. (1998). The Spiritual Tourist. London: Bloomsbury. Bull, A. (2006). Is a trip to the seaside a spiritual journey? Unpublished paper presented at the Tourism: The Spiritual Dimension Conference. UK: University of Lincoln. Bunce, M. (1994). The Countryside Ideal: Anglo-American Images of Landscape. London: Routledge. Burchardt, J. (2002). Paradise Lost: Rural Idyll and Social Change Since 1800. London: I. B. Tauris. Burls, A. (2007). People and green spaces: promoting public health and mental well-being through ecotherapy. Journal of Public Mental Health, 6(3), 24-39. Casey, E. (1993). Getting Back into Place: Toward a Renewed Understanding of the Place-World. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Coble, T., Selin, S., & Erickson, B. (2003). Hiking alone: Understanding fear, negotiation strategies and leisure experience. Journal of Leisure Research, 35(1), 1-22. Darby, W. (2000). Landscape and Identity: Geographies of Nation and Class in England. Oxford: Berg. Darker, C., Larkin, M., & French, D. (2007). An exploration of walking behaviour: An interpretative phenomenological approach. Social Science & Medicine, 65(10), 2172-2183. de Botton, A. (2003). The Art of Travel. London: Penguin Books. de Vries, H. (Ed.). (2008). Religion: Beyond a Concept. Bronx, NY: Fordham University Press. Drury, N. (2004). The New Age: Searching for the Spiritual Self. London: Thames & Hudson. Elkins, D., Hedstrom, L., Hughes, L., Leaf, J., & Saunders, C. (1988). Toward a humanistic phenomenological spirituality: Definition, description and measurement. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 28(4), 5-18.

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

149

Fisher, J., Francis, L., & Johnson, P. (2000). Assessing spiritual health via four domains of spiritual wellbeing: The SH4DI. Pastoral Psychology, 49(2), 133-145. Flanagan, K., & Jupp, P. (Eds.). (2007). A Sociology of Spirituality. Farnham: Ashgate. Fredrickson, L., & Anderson, D. (1999). A qualitative exploration of the wilderness experience as a source of spiritual inspiration. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(1), 21-29. Gieryn, T. (2000). A space for place in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 463-496. Graburn, N. (1989). Tourism: The sacred journey. In V. Smith (Ed.), Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (2nd ed.) (pp. 21-36). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Halfacree, K. (1993). Locality and social representation: Space, discourse and alternative definitions of the rural. Journal of Rural Studies, 9(1), 23-37. Harrison, C. (1991). Countryside Recreation in a Changing Society. London: TMS Partnership Ltd. Harvey, D. (2003). Cell church: Its situation in British evangelical culture. Journal of Contemporary Religion, 18(1), 95-109. Hay, D., & Socha, P. (2005). Spirituality as a natural phenomenon: Bringing biological and psychological perspectives together. Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science, 40(3), 589-612. Heelas, P., & Woodhead, L. (2005). The Spiritual Revolution: Why Religion is Giving Way to Spirituality. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Heintzman, P. (2009). Nature-based recreation and spirituality: A complex relationship. Leisure Sciences, 32(1), 72-89. Horton, J. (2008). Producing Postman Pat: The popular cultural construction of idyllic rurality. Journal of Rural Studies, 24(4), 389398. Houtman, D., & Aupers, S. (2007). The spiritual turn and the decline of tradition: The spread of post-Christian spirituality in 14 western countries, 1981-2000. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46(3), 305-320. Jepson, D., & Sharpley, R. (2015). More than sense of place? Exploring the emotional dimension of rural tourism experiences. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(8-9), 157-178. Kale, S. (2004). Spirituality, religion, and globalization. Journal of Macromarketing, 24(2), 92-107.

150

Chapter Six

Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169-182. Kastenholz, E. (2000). The market for rural tourism in north and central Portugal. A benefit segmentation approach. In D. Richards & G. Hall (Eds.), Tourism and Sustainable Community Development (pp. 268284). London: Routledge. Korpela, K., & Hartig, T. (1996). Restorative qualities of favourite places. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16(3), 221-233. Laing, J., & Crouch, G. (2009). Lone wolves? Isolation and solitude within the frontier travel experience. Geografiska Annaler Series B: Human Geography, 91(4), 325-342. Laing, J., & Crouch, G. (2011). Frontier tourism: Retracing mythic journeys. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1516-1534. Lambert, Y. (2004). A turning point in religious evolution in Europe. Journal of Contemporary Religion, 19(1), 29-45. Little, D., & Schmidt, C. (2006). Self, wonder and God! The spiritual dimensions of travel experiences. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal, 54(2), 107-116. MacCannell, D. (1976). The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: Schocken Books. Mannell, R. (1996). Approaches in the social and behavioral sciences to the systematic study of hard-to-define human values and experiences. In B. Driver, D. Dustin, T. Baltic, G. Elsner & G. Peterson (Eds.), Nature and the Human Spirit: Toward an Expanded Land Management Ethic (pp. 404-416). State College, PA: Ventura Publishing. Manzo, L. (2003). Beyond house and heaven: Toward a revisioning of emotional relationships with places. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(1), 47-61. Morgan, P. (2009). Towards a developmental theory of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 11-22. Nash, D. (1996). Anthropology of Tourism. Oxford: Pergamon. Newby, H. (1979). Green and Pleasant Land? Social Change in Rural England. London: Wildwood House. OED. (2014). Oxford English Dictionary (Online). Retrieved from http://www.oed.com Pargament, K. (1999). The psychology of religion and spirituality? Yes and no. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 9(1), 316.

Rural Tourism Experiences: The Emotional-Spiritual Dimension

151

Ramkissoon, H., Weiler, B., & Smith, L. (2012). Place attachment and pro-environmental behaviour in national parks: The development of a conceptual framework. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(2), 257276. Roberts, E. (1996). Place and spirit in public land management. In B. Driver, D. Dustin, T. Baltic, G. Elsner & G. Peterson G. (Eds.), Nature and the Human Spirit: Toward an Expanded Land Management Ethic (pp. 61-80). State College, PA: Ventura Publishing. Sharpley, R., & Jepson, D. (2011). Rural tourism: A spiritual experience? Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 52-71. Short, J. (1991). Imagined Country: Environment, Culture and Society. London: Routledge. Smith, V. (1992). Introduction: The quest in guest. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(1), 1-17. Stark, R., Hamberg, E., & Miller, A. (2005). Exploring spirituality and unchurched religions in America, Sweden and Japan. Journal of Contemporary Religion, 20(1), 3-23. Stedman, R. (2003). Is it really just a social construction? The contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Society & Natural Resources, 16(8), 671-685. Stringer, L., & McAvoy, L. (1992). The need for something different: Spirituality and the wilderness adventure. The Journal of Experiential Education, 15(1), 13-21. Teasedale, W. (1999). The mystic heart. Novato, CA: New World Library. Theos. (2013). The spirit of things unseen: Belief in post-religious Britain. London: Theos. Timothy, D., & Olsen, D. (Eds.). (2006). Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys. Abingdon: Routledge. Timothy, D. (2013). Religious views of the environment: Sanctification of nature and implications for tourism. In A. Holden & D. Fennell (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and the Environment (pp. 31-42). Abingdon: Routledge. Vukoniü, B. (1996). Tourism and Religion. Oxford: Pergamon. Williams, K., & Harvey, D. (2001). Transcendent experience in forest environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 249-260. Woods, M. (2011). Rural. London: Routledge. Wuthnow, R. (1998). After Heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950s. Berkeley: University of California Press. Zinnbauer, B., Pargament, K., & Scott, A. (1999). The emerging meanings of religiousness and spirituality: Problems and prospects. Journal of Personality, 67(6), 889-919.

PART II. LOCAL ACTORS AND COMMUNITIES, LOCAL RESOURCES AND CONDITIONS

CHAPTER SEVEN THE ROLE OF LOCAL ACTORS AND RURAL RESOURCES IN THE CO-CREATION OF TOURISM EXPERIENCES ELISABETE FIGUEIREDO, CELESTE EUSÉBIO AND ZÉLIA BREDA

Introduction This chapter aims to contribute, from a theoretical perspective, to the debate on the role of local actors, stakeholders and rural natural and cultural resources in the co-creation of rewarding rural tourism experiences. This debate is anchored to the broader discussion of the role rural tourism may play in fostering local sustainable development, as well as of the relevance of involving all the stakeholders in achieving that goal. The discussion regarding the role rural tourism may play in fostering local communities’ development has been well documented for some decades (Kastenholz & Figueiredo, 2007; Ribeiro & Marques, 2002). The positive contribution of this activity may be expressed in the potential multiplier effects tourism may induce in local communities, often fragile in social and economic terms (Lane, 2009; Ribeiro & Marques, 2002; Sharpley & Roberts, 2004). At the same time, tourism may induce significant changes in local communities, due to its (positive and negative) impacts (Andereck, 1995; Andereck, Valentine, Knopf & Vogt, 2005) that often guide the (also positive and negative) attitudes of local residents towards tourism and tourists, as well as their perception of their living places as tourism destination areas (Figueiredo, Kastenholz & Lima, 2013). Rural areas, although diverse, possess a vast capital in terms of cultural and natural resources that may sustain a large set of tourism activities and initiatives. This capital, as Garrod, Wornell and Youell (2006) state,

156

Chapter Seven

includes both material and immaterial features and must be preserved and promoted, by local populations and stakeholders, in order to effectively constitute tourism attractions and rural destination assets. For this matter, social capital—as further discussed in the first section of the chapter—is extremely relevant. However, in many rural areas—particularly in the most remote ones—social capital is declining along with the decline and ageing of the population and with the loss of social and economic dynamics, which means that the maintenance and promotion of the rural capital may be compromised. The relevance of the involvement and participation of local inhabitants and supply-agents is discussed in the second section of this chapter, as it is extremely important both to the preservation and maintenance of the “countryside capital” and to the overall tourism experience. In fact, as will be shown, local inhabitants are central elements in the creation and provision of a rewarding tourism experience (Andereck et al., 2005; Eusébio & Carneiro, 2010; Figueiredo et al., 2013; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Eusébio & Figueiredo, 2013; Pizam, Uriely & Reichel, 2000; Reisinger & Turner, 2003; Sinkovics & Penz, 2009), given their role in the creation of a welcoming atmosphere as well as their frequent function as “cultural brokers” (Cohen, 1988; Kastenholz et al., 2013), interacting with and providing information about local characteristics to visitors. This interaction is generally valued, as demonstrated, for instance, by Andereck and Nyaupane (2011), Figueiredo et al. (2013), Figueiredo, Kastenholz and Pinho (2014) and Kastenholz et al. (2013). Several studies show that the more interaction and exchange are valued, the more local populations are willing to embrace tourism, regardless of the perception of some negative impacts (Andereck & Nyaupane, 2011; Figueiredo & Eusébio, 2014; Figueiredo et al., 2013; Figueiredo, Kastenholz & Pinho, 2014; Kastenholz et al., 2013). There is a scarcity of literature about the role of rural tourism supplyagents in the co-creation of rural tourism experiences, as part of the socioeconomic context and particularly as the main agents in the supply of services and activities to tourists. Nevertheless, it is clear that they must be involved (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012), preferably in an integrated manner, combating the often fragmented nature of this industry (Saxena & Ilbery, 2008). In other words, an integrated rural tourism approach is needed, sustained by the involvement and coordination of all resources and stakeholders available, in synergy-enhancing network constellations. This approach is discussed in the last section of this chapter. Networking seems particularly important in rural contexts where the nature of rural tourism activities, often fragmented and geographically

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

157

disperse, requires a strategic action to overcome these difficulties (Clarke, 2005). In spite of some obstacles in the creation of networks, it is commonly argued that they may contribute to promoting sustainable rural tourism and rewarding tourism experiences, as well as a vast set of other benefits (Lynch et al., 2000, cited in Morrison, Lynch & Johns, 2004).

The Relevance of Rural Resources in Tourism Experiences Despite their diversity, rural areas are generally characterised by a variety of resources often used when planning and promoting rural tourism activities and experiences. Rural tourism is almost by definition (although it is important to note that there is no consensual definition regarding this topic) based on local, rural, natural, cultural, social and economic resources or, in other words, based on features of rurality (Kastenholz & Figueiredo, 2007). Low population density, a predominance of agriculture and agricultural landscapes, the prevalence of small settings and the preservation of traditional ways of life, know-how and ways of doing are some of the most common criteria when defining rural areas and the context they provide for rural tourism experiences (Lane, 1994, 2009). Lane (1994) specifically suggests that rural tourism should ideally be, apart from naturally located in rural environments, functionally rural, rural in scale, traditional in character, organically and slowly growing and controlled by local communities. As Keane (1992) advocates, when the last requirement is fulfilled, the term “rural community tourism” may be used or, as more recently suggested by Saxena, Clark, Oliver and Ilbery (2007), the concept of “integrated rural tourism” (IRT) may be advanced, precisely to express the integrated and coordinated manner in which tourism should be developed. Rural tourism, as Kastenholz and Figueiredo (2007) claim, may, in theory, play an important role in the development of rural areas, due to its potentially multiplier effects, as rural areas’ entire lifestyles and characteristics seem to be of interest to an increasing number of visitors in search of unique and overall tourism experiences (Lane, 2009; Sharpley & Roberts, 2004). Concomitantly, the presence of tourists, their curiosity and appreciation of diverse aspects of local communities may contribute to increasing the local population’s self-esteem, pride and sense of belonging and identity (Kastenholz, 2004; Figueiredo et al., 2013). They can thus rediscover the value of certain local resources and even transform and recreate those same resources (Figueiredo et al., 2013). Furthermore, the arrival of visitors to local and, very often, small and somehow isolated

158

Chapter Seven

rural settlements brings new life to communities, providing opportunities of communication and exchange that may be major factors of attraction both for local inhabitants and visitors (Chuang, 2010; Figueiredo et al., 2014; Karabati, Dogan, Pinar & Celik, 2009; Kastenholz et al., 2013; Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009; Pizam et al., 2000; Tucker, 2003), as will be discussed in the following section. As Partidário (2003) and Garrod et al. (2006) demonstrate, rural areas present a vast and interesting “capital” in terms of natural and social resources that, at least theoretically, offer multiple opportunities in terms of tourism activities. Garrod et al. (2006), after discussing the relative novelty of the term “countryside capital” vis-a-vis other types of capital (e.g. natural capital), state that countryside capital is the “fabric of the countryside”, comprising villages, small market towns, as well as natural resources and elements (as wildlife species), built elements and cultural traditions. Rural capital may either be tangible or intangible (Figueiredo, 2013), deriving from concrete physical and built elements, as well as from social interactions and representations. Based on this definition, Garrod et al. (2006, p. 119) present a summing up of the countryside capital (Table 7-1), explaining how rural tourism destinations employ all these characteristics of rural areas, in various ways and to diverse extents, to attract tourists and to provide them with rewarding experiences. Table 7-1. Constituent elements of countryside capital Landscape, including seascape Wildlife, both fauna and flora Biodiversity Geology and soils Air and air quality Hedgerows and field boundaries Agricultural buildings Rural settlements, from isolated dwellings to market towns Historical features, such as historical buildings, industrial remnants Tracks, trails, bridleways, lanes and roads Streams, rivers, ponds and lakes Water and water quality Woods, forests and plantations Distinctive local customs, languages, clothes, foods, crafts, festivals, traditions, ways of life Source: Garrod et al. (2006, p. 119)

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

159

Rural tourism activities and experiences are, therefore, strongly related to and based on this rural capital. The fact that, as shown in Table 7-1, a great diversity of elements and resources, as well as opportunities, exist in the countryside, also demonstrates its sustainability capital. The list of elements which compose the countryside capital draws our attention to the circumstance that they are more abundant (and relatively less spoiled) in remote rural areas, frequently marginalised by the processes of economic development and urbanization (Figueiredo, 2013). That list also implies that the quality of rural tourism experiences that rural areas may offer is strongly dependent upon the quality of the countryside capital, although other factors cannot be neglected, such as the existence of services, facilities and information (Garrod et al., 2006; Kastenholz & Figueiredo, 2007; Ribeiro & Marques, 2002). Rural resources or countryside capital are often not able per se to trigger rural tourism activities and experiences, since many rural areas do not possess another type of relevant capital—social capital—, which is indispensable to recover, activate and promote local assets and features. Many rural areas—particularly remote ones—have a small and aged population, with low literacy levels in a context of little social and economic dynamics. This situation implies that, in most cases, some technical and financial instruments should be created to enhance social capital in rural areas and, consequently, to preserve and promote countryside capital. Many of the elements which compose the rural capital are part of what tourists perceive as the “rural idyll” (Bell, 2006; Crouch, 2006; Figueiredo, 2013; Figueiredo et al., 2013; Halfacree, 2006, 2014), which, in turn, is one of the major factors attracting visitors to rural territories. The rural idyll is very often represented as a global amenity, and this representation derives from a set of sources, such as, among others, tourists themselves, tourist operators, public policies, mass media and advertisers (Figueiredo, 2013), which tend to promote a relatively standardised image of rurality and rural capital. Rural tourism destinations are frequently represented as idyllic, authentic and genuine places, capable of offering closer and purer contact with nature and cultural traditions and memories of the past, providing peace and tranquillity, fresh air and authentic food products and a wide range of other experiences. On the basis of this globalised image (or idealization) of the countryside, rural territories are also represented as isolated and remote, characterised by picturesque landscapes which combine agricultural and natural features. Life in rural tourism destinations is often portrayed as simple and rustic, based on traditional

160

Chapter Seven

small-scale activities (such as traditional agriculture) (Figueiredo, 2013). As Bell (2006) notes, animals are often included in this scenery, both wild and domestic ones, as well as traditional gastronomy and fairs, workers in the green fields along with children that run freely in the great outdoors. Rural areas’ resources provide, therefore, an appropriate setting for a wide range of adventures and experiences (among them walking, birdwatching, sightseeing, canoeing, horse-riding, picnics), which are, to a certain extent, completely free of charge and seem able to satisfy all types of tourist demand. As Figueiredo (2013) demonstrates, analysing the case of the Schist Villages Network (Portugal), the appeal of rural areas is based on the commodification of almost every resource and element, from natural aspects to the countryside dwellers themselves. Despite the conflicts that may arise from this commodification between the different stakeholders and actors present in contemporary rural areas, the fact is that local inhabitants are relevant (central, in fact) “resources” in rural tourism experiences. Furthermore, they seem to appreciate tourists and tourism activities in their daily living contexts (Chuang, 2010; Kastenholz et al., 2013) and to value the interactions and cultural exchange tourism provides to their local communities (Figueiredo et al., 2013; Karabati et al., 2009).

The Role of Local Actors in the Co-creation of Tourism Experiences in Rural Contexts The Role of Local Communities As previously suggested, the integration and involvement of local inhabitants in the preservation and maintenance of rural capital and, particularly, in the tourism experience it may provide to visitors, are key elements for both tourists and residents in the creation of integrated and rewarding tourism products (Andereck et al., 2005; Eusébio & Carneiro, 2010; Figueiredo et al., 2013; Kastenholz et al., 2013; Pizam et al., 2000; Reisinger & Turner, 2003; Sinkovics & Penz, 2009). Not only may local residents strongly contribute to the creation of a welcoming and worthwhile atmosphere but they may also function as “cultural brokers” (Cohen, 1988; Kastenholz et al., 2013), helping visitors to understand and to live in local communities, and contributing to visitors’ integration in rural destinations. Positive views of each other and close relationships between hosts and visitors are, therefore, crucial for the destination’s sustainable development (Kastenholz et al., 2013; Sinkovics & Penz, 2009).

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

161

As Kastenholz et al. (2013) state, there is diversity among both visitors and residents regarding social interaction and attitudes towards tourism and tourism experiences, varying from a genuine interest in interacting (Tucker, 2003) to the consideration, on the part of tourists, that local people are just part of the rural scenery (Figueiredo, 2013; Pearce, 1998), i.e. another commodity to be consumed. The attitudes of hosts regarding tourism may also widely vary as they are extremely dependent upon the perceptions of the benefits and impacts of tourism in their daily life and in that of communities (Andereck et al., 2005; Figueiredo et al., 2014; Kuvan & Akan, 2005). The perception of tourism impacts is a powerful determinant of the involvement of local actors, as well as of the positive and negative attitudes regarding tourism (Ap & Crompton, 1998; Perdue, Long & Allen, 1987). These attitudes, in turn, tend to condition local actors’ behaviour towards tourism and tourists and, therefore, to determine the overall tourism experience desired and/or encountered by visitors in rural destinations (Figueiredo et al., 2014). Generally, impacts of tourism have been divided into three main categories: economic, environmental and socio-cultural (Andereck, 1995; Andereck et al., 2005; Brunt & Courtney, 1999; Figueiredo et al., 2014; Kuvan & Akan, 2005; Ribeiro & Marques, 2002). Several studies have demonstrated that economic impacts are, however, the most relevant ones when considering perceptions, and especially attitudes, regarding tourism (Andereck et al., 2005; App & Crompton, 1998; Eusébio & Carneiro, 2010; Figueiredo et al., 2014; Kuvan & Akan, 2005; Perdue et al., 1987). Therefore, there is a strong correlation between the perception of positive economic impacts and benefits derived from tourism, as well as of the justice of distribution of these benefits, and the development of positive attitudes towards tourists and tourism, among local people. Together with positive economic impacts and benefits, socio-cultural dimensions and impacts also seem to play a relevant role when predicting residents’ attitudes (Andereck et al., 2005; Kastenholz et al., 2013). In general, residents of a rural tourism destination perceive the social interactions and contacts with visitors in a very positive manner (Figueiredo et al., 2013; Figueiredo et al., 2014; Kastenholz et al., 2013). In a recent study on two small communities in Portugal, Kastenholz et al. (2013) conclude that, despite the superficiality of the contacts with tourists, local inhabitants perceived interaction as extremely positive, particularly regarding the opportunities it may open for encounters with different people and cultures. The growing valorisation of rural capital by tourists seems to trigger local self-esteem and pride. This is visible in the local actors’ recognition of the relevance of their contribution and role as

162

Chapter Seven

co-providers of tourism experiences, namely in providing information to tourists (De Kadt, 1979; Garrod et al., 2006), in influencing some visitors’ decisions and behaviours while visiting local communities and enjoying the countryside capital, and, above all, in providing a welcoming atmosphere. As Eusébio and Carneiro (2010) and Kastenholz et al. (2013) state, the influence of social contacts between residents and tourists on the rural tourism experience depends on the frequency and intensity of the interactions. Despite the recognition of the relevance of social interactions between hosts and guests, there is a lack of literature regarding the shared tourism experience (Zhang, Inbarakan & Jackson, 2006), particularly when trying to address the ways in which social interaction should be measured (Kastenholz et al., 2013; Reisinger & Turner, 2003). Some authors (e.g. Pizam et al., 2000) bring to the fore the intensity of the interaction, while others (e.g. Andereck et al., 2005) prefer to use the frequency of social contacts, or use the types of contact preferred by visitors and respective levels of satisfaction (e.g. Reisinger & Turner, 1998). Kastenholz et al. (2013) combine all these dimensions, through a qualitative approach, to compare the perspectives of visitors, local actors and supply agents on social contacts and interactions. All the aforementioned studies confirmed the relevant role of local actors and of social interactions they engage in with tourists as an important factor of visitors’ satisfaction (Figueiredo et al., 2014; Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009; Pizam et al., 2000; Reisinger & Turner, 2003; Tucker, 2003) and as a crucial part of the integrated tourism experience (Andereck et al., 2005; Figueiredo et al., 2014; Kastenholz et al., 2013; Tucker, 2003; Zhang et al., 2006). The more local dwellers—residents and supply agents—value interaction and exchange (as will be discussed in the following section), the more tourism and its diverse impacts seem to be accepted. As previously suggested, rural populations themselves have started to gradually commodify the manifestations of the rural and rurality in search of alternative sources of income and economic diversification (Figueiredo et al., 2013) and are trying to make the “tourist” (as far as Halfacree (2014) describes, seen as the “outsider”) an important part of local communities and of the co-creation of overall experiences rewarding to all.

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

163

The Role of Supply Agents (Private and Public) Although the analysis of the role of supply agents in the co-creation of tourism experiences is paramount to improve the competitiveness of rural tourism destinations (Kastenholz et al., 2012), limited research has been conducted in this domain so far. The concept of co-creation in tourism has been used to reflect the fact that hosts and guests may co-create the value of tourism experiences in an integrated manner (Prebensen & Foss, 2001). Binkhorst and Dekker (2009) highlight that co-creation is a process in which consumers interact with product providers, generating their own experience. In rural areas, due to the diversity of tourism resources, various types of tourism experience can be designed, and diverse tourist types will experience these resources distinctly in an active co-creation process (Kastenholz et al., 2012). This co-creation is also a challenge for all stakeholders involved in the process, with supply agents (local service providers and local government organizations) being of utmost relevance. These agents have to understand individual motivations, needs, expectations, perceptions and meanings associated with the subjective experiences of the diverse tourist segments of a rural destination in order to play an active role in the cocreation of memorable tourism experiences. To be successful, rural tourism development must be planned and managed involving all the supply agents (private and public). Without their support, it is nearly impossible to co-create tourism products and experiences. As March and Wilkinson (2009, p. 455) mention, “the quality of the experience offered by a tourist destination is more than the sum of its parts; it depends, in important ways, on how the organisational parts are interconnected, the way they act and interact and the relations between the actors involved”.

Tourism destinations generally include a large number of different coproducing actors delivering a great variety of products and services (Haugland, Ness, Gronseth & Aarstad, 2011). In this context, the success of individual actors, as well as the success of a rural tourism destination as a whole, requires involvement, efficient coordination and integration of all supply agents and resources. However, in the majority of rural tourism destinations, the supply agents often work in a fragmented way. In order to overcome this fragmentation, the “integrated rural tourism” concept has been proposed

164

Chapter Seven “as a means of thinking critically and comprehensively about the actors, resources, and relationships involved in this notoriously fragmented industry” (Saxena & Ilbery, 2008, p. 234).

Moreover, as Kastenholz et al. (2012) suggest, the multifaceted character of the rural tourism experience requires an Integrated Rural Tourism (IRT) development, based on the involvement and coordination of all resources and stakeholders and on the principles of sustainable development. The promotion of this type of rural tourism encourages local actors to work together in order to satisfy all stakeholders (visitors, residents and local agents) and, simultaneously, to promote and maintain the economic, social, cultural, natural, and human resources of the rural areas in which they occur (Saxena & Ilbery, 2008). As Cawley and Gillmor (2008, p. 318) state, the IRT concept emphasises a bottom-up approach “that involves local stakeholders centrally in its pursuit and that is based on local physical, economic, social and cultural resources”. Two projects may be mentioned as examples of IRT: (i) the European project “supporting and promoting integrated tourism in Europe’s lagging rural regions” (SPRITE) (Petrou, Pantziou & Dimara, 2007) and (ii) a Portuguese project “the overall rural tourism experience and sustainable local community development” (ORTE) (Kastenholz et al., 2012). Both projects demonstrate that supply agents (private and public) play a vital role in the co-creation of memorable tourism experiences. In rural tourism destinations, different types of entities may also play an important role in the creation of the experiences available for the visitors. These organizations may be categorised, according to March and Wilkinson (2009), in two groups: (i) organizations directly involved in the supply of tourism services and experiences, and (ii) organizations involved in providing general relevant amenities to tourism development. The first group includes organizations responsible for providing tourism activities, such as accommodation, transport, entertainment, booking and tourist information, while the second group includes other agents, such as local government authorities and local producers. All these stakeholders (both directly and indirectly involved in the supply of tourist services and experiences) are active players in the co-production and co-creation of tourism experiences in rural tourism destinations. As March and Wilkinson (2009, p. 455) highlight, they are part “of value chains and networks through which value is co-created and co-delivered”. Additionally, as Kastenholz et al. (2012) state, local service providers, together with the local community, may also play a relevant role in the cocreation of tourism experience helping visitors to “discover” and enjoy a more intense experience of these rural areas.

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

165

Local government organizations are responsible for providing vital elements of the tourism experience in rural tourism destinations, such as visitor information centres, interpretation centres of cultural and natural resources, facilities to support tourism development (e.g. roads, signage, parks and gardens, street cleaning), promotion, regular tourism-related training for staff not directly employed in the tourism industry (e.g. street cleaners) and planning (March & Wilkinson, 2009). Several authors (e.g. Cawley & Gillmor, 2008; Irvine & Anderson, 2004) recommend that rural tourism development should be conducted by small and medium-sized businesses owned by locals. In rural areas, frequently, small businesses are part of the community. Moreover, this kind of firm is often seen as more flexible and agile enough to make rapid responses to change (Irvine & Anderson, 2004). Two important factors emerge from the literature as influencing the support of supply agents for the co-creation of memorable tourism experience in rural spaces: (i) perceived impacts and (ii) interactions between visitors and local service providers. The study of Byrd, Bosley and Dronberger (2009) is one of the few studies that analyses the differences in tourism impact perceptions among four stakeholder groups (residents, entrepreneurs, governmental entities and tourists) in a rural community. The results of this study reveal that entrepreneurs and government agents did not significantly differ in their perceptions regarding tourism development. When the differences exist, conflicts between entrepreneurs and governmental officials may occur, negatively influencing the tourism experience. The incorporation of the views and interests of all supply agents (private and public) in the planning and management of rural tourism can reduce conflicts, thereby enhancing the tourism experience. Several social interactions between local service providers and visitors may occur in a rural tourism destination when visitors purchase goods and services. Although the contacts between tourists and hosts are frequently superficial, brief and formal (Reisinger & Turner, 2003), rural areas may provide the conditions for a closer interaction. A study carried out by Kastenholz et al. (2013) in two Portuguese villages (Janeiro de Cima and Linhares da Beira) reveals that social interaction is one of the most relevant aspects of the rural tourism experience for all stakeholders involved, including supply agents. Moreover, local service providers may also play an important role in the co-creation of tourism experiences, sharing their knowledge of a region’s history, culture and natural heritage, their ways of life (e.g. inviting tourists to their homes) and local products (e.g. providing opportunities for visitors to try them). Moreover, as

166

Chapter Seven

Prebensen and Foss (2011) discuss, typical service interactions are not limited to relationships between a consumer and a service provider, but also the atmosphere and physical environment where this interaction occurs have importance for consumer satisfaction. Given the fact that all people, places and resources involved in rural tourism have an important role in the co-creation of tourism experiences, the creation and consolidation of networks may facilitate the inclusion, involvement and cooperation of all stakeholders, as will be discussed in the following section.

Interactions and Networking of Local Stakeholders to Co-Create Rewarding Overall Tourism Experiences As mentioned, the tourism industry consists mainly of small-sized companies, generally in the form of family businesses. These companies play a major role in the growth and economic development of rural destinations, because of their ability to innovate, to stimulate competition, to create new jobs and to promote local development through their businesses’ multiplier effect, among other socio-economic reasons (Buhalis & Peters, 2005). Nonetheless, one of the challenges of tourism in rural areas relates to the inability of local stakeholders to reach the market (Cai, 2002; Dolli & Pinfold, 1997), which is often due to the small scale of these businesses and their lack of financial and human resources. The fragmented nature of tourism, characterised by its geographical dispersion, in areas usually distant from the consumer market, and with a predominance of small companies, makes relationships between the various agents of a tourism destination critical. Networking can, thus, be seen as a strategic action of tourism actors to create a positive image of a destination in order to gain markets. In this context, joint efforts between public and private stakeholders and a better use of joint strategies and marketing initiatives, can reduce the isolation of small rural tourism businesses and enable them to use resources more efficiently, which can be the key to the success of rural tourism (Clarke, 2005). Research on networks in tourism has mainly focused its attention on destination management and planning, cooperative relations being considered a way to achieve local development. This form of governance for tourism destinations, where there is a plurality of stakeholders with differing interests and agendas, and with varying degrees of power (Clarke, 2005), increases the link between these various tourism actors, particularly in rural areas, where this is a critical factor. In order to offer a global and integrated tourism product, rural destinations must adopt a

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

167

specific management approach, different from that used in traditional products. The nature of tourism pushes service providers to develop formal and informal relationships, leading to the emergence of interorganisational networks in destinations. These networks can be seen as groups that are articulated freely, with the goal of providing a comprehensive tourism product (Scott, Baggio & Cooper, 2008). Another peculiarity of tourism, which justifies a network management approach, is the fact that it develops in areas that are consumed by visitors, but at the same time, are also used by other types of public, namely the residents. The participation of the local community in the tourism management and planning process is thus essential. Through a network management system, local actors have more chances of effective participation in the management process. On the other hand, access to entities that grant support in terms of marketing and that can help promote a good image of the destination in the market is also important (Dolli & Pinfold, 1997). A network must embrace a variety of formal and informal structures, from groups of people to organizations supported by paid staff and financial resources (Saxena, 2005). In the case of rural tourism, Clarke (2005) states that this should be formed by suppliers of individual components and goods, providers of services from other local economic sectors, travel agents and other intermediaries, segments formed by key customers, business associations and tourism professionals and other rural sectors, training institutions in the area, local government entities and many others. The process of forming a network relates to the characteristics of the actors in the destination and its structure is influenced by the environment in which it develops. That is, the circumstances surrounding the creation of a network determine its operation, as well as the motivations and roles played by the actors, and the way they communicate with each other, determine the quality of the interactions within the structure (Gnoth & Jaeger, 2007). Indeed, not only is the existence of relationships important but also the density and quality of these connections (Clarke, 2005). Thus, the main difficulties encountered in the implementation of network management models in tourist destinations relate to: (i) the exact definition of the actors belonging to the network and its geographical limits (Dredge, 2006; Minguzzi, 2006); (ii) the balance of power within the network (Dredge, 2006); the difficulty of framing this type of structure in the existing institutional and legal systems (Novelli, Schmitz & Spencer, 2006); the implementation of the network management process itself (Halme, 2001; Morrison et al., 2004); and the lack of resources to measure

Chapter Seven

168

its effective benefits for tourism destinations (Nilsson, 2003, cited by Morrison et al., 2004). Despite these difficulties, networks can generate several benefits for a destination. Lynch et al. (2000, cited in Morrison et al., 2004), based on a comprehensive literature review, summarise the potential benefits that can result from a network, classifying them into three types: learning and exchange, business activity and community (Table 7-2). Table 7-2. Benefits of tourism networks Characteristics

Learning and exchange

Business activity

Community

Benefits Knowledge transfer Education process in tourism Communication Development of cultural values Faster support from certain entities Encouragement for the development of small enterprises Cooperative activities (e.g. marketing, purchasing, production) Development of approaches based on the needs (e.g. people development) Increase in the number of visitors Better use of small businesses Increase of visitors’ length of stay Improvement of business activity Inter-trading within the network Improvement of product quality and visitor experience Opportunity for business development Promote a common purpose Community support for the development of the destination Increase or reinvention of the sense of community Involvement of small businesses in the development of the destination More income remaining on site

Source: Lynch et al. (2000, cited in Morrison et al., 2004)

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

169

In fact, the potential benefits of the networks are quite comprehensive and not limited to the management of a tourism destination. Networks can serve as an important tool to stimulate learning and exchange through an increased flow of information and exchange of experiences between the actors involved in the network, contributing to the development of new cultural values and for the support of local actors in implementing new development initiatives (Halme, 2001; Lynch & Morrison, 2007; Morrison et al., 2004; Novelli et al., 2006). The establishment of a network can also influence many aspects of the community where it operates, positively changing the way the relationships between people and institutions are established. This contributes to an improvement of the local background, at social, business and economic levels, and a greater appreciation of heritage and tourist attractions (Lynch et al., 2000, cited by Morrison et al., 2004), making the visitor experience more positive and increasing the overall quality of the tourism product offered by the destination. Additionally, networks can promote business activity and capacity building within the destination, as well as contribute to the resolution of some socio-economic problems of poor communities, through greater involvement of small and micro businesses, community groups and local authorities (Lynch & Morrison, 2007). The benefits from the positive synergies generated by intensifying the relationships between these actors have a positive impact individually, at the level of each actor that integrates the network, but also as a whole, generating greater global competitiveness of the destination. Other benefits that networks can generate for the economic structure of a destination are the improvement of access to public funding (Novelli et al., 2006), and the better internal organization of the economy through greater integration between local actors (linkages), leading to a reduction of leakages in the economy and, consequently, to an increase of the multiplier effect of tourism (Baaijens, Nijkamp & Van Montfort, 1998). Cohesive tourism supply brings benefits to service providers and, at the same time, promotes increased quality of the overall product offered. Recently, networks in rural tourism gained a new impetus with the introduction of the concept of IRT, which was discussed in the previous section. Indeed, a chain of different actors can add value, not only to products themselves but also to rural communities. Naturally, the different actors involved may have different degrees of integration into networks. Nevertheless, the notion of integration stimulates the uptake of more actors and resources aiming at success through networks of cooperation and collaboration (Saxena & Ilbery, 2008).

170

Chapter Seven

Conclusion As established in the introduction, this chapter aimed at providing a theoretical discussion on three interrelated dimensions regarding the cocreation of rural tourism experiences: the role of the “countryside capital”, the relevance of local communities and supply-agents and the importance of the creation of networks and collaborative relations between all the public and private stakeholders. Rural tourism may play, if well planned and managed, a paramount role in rural areas’ development. This is due both to the current interest of an increasing number of visitors in search of rewarding experiences in a rural context and to the potential multiplier effects it may have in local economies. The presence of visitors and their interest in the diverse characteristics and resources of rural areas may contribute to local development both in material and immaterial terms, from economic improvement to positive social interactions. Given the diversity of rural areas, they typically possess a variety of resources that may sustain the planning and management of rural tourismrelated activities. In fact, rural areas often present a generous (material and symbolic) natural and cultural capital that nowadays seems to be a major factor in attracting tourists, motivating the desire to live authentic rural experiences. However, the rural capital per se is not enough to define a rural area as a tourism destination. Social capital is also indispensable to recover, activate, maintain and promote local assets. As many rural areas—particularly the most remote ones—are becoming increasingly depopulated, having an increasingly aged population, with low literacy levels, social capital may be difficult to create and to foster, therefore compromising the local character of rural tourism initiatives. This situation implies that, in many situations, technical and financial support may be needed in order to enhance social capital and to preserve and promote natural and cultural capital. Social capital is also extremely important to provide a welcoming atmosphere and to guarantee that visitors will have a rewarding experience while in a rural destination. The co-creation of tourism experiences is also extremely dependent on the interactions between hosts and guests. These may be diverse as may the views hosts and guests have of each other. Positive views and close relationships between hosts and guests are crucial for the destination’s sustainable development, as well as to offer overall and complete tourism experiences. The attitudes of the local population towards tourism—often dependent upon the perceived benefits and impacts, particularly at economic level—are also fundamental to foster tourism development and

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

171

rewarding experiences. In many destinations, the local population generally acts as “cultural broker”, providing tourists with information on local history, monuments, traditions, gastronomy and activities, therefore contributing to creating rewarding tourism experiences. Despite the scarcity of literature about the role of rural tourism supplyagents in the co-creation of rural tourism experiences, as part of the socioeconomic contexts and particularly as the main agents in the supply of services and activities to tourists, it is clear that they must be involved in this process. Supply-agents also have a fundamental role in the interaction with tourists, even if this is often superficial, formal and of short duration. The action and potential of supply-agents in rural tourism development and the co-creation of tourism experiences may be potentiated through the creation of cooperation networks. Networking is extremely relevant in rural tourism, as its supply structure is generally composed of small companies, geographically disperse and distant from the consumers. Networks may constitute a strategic action to create a positive image of destinations, to attract visitors and to plan and manage rural tourism activities, despite some obstacles. The existence of networking can strongly influence the shape and intensity of tourism impacts. Networks can affect tourism supply and demand; particularly they may promote the co-creation of more attractive, varied, better integrated and coordinated tourism experiences, based on the most interesting and differentiating local/regional resources. They can contribute to the suitability of the marketing strategy to the overall objectives of the stakeholders, as well as stimulate the local economy by encouraging greater synergies between companies. They can also help to match supply with adequate visitor flows, to attract the desired market segments, as well as to optimise the profile of visitor spending, if adjusted to the economic structure of the destination.

References Andereck, K. L. (1995). Environmental consequences of tourism: A review of recent research—Linking tourism, the environment, and sustainability. Annual Meeting of the National Recreation and Park Association (pp. 77-81). General Technical Report No. INT-GTR-323. Andereck, K. L., & Nyaupane, G. P. (2011). Exploring the nature of tourism and quality of life perceptions among the residents. Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 248-260.

172

Chapter Seven

Andereck, K. L., Valentine, K. M., Knopf, R. C., & Vogt, C. A. (2005). Residents’ perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4), 1056-1076. Ap, J., & Crompton, J. L. (1998). Developing and testing a tourism impact scale. Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 120-130. Baaijens, S. R., Nijkamp, P., & Van Montfort, K. (1998). Explanatory meta-analysis for the comparison and transfer of regional tourist income multipliers. Regional Studies, 32(9), 839-849. Bell, D. (2006). Variations on the rural idyll. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. H. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of rural studies (pp. 149-160). London: Sage Publications. Binkhorst, E., & Dekker, T. D. (2009). Agenda for co-creation tourism experience research. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2-3), 311-327. Brunt, P., & Courtney, P. (1999). Host perceptions of sociocultural impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(3), 493-515. Byrd, E. T., Bosley, H. E., & Dronberger, M. G. (2009). Comparisons of stakeholder perceptions of tourism impacts in rural eastern North Carolina. Tourism Management, 30(5), 693-703. Buhalis, D., & Peters, M. (2005). SMEs in tourism. In D. Buhalis & C. Costa (Eds.), Tourism management dynamics: Trends, management and tools (pp. 116-129). Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Cai, L. A. (2002). Cooperative branding for rural destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3), 720-742. Cawley, M., & Gillmor, D. A. (2008). Integrated rural tourism: Concepts and practice. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 316-337. Chuang, S. T. (2010). Rural tourism: Perspectives from social exchange theory. Social Behavior and Personality, 38(10), 1313-1322. Clarke, J. (2005). Effective marketing for rural tourism. In D. Hall, I. Kirkpatrick & M. Mitchell (Eds.), Rural tourism and sustainable business (pp. 87-102). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and commoditization in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 371-386. Crouch, D. (2006). Tourism, consumption and rurality. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. H. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of rural studies (pp. 355364). London: Sage Publications. De Kadt, E. (1979). Tourism: Passport to development?—Perspectives on the social and cultural effects of tourism in developing countries. New York: Oxford University Press. Dolli, N., & Pinfold, J. F. (1997). Managing rural tourism businesses: Financing, development and marketing issues. In S. Page & D. Getz

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

173

(Eds.), The business of rural tourism international perspectives (pp. 38-58). London: International Thomson Business Press. Dredge, D. (2006). Policy networks and the local organization of tourism. Tourism Management, 27(2), 269-280. Eusébio, C., & Carneiro, M. J. (2010). Determinants of tourist-host interactions: A youth market analysis. In M. Kozak (Ed.), Proceedings book of the 5th world conference for graduate research in tourism, hospitality and leisure (pp. 92-113). Turkey: Detay Yayincilik. Figueiredo, E. (2013). ‘McRural, no rural or what rural?’ Some reflections on rural reconfiguration processes based on the promotion of Schist Villages Network, Portugal. In L. Silva & E. Figueiredo (Eds.), Shaping rural areas in Europe perceptions and outcomes on the present and the future (pp. 129-146). Dordrecht: Springer. Figueiredo, E., Kastenholz, E., & Lima, J. (2013). Recreating rurality through tourism-visions of hosts and guests in two Portuguese villages. In E. Figueiredo & A. Raschi (Eds.), Fertile links? Connections between tourism activities, socio-economic contexts and local development in European rural areas (pp. 43-70). Florence: Florence University Press. Figueiredo, E., Kastenholz, E., & Pinho, C. (2014). Living in a rural tourism destination: Exploring the views of local communities. Revista Portuguesa de Estudos Regionais, 36, 4-11. Garrod, B., Wornell, R., & Youell, R. (2006). Re-conceptualising rural resources as countryside capital: The case of rural tourism. Journal of Rural Studies, 22(1), 117-128. Gnoth, J., & Jaeger, S. (2007). Destinations as networking virtual service firms. International Journal of Excellence in Tourism, Hospitality and Catering, 1(1), 1-18. Halfacree, K. (2006). Rural space: Constructing a three-fold architecture. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. H. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of rural studies (pp. 44-62). London: Sage Publications. Halfacree, K. (2014). A critical response to the (non-) place of rural leisure users within the counterurban imagination. Pasos—Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 12(3), 515-523. Halme, M. (2001). Learning for sustainable development in tourism networks. Business Strategy and the Environment, 10(2), 100-114. Haugland, S. A., Ness, H., Gronseth, B.-O., & Aarstad, J. (2011). Development of tourism destinations: An integrated multilevel perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 268-290.

174

Chapter Seven

Irvine, W., & Anderson, A. R. (2004). Small tourists firms in rural areas: Agility, vulnerability and survival in the face of crisis. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 10(4), 229-246. Karabati, S., Dogan, E., Pinar, M., & Celik, L. M. (2009). Socio-economic effects of agri-tourism on local communities in Turkey: The case of Aglasun. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 10(2), 129-142. Kastenholz, E. (2004). Management of demand as a tool in sustainable tourist destination development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5), 388-408. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C. P., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience: The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M. J., & Figueiredo, E. (2013). Host-guest relationships in rural tourism: evidence from two Portuguese villages. Anatolia, 24(3), 367-380. Kastenholz, E., & Figueiredo, E. (2007). Existing and potential connections between rural tourism and rural development: Empirical Approach. Invited talk at the 3rd European Congress on Rural Tourism “Challenges and Strategies for Rural Tourism”, EUROGITES—European Federation of Farm and Village Tourism, Eger, Hungary, 27 September. Kastenholz, E., & Sparrer, M. (2009). Rural dimensions of the commercial home. In P. Lynch, A. MacIntosh & H. Tucker (Eds.), The commercial home: International multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 138-149). London, Routledge. Keane, M. (1992). Rural tourism and rural development. In H. Briassoulis & J. van der Straaten (Eds.), Tourism and the environment (pp. 43-55). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Kuvan, Y., & Akan, P. (2005). Residents’ attitudes toward general and forest-related impacts of tourism: The case of Belek—Antalya. Tourism Management, 26(5), 691-706. Lane, B. (1994). Sustainable rural tourism strategies: A tool for development and conservation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1), 102-111. —. (2009). Rural tourism: An overview. In T. Jamal & M. Robinson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of tourism studies (pp. 354-370). London: Sage Publications.

The Role of Local Actors and Rural Resources

175

Lynch, P., & Morrison, A. (2007). The role of networks. In E. Michael (Ed.), Micro-clusters and networks: The growth of tourism (pp. 43-62). Oxford: Elsevier. March, R., & Wilkinson, I. (2009). Conceptual tools for evaluating tourism partnerships. Tourism Management, 30, 455-462. Minguzzi, A. (2006). Destination competitiveness and the role of Destination Management Organization (DMO): An Italian experience. In L. Lazzeretti & C. S. Petrillo (Eds.), Tourism local systems and networking (pp. 197-208). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Morrison, A., Lynch, P., & Johns, N. (2004). International tourism networks. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16, 197-202. Novelli, M., Schmitz, B., & Spencer, T. (2006). Networks, clusters and innovation in tourism: A UK experience. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1141-1152. Partidário, M. R. (2003). Turismo em espaços rurais e naturais: Uma oportunidade sustentável. In O. Simões & A. Cristóvão (Eds.), TERN: Turismo em espaços rurais e naturais (pp. 115-123). Coimbra: IPC. Pearce, P. L. (1998). The relationship between residents and tourists: The research literature and management directions. In W. F. Theobald (Ed.), Global tourism (pp. 129-149). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Perdue, R. R., Long, P. T., & Allen, L. (1987). Rural resident tourism perceptions and attitudes. Annals of Tourism Research, 14(3), 420-429. Petrou, A., Pantziou, E. F., Dimara, E., & Skuras, D. (2007). Resources and activities complementarities: The role of business networks in the provision of integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment, 9(4), 421-440. Pizam, A., Uriely, N., & Reichel, A. (2000). The intensity of tourist-host social relationship and its effects on satisfaction and change of attitudes: The case of working tourists in Israel. Tourism Management, 21(4), 395-406. Prebensen, N. K., & Foss, L. (2011). Coping and co-creating in tourist experiences. International Journal of Tourism Research, 13, 54-67. Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (1998). Cultural differences between Mandarin-speaking tourists and Australian hosts and their impact on cross-cultural tourist-host interaction. Journal of Business Research, 42(2), 175-187. Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (2003). Cross-cultural behaviour in tourism. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

176

Chapter Seven

Ribeiro, M., & Marques, C. (2002). Rural tourism and the development of less favoured areas: Between rhetoric and practice. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(3), 211-220. Saxena, G. (2005). Relationships, networks and the learning regions: Case evidence from the Peak District National Park. Tourism Management, 26(2), 277-289. Saxena, G., Clark, G., Oliver, T., & Ilbery, B. (2007). Conceptualizing integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment, 9(4), 347-370. Saxena, G., & Ilbery, B. (2008). Integrated rural tourism: A border case study. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(1), 233-254. Scott, N., Baggio, R., & Cooper, C. (2008). Network analysis and tourism: From theory to practice. Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Sharpley, R., & Roberts, L. (2004). Rural tourism: 10 years on. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6(3), 119-124. Sinkovics, R. R., & Penz, E. (2009). Social distance between residents and international tourist implications for international business. International Business Review, 18(5), 457-469. Tucker, H. (2003). The host-guest relationship and its implications in rural tourism. In D. L. Roberts & M. Mitchell (Eds.), New directions in rural tourism (pp. 80-89). Aldershot: Ashgate. Zhang, F., Inbakaran, R. I., & Jackson, M. (2006). Understanding community attitudes towards tourism and host-guest interaction in the urban-rural border region. Tourism Geographies, 8(2), 182-204.

CHAPTER EIGHT HUMAN CAPITAL AND GENDER GAPS IN THE TOURISM SECTOR: IS THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION OF PORTUGUESE TOURISM GRADUATES SIMILAR IN RURAL AND URBAN MUNICIPALITIES? CARLOS COSTA, SANDRA CAÇADOR, ZÉLIA BREDA AND MARÍLIA DURÃO

Introduction Tourism stands out as an important sector for national economies and a relevant employment generator. According to the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC), tourism in Portugal has contributed 15.9% to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and was responsible for 18.5% of employment created in 2012 (WTTC, 2013). Even though its pace of growth is slowing down, tourism is still a sector in expansion. In recent years, and given that tourism is acknowledged as an important tool in fighting desertification, which is seriously affecting Portugal’s rural inland, this sector has gained greater economic importance in these areas. New job opportunities are a reality due to the increase in popularity of rural tourism, but little is known concerning the employment situation of the tourism workforce in rural areas. Regarding the employment situation of tourism graduates, Costa, Carvalho, Caçador and Breda (2012a, 2012b) presented a general diagnosis for the Portuguese context, concluding that there are not only remarkable gaps between men and women but also that those graduates have difficulty in finding a tourism-related job and earn low salaries. They

178

Chapter Eight

also unveiled the fact that a fairly high percentage of Portuguese tourism graduates are working outside the tourism field. But what about the professional situation of those living in rural areas? Are there differences among tourism graduates living in rural areas and those living in urban areas? Does the urban versus rural context affect gender gaps? These are some of the questions addressed in this chapter. Although the tourism industry in rural areas has been identified as economically important, the lack of qualified professionals is said to be one barrier to successful rural tourism development (Sharpley & Vass, 2006), which increases the relevance of studying the labour market in these areas. Therefore, this chapter aims to shed some light on the skilled human capital operating in rural municipalities, also comparing the employment conditions of tourism graduates living there with the employment conditions of those living in urban municipalities. Specifically, employment rates, professional experience, field of activity, working hours and schedules, contractual situation, entrepreneurial activity, leadership positions and salaries are compared. Gender patterns are also highlighted when analysing if and how the type of municipality where individuals choose to live affects their employment situation. In the first place, literature on employment in rural areas and the tourism labour market is reviewed, particularly concerning the Portuguese context. Next, the methodology underlying the empirical study is presented, with data collected through an online questionnaire applied to tourism graduates within the research project GENTOUR1, carried out in Portugal. The results concerning differences in the employment situation of tourism graduates living in rural and urban municipalities are presented and discussed in the next sections. The demographic profile, educational level, employment rate, professional experience, the sector of activity, contractual situation, working schedule, entrepreneurship and leadership positions, salary and gender gaps are compared for rural versus urban municipalities. Finally, the main conclusions and limitations of the study are presented.

Employment in Rural Areas and the Tourism Labour Market: The Portuguese Case According to the SERA Report2 (Copus, Hall, Barnes, Dalton, Cook, Weingarten & Johansson, 2006), in Portugal, as generally in the European Union (EU27), only one out of five people lives in predominantly rural (PR) areas3. But defining “rural” has not been an easy or consensual task,

Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector

179

as many attempts have been made to unravel this concept and different approaches can be used. Additionally, as the OECD (1994) and Weaver and Lawton (2001) remark, not all areas fit into neat categories of “urban” or “rural” and many are portrayed as transitional spaces of blurred boundaries that blend into each other. Some authors (e.g. Amin & Thrift, 2002; Halfacree, 1993; Hoggart, 1990) understand rural and urban spaces as social representations, which often feature rural areas as places that may offer a better quality of family life, regardless of any problems experienced in these territories. Dominance of agricultural production, conservative political ideologies, low wage economies, sparseness of population, spatial peripherality, social heterogeneity, status-driven education, close-knit social networks, stronger resistance to change, integration of personal/ family life with work environment, maintenance of “traditional” practices, as well as the presence of scenic and natural values and open spaces are some of the distinct characteristics of rural areas (as opposed to the urban context) (OECD, 1994; Shucksmith, Cameron & Merridew, 2006). The labour market in these areas is generally associated with lower activity rates; an older working population; higher incidence of part-time, seasonal and casual employment; higher levels of primary sector employment, combined with relatively low levels of activity in professional and technical services; and lack of basic services and infrastructures (Copus et al., 2006). Particularly in the tourism business field, a lack of skilled professionals has been identified in several cases. Also in the SERA Report, Portugal stands out as one of the Member States where demographic ageing is of alarming dimensions since the population of predominantly rural (PR) regions has a higher proportion of people over 65 and, simultaneously, the lowest ratio of children to pensioners4 and the highest dependency rate5. Thus, Portugal is seriously exposed to the phenomenon of desertification: comparative to predominantly urban (PU) or significantly rural (SR) regions, Portuguese PR areas present the lowest crude birth rate6 (9.2%) and the highest crude death rate7 (13.7%). In fact, the majority of the territory of mainland Portugal is classified as “growth region with natural decrease”, which corresponds to a region where the “population increase is dependent on inmigration and the natural population change is negative” (Copus et al., 2006, p. 33). On the other hand, tourism plays an important role in fighting the negative social and economic trends associated with the rural crisis (Ribeiro & Marques, 2002). Moreover, in recent decades, rural tourism has been regarded as an important strategy to “retain the population, create

180

Chapter Eight

jobs and, in final analysis, promote the socio-economic development of disadvantaged areas” (LEADER, 1995). However, social and political expectations concerning the potential of tourism in promoting the development of rural economies are most often too high (Ribeiro & Marques, 2002). Furthermore, issues related to the unsustainable development of tourism infrastructures and the reinforcement of a precarious employment situation also need to be carefully addressed in the context of rural tourism. This fragility observable in rural areas is especially problematic because the rural tourist experience needs “to be understood as the overall experience of a large number and diversity of resources, attractions, services, people and environments offered by a destination” (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012, p. 208). Human resources have an important role in shaping this overall tourism experience, for instance in the design of the servicescape (Knutson & Beck, 2004; Verhoef, Lemon, Parasuraman, Roggeveen, Tsiros & Schlesinger, 2009) and the determination of other more intangible service features (Knutson & Beck, 2004). Therefore, human resources can help build bridges to reduce the distance between the visitors and the destination context (Kastenholz et al., 2012). Walmsley (2004) summarised eight characteristics of the tourism labour market, based on previous research: low salaries, demand for low levels of skills, negative image, poor management, part-time, seasonality and lack of a clear career structure. The author thus described tourism as a “refuge sector”. Work in tourism is perceived as a low status/prestige activity, requiring few skills and providing, in most cases, few possibilities for vertical mobility within the company/organisation (Hemmati, 2000; Parrett, 2004; Purcell, 1997). It very frequently demands work at unsocial hours, such as during holidays, nights and weekends (O’Leary & Deegan, 2005; Parrett, 2004; Ramb, 2008). The tourism sector also provides many part-time jobs, which tend to be filled by women. Although part-time jobs have the advantage of facilitating the work-family balance, they also present a significant number of disadvantages, including lower salaries, lower opportunities for promotion and career development, and less protection in case of unemployment (Hemmati, 2000). Particularly in Portugal, the tourism industry is characterised by the predominance of female employment, low levels of education and short average tenure (Santos & Varejão, 2007). These findings are supported by the work of Costa, Carvalho and Breda (2011), which relied on data from the National Employment Survey. Concerning working hours, tourism employees, particularly men, work more unsocial hours, such as in shifts,

Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector

181

at night, and on Saturdays and Sundays. However, while most female parttime work is involuntary and reflects the lack of better employment opportunities, male part-time work is mostly due to studying or training. In addition, tourism workers have the highest amount of weekly working hours. Despite that, they are amongst the worst paid workers in the whole economy, particularly in the food and beverage subsector (Costa et al., 2012a). Costa et al. (2012a, 2012b) also analysed the employment situation of male and female Portuguese tourism graduates, observing that a relatively high percentage of tourism graduates are working outside the tourism field. This situation suggests that the labour market is failing to meet the expectations of the qualified workforce, either because it is saturated or because the skills developed by tourism graduates are not adequately recognised and valued by the market. Data from the Employment Survey of Statistics Portugal suggests that the proportion of tourism graduates in leadership positions, outside the field of tourism, is high when compared with workers employed in some of the main tourism subsectors (accommodation, food and beverage, and travel agencies and tour operators) regardless of their levels of education. In addition, salaries earned by tourism graduates are low, particularly if these are compared to those of the graduates in general and also reveal significant gender gaps, particularly if salaries in leadership positions are analysed.

Methodology The empirical study underlying the present research was based on a survey applied to Portuguese tourism graduates. The survey was carried out from December 2010 to March 2011 and the sample consisted of 1,419 graduates: 1,065 (75.1%) employed and 354 (24.9%) unemployed. The convenience sampling technique was used. Contacts were established with professors and researchers at all Portuguese institutions with higher education degrees in tourism, who were asked to disseminate the survey among former graduates. Although the generalisation of results to the population is not possible, the robustness of the sample (specifically concerning the high number of responses received) yielded consistent findings and identified important and statistically significant trends among Portuguese tourism graduates. The criterion applied for the classification of municipalities of residence as rural versus urban was based on the definition presented by the Statistics Portugal (Instituto Nacional de Estatística), which defines a predominantly rural area, henceforth referred to as rural area or rural

182

Chapter Eight

municipality, as a “statistical subsection […] [where] population density is less than or equal to 100 inhabitants per square km [and], excluding localities with 2,000 or more inhabitants” (Statistics Portugal, 2013). The instrument used for data collection was an online questionnaire. Since the main aim of the GENTOUR Project was to analyse gender inequalities in employment, it covered a broad range of topics, concerning not only employment but also education, perceptions of discrimination and work-family balance. The software IBM SPSS Statistics (v. 19) was used to perform the statistical analyses. Univariate and bivariate statistical techniques were applied, allowing both exploratory and inferential methods, adopting a 5% level of significance for the latter.

Differences in the Employment Situation of Tourism Graduates Living in Rural and Urban Municipalities Demographic Characterisation Although the majority (61.5%) of Portuguese municipalities (171 out of 278) are classified as rural municipalities8, only 21.7% (224) of the surveyed tourism graduates are living in these municipalities. Half of the graduates are 28 years old or younger, and their average age is 29 (M=28.87, SE=0.19, 95% CI [28.50; 29.24])9. Analysing the respondents’ age according to the type of municipality of residence, it can be confirmed that there are no statistically significant differences (t(1028)=-1.461, p=.144) among graduates living in rural (M=28.31, SE=0.38, 95% CI [27.56; 29.05]) and urban municipalities (M=29.01, SE=0.23, 95% [28.56; 29.47]). The gender distribution is very similar, which is supported by the inexistence of a statistically significant association between gender and the type of municipality (F2(1)=0.690, p=.229). However, the proportion of women surpasses the proportion of men only in rural municipalities (Fig. 8-1). As confirmed in previous publications (Costa et al., 2012a, 2012b), women prevail in the sample of the tourism graduates, reflecting the unequal gender distribution of the population of Portuguese tourism graduates, since only 39% of graduates in the year 2011/12 were male (GPEARI-MCTES, 2014).

Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector

183

Fig. 8-1. Distribution of graduates by type of municipality of residence and gender

100% 78.3% 80.0% 77.6%

80% 60% 40% 21.7% 20.0% 22.4%

20% 0% Rural Total

Men

Urban Women

Source: Based on the GENTOUR Survey

Educational Level Regarding the academic degree, most tourism graduates have a Licenciatura (5-year degree), regardless of the type of the municipality where they live. However, there are statistically significant differences concerning the academic degree and the type of municipality of residence (F2(4)=10.480, p=.033), since the proportion of post-graduates (Postgraduation, Master’s or Doctorate) living in urban municipalities (16.1%) is more than double the proportion of those living in rural municipalities (7.7%). Apart from tourism degrees, some respondents also possess nontourism degrees (11.2% in rural municipalities and 13.8% in urban municipalities). The more common fields of study among these graduates with additional education are Social Sciences, Commerce and Law. The majority of the respondents concluded their academic degree in a polytechnic institute, regardless of whether they lived in a rural (73.7%) or an urban municipality (76.6%). This result is consistent with the Portuguese situation since almost 60% of tourism higher education programmes are provided by polytechnic institutions while the remaining 40% is administered by universities (Costa, Caçador, Carvalho, Breda & Costa, 2013).

Chapter Eight

184

Employment Rate and Professional Experience Employment rates are also similar for those living in rural (73.2%) and urban municipalities (73.7%) (Fig. 8-2). Analysing the employment rate of female and male respondents, according to the type of municipality of residence, no statistically significant differences are found (F2(1)=1.894, p=.115 and F2(1)=0.405, p=.298, respectively). Nonetheless, the employment rate is considerably lower among male respondents living in rural municipalities (68.4%) than in urban municipalities (77.2%). Fig. 8-2. Employment rate by type of municipality of residence and gender

100% 80%

73.7%77.2%72.4%

74.9% 73.2% 68.4%

60% 40% 20% 0% Rural Total

Men

Urban Women

Source: Based on the GENTOUR Survey

On average, male graduates living in urban municipalities take less time to find their first job (3.09 months versus 3.46 months), have had more jobs (3.14 jobs versus 2.64 jobs), work more hours per week (43.34 hours versus 39.95 hours), have been working in the same organisation for longer (4.98 years versus 4.16 years) and performing the same task over a longer period (3.75 years versus 2.77 years) than their counterparts living in rural municipalities. Concerning female graduates, the differences between those living in urban and rural municipalities are not so accentuated. In fact, the average number of workplaces (2.80 jobs in urban areas versus 2.65 jobs in rural areas), as well as the period of time they have been, on average, working in the same organisation (3.18 years in urban areas versus 3.28 years in

Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector

185

rural areas) and performing the same task (2.93 years in urban areas versus 2.93 years in rural areas) are very similar. However, those living in urban municipalities take more time, on average, to find the first job (4.07 months in urban areas versus 3.72 months in rural areas) and work more hours per week (38.22 hours in urban areas versus 36.36 hours in rural areas). Even though the differences mentioned above are not statistically significant, they suggest that tourism graduates living in urban municipalities tend to have slightly more professional experience than those living in rural municipalities.

Sector of Activity The analysis of the sector of activity revealed an important result. This study reveals no statistical association between the type of municipality of residence and whether or not these graduates were working in the tourism sector (F2(1)=0.059, p=.451), which is corroborated by a similar proportion of graduates working outside the tourism sector among those living in rural (24.8%) and urban municipalities (25.8%). However, the subsector of activity of tourism graduates working in the tourism sector shows statistically significant differences by the type of municipality of residence (F2(9)=28.719, p=.001). The categories “travel agencies, tour guides and tour operators”, “cultural, recreational and leisure services”, and “consultancy firms” stand out as the areas of activity with significantly higher proportions of urban residents, when compared to graduates living in rural municipalities. The opposite is observed within the public sector (education and public organisations), where the proportion of graduates living in rural municipalities is more significant comparatively to the proportion of those living in urban municipalities. Slight differences were observed in accommodation and food and beverage; additionally, accommodation stands out as the subsector in which most graduates work, regardless of the type of municipality they live in (Fig. 8-3).

Chapter Eight

186

Fig. 8-3. Field of activity by type of municipality of residence Consulting firms

2.6% 0.0%

Cultural, recreation and leisure services

3.0% 0.7%

Transportation/Rent-a-car

3.4% 2.2%

Food and beverage

3.6% 4.4%

Travel agencies and tour operators

13.6% 5.1%

Public sector organizations

7.7% 15.3%

Education

11.2% 15.3%

Accommodation

22.5% 24.8%

Outside the tourism field

25.8% 24.8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100% Urban

Rural

Source: Based on the GENTOUR Survey

Analysing the sector of activity (working in or outside the tourism sector) by type of municipality and by gender, a curious result is highlighted: while among female graduates the percentage of women working outside the tourism sector is similar in rural (29.8%) and urban (23.2%) municipalities, among their male counterparts the proportion of men working outside the tourism sector in urban municipalities (32.4%) more than tripled the proportion observed in rural municipalities (9.1%). Additionally, no statistically significant differences among female graduates were found (F2(1)=1.895, p=.197), while among male graduates the association between the sector and the type of municipality of residence revealed statistically significant differences (F2(1)=7.239, p=.006).

Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector

187

Contractual Situation and Work Schedule The analysis of the contractual situation according to the type of municipality of residence (Fig. 8-4) shows that tourism graduates living in rural municipalities have lower professional stability, namely temporary work with or without formal contracts. These differences are statistically significant (F2(2)=8.367, p=.015) and confirm a general poorer contractual situation for the tourism graduates living in rural areas. Fig. 8-4. Contractual situation by type of municipality of residence

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

49.8% 47.4% 39.2%

43.1%46.4%42.2%

14.4% 9.5% 8.0% Permanent formal contract

Temporary formal contract

Total

Rural

Other Urban

Source: Based on the GENTOUR Survey

Analysing the contractual situation among male tourism graduates, marginally significant differences are found (F2(2)=5.809, p=.055). Specifically, the proportion of male tourism graduates with permanent work contracts is higher among those living in urban municipalities (59.5% in urban areas versus 40.5% in rural areas). The same situation is found among female tourism graduates, although the differences are not statistically significant (F2(2)=3.579, p=.167) (Fig. 8-5).

Chapter Eight

188

Fig. 8-5. Contractual situation by type of municipality of residence by gender

9.2% 14.7% 5.2% 13.5%

Other

45.0% 46.6% 35.3% 45.9%

Temporary formal contract

45.8% 38.8%

Permanent formal contract

59.5% 40.5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Women living in urban municipalities

Women living in rural municipalities

Men living in urban municipalities

Men living in rural municipalities

Source: Based on the GENTOUR Survey

Concerning work schedules, tourism graduates living in rural municipalities work more in part-time jobs (28.7%) than those living in urban municipalities (23.9%), but no statistically significant differences (F2(1)=0.209, p=.125) were found. Analysis by gender reveals different trends among male and female tourism graduates since the proportion of those working part-time is higher for male tourism graduates living in urban municipalities (7.4% versus 5.1%), while for women, the higher proportion of part-time female workers is observed among those living in rural municipalities (36.0% versus 30.8%). Also, no statistically significant differences were found among male (F2(1)=0.251, p=.466) or female graduates (F2(1)=1.202, p=.162). In order to know more about the differences in the work schedules of tourism graduates, the distribution of respondents working unsocial hours, such as shifts or weekends, was analysed. The analysis by type of municipality of residence showed that those living in rural municipalities work more in shifts (Fig. 8-6), namely in fixed shifts (13.4% versus 10.8%) or in rotating shifts (28.0% versus 20.0%); furthermore, these graduates also work more frequently on Saturdays (42.1% versus 33.3%)

Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector

189

and Sundays (37.8% versus 27.1%), while tourism graduates living in urban municipalities prevail in the categories related to more traditional work schedules, in particular, don’t work in shifts and never work at weekends. It should be taken into consideration that accommodation and food and beverage-related services are the most shift-oriented subsectors, and are also the most relevant activities for tourism employment in rural municipalities (Fig. 8-3). Fig. 8-6. Work in shifts by type of municipality of residence

100% 80% 60%

69.2% 66.9% 58.5%

40%

28.1% 21.8% 20.0%

20%

11.3%13.4%10.8%

0% Do not work in shifts

Work in fixed shifts Work in rotating shifts

Total

Rural

Urban

Source: Based on the GENTOUR Survey

The differences observed between rural and urban municipalities concerning work in shifts (F2(2)=6.835, p=.033), work on Saturdays (F2(2)=5.707, p=.058) or Sundays (F2(2)=7.252, p=.027) are, once again, statistically significant. Analysing by gender, the statistical association between the work schedule and the type of municipality of residence remains evident only for female tourism graduates (F2(2)=5.854, p=.054), confirming a higher tendency among women living in rural municipalities to work in fixed (14.4% versus 10.5%) or in rotating shifts (28.8% versus 21.0%) comparatively to women living in urban municipalities. Among male graduates no statistical association between the work schedule and the type of municipality of residence was found (F2(2)=1.333, p=.514).

Chapter Eight

190

A similar scenario is observed when the patterns of female and male tourism graduates are analysed concerning the frequency of work at weekends, according to the type of municipality where they live (Fig. 8-7). Female workers living in rural municipalities work more frequently on Saturdays (42.4% versus 30.5%) and on Sundays (36.8% versus 26.0%) than those women living in urban municipalities. These differences are statistically significant (F2(2)=9.224, p=.010 and F2(2)=5.666, p=.059, respectively). Fig. 8-7. Work on weekend days by type of municipality of residence 100% 90% 80% 70% 60%

48.7% 42.4% 45.8%46.2% 42.6% 41.0% 40.8% 39.8% 41.0% 36.8% 38.4% 39.8% 40% 32.8% 30.5% 30.7% 31.0% 28.2% 29.5% 26.0% 24.8% 30% 22.4% 17.6% 20% 10.3% 12.8% 10% 50%

0% Never work Work Work Never work Work Work on Saturdays occasionally frequently on on Sundays occasionally frequently on on Saturdays Saturdays on Sundays Sundays Men living in rural municipalities

Men living in urban municipalities

Women living in rural municipalities

Women living in urban municipalities

Source: Based on the GENTOUR Survey

Among male tourism graduates, the differences are marginally significant only when work on Sundays is analysed. Although differences concerning work on Saturdays are not statistically significant (F2(2)=1.346, p=.510), it is observed that the proportion of male tourism graduates living in urban municipalities who claim never to work on Saturdays (17.6%) is significantly higher than the proportion observed among those living in rural municipalities (10.3%). Although differences are only marginally significant (F2(2)=5.359, p=.069), it is observed that those living in rural municipalities claim to work more occasionally (46.2% versus 39.8%) or more frequently (41.0% versus 29.5%) on Sunday, with the proportion of male respondents claiming never to work

Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector

191

on Sundays (12.8%), being less than half of the proportion observed among those living in urban municipalities (30.7%).

Entrepreneurship and Leadership Positions Entrepreneurial activity was measured by asking whether tourism graduates have created their own employment or business. The analysis of entrepreneurship according to the type of municipality of residence revealed that, although there are no statistically significant differences (F2(1)=1.028, p=.187), entrepreneurial activity is more evident among tourism graduates living in urban municipalities (13.6% versus 10.8%). By gender, the data show that there is no statistical association between entrepreneurship and the type of municipality, neither among male graduates (F2(1)=0.051, p=.506) nor female graduates (F2(1)=0.750, p=.241). Those living in urban municipalities are more represented in supervisory positions (36.1% versus 30.5%) and leadership positions (19.3% versus 11.0%) (Fig. 8-8). However, only the differences concerning leadership positions of tourism graduates are statistically significant (F2(2)=6.205, p=.007). Fig. 8-8. Entrepreneurship and leadership positions by type of municipality of residence

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

36.1% 34.9% 30.5% 19.3% 17.5% 11.0%

13.6% 13.0%10.8%

Create their own employment/business Total

In supervision positions Rural

Source: Based on the GENTOUR Survey

In leadership position Urban

G

192

Chapter Eight

Analysing the data by gender, no significant differences are found concerning supervisory positions among those living in rural versus urban municipalities. On the other hand, it is observed that the type of municipality of residence affects, more intensively, the leadership activity of male tourism graduates. In fact, the differences among men turn out to be statistically significant (F2(1)=3.478, p=.043), which is not surprising since the proportion of men in leadership positions among those living in urban municipalities (30.1%) is almost double that of those living in rural municipalities (15.4%). Among women, differences are only marginally significant (F2(1)=2.213, p=.087) and are also more mitigated: while the proportion of women in leadership positions is 14.8% among those living in urban municipalities, among those living in rural areas it is only 9.6%.

Salary Tourism graduates living in rural municipalities prevail in the lowest salary categories while those living in urban municipalities prevail in the highest salary categories (Fig. 8-9). The analysis of the average salaries of tourism graduates living in rural municipalities (€817.66) and of those living in urban municipalities (€950.51) revealed statistically significant differences (t(317.238)=-3.528, p65 years old). 5. The dependency rate is defined as the total population divided by population aged 15-64 years old. 6. The crude birth rate is defined as the number of births per thousand total population. 7. The crude death rate is defined as the number of deaths per thousand total population. 8. According to the classification of Statistics Portugal. 9. M=Mean, SE= Standard Error, CI= Confidence Interval.

References Amin, A., & Thrift, N. (2002). Cities: Re-imagining the urban. Cambridge: Polity Press. Copus, A., Hall, C., Barnes, A., Dalton, G., Cook, P., Weingarten, P., & Johansson, M. (2006). Study on Employment in Rural Areas (SERA). s.l.: Directorate General for Agriculture of the European Commission. Costa, C., Caçador, S., Carvalho, I., Breda, Z., & Costa, R. (2013). The influence of gender and education-related variables on career development: The case of Portuguese and Brazilian tourism graduates. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 13(2), 148-169. Costa, C., Carvalho, I., & Breda, Z. (2011). Gender inequalities in tourism employment. The Portuguese case. Revista Turismo & Desenvolvimento, 15, 37-52. Costa, C., Carvalho, I., Caçador, S., & Breda, Z. (2012a). Future higher education in tourism studies and the labor market: Gender perspectives on expectations and experiences. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 12(1), 70-90. Costa, C., Carvalho, I., Caçador, S., & Breda, Z. (2012b). Gender and entrepreneurship in tourism: An analysis of tourism graduates’ entrepreneurial profile. Revista Turismo & Desenvolvimento, 17/18, 623-635. Cunha, C., Kastenholz, E., & Carneiro, M. J. (2014). Entrepreneurs in rural tourism: Lifestyle versus business orientation. Proceedings of ICIEMC 2014—International Conference on Innovation, Entrepreneurship in Marketing and Consumer Behaviour, 2-3 May 2014, IPAM Aveiro. GPEARI-MCTES. (2014). Estatísticas 2011/2012: Principais resultados do inquérito RAIDES 12—Diplomados. Retrieved from http://www.dgeec.mec.pt/np4/EstatDiplomados/

198

Chapter Eight

Halfacree, K. (1993). Locality and social representation: Space, discourse and alternative definitions of the rural. Journal of Rural Studies, 9(1), 23-37. Hemmati, M. (2000). Women’s employment and participation in tourism. Sustainable Travel & Tourism, 5(1), 17-20. Hoggart, K. (1990). Let’s do away with rural. Journal of Rural Studies, 6(3), 245-257. Kastenholz, K., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C. P., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience: The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Knutson, B. J., & Beck, J. (2004). Identifying the dimensions of the experience construct: Development of the model. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 4(3), 23-35. LEADER. (1995). Rural tourism and local development: Harmful effects of too much tourism. Marketing quality rural tourism. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/rur/leader2/ruralen/biblio/touris/art03.htm O’Leary, S., & Deegan, J. (2005). Career progression of Irish tourism and hospitality management graduates. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 17(5), 421-432. OECD. (1994). Tourism strategies and rural development. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Parrett, L. (2004). Women in tourism employment: A guided tour of the Greenwich experience—Research report. London: London Thames Gateway Forum Equality, Access & Participation. Purcell, K. (1997). Women’s employment in UK tourism: Gender roles and labour markets. In M. T. Sinclair (Ed.), Gender, work and tourism (pp. 33-54). London: Routledge. Ramb, F. (2008). Employment gender gap in the EU is narrowing: Labour market trends 2000-2007. Luxembourg: Eurostat. Ribeiro, M., & Marques, C. (2002). Rural tourism and the development of less favoured areas: Between rhetoric and practice. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(3), 211-220. Santos, L. D., & Varejão, J. (2007). Employment, pay and discrimination in the tourism industry. Tourism Economics, 13(2), 225-240. Sharpley, T., & Vass, A. (2006). Tourism, farming and diversification: An attitudinal study. Tourism Management, 27(5), 1040-1052. Shucksmith, M., Cameron, S., & Merridew, T. (2006). First European Quality of Life Survey: Urban–rural differences. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.

Human Capital and Gender Gaps in the Tourism Sector

199

Statistics Portugal. (2013). Statistics divisions. Retrieved from http://www.ine.pt/xportal/ine/portal/portlets/html/conteudos/listaConte ntPage.jsp?BOUI=6251013&xlang=PT Verhoef, P. C., Lemon, K. N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M., & Schlesinger, L. A. (2009). Customer experience creation: Determinants, dynamics and management strategies. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 31-41. Walmsley, A. (2004). Assessing staff turnover: A view from the English Riviera. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6, 275-287. Weaver, D. B., & Lawton, L. J. (2001). Resident perceptions in the urban– rural fringe. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(2), 439-458. WTTC (2013). Travel and Tourism Economic Impact 2013—Portugal. s.l.: World Travel & Tourism Council.

CHAPTER NINE SOCIAL CAPITAL AND LEADERSHIP IN RURAL TOURISM DEVELOPMENT NANCY GARD MCGEHEE, WHITNEY KNOLLENBERG AND AMY KOMOROWSKI

Introduction Leadership strategies are diverse and abundant. In the unique environment of rural tourism, leadership has often been credited for driving sustainable development initiatives, but it has rarely been empirically examined. This chapter explores the current literature in leadership, both in general and specific to rural tourism, then uses the case study method to showcase three community-level rural tourism leaders: in North Carolina, USA, Virginia, USA, and Haiti. The cases are approached using the social capital framework, a unique way to analyse the sources of success of these three individuals and their communities. Social capital, defined as the networks used by community members to gain access to power and decision-making opportunities (Dasgupta & Serageldin, 2000, based on Putnam, 1993), is often seen as an important factor influencing other forms of capital (Flora, 2004; Putnam, 1993), and plays a major role in leadership development (Day, 2001). While this approach has been previously utilised at the community level, the authors of this study set out to explore whether individuals may embody elements of bridging and bonding social capital regardless of the type of leadership traits and approaches they possess. In their efforts to use tourism as a means of economic development each leader used their social capital to contend with multiple levels of governance systems and stakeholder interests. Three examples of leadership approaches are present: servant, shared/community-based, and authentic.

Chapter Nine

202

Leadership Theories in Psychology, Community Development, and Business The literature reveals that the concept of leadership has evolved from a top-down hierarchal and directive approach to a more dynamic, sitespecific form (Rodinelli & Heffron, 2009; Yukl, 1999). Initially, the literature focused on Trait and Transactional Leadership theories (Bass, 1991; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991; Stogdill, 1948; Zaccaro, Kemp & Bader, 2004) from which Transformational Leadership evolved and focused on the process of empowering leadership (Bass, 1991). Transformational Leadership influenced the development of the process-based leadership approaches such as Shared/Community-Based, Authentic, and Servant Leadership (Avolio, Walumbwa & Weber, 2009; Bass, 1991; Bass & Avolio, 1993; Kirk & Shutte, 2004; Stone, Russell & Patterson, 2003) (Fig. 9-1). Fig. 9-1. A Leadership Continuum

Trait Theories

Transactional Leadership

Transformational Leadership

Shared Leadership/ Community-Based Leadership

Servant Leadership

Authentic Leadership

Functional Leadership Initially, researchers sought to associate an individual’s traits to leadership success such as communication and capacity (Stogdill, 1948), ambition, tenacity, honesty, and emotional stability (Kirkpatrick & Locke,

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

203

1991). However, some authors questioned the value of this approach and argued that traits are often circumstance-specific and change over time (Kenny & Zaccaro, 1983; Zaccaro, 2007). This critique seems especially appropriate in the context of community development leaders who operate within the unique milieu of their surroundings. Transactional Leadership marks a movement away from a trait-based approach to leadership and toward the inclusion of the role of followers. Burns (1978) proposed that Transactional Leadership was built upon the exchange of something valuable between a leader and her/his followers, such as a promotion, in exchange for increased productivity. While this perspective enjoyed some success, Bass (1991) critiqued this reward-based system of Transactional Leadership, arguing that it results in mediocre performance and reduced productivity, and instead promoted the idea of Transformational Leadership, introducing an emotional engagement process between leaders and followers which fosters motivation and morality (Bass, 1991; Northouse, 2012). However, it was not long before that Bass and Steidlmeier (1999) expressed concern that this approach could be manipulative as leaders may time the release of or withhold information in order to advance their agenda. Based on these critiques, Shared/Community-Based, Servant, and Authentic Leadership were developed. Shared or Community-Based Leadership focuses on the collective application of leadership as opposed to limiting it to one individual (Avolio et al., 2009). Community-Based Leaders empower individuals to develop mutual understanding through discussion and problem solving (Avolio et al., 2009; Bass, 1985; Heifetz, 1994; Kirk & Shutte, 2004). Pearce and Conger (2003) addressed some shortcomings of this approach, namely that cultural modifiers (i.e. values and community life cycle) influence the perception and acceptance of Community-Based Leadership. As no two communities are identical, these cultural modifiers are important to acknowledge in any leadership study. Servant Leadership also addressed empowerment and development of trust but added humility and stewardship as leadership tools (Stone et al., 2003; van Dierendonck, 2011). Servant Leadership emphasised leaders’ roles in developing individual members of a group or community, rather than focusing on the collective (Stone et al., 2003). However, Servant Leadership has been critiqued for lack of research supporting its effectiveness (Stone et al., 2003). Authentic Leadership integrated group engagement, empowerment, and trust found in Shared and Servant perspectives of leadership and included a leader’s ethical and moral authenticity (Avolio et al., 2009;

204

Chapter Nine

Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Heifetz, 1994). “Authentic leaders understand their own values and behave toward others based on their values” (Northouse, 2012, p. 259). Critiques of Authentic Leadership have been minimal and mainly focus on the challenges associated with distinguishing a leader’s moral and ethical obligations (Northouse, 2012). As the discussion indicates, leadership research is vast and includes a number of theoretical approaches that intertwine and build off one another. Presently, it is difficult to determine which approach is most effective, particularly in the context of rural tourism development. What is evident is that further research is needed.

Leadership Research in Tourism Compared to other fields and disciplines, relatively little work has been done in the area of tourism leadership. The preponderance of research in this area comes from the hospitality perspective, with the notable exception of Long and Nuckolls’ (1994) acknowledgement of the vital role of leadership in rural tourism development. Furthermore, there is weak continuity across the tourism and hospitality literature, suggesting that the findings may be highly contextual and that challenges within the industry require an ever-evolving set of skills (Ladkin & Weber, 2011). As with the mainstream leadership research, studies in hospitality and tourism have evolved from a Trait-Based to Approach-Based focus. Hospitality studies have examined the influence of Transformational Leadership on employee satisfaction (Rothfelder, Ottenbacher & Harrington, 2013), performance (Brown & Arendt, 2011), and perceived stress (Gill, Flaschner & Shachar, 2006), as well as the influence of Transformational Leadership across cultures (Shafer, Vieregge & Youngsoo, 2005). Collectively, these studies have indicated that the application of Transformational Leadership improves the hospitality workplace environment. Recent studies have also explored the permutations of Transformational Leadership in the context of hospitality and tourism. Brownell (2010) proposed that Servant Leadership may serve as a valuable approach in hospitality settings. Valente, Dredge, and Lohmann (2014) contended that Distributed Leadership, a form of Community-Based Leadership, provided the opportunity for equitable power and decision-making among many participants in a tourism-related setting. Benson and Blackman (2011) utilised a case study of volunteer tourism in Indonesia to illustrate how Distributed Leadership can often benefit small and widely dispersed businesses within a tourism destination. This shift in perspective, moving away from centralised leadership and towards collective leadership, still

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

205

requires additional study in tourism-related settings to determine its potential value. The tourism leadership literature has continued to grow and offers evidence of an intriguing connection between leadership and tourism development (Aref, 2010; Aref, Redzuan & Emby, 2009; Beritelli & Bieger, 2014; Blichfeldt, Hird & Kvistgaard, 2014; Slocum & Everitt, 2014; Zehrer, Raich, Siller & Tschiderer, 2014), which invites greater exploration of the role of community leaders in tourism development. Furthermore, much of the present understanding of tourism leadership focuses on its impact on employees (Brown & Arendt, 2011; Gill et al., 2006; Rothfelder et al., 2013), providing a limited examination of the individuals and organizations a tourism leader may effect. Rural tourism development can involve a variety of public-private partnerships and may have an expansive vertical reach that begins on the ground with local businesses and groups but often extends to the national or even international level. Thus, a more inclusive leadership framework is needed. These reasons alone provide a strong argument for the exploration of additional approaches to the study of leadership in tourism development.

A Modest Proposal: Bridging and Bonding Social Capital as a Framework for Leadership in Rural Tourism Many studies have found leadership traits or approaches that were valuable in a specific context (Ladkin & Weber, 2011; Long & Nuckolls, 1994). Others have noted leaders’ roles in overcoming barriers in order to obtain resources within and outside the community (Aref, 2010). Each community, business, or organization studied has unique components which require specific types of leadership. Using the notion of bridging and bonding social capital, this chapter supports the argument that leadership is context-dependent and subsequently examines the channels through which successful leaders access and accrue resources rather than attempting to isolate a universal leadership trait or approach for rural tourism development. While we often think of money or hard goods as capital, it can also mean anything of value to the community which can be invested in and saved in order to provide returns (or conversely shrink and eventually have no worth). Sustainable communities must protect the principal and live off the interest of all forms of community capital, including cultural, built, human, political, natural, financial, and social capital (Flora, 2004). Social capital is of particular interest for this study. The Networks View, which

206

Chapter Nine

delineates bridging and bonding social capital, provides a useful way to typologise social capital (Woolcock & Narayan, 2000). The internal relationships, networks, and trust that occur “horizontally” (Putnam, 1993) within a community comprise bonding social capital. For example, civic organizations, religious groups, or destination marketing cooperatives within the community all exemplify and strengthen bonding social capital. Bridging social capital occurs when bonded groups within a community reach out (often “vertically”) to groups and institutions outside the community to seek information, resources, or support. In rural tourism development, this may occur through obtaining consultancies, engaging private-sector developers, or seeking federal government assistance. Both forms of social capital are important for community development. Bonding social capital provides useful leverage for underserved communities to make ends meet (get by); bridging social capital is necessary to go beyond a subsistence economy (get ahead) and engender community sustainability (Barr, 1998; Briggs, 1998). Both forms have been found to facilitate the creation of other forms of capital (Zahra & McGehee, 2013). For example, individuals may travel outside the community to obtain higher education, thereby using bridging social capital to improve and cultivate human capital (education). Given these findings and the need for research in tourism leadership development to be context specific, questions then arise: as social capital must be cultivated through individuals who make up community organizations, can an individual embody elements of bridging and bonding social capital? Can this occur regardless of the type of leadership traits and approaches they take? Three cases will be used to explore and illustrate these ideas.

Method: Case Study Analysis The cases were purposively selected through the following criteria: a rural locale where tourism occurs; the author’s firsthand knowledge and participant observation through other tourism-related research in the community which provided access and an environment where leaderinformants would feel comfortable; and presence of an identified community leader who is not specifically involved in tourism but tangentially impacts it. It must be stressed that the use of these three leaders and their respective communities is illustrative, serving as examples that provide context for the above questions. Information for each of the cases was collected via data and method triangulation, including participant observation, website analysis, and

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

207

leader interviews (DeCrop, 2004). In general, the primary author worked directly with each of the selected leaders. Background information for each leader-informant was gathered online before the telephone (1) or inperson (2) interviews. Leader-informants were asked the same questions from a loosely structured interview script; all gave permission to use their names. The interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed. Notes were also taken during each interview that included additional thoughts and reactions to the leader-informants’ responses. An audit trail was created and leader-informants were given the opportunity to provide member checks of the study’s findings.

The Cases The following is an overview of three leaders in rural tourism development selected for this study: Lydeana Martin, Community and Economic Development Director, Floyd County, VA; Becky Anderson, Founder, HandMade in America, Asheville, North Carolina; and Edsel Redden, Director, F.I.S.H. Ministries, Gressier, Haiti.

Case 1: Lydeana Martin Floyd County is located in Southwest Virginia and has a population of 15,390. Historically, this rural county has relied on agriculture and forestry for its economic vitality with minimal business development. The Blue Ridge Parkway borders the county, providing a conduit for travellers and serving as a natural resource based attraction. Tourists visit the community to experience its unique culture, which combines traditional Appalachian culture with alternative lifestyles that focus on communal living, organic and forms of agriculture, and the creation of handicrafts and fine art. One leader who plays a role in tourism’s success in Floyd County is Lydeana Martin. As Floyd County’s Community and Economic Development Director she “focuses on planning and development to facilitate orderly, responsible growth. This office also assists companies who wish to create or expand businesses and jobs in Floyd County” (Floyd County, 2014). While Martin does not exclusively work on tourism development, she does incorporate it into the overall economic mix. Martin’s efforts have contributed to successful tourism development in Floyd County, where overnight travel has increased and tourism expenditures have risen 18.21% between 2009 and 2012 (Virginia Tourism Corporation, n.d.). Martin helps shape this successful tourism development through her efforts to

208

Chapter Nine

convert social capital into financial capital in a way that reflects the community’s values. Martin possesses a blend of home-grown talent and local roots with outside education, contacts, and resource access; in other words, a unique combination of bridging and bonding social capital. Floyd County has been home to her family for over 100 years and provides what she describes as “a work culture, a faith culture”. Martin is the first in her family to graduate high school and attend college. Her roots in the community can be described as deep and wide. She is a living illustration of the importance of being exposed to many different types of people at an early age. She explained it in this way: “… my dad was a small business person, and my mom was extremely active in the church… [my dad] also took me to music festivals. We also played cards with the neighbours in winters when it snowed… I think that the comfort zones that we find when we were young tend to play out later... I think it’s an advantage for people who are trying to understand other people from as many different experiences as possible.”

Martin understood early on that these connections were a gift that would allow her to help the community. She explains that in high school “My prayer was that I could find a way to use education and information to make people’s lives better in this region.” Martin realised that to do so she needed resources that could not be found within the community. Initially, those resources came through higher education. She earned a BA in History, an MBA, and a Master’s in Urban and Regional Planning in addition to credentials from the American Institute of Certified Planners. Early in her career, she worked for a newspaper business outside of Floyd County because she recognised the value of understanding for-profit businesses. Grant writing is also a skill that she developed as a way to glean resources. Martin’s education has helped her to amass over $2.5 million in grant funding from outside the community via the bridging social capital she has cultivated through the years. The evidence indicates that Martin utilises a Shared/Community-Based Leadership approach. She finds common ground within her community and humbly deflects attention away from herself and toward the community’s actions. Further, Martin initially resisted calling herself a leader, preferring instead the label of facilitator: “I just think of myself as a person who likes to be in meetings, believe it or not. Like to have people talking, like to learn, and particularly like to find commonalities between people and get them to find them for themselves.”

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

209

Martin is adept at creating bonding social capital by cultivating trust and cooperation amongst local government officials, private investors and business owners, secondary schools, and community colleges within the community. When pressed, she often deflects any credit for her role in the success of the community and instead points to members of the community, arguing that there is a “quilt of effects” in Floyd County that comes from pulling people together. She likes to “look where there is energy, movement, and balance, putting energy where things are already happening with some projects that are not getting attention but are worthy… [for example, there is currently] momentum around local foods.” Martin discusses programs in Floyd County called “Creating Innovators”, and another called “Invent to Learn”. “I think those are good fits for Floyd and potentially a way to bring together the alternative community with the traditional”. Simply but profoundly put, Martin states: “We all like to make stuff. We like to grow stuff and we like to have real stuff”. She sees this as an important value around which she can create community consensus. Martin excels as a Shared/Community-Based Leader as she purposefully distributes influence among stakeholders within and outside the community. Within the community, she makes sure to incorporate the opinion leaders, as noted here: “I know the phrase ‘thought leaders’ probably gets a little overused. But, I do think there’s something to that of finding people in the community. They may not be business owners; they may not be elected officials, and they may not even be on appointed boards. They just know a lot of people. And they’re just kind of respected.”

Related to that, Martin’s efforts to create trust and cooperation results in stakeholders recognizing the value of reciprocity within community networks. She summarises: “I think more people are really comfortable with what Floyd is and who we are. That we are perfectly happy that we don’t have a four-lane road. We’re happy that we don’t have rail, and those kinds of typical economic development things. Because part of what we’re trying to do is maintain the character that we’ve enjoyed, but have targeted economic development. And to fit in this context… You want visitors who will respect and really know what they’re coming to see and not expecting something else, but that’s the kind of entrepreneurs or small business owners that you want as well”.

210

Chapter Nine

This exemplifies Martin’s approach to tourism development in Floyd County, which benefits from active stakeholder involvement. She attributes local commitment to the early successes of development efforts, which are underpinned by a common stakeholder vision. Martin notes, “Success has kept the people at the table that I knew passionately loved this county, had different skill sets and different perspectives and keeping them together long enough for them to come to appreciate each other a little bit.”

Martin illustrates that internal early success, like Floyd’s participation in the development of The Crooked Road Music Trail, helps cultivate bridging social capital. “When you have early success like The Crooked Road had, getting a lot of media attention, I think that gets everybody excited and adds to the energy... I think that helps everybody.”

Martin embodies Shared/Community-Based Leadership. She sees herself as a facilitator who integrates input from a variety of stakeholders, within and outside the community, to support successful sustainable development. Her bonding social capital, developed through her childhood experiences and upbringing, fosters these stakeholder connections. Furthermore, her development efforts are fuelled by the bridging social capital she cultivates through her education, career trajectory, and efforts to obtain outside financial resources. Together, this combination helps to encourage trust, reciprocity, and cooperation in the community, leading to tourism development success in Floyd County.

Case 2: Becky Anderson Western North Carolina consists of 25 counties located west of Interstate 77 and north of Charlotte, North Carolina, which have been designated as the Blue Ridge National Heritage Area (AdvantageWest, n.d.). In this area, known for its traditional and bluegrass music, artistic communities, and craftsmanship (Asheville CVB, n.d.; HandMade in America, n.d.), tourism development efforts come from governmentsupported operations and non-governmental organizations like HandMade in America, founded by Becky Anderson in 1991. The goal of HandMade is to “grow handmade economies through craft, cultural heritage and community assets” (HandMade in America, n.d.). Utilizing a five-step process, HandMade’s Small Town Program (STP) brings together a

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

211

variety of stakeholders to work toward a common goal of community revitalization (McGehee, Kline & Knollenberg, 2014). Due to HandMade’s emphasis on craft and cultural heritage, revitalization efforts focus on promoting these assets through events and/or trails that create regional tourism attraction networks. Prior to her work with HandMade, Anderson amassed economic development experience and bridging social capital in a myriad of ways. She gained exposure to numerous external resources and networks while working on the municipality of Asheville’s downtown revitalization efforts in the 1970s and later as one of the state’s first female industrial recruiters with the Asheville Chamber of Commerce. While Anderson enjoyed great success working in Asheville, she maintained a passion for economic development in rural communities like the small mountain town where she was raised. In the early 1990s, Anderson was presented with the opportunity to work in such rural communities when a colleague from the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) approached her with an idea to utilise Western North Carolina’s unique craft and heritage as a means of economic development. Simultaneously, her work with the Chamber of Commerce connected her with philanthropists like Jack Cecil, a member of the Vanderbilt family, who was willing to support fully Anderson’s efforts to diversify the area’s economy through means other than manufacturing; and granting agencies such as the Pew Charitable Trust, which ultimately was the source of start-up funding for HandMade in America. While her work experience helped to develop her bridging social capital, Anderson credits her parents, who were educators, small business owners, and community leaders, with teaching her the value of giving back to the community (and hence cultivating bonding social capital). She incorporates their values into her own leadership perspective: “... I saw that at home, and it’s just this whole idea that you give back. You give back. You give back.” In terms of her leadership approach, this commitment suggests that Anderson embodies the definition of a Servant Leader. Anderson often focuses on empowering knowledgeable individuals within a community to help create the trust, reciprocity, and cooperation components of bonding social capital that support tourism development. She describes this practice here: “Often it would be someone… At every fundraiser, they would be back in the kitchen serving plates. They knew who needed what… I always looked for retired teachers. They know everyone in the community and they want to put together a community re-vitalization team… They know what the

212

Chapter Nine needs are and so I always look for somebody like that. With a long connectivity of the community.”

To establish bonding social capital within the tourism development process, Anderson describes her Servant Leadership traits of empowering individuals and humility in this way: “I always started out saying, ‘I know nothing about this, I need you to help me.’ People like that. They will respond… You make them feel needed, and then they want to be a part of it”. Through HandMade, Anderson fostered craft and heritage-based community development in fourteen rural communities, often through tourism-centric programs. She recognises that one of the biggest challenges of tourism development is the potential for conflict between the “not-from-heres,” or recent transplants to the community, with long-term local residents, or “from heres”. “Whenever we’re doing tourism, [it’s] a real risk when people don’t want anything to do with those ‘weird people that talk funny’. They don’t want them in their diner in the mornings and they don’t need them. Other people who earn their living from it, they want to welcome them. Tourism is a big divider in many ways”.

Anderson works hard to find common ground between newcomers and long-time residents through the STP process, solidifying bonding social capital within the community. For example, to initiate tourism development efforts in these communities, Anderson asks all community members questions such as “What would you share with a visitor in this community?” and “What would you like a visitor to know about your community?” She describes how this approach fosters pride, trust, and cooperation between both camps of community members and builds a system of support for tourism. She refers to this approach as CommunityBased tourism, “The community truly defined where a visitor was welcome or not welcome and what the community was willing to do, to promote, develop, and enhance tourism...”

HandMade’s process incorporates craft, heritage, and tourism; it diversifies the economy of several rural communities and contributes to tourism growth in Western North Carolina, which helps both segments of stakeholders to appreciate each other. These examples of Anderson’s ability to cultivate both bridging and bonding social capital contribute to

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

213

tourism development successes in Western North Carolina’s rural communities. Since 1991, tourism expenditures have increased by almost $2 million and tourism employment has increased by 7,000 jobs (North Carolina Department of Commerce, n.d.). After receiving the funding to create HandMade, Anderson continued to gain outside support (and bridging social capital) for the program by inviting North Carolina’s governor to serve on HandMade’s board and developing partnerships with Federal organizations like the Appalachian Regional Commission. In regards to these regional relationships Anderson stated: “That was the one good example I remembered when we bridged all kinds of things to a larger scale, to at least 13 Appalachian states. Those relationships outside the community are extraordinarily valuable also.”

These outside relations help spread the word of HandMade’s success. Anderson continued to build bridging social capital by presenting HandMade’s work to both the State Legislature and U.S. Congress. As a Servant Leader, Anderson feels that cultivating bridging social capital in this manner is valuable for the communities she serves as it creates a sense of pride among stakeholders, knowing that others recognise the hard work they put into community development. Anderson demonstrates characteristics of a Servant Leader by emphasizing the importance of an individual’s involvement in development activities and approaches her leadership role with humility and a desire to give back. She also provides an example of how a Servant Leader may cultivate bridging and bonding social capital to support community development activities by engaging community members to lead development efforts and utilises her experience and connections at the State and Federal level to cultivate resources which support the success of HandMade.

Case 3: Edsel Redden Gressier, Haiti, is a rural, primarily agrarian and fishing community about an hour outside of Port-Au-Prince and near the epicentre of the 2010 earthquake. Edsel Redden is involved with three non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in this community: FISH Ministries (FISH), KORE, and Christianville Mission and Foundation (CF). FISH is a faith-based organization, which provides protein to underserved Haitian children through farming fish, chickens and goats. FISH works with KORE, which concentrates on sustainable solutions using a “business as ministry”

214

Chapter Nine

approach. Both organizations work with CF, which operates an orphanage and a pre-k-grade 12 school where children receive daily meals that supply animal protein essential for early brain development. CF also houses medical, dental, and eye clinics and an Elderly Nutrition Program that provides supplementary food for those in financial need. Redden oversees the activities of FISH, KORE, and CF. Born and raised near the coalfields of West Virginia, Redden identifies strongly with his Appalachian upbringing, particularly in terms of work ethic and religious beliefs. He holds degrees in agriculture education and vocational education and has been involved with agriculture in Haiti since 1989. Redden is currently an Associate in Environmental and Global Health for the Cooperative Extension Service, College of Public Health and Health Professions (PHHP), University of Florida. His primary duties include administrative oversight of the PHHP’s teaching, research, and service activities in Haiti. While much of Redden’s responsibilities involve the agriculturally-related elements of FISH, KORE, and CF, he has come to find himself managing the organic emergence of a mission-based volunteer tourism program, which serves these NGOs. Thus, in many ways, Redden is unique to this discussion of tourism development leadership as he does not see it as the emphasis of his work. Today, CF operates a school, an orphanage, a medical centre, a vocational centre that includes a restaurant, and various types of guest lodging for up to 82 visitors including two guest houses, a bunk house, and men’s and women’s dormitories. The compound is modern, with its own safe water source, a new air-conditioned restaurant that seats 100, laundry facilities, malaria and tuberculosis research laboratories, office space, several residences for long term volunteers, a chapel, and its own generator for electricity. In addition to these facilities, the compound also houses the clinics and school listed above, chicken coops for the poultry operation, barns and paddocks for goats, aquaculture and hatcheries, and high tunnel greenhouses, providing numerous volunteer opportunities for guests. The accommodations and restaurant cater to short-term, mission-based volunteer tourists who engage with FISH, KORE, and other service-based activities in the region. Participants also engage in a variety of crosscultural experiences. The primary focus of a CF visit is for participants to enrich their spiritual lives. Since the 2010 earthquake, the number of guests has increased exponentially, with thousands of volunteer tourists visiting the CF compound each year. Redden welcomes this trend, but is emphatic that it will only continue if it helps to achieve the goals of the organizations: “I’m not interested in running a hotel where people come

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

215

here and do whatever they want. They have to abide by our rules, respect what we do, and respect the people who live and work here”. Redden’s bridging and bonding social capital differs from the other cases. For example, he is not a native to the community but has worked in Haiti for nearly three decades, earning trust and respect within the communities where he is considered to be an integral member. He does share a common thread with the other leaders in that his personality “works” for the situation. Redden is straightforward and takes pride in treating everyone the same, regardless of what standing they have within the community. His consistent behaviour, grounded in his goals to provide Haitian children with crucial protein and offering spiritual sustenance to the CF community, illustrates Redden’s application of an Authentic Leadership approach. Redden’s bonding social capital stems from his understanding of Haitian culture and deep religious faith, which resonates within the communities where he works. Furthermore, he has developed the ability to navigate the political waters and cultivate social networks in this small but complicated country. During several of our discussions, Redden emphasised that he wants to see FISH, KORE, and CF become completely Haitian operated as he states “it’s not about me running my own show here. Soon I’ll be getting out of the way so that the Haitians who work here can take over. And they’ll do a much better job than me”. He is very close to accomplishing that goal and is actively mentoring his own replacement. Finally, he focuses on doing one thing very well: getting protein to Haitian children. As a result of these bonding social capital efforts, he has been accepted in the Haitian community as “one of their own”. Redden brings a great deal of bridging social capital to his community. His position as faculty at the University of Florida provides many assets and resources. He also brings the skills, knowledge, and connections from decades of work in community-based agriculture in tropical settings. Creating an exemplary program has captured the attention and cooperation of both mission-oriented volunteer tourists who come with skills and resources of their own, as well as former U.S. Presidents and actors like Sean Penn who are involved in funding projects in Haiti. Redden is always open to potential synergies that can maximise existing resources in order to reach his goals. Accordingly, Redden recognises the value of missionbased volunteer tourists as a means to that end, as their service and longterm connections with CF often manifest into monetary support. He is also networked with other faith-based organizations that have the capacity and resources to support his projects. Redden’s efforts in Haiti have resulted in a number of high-profile awards, including the Rotary International

216

Chapter Nine

Service Above Self, an international award that includes 150 recipients worldwide. These recognitions serve to strengthen his position as an Authentic Leader. It is evident that Redden relies upon his personal values, which are anchored by a strong sense of purpose and ethics tied to his religious faith, in his reactions and responses to challenges regardless of their origin or circumstances. He is very public about the role of his faith in his decisionmaking and leadership, and uses it as a central tenet of any decision he makes. This may result in a sense of security for those involved with Redden’s efforts, whether they are volunteer tourists or international figureheads. This consistent use of personal values is a defining characteristic of Authentic Leadership, a leadership approach that may be particularly effective in Haiti, which typifies an unbalanced system (Kirk & Shutte, 2004). Authentic Leaders also focus on empowerment as Redden has with his efforts to see KORE, FISH, and CF run by Haitians. Furthermore, by actively empowering Haitian citizens, Redden demonstrates the value of creating bonding social capital. This provides a third example of a leadership approach that utilises bridging and bonding social capital.

Conclusion This chapter tells the stories of three leaders from rural communities and utilises social capital as a lens to improve the understanding of leadership’s role in tourism development. The authors set out to explore these questions: are there successful rural communities led by individuals that embody elements of bridging and bonding social capital? Researchers have addressed these traits in the context of communities, but what about individuals? Can one person embody a blend of bridging and bonding social capital regardless of the type of leadership traits and approaches they employ? Given these cases, a tentative answer is yes. It is particularly interesting that multiple leadership approaches were present, yet each individual still embodied bridging and bonding social capital. Such findings may lay a foundation and serve as a framework for future research. This study contributes to the larger body of research in a number of ways. Namely, it moves beyond the present focus on leadership in the workplace (i.e. Brown & Arendt, 2011; Gill et al., 2006) to account for the broader notion of community-wide tourism leadership, specifically in a rural context. Until now very little of the literature has attempted to answer Long and Nuckolls’ (1994) call for an emphasis on the exploration of leadership in rural tourism development. Given the wide vertical reach that

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

217

begins on the ground with local businesses and groups and extends to the national or even international level, the broad range of tourism sector entities, and preponderance of public-private partnerships involved with rural tourism development, there is a strong need to expand beyond a business-focused approach toward a more inclusive framework such as the one taken in this study. This work also demonstrates the value of social capital in rural tourism leadership, supporting Day’s (2001) conclusion that social capital is a vital component of leadership development. Use of social capital within the framework also incorporates Pearce and Conger’s (2003) cultural modifiers, those things that make each community unique. In addition to the findings supporting social capital’s value in rural tourism leadership, this work also contributes to the wider leadership literature by providing evidence of how Shared/Community-Based Leadership (Kirk & Shutte, 2004), Servant Leadership (Stone et al., 2003), and Authentic Leadership (Northouse, 2012) are applied in the context of rural tourism. Additionally, this study is distinct in that it gives voice to the leaders themselves, providing an opportunity for them to articulate the factors supporting their success. The leaders examined here all possess qualities of bridging and bonding social capital, which facilitate successful rural tourism development in accordance with Aref’s (2010) recommendations to tourism leaders. For both Anderson and Martin, community involvement at an early age cultivated their bonding social capital. Martin developed a web of community activism through various individuals within Floyd County, looking for opinion leaders rather than just those who currently held power. In a similar fashion, Anderson made a concerted effort to create dialogue within the HandMade STP communities, enabling all members to voice their opinion. While Redden was not born in Haiti, his long-term commitment to the community as well as his consistent and ethical approach works to cultivate bonding social capital, trust, and cooperation. Anderson and Martin both attribute their bridging social capital to their early career successes. Martin flourished from the Crooked Road Music Trail’s success and the attention it drew from outside sources. Anderson found opportunities for bridging social capital early on through her position at the Chamber of Commerce and partnership with the Pew Charitable Trust. Redden’s association with the University of Florida creates strong bridging social capital that provides resource channels and networks for Gressier. In all three cases the leaders capitalise on their skills, experience, and personal values to cultivate bridging and bonding social capital that maximises resources, cultivates trust and a sense of reciprocity, and creates a climate of cooperation. Each utilises different

218

Chapter Nine

mixes of social capital and different leadership approaches to help facilitate their success. As with any theoretical framework in its early stages, there are questions to be addressed in future research. For example, is an optimal bridging and bonding social capital mix for an individual both necessary and sufficient for rural tourism success? What other elements may be important? The findings of this work support the need for additional studies of how various governance structures impact leadership capacity (Valente et al., 2014) and strategies (Slocum & Everett, 2014), as these may be impacted by leaders’ social capital. The authors are also concerned that this perspective may have a danger of cultivating a situation in which communities are largely dependent on one individual. Given the transient nature of leaders, communities should be mindful of the need to cultivate these individuals over time in order to ensure sustained rural tourism development.

References AdvantageWest. (n.d.). Region Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.advantagewest.com Aref, F. (2010). Barriers to Community Capacity Building for Tourism Development in Communities in Shiraz, Iran. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(3), 347-359. Aref, F., Redzuan, M., & Emby, Z. (2009). Assessing Community Leadership Factor in Community Capacity Building in Tourism Development: A Case Study of Shiraz, Iran. Journal of Human Ecology, 28(3), 171-176. Asheville CVB. (n.d.). About Asheville. Retrieved from http://www.exploreasheville.com/about-asheville/ Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 421-449. Barr, A. (1998). Enterprise Performance and the Functional Diversity of Social Capital. Working Paper Series, 98-1. Oxford: University of Oxford, Institute of Economics and Statistics. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press. —. (1991). From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31.

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

219

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture. Public Administration Quarterly, 17(3-4), 112121. Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, Character, and Authentic Transformational Leadership Behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181-217. Benson, A. M., & Blackman, D. (2011). To Distribute Leadership or Not? A lesson from the islands. Tourism Management, 32(5), 1141-1149. Beritelli, P., & Bieger, T. (2014). From Destination Governance to Destination Leadership—defining and exploring the significance with the help of a systemic perspective. Tourism Review, 69(1), 25-46. Blichfeldt, B. S., Hird, J., & Kvistgaard, P. (2014). Destination Leadership and the Issue of Power. Tourism Review, 69(1), 74-86. Briggs, X. (1998). Brown Kids in White Suburbs: Housing mobility and the multiple faces of social capital. Housing Policy Debate, 9(10), 177221. Brown, E. A., & Arendt, S. W. (2011). Perceptions of Transformational Leadership Behaviors and Subordinates’ Performance in Hotels. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism, 10(1), 45-59. Brownell, J. (2005). Predicting Leadership: The assessment center’s extended role. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 17(1), 7-21. —. (2010). Leadership in the Service of Hospitality. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 51(3), 363-378. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row. Cichy, R. F., & Schmidgall, R. S. (1997). Financial Executives in U.S. Clubs: Foundations of leadership. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 38(5), 67-73. Dasgupta, P., & Serageldin, I. (Eds.). (2000). Social capital: A multifaceted perspective. Washington D.C.: World Bank Publications. Day, D. V. (2001). Leadership Development: A review in context. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 581-613. DeCrop, A. (2004). Trustworthiness in Qualitative Tourism Research. In J. Phillimore & L. Goodson (Eds.), Qualitative Research in Tourism: Ontologies, Epistemologies and Methodologies (pp. 156-169). New York: Routledge. Flora, C. (2004). Community Dynamics and Social Capital. In D. Rickerl, & C. Francis (Eds.), Agroecosystems Analysis (pp. 93-107). Madison: American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America.

220

Chapter Nine

Floyd County. (2014). Floyd County Planning and Economic Development Department. Retrieved from http://floydcova.org/departments/community_dev.shtml Gill, A. S., Flaschner, A. B., & Shachar, M. (2006). Mitigating Stress and Burnout by Implementing Transformational-leadership. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(6), 469-481. Graham, J. W. (1991). Servant-leadership in Organizations: Inspirational and moral. The Leadership Quarterly, 2(2), 105-119. HandMade in America. (n.d.). About Us. Retrieved from http://www.handmadeinamerica.org/about.html Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership Without Easy Answers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Kenny, D. A., & Zaccaro, S. J. (1983). An Estimate of Variance Due to Traits in Leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 678-685. Kent, A., & Chelladurai, P. (2003). Multiple Sources of Leadership and Employee Reactions in a State Parks and Recreation Department. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 21(1), 38-60. Kirk, P., & Shutte, A. M. (2004). Community Leadership Development. Community Development Journal, 39(3), 234-251. Kirkpatick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter? The Executive, 5(2), 48-60. Kriegl, U. (2000). International Hospitality Management: Identifying important skills and effective training. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 41(2), 64-71. Kuhnert, K. W., & Lewis, P. (1987). Transactional and Transformational Leadership: A constructive/developmental analysis. Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 648-657. Ladkin, A., & Weber, K. (2011). Leadership Issues and Challenges in the Tourism Industry: A Hong Kong perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 16(3), 273-288. Lakshman, C. (2007). Organizational Knowledge Leadership: A grounded theory approach. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 28(1), 51-75. Long, P. T., & Nuckolls, J. S. (1994). Organising Resources for Rural Tourism Development: The importance of leadership, planning and technical assistance. Tourism Recreation Research, 19(2), 19-34. McDonald, J. R. (2009). Complexity Science: An alternative world view for understanding sustainable tourism development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(4), 455-471.

Social Capital and Leadership in Rural Tourism Development

221

McGehee, N. G., Kline, C., & Knollenberg, W. (2014). Social Movements and Tourism-related Local Action. Annals of Tourism Research, 48, 140-155. North Carolina Department of Commerce. (n.d.). Tourism Research. Retrieved from http://www.nccommerce.com Northouse, P. G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice. Los Angeles: Sage. Pearce, C. L., & Conger, J. A. A. (2003). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Pitts, G. (2008). Life as an Entrepreneur: Leadership and learning. Development and Learning in Organizations, 22(3), 16-17. Putnam, R. D. (1993). The Prosperous Community—Social Capital and Public Life. The American Prospect, 13, 35-42. Rodinelli, D. A., & Heffron, J. M. (Eds.). (2009). Leadership for Development: What Globalization Demands of Leaders Fighting for Change. Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press. Rothfelder, K., Ottenbacher, M. C., & Harrington, R. J. (2013). The Impact of Transformational, Transactional and Non-leadership Styles on Employee Job Satisfaction in the German Hospitality Industry. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 12(4), 201-214. Shafer, E. L., Vieregge, M., & Youngsoo, C. (2005). Cultural Differences in Perceived Leadership Styles. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, 6(3), 65-84. Slocum, S. L., & Everett, S. (2014). Industry, Government, and Community: Power and leadership in a resource constrained DMO. Tourism Review, 69(1), 47-58. Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal Factors Associated with Leadership: A survey of the literature. The Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 35-71. Stone, A. G., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2003). Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(4), 349-361. Testa, M. R., & Sipe, L. (2012). Service-leadership Competencies for Hospitality and Tourism Management. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(3), 648-658. Valente, F. J., Dredge, D., & Lohmann, G. (2014). Leadership Capacity in Two Brazilian Regional Tourism Organisations. Tourism Review, 69(1), 10-24. van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant Leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1228-1261.

222

Chapter Nine

Virginia Tourism Corporation. (n.d.). Economic Impact of Travel 20092013. Retrieved from http://www.vatc.org/home/ Wong, A., & Chan, A. (2010). Understanding the Leadership Perceptions of Staff in China’s Hotel Industry: Integrating the macro- and microaspects of leadership contexts. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(3), 437-447. Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy. The World Bank Research Observer, 15, 225-249. Yeow, J. B., & Martin, R. (2013). The Role of Self-regulation in Developing Leaders: A longitudinal field experiment. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(5), 625-637. Yukl, G. (1999). An Evaluation of Conceptual Weaknesses in Transformational and Charismatic Leadership Theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285-305. Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based Perspectives of Leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 6-16. Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader Traits and Attributes. In J. Antonaki, A. T. Cianciolo & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The Nature of Leadership (pp. 101-124). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Zahra, A., & McGehee, N. G. (2013). Volunteer Tourism: A host community capital perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 2245. Zehrer, A., Raich, F., Siller, H., & Tschiderer, F. (2014). Leadership Networks in Destinations. Tourism Review, 69(1), 59-73.

CHAPTER TEN THE INFLUENCE OF LANDSCAPE CAPITAL DIFFERENTIATION ON THE OFFER OF AGRO-TOURIST FACILITIES IN POLAND JERZY BAēSKI AND MARIA BEDNAREK-SZCZEPAēSKA

Introduction Agro-tourism constitutes a type of rural tourism which is characterised by the association of tourist services with farming activity, enabling the visitors to participate in farm life. Polish agriculture is based on small family farms. Agro-tourism has had a long tradition here and has been developing with different levels of intensity throughout the country. Diverse conditions determine the spatial distribution of agro-tourism and the nature of the services offered. The objective of this study was to analyse whether the location in an area featuring specific spatial and landscape capital determines various characteristics of the activity of Polish agro-tourist facilities. If this were to be the case, the research attempted to identify the differences among the agro-tourist products in the areas displaying different landscape qualities. Another objective was to diagnose the differences between the numbers of visitors (specifying their origin) taking advantage of accommodation located in areas with different landscapes. For this analysis, the territory of Poland was divided into four physico-geographical area types featuring different landscape qualities. In each of these types of area, 60 agro-tourist farms were subjected to detailed analysis. The data collected with the survey method were analysed using descriptive statistics.

224

Chapter Ten

Literature Review Current definitions of agro-tourism found in the literature differ somewhat, although their essential meaning remains similar. Thus, for instance according to Sharpley and Sharpley (1997), agro-tourism is composed of the tourist products directly linked to the agricultural environment, farming production or agrarian stays. For Barbieri and Mshenga (2008) the notion deals with all kinds of activities, carried out within the functioning farms, directed towards attracting visitors. Sonnino (2004) perceives agro-tourism as activities of hospitality, undertaken by farmers and their families, which are linked with and complementary to the farming activity. Weaver and Fennell (1997) are of a similar opinion, and they include in the scope of agro-tourism all the rural undertakings whose component elements are the environment of the active agricultural farm and commercial hospitality activity. The development of agro-tourism is influenced by numerous external and internal conditions, forming a complex system of interrelations. Landscape qualities are in this context the most classical conditioning factor for the development of tourism (Collins, 1999; Farrell & Runyan, 1991; Mieczkowski, 1995). The landscape capital is considered as a quality of a comprehensive system consisting of forms of relief and water, vegetation and soils, rocks and atmosphere (Zonneveld, 1990). Landscape capital may also be considered as an element of a broader category— countryside capital, which comprises various natural and human-made components, forming the fabric of the countryside. The quality of the rural tourism experience depends on the quality of the existing countryside capital (Garrod, Wornell & Youell, 2006). Farms located within naturally attractive areas, which are at the same time unfavourable for farming, have a greater chance of deploying tourist functions (Wilson, 2008). As noted by Walford (2001), the chances of success are higher in the case of agrotourist facilities, located either close to large urban centres or in the environments that are attractive in naturalistic and aesthetic terms, allowing for various forms of recreation. The fact that the natural environment is associated with some of the most important motivations for the choice of the place of vacationing is well reflected in the distribution of tourist infrastructure in Poland, which is concentrated in the areas that are most attractive in terms of nature (BaĔski, 2009; Heffner & Rosner, 2002). Diversification of nature is also one of the primary reasons for the uneven development of agro-tourism on the country scale (Drzewiecki, 1995). It can be supposed that being located in an area featuring specific qualities of nature also has an

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

225

influence on the character of the agro-tourist offer and on other aspects of the provision of agro-tourist services. According to Wojciechowska (2009), the features differentiating the agro-tourist offer across the country are mainly associated with the qualities of nature and culture, and less with the skills and formal capabilities of the service providers. Regional studies show that a variety of relations exists between agrotourist supply and natural environment in the Polish context. WoĞ (2011) claims that in the ĝwiĊtokrzyskie Mountains, services provided to tourists were associated with the natural environment. For instance, walking and bike trips were organised by agro-accommodation providers operating in areas of diversified landscape and special natural attractions. Mushroom picking, undergrowth explorations, workshops in picking and applying herbs were organised by agro-accommodation providers operating in the vicinity of forests and areas of high biodiversity. In contrast, BaliĔska (2009) shows that, in many cases, the natural assets of an area are capitalised for the purpose of tourist-product development by agroaccommodation providers of eastern Poland on a limited and insufficient scale. Other studies show how in the less attractive areas, a wide scope of services and attractions on the farms “compensate” for the lack of natural attractions in their vicinity. An interesting tourist product on a farm enables an agro-tourism provider to succeed despite the unfavourable natural conditions (Cichowska, 2011). According to the majority of studies based on surveys and interviews with agro-tourists (e.g. Bott-Alama, 2004; NaáĊcka & ĩbikowski, 2005; Strzembicki, 2001), contact with nature and calmness are the most important values for them. They choose agro-tourism because they prefer to rest in natural, healthy and tranquil rural environments and in an attractive landscape. That is the essence of the agro-tourism experience in the Polish context.

The Method of Study The characteristics of landscape, resulting from differences in geological past and geomorphological processes, as well as in altitude above sea level, are the basis for the physico-geographical regionalisation of the Polish territory. Yet, for the purpose of this study, distinctions were limited to the basic types of area in Poland, differing regarding the landscape and the environmental features, and classified into 1) lakelands; 2) lowlands; 3) uplands; 4) mountains and foothills (Kondracki, 2002)1. Agro-tourist farms were identified for the purposes of analysis within the four area types distinguished.

226

Chapter Ten

The database for the analyses conducted in the study we report here was constituted by the statistical materials of the Polish Central Statistical Office (CSO) and the results of questionnaire-based surveys carried out with the owners of the agro-tourist farms in Poland in the year 20122. The study conducted does not account for the features of the location of the farm on the local scale—distance to a forest, lake or river—but refers to the general characteristics of the landscape (mountains, plains, etc.), within which a given farm is located. For the detailed analyses, 60 agrotourist farms were selected from each of the four physico-geographical categories of areas that correspond to different types of landscape, i.e. mountainous, lowland, upland, and lake regions (Kondracki, 2002). Statistical descriptive analysis was used to identify the differences between the agro-tourist farms located in areas with different types of landscape regarding the content of the respective offers—i.e. various services, tourist attractions, equipment of the facilities, promotional activities undertaken, seasonality of the services provided, plans for development of the hospitality activity, the number of tourists and their places of origin.

The Diagnosis of the Current State According to the data from the Institute of Tourism, in 2007, there were approximately 8,850 agro-tourist farms in Poland. Compared to other accommodation services, the agro-tourist sector is characterised by a relatively high spatial dispersion. This kind of service was offered in 55% of municipalities in Poland, and most often there were between one and four such facilities per municipality. There were only 47 municipalities in which the number of agro-tourist farms exceeded 30 (BednarekSzczepaĔska, 2011). The agro-tourist sector develops not only in regions which are attractive in tourist terms but also, though to a much lower degree, in typical farming areas, where it often constitutes the only way of providing accommodation service. Agro-tourist facilities are more developed within the mountainous areas and in the lakelands, especially in the Carpathians and within the Lakeland in north-east Poland (Fig. 10-1). The three provinces, namely Maáopolskie, Podkarpackie and WarmiĔsko-Mazurskie, which encompass the attractive areas mentioned above (three provinces out of the total of sixteen), account for approximately 40% of all the agro-tourist farms registered in Poland. The highest numbers occur in the neighbourhood of the most attractive (in terms of tourism) mountain ranges and lakes. In the

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

227

uplands zone, the most extensive area of concentration of agro-tourist farms is associated with the ĝwiĊtokrzyskie Mountains. Fig. 10-1. Spatial distribution of agro-tourist farms in 2007

Source: BaĔski (2010)

The utility of the natural resources for tourism may be assessed and spatially compared using the methods based on evaluation indices. The elaborated synthetic indicator of the natural attractions3 allows identification of the areas featuring the highest values in the country. In a simplified manner, it might be assumed that mountains and lake districts, and also partly uplands are characterised by higher qualities, from the tourism development point of view, in comparison to lowland and partly upland areas. By comparing the distribution of the agro-tourist farms (Fig. 10-1) with the results of the indicator-based evaluation at the level of

228

Chapter Ten

municipalities (Fig. 10-2), one can conclude that the areas of a relatively high level of development of agro-tourism coincide mostly with those featuring the highest natural qualities. Fig. 10-2. Synthetic indicator of the natural attractions of municipalities

Source: Own elaboration

Characteristics of Agro-Tourism and Type of Landscape Farms have provided accommodation services for quite a long time, but it was only at the beginning of the transformation period (the early 1990s) in Poland that the formal framework for their functioning was established and it became common to call them agro-tourist farms. Among the 240 agro-tourist farms investigated here, the average period of activity was slightly above nine years (see Table 10-1). It is worth noting that the longest periods of activity are more characteristic of farms located in areas featuring the highest landscape quality, i.e. in the mountains (around 12 years) and in the lake districts (around ten years), mostly constituting the space of tourist assimilation (after Wojciechowska, 2009). On the other hand, within the lowland plains, the development of services took place somewhat later. This difference is related to the traditional development of tourism in rural areas of the most beautiful regions. In such regions, farms have been accommodating tourists for decades. Górz (2007) claims that

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

229

there was already official consent to the existence of private guest rooms on farms in the 1950s. Thus, for instance, in 1987 in the foothill region of Podhale, 12,300 beds in such farm-based facilities were registered, while the true scale of the phenomenon was most probably 4-5 times larger (Górz, 2007). Owing to these traditions, agro-tourism in the modern, post-socialist form had good starting conditions in those areas. On the other hand, within the areas featuring fewer tourist attractions, e.g. the lowlands, agrotourism was something relatively new, devoid of such a long-standing tradition. Yet, the fashion for agro-tourism came also there. This kind of activity became the object of support and promotion from the side of various public and non-governmental organisations throughout Poland, and an increasing number of farmers would endeavour towards a diversification of their economic activity. Table 10-1. Selected features of the analysed agro-tourist households Landscape type

Total Mountains Lowlands Lakelands Uplands

Average period of activity (in years) 9.2 11.8 6.8 9.7 8.3

Share of wholeyear facilities (in %) 58 57 63 48 62

Average number of beds per facility

Average number of persons accommodated in a year

Median number of persons accommodated in a year

15.1 14.7 17.6 16.9 11.2

263 84.9 444 175 346

90 50 225 95 100

Source: Own elaboration

The study presented here indicates that agro-tourism, similarly to other forms of tourism, is characterised by seasonality, with a distinct concentration in the summer season, irrespective of the location of facilities. Although, in theoretical terms, the classical agro-tourist offer has a full-year nature, given the character of services provided, yet in practice, it is primarily used during summer. The highest share of the accommodation providers seasonally running the business was observed within the lakelands (Fig. 10-3). Fewer than half of them function during the whole year. This fact is associated with the clear seasonality of holiday making on the lakes, limited in practice to the summer months. Few tourists visit those areas in winter. Another factor that may contribute to this situation is accessibility in terms of transport. Most of the lake districts are located in the peripheral areas, far

230

Chapter Ten

from large urban centres. Among the facilities located in the lowland plains and the uplands, on the other hand, the majority offer their service during the entire year. Still, a distinct concentration of activity in the summer season is also observed. On the other hand, on the farms located in the mountain areas two periods of more intensive activity are observed—summer and winter. The agro-tourist facilities, which were included in the study, generally do not differ very much regarding the number of beds. An average farm can accommodate simultaneously from 11 (upland areas) to 18 (lowlands) persons. Yet, the actual use of this potential is highly differentiated. The worst record with this respect characterises the farms analysed in the mountains, which were visited by only 85 persons on average during the year, while the best area regarding this feature—the lowlands—hosts 444 tourists, on average, during the same period. This, indeed, is a rather surprising result, calling for a broader analysis. Fig. 10-3. Average use of accommodation capacities in agro-tourist households according to season

Source: Own elaboration

The highest number of agro-tourist facilities, whose managers declared having hosted at least 1,000 persons per annum, was located, as mentioned, in the lowlands and the uplands. Such facilities most probably offer specific tourist products or services, not only to individual tourists,

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

231

but also to larger organised groups, the latter contributing importantly to the high overall numbers of guests. In the case of farms located in the lowlands, these high numbers might also result from the relatively low level of seasonality of service provision (accommodation being offered all year round) and from the spatial dispersion of the facilities, and also from low supply of service compared to demand, generated by the large urban centres. It is exactly the location near large and medium-sized agglomerations, with good transportation accessibility, which can exert significant influence, leading to the relatively intensive tourist traffic in the agro-tourist facilities considered. Within the lowlands and the uplands, i.e. largely outside of the traditional tourist areas, agro-tourist facilities frequently are—as already mentioned—the sole providers of the hospitality sector on a local scale. According to a study undertaken by Bednarek-SzczepaĔska (2010), lack of local competition in this sector means the existing facilities are also used for other purposes than just recreation and leisure. The results from the studies of agro-tourist households in the region of Lublin indicate that they often offered overnight stays to, for instance, participants of family events in the neighbourhood (like weddings), to persons on business trips, and to seasonal workers. The important domination mentioned here of the agro-tourist facilities from the lowlands and uplands in terms of numbers of visitors might also result from the fact that they are probably used to a greater extent as weekend outing destinations. The mountain and lakeland areas are, on the other hand, traditionally destinations for longer stays, associated with summer or winter holidays (see Durydiwka, 2008). This situation seems to occur in the facilities located in these areas. Of the agro-tourist farms analysed, the ones located in the mountainous landscape hosted the lowest number of guests on average per annum. This might partly be the effect of the high density of providers of hospitality services in such areas. The competition for agro-tourist farms comes largely from the so-called “guest-rooms”, offering a similar kind of service and prices. It appears that for the tourists visiting the mountains for leisure, the “agricultural”, i.e. agro-tourist, character of the offer is not so important, and such a high supply of beds in “guest-rooms” may lead to lower effective demand for agro-tourist facilities. It is, therefore, highly probable that the emergence of new agro-tourist facilities in such areas, providing service limited mainly to overnight stays or bed-and-breakfast, is not economically justified. Only those facilities that diversify their offer and improve its quality can expect to have business success. The shortage of the original, specialised agro-tourist

232

Chapter Ten

products, adapted to the needs of specific segments of the market, is the disadvantageous feature of the Polish agro-tourism in general, as already emphasised many times by various researchers (Bednarek-SzczepaĔska, 2010; Przezbórska, 2005; Wojciechowska, 2009). Similar conclusions apply to the service providers analysed in the lakelands, with the additional remark that the improvement of the use of existing potential ought, to a greater extent, to result from the extension of duration of the service season. New services and new qualities of the agro-tourist product ought to be also introduced also beyond the summer season in order to extend the duration of the service period. The subsequent object of analysis was constituted by the origin of tourists who visited the agro-tourist facilities (Fig. 10-4). This part of the study did not bring surprising results. Preferences with respect to the location of the agro-tourist facilities among the inhabitants of the selected largest urban centres are mainly related to distance. The facilities that are located within lowlands and lakelands are primarily visited by guests from Warsaw while those located in the uplands by guests from Cracow. Fig. 10-4. Distribution of guests from selected urban centres in the facilities within each area of study

Source: Own elaboration Note: The percentages correspond to the shares of farms in particular areas, indicating the origins of their guests. These percentages do not add up to 100%, since if one agro-tourism farm received guests from more than one urban centre, the respondent (the agro-tourism farm owner) would select more than one urban centre.

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

233

Agro-tourist facilities were also investigated from the perspective of their offer for tourists, including various types of equipment in these facilities, as well as services and attractions provided by the hosts. The offer, concerning additional equipment of the agro-tourist farms is relatively poor in the majority of cases (Fig. 10-5). The equipment offered by the highest share of farms is a children’s playground (about 30% to 60% of farms, depending on the region) and the possibility of bike hire (about 20% to 45%, depending on the region). This is a confirmation of the results from other, earlier studies, carried out in several regions of Poland, according to which children’s playgrounds and bike hire were the most frequently encountered elements of additional equipment (BednarekSzczepaĔska, 2010; Mazurek, 2008; Wojciechowska, 2009). About 20% of agro-tourist facilities have volleyball or basketball fields. The results of the present study indicate that other kinds of additional equipment are quite rare in agro-tourist facilities. Thus, even within the lake districts, only one third of the facilities offered watercraft facilities, important for recreation on water. Fig. 10-5. Selected types of additional equipment of the agro-tourist farms according to the regions of study

Source: Own elaboration

Chapter Ten

234

It can be stated that, generally, a somewhat more advantageous situation in terms of farms’ equipment is observed within the lakelands and on the uplands. The analysis conducted showed that the majority of farms located in such regions (approximately 80%) offer some additional elements of equipment. Within the mountains and lowlands, the respective share is 65% only. Farms in the highlands are more likely to have children’s playgrounds than farms located in other areas, whereas farms in lakelands are more likely to offer bikes and watercraft.

landscape type

participation in farm work

sale of regional products

possibility of horseback riding

winter sleigh cavalcades, carriage rides

organisation of entertainment events

organisation of holiday receptions

offer for so-called “green schools”

offer for companies

Table 10-2. Shares of agro-tourist farms providing additional service, in % of farms

total mountains lowlands lakelands uplands

30.4 23.3 46.7 16.7 35.0

10.4 20.0 15.0 1.7 5.0

21 15.0 25.0 15.0 28.0

22.5 36.7 25.0 8.3 20.0

21.3 35.0 28.3 6.7 15.0

16.3 26.7 23.3 5.0 10.0

2.92 5.0 5.0 0.0 1.67

7.1 6.7 13.3 3.3 5.0

Source: Own elaboration

The offer of additional service provided by agro-tourist facilities is definitely richer within the mountain and lowland areas than in the uplands and lakelands (Table 10-2). Those located in the mountains and lowlands offer, in particular, services intended for a broader range of customers, including bigger, organised groups of tourists (companies, schools). It seems, though, that only the farms located in the lowlands make actual use of their potential with this respect, as demonstrated by the highest number of persons having been accommodated at a farm, on average, in this area.

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

235

It is, most probably, the effect of the use of this offer by the companies (e.g. integration events) and school groups (excursions for one or more days, the so-called “green schools”). It is interesting to note that only one third of the facilities analysed offer their guests the possibility of participating in farm work. It seemed that this ought to be the “flagship” attraction of agro-tourism. The low share of hosts offering the possibility for guests to participate in the work on the farm may either be the evidence of the marginal role of agriculture in the facilities investigated, or of the lack of interest of visitors in this type of occupation. Thus, the connection between agro-tourism and farming production is very fragile, and, in practice, the character of this form of tourism moves farther and farther away from the initial model. This kind of phenomenon has also been observed in other countries (Busby & Rendle, 2000; Fleischer & Tchetchik, 2005). Regarding the shares of agro-tourist facilities offering the possibility of participation in farm work, those located in the lowlands and in the uplands are better off. It can, therefore, be stated that in these areas classical agro-tourism, including the “farming” elements of the offer, is more common than in the mountains and in the lakelands. It was already almost 20 years ago, in the initial phase of development of the “modern” agro-tourism in Poland, that Drzewiecki (1995) showed the existence of the “classical” agro-tourism and facilities more associated with true-to-life farms, within the lowland plains and in the uplands of central and eastern Poland. Wojciechowska (2009) also writes about the “deformation” or “fake realisation” of the concept of agro-tourism. The studies she conducted led her to the conclusion that within the mountainous and seaside areas numerous so-called agro-tourist hostels do not have extensive areas of agricultural land and no agricultural production is conducted in these hostels, with agricultural areas being frequently far away from the accommodation facilities (agricultural areas are not accessible to tourists). This is an example of a weak link between agrotourism and farming production. As stated above, agro-tourism is increasingly farther and farther away from its “classical” model. Another service analysed was the sale of regional products. This happened most often in the facilities located in the mountains. It is not a surprising result, since in the mountainous areas, especially in the province of Maáopolskie, the commonly available and known regional food products (like mountain cheeses, sauerkraut soup, ginger beer and wine, etc.) have gained popularity. For a significant group of agro-tourist farms an important element of the offer is constituted of the services associated with the use of horses.

236

Chapter Ten

Arranging winter sleigh cavalcades or carriage rides turned out to be first of all the specialities of service providers from the mountains, in particular, those from the Carpathians. On the other hand, hiring horses for horseback riding seems to be more popular within the uplands and lowlands than in the mountains and lakelands. The latter areas offer a broader scope of attractive possibilities for active holidaymaking (mountain hiking, aquatic sports) than lowlands and uplands. It can, therefore, be supposed that service providers from the lowlands and uplands often base their offer of active leisure on horseback riding, for which these areas are relatively convenient, also given the shortage of other attractive forms of active leisure. The agro-tourist facilities considered offer a very modest scope of possibilities of spending time. However, the results of the present study suggest that landscape seems to be a factor that determines, at least in part, the degree of diversification of the tourist offer. The owners of the agro-tourist farms were also asked about the potential investments planned for the coming years. These plans, though, are generally limited to the increase in the number of beds in the units considered, as declared by approximately 20% of farm managers. Only a couple of farm owners presented plans for investments related to the construction of new accommodation facilities, the extension of the existing buildings for purposes of, for instance, improvement of the catering services, or introduction of new services and tourist attractions. Such responses do not permit an optimistic perspective. The agro-tourist offer nowadays is very poor and the service providers in the market do not plan on undertaking actions that could change this disadvantageous situation and enhance the competitiveness of agro-tourism. Agro-tourist facilities were also analysed with respect to promotion methods adopted. Concerning the entire sample, the most frequent promotional activity consisted of placing ads on the Internet, but only roughly half of the service providers involved (48%) took advantage of this medium. This share is decidedly too small. Another very common tool of promotion was to distribute own leaflets and business cards (43% of service providers). This latter method was most popular in the mountains and least popular in the lowlands. In general terms, the least popular forms of promotion were: participation in tourist fairs and advertising own services through booklets and other publications issued by regional and local tourist associations and organisations. The results also show that the owners of the agro-tourist facilities located in the mountains and in the lake districts used, on average, more methods of promotion of their services than the owners of facilities located

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

237

in the lowlands and in the uplands. They also advertised their services on the web and created their own website more frequently than the other owners. The results of the study suggest that the service providers from the areas with stronger tourist traditions are more engaged in the promotion of their service.

Conclusions The analyses performed indicate that the location within areas featuring different types of landscape (lake districts, lowlands, uplands, mountains) differentiates some aspects of the agro-tourist farms’ activity. The facilities, located in the mountains and in the lake districts, that is, within the most attractive regions from the point of view of tourism, have been functioning for a somewhat longer period than those in the lowlands and the uplands. The average number of visitors staying overnight, per year, in agro-tourist farms, was highest in the lowlands, and lowest in the mountains, this fact being the effect of a number of factors, commented upon in the paper. The profile of the tourists’ origin, visiting the facilities investigated, was determined primarily by the distance from the centres of emission of the tourist traffic, along with the demographic potential of these agglomerations, as well as the tourist attractiveness of the reception areas. The agro-tourist farms in the lowlands and the lake districts were dominated by visitors from Warsaw; in the uplands the greatest share was taken by the guests from Cracow while mountains were visited in similar proportions by guests from all the places of origin considered here. In general terms, the offer of the agro-tourist farms is very poor. The majority of the facilities make available to the visitors only a single kind of equipment, service or attraction. No regional-landscape specificity of the agro-tourist product was identified. However, it was possible to distinguish certain differences in the offer of equipment and services among the accommodation facilities of areas with different landscapes. The watercraft was accessible for tourists mostly in lakelands, whereas entertainment events and activities for companies, school groups and other groups were organised mostly in lowlands and in the mountains. The opportunity to participate in farm work was greater in lowlands and highlands than in the other areas. Sale of regional products was relatively most popular in the mountains, as were winter sleigh and carriage rides. Some differences were also noticed in the promotional activities developed by the owners of houses in the geographical areas analysed, with the owners of accommodation in the mountains and lakelands using the web more often to promote their service than the remaining owners.

Chapter Ten

238

All these differences seem to be partially related to specificities regarding the resources of each area and, as well, to different dynamics generated in each area. The spatial influence of the location of the agro-tourist activity deserves further study. The paper presents just some perspectives in this field. An interesting issue for investigation is to analyse whether the distance between an agro-tourist facility and local features such as, for instance, lakes, forests, national parks, or an important historical monument, is a factor which contributes to the differentiation of the characteristics of the agro-tourist farms. It is also possible to study the potential influence of the distance from the centres of emission of tourist flows on the character of the agro-tourist offer.

Notes 1. Lack of appropriate materials from the field study under analysis made it impossible to distinguish the area of the Baltic Sea coast. 2. The representative investigation encompassed 800 accommodation facilities of rural tourism that included 641 agro-tourist farms, located in 242 municipalities (basic administrative units in Poland, corresponding to NUTS 5), belonging to all the provinces of Poland (units of the NUTS 2 level). 3. The synthetic indicator in question was calculated for each municipality on the basis of the weighted average of five sub-indicators. The sub-indicators are listed below the formulas. The value of each sub-indicator was standardised. Weights of sub-indicators were derived from previous studies. Wi = 0.250*wzi1 + 0.083*wzi2 + 0.250*wzi3 + 0.250*wzi4 + 0.167*wzi5

wzij

wij max(w j )

, where: Wi—synthetic indicator of natural attractions of municipality i; wzij—standardised value of sub-indicator wij; wi1—share of lakes in the area of municipality i; wi2— share of landscape parks and protected landscape areas in the area of municipality i; wi3—share of forests in the area of municipality i; wi4—share of areas with slope exceeding 5% in the area of municipality i; wi5—share of national parks and nature reserves in the area of municipality i; max(wj)—maximal value of wij index in the whole set of rural municipalities.

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

239

References BaliĔska, A. (2009). Walory turystyczne w tworzeniu i realizacji produktu turystycznego [Tourist assets for tourist product creation and implementation]. Studia i Materiaáy Centrum Edukacji PrzyrodniczoLeĞnej, 11(4). Rogów, 36-44. BaĔski, J. (Ed.). (2009). Analiza zróĪnicowania i perspektyw rozwoju obszarów wiejskich w Polsce do 2015 roku [Analysis of diversity and of the development perspectives for Polish rural areas until 2015]. Studia Obszarów Wiejskich 16. Warszawa: IGiPZ PAN, PTG. BaĔski, J. (Ed.). (2010). Atlas Rolnictwa Polski [Atlas of Polish Agriculture]. Warszawa: IGiPZ PAN. Barbieri, C., & Mshenga, P. M. (2008). The role of the firm and owner characteristics on the performance of agritourism farms. Sociologia Ruralis, 48, 166-183. Bednarek-SzczepaĔska, M. (2010). Rola podmiotów lokalnych w rozwoju turystyki wiejskiej na wybranych obszarach Lubelszczyzny [The role of local entities in the development of rural tourism on selected areas of the Lublin region]. Studia Obszarów Wiejskich, 23. Warszawa: IGiPZ PAN, PTG. —. (2011). Mit o agroturystyce jako szansie rozwojowej polskiej wsi [The myth of agro-tourism as a development opportunity for the Polish countryside]. Czasopismo Geograficzne, 82(3), 249-270. Bott-Alama, A. (2004). Uwarunkowania rozwoju turystyki wiejskiej w województwie zachodniopomorskim [Conditions of rural tourism development in Zachodniopomorskie voivodeship]. Rozprawy i Studia 501. Szczecin: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu SzczeciĔskiego. Busby, G., & Rendle, S. (2000). The transition from tourism on farms to farm tourism. Tourism Management, 21(8), 635-642. Cichowska, J. (2011). Znaczenie walorów przyrodniczych w rozwoju agroturystyki [The importance of natural assets in the development of agro-tourism]. Infrastruktura i Ekologia Terenów Wiejskich, 10, 173186. Kraków: Komisja Technicznej Infrastruktury Wsi PAN. Collins, A. (1999). Tourism development and natural capital. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 98-109. Drzewiecki, M. (1995). Agroturystyka. ZaáoĪenia–uwarunkowania– dziaáania [Agro-tourism. Prerequisites–conditions–activities]. Bydgoszcz: Instytut Wydawniczy, ĝwiadectwo. Durydiwka, M. (2008). Przestrzenne zróĪnicowanie funkcji turystycznej na obszarach wiejskich w Polsce [Spatial differentiation of the tourist

240

Chapter Ten

function on rural areas in Poland]. In G. Goáembski (Ed.), Nowe trendy rozwoju turystyki (pp. 399-408). Sulechów: Wydawnictwo PWSZ. Farrell, B. H., & Runyan, D. (1991). Ecology and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 18(1), 26-40. Fleischer, A., & Tchetchik, A. (2005). Does rural tourism benefit from agriculture? Tourism Management, 26, 493-501. Garrod, B., Wornell, R., & Youell, R. (2006). Reconceptualising rural resources as countryside capital: the case of rural tourism. Journal of Rural Studies, 22, 117-128. Górz, B. (2007). Funkcje turystyki na obszarach wiejskich [Functions of tourism in rural areas]. In W. Kurek & M. Mika (Eds.), Studia nad turystyką. Tradycje, stan obecny i perspektywy badawcze (pp. 223235). Kraków: IGiGP UJ. Heffner, K., & Rosner, A. (2002). Czynniki specyficzne wywierające wpáyw na potencjaá rozwojowy obszarów wiejskich [The specific factors that influence the development of rural areas]. In A. Rosner (Ed.), Wiejskie obszary kumulacji barier rozwojowych (pp. 107-132). Warszawa: IRWiR PAN. Kondracki, J. (2002). Geografia regionalna Polski [Regional Geography of Poland]. Warszawa: PWN. Mazurek, J. (2008). Uwarunkowania rozwoju agroturystyki na obszarach wiejskich gmin PobrzeĪa KoszaliĔskiego [Conditions for development of agro-tourism on the rural areas of Koszalin Seacoast]. Regiony Nadmorskie 16. Gdynia-Pelplin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu GdaĔskiego. Mieczkowski, Z. (1995). Environmental issues of tourism and recreation. University Press of America. NaáĊcka, D., & ĩbikowski, J. (2005). Motywy wyboru wypoczynku w gospodarstwach agroturystycznych w Ğwietle badaĔ ankietowych [Motives of staying on agro-tourism farms in the light of questionnaire-based studies]. In J. Bergier & B. Sawicki (Eds.), Wybrane zagadnienia z turystyki wiejskiej (pp. 121-128). Biaáa Podlaska: Wydawnictwo PWSZ. Przezbórska, L. (2005). Przemiany gospodarstw agroturystycznych Wielkopolski w latach 1990-2003 [Transformations in the agro-tourist farms of the region of Wielkopolska in the years 1990-2003]. Roczniki Naukowe SERIA, 7(1), 197-203. Sharpley, R., & Sharpley, J. (1997). Rural tourism: An introduction. London: Thomson Business Press.

The Influence of Landscape Capital Differentiation

241

Sonnino, R. (2004). For a ‘Piece of Bread’? Interpreting Sustainable Development through Agritourism in Southern Tuscany. Sociologia Ruralis, 44, 285-300. Strzembicki, L. (2001). Zachowania nabywców na krajowym rynku turystyki wiejskiej w Ğwietle badaĔ ankietowych [Attitudes of clients on the domestic rural tourism market in the light of questionnaire-based studies]. Kraków: Instytut Turystyki, Centrum Edukacji Kadr Turystycznych. Walford, N. (2001). Patterns of development in tourist accommodation enterprises on farms in England and Wales. Applied Geography, 21, 331-345. Weaver, D. B., & Fennell, D. A. (1997). The vacation farm sector in Saskatchewan: A profile of operations. Tourism Management, 18(6), 357-365. Wilson, G. A. (2008). From ‘weak’ to ‘strong’ multifunctionality: Conceptualising farm-level multifunctional transitional pathways. Journal of Rural Studies, 24, 367-383. Wojciechowska, J. (2009). Procesy i uwarunkowania rozwoju agroturystyki w Polsce [The processes and the conditions for the development of agro-tourism in Poland]. àódĨ: Wyd. Uniwersytetu àódzkiego. WoĞ, B. (2011). Wykorzystanie potencjaáu Ğrodowiska naturalnego Gór ĝwiĊtokrzyskich w ofercie gospodarstw agroturystycznych [Use of the natural environment potential of the ĝwiĊtokrzyskie Mountains in the offer of agro-tourism farms]. Infrastruktura i Ekologia Terenów Wiejskich, 10, 173-186. Kraków: Komisja Technicznej Infrastruktury Wsi PAN. Zonneveld, J. I. S. (1990). Introduction. In H. Svobodova (Ed.), Cultural aspects of Landscape (pp. 7-12). Wageningen: Pudoc.

CHAPTER ELEVEN LIFESTYLE ENTREPRENEURS IN RURAL TOURISM: HOW DOES THE LIFESTYLE DRIVE GET ALONG WITH BUSINESS ORIENTATION? CONCEIÇÃO CUNHA, ELISABETH KASTENHOLZ AND MARIA JOÃO CARNEIRO

Introduction In Portugal, as in other European countries, tourism is seen as a potential tool for developing rural areas, increasingly affected by the loss of economic opportunities and, consequently, a decrease in population (Cavaco, 2003; Kastenholz, 2003). Rural economies benefit not only from direct tourist spending but also from increased awareness of local products, new investments, job creation and the dynamics of already established tourism businesses, particularly if well connected to other economic sectors (Bosworth & Ferrell, 2011). Although excessive optimism is recognised, particularly in much of the political discourse regarding the potential of tourism as a development tool for rural areas (Ribeiro & Marques, 2002), small rural tourism businesses may indeed contribute to sustainable rural development through a combination of local and extra-local networks, increasing local trade and helping create ‘social capital’ which is essential to keep these small rural communities alive (Bosworth & Ferrell, 2011; Keen, 2004; Morrison, 2006). The entrepreneur in small rural tourism businesses, like in other contexts of small businesses in tourism, is frequently characterised by assuming “lifestyle” objectives as the primary drive in creating a firm. It seems that the often evoked lack of orientation towards profit maximisation

244

Chapter Eleven

or business growth does not necessarily compromise the success of these small tourism firms, however. Although small and strongly affected by rural contexts (i.e. remoteness from larger markets, from a skilled labour force and disperse business networks) and by personal and family lifestyle goals, these businesses not only show economic concerns, but also opportunity pursuit, expansion plans, risk acceptance, growth and profit motivations—features usually considered as dimensions of entrepreneurial behaviour (Beaver, 2002; Bolton & Thompson, 2003; Kaplan, 2003). A strong focus on business success, while effectively revealing success in satisfying their clients (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000; Bosworth & Ferrell, 2011; Hall & Rusher, 2004; Komppula, 2004; Lewis, 2005; Morrison, Carlsen & Weber, 2007; Shaw & Williams, 2004), may contribute, in this particular context of rural locations, to enhancing the local economy. In this chapter, lifestyle entrepreneurship in rural tourism is conceptualised and further analysed in an exploratory case-study approach, which is part of a larger research project. In this chapter, we explore the entrepreneurial nature of some small scale tourism businesses located in three Portuguese villages (located in the North and Central Regions of the country), whose owners’ management is impacted by lifestyle motives. The analysis attempts to identify and highlight, along with lifestyle motivations, the entrepreneurial attitudes of these entrepreneurs (like opportunity recognition or the willingness to take risks), as well as to analyse whether lifestyle-oriented businesses can also be entrepreneurial, and may, therefore, contribute to enhancing the local economy, as suggested in some previous studies (Komppula, 2004; Morrison, 2006; Morrison et al., 2007; Shaw & Williams, 2004). Based on the literature review and the exploratory results presented here, the chapter discusses the nature and potential implications of lifestyle-oriented entrepreneurship in rural tourism, particularly regarding their potential contribution to sustainable destination development.

Entrepreneurship in Tourism The concept of entrepreneurship is multidimensional and complex. According to Schumpeter (1934), an entrepreneur is a person who assumes responsibility for matching new combinations of factors to result in the creation of new products, processes, markets, organizational designs or forms of supply. Entrepreneurship is then the process of putting into practice new combinations of factors. According to this perspective, what distinguishes entrepreneurship from the daily management of a company is the ability to take advantage of a new opportunity. This distinction was

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

245

first made by Schumpeter (1934) who, in his seminal work on “Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy”, introduced the concept of “creative destruction”. This concept was then used to define the mutability, the dynamic nature of the entrepreneurial phenomena and to support the idea that change is an essential ingredient for success. Drucker (1991) proposed the concept of entrepreneurship as a discipline that can be taught; this perspective emphasises the management, the daily effort of making things happen, the creative, hard and courageous action as well as the results of that action. Despite these multiple definitions, the streams of research on entrepreneurship have some key elements in common, like an inclination towards innovation, risk-taking and presence of management skills (Echtner, 1995), the transformation of resources into outputs (Hisrich & Peters, 1998), and involvement of the entrepreneur and his (her) team in the creation of value (Timmons, 1994). However, the definition of the term “entrepreneur” can be simplified to a person who starts and runs his (her) own business (Martz Jr., Biscaccianti, Neil & Williams, 2005), as we also assume in this chapter. Although little attention has been given to these topics in tourism research (Ioannides & Petersen, 2003), the relevance of entrepreneurship has been increasingly recognised, particularly in the last two decades (Morrison, Carlsen & Weber, 2010; Thomas, Shaw & Page, 2011). As a matter of fact, the tourism industry is characterised, in many countries, by small family businesses, dealing with capital constraints and being managed with highly personalised criteria (few businesses have planning, growth and marketing strategies). Many entrepreneurs in the sector are driven by lifestyle motives, having few or no formal qualifications, no prior management experience or tourism skills, and choose to enter the business due to being in a particular lifecycle stage (sometimes induced by a semi-retirement situation) because, among other features, no substantial entry barriers are identified (Getz & Peterson, 2005; Morrison, 2006; Shaw & Williams, 2004). As highlighted by Getz and Carlsen (2004), tourism in rural and peripheral areas is especially determined by family businesses, where lifestyle motives frequently play a major role. Therefore, a deeper understanding of the motives of the managers of rural tourism businesses, as well as the dynamics and constraints of these businesses, is certainly important in shaping the “entrepreneurial map” of these regions and assessing the real limitations and potentialities of these businesses, as will be discussed in the following sections, additionally highlighting the concept of lifestyle entrepreneurship.

246

Chapter Eleven

Lifestyle Entrepreneurship As Veal (2000) observes, despite the different definitions in use, a good definition of lifestyle needs to include activities and behaviour, values and attitudes, group belonging and an element of choice. In the context of entrepreneurship, being a lifestyle entrepreneur means that the entrepreneur is involved in a range of activities of relevance to himself or herself beyond those concerning the business. Entrepreneurs in small rural tourism businesses, like in other contexts of small businesses in tourism, are often characterised by assuming “lifestyle” objectives as the primary drive in creating a firm. It is argued that they frequently lack orientation towards profit maximization or business growth (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000; Hall & Rusher, 2004; Komppula, 2004; Lewis, 2005; Shaw & Williams, 2004). The so-called “lifestyle” entrepreneurship is thus associated with a lack of economic ambition of the entrepreneurs because their goals are mainly oriented towards maintaining a certain way of life rather than wealth creation or business growth (Hollick & Braun, 2005). Others (Bosworth & Farrell, 2011; Morrison, 2006; Shaw & Williams, 2004) argue that this vision of the phenomenon is a limited one, pointing to a set of business benefits promoted by lifestyle entrepreneurship. Most of these businesses are small, with weak economic indicators (job creation, growth and turnover), but one cannot forget that many small businesses account for important contributions to some industries, territories and communities, particularly in rural territories, where economic alternatives are scarce, and the possibility of maintaining a minimum population base is, in itself, highly valuable. Furthermore, the lifestyle entrepreneur seems to achieve higher levels of satisfaction, and there is evidence that happy individuals show higher levels of utility—a measure of economic well-being (Gelderen, 2007). The same author stresses that this type of entrepreneurship is very beneficial since it helps diversify economic activity. The diversity or variety of types of business in an economy is also positively linked to economic return (Aldrich, 1999, cited by Gelderen, 2007; Hannan & Freeman, 1989, cited by Gelderen, 2007). Businesses created based on lifestyle goals are, generally, more innovative and creative. Lifestyle entrepreneurs are presented as important players in creating innovative products (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000) designed for emerging market segments of high value. Hall and Rusher (2004) provide evidence that the objectives of lifestyle are not necessarily in opposition to those of an economic nature (such as business growth) and that, for most entrepreneurs providing bed &

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

247

breakfast in New Zealand, “lifestyle” is assumed as a strategic objective of the business and is decisive for creating and managing these businesses. Shaw and Williams (2004) also argue that in many cases, the lifestyle motives are embedded within an economic agenda; with both types of motives intrinsically linked. These entrepreneurs operate their business within “the small is beautiful” paradigm, developing it with an emphasis on flat management: collaborative and personal interactions with both employees and consumers. The new concept of entrepreneurship comprises social and cultural values as success factors along with objectives of development and business growth (economic perspective) (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000; Bosworth & Farrell, 2011). In the context of the sustainability paradigm, it is important to note that growth should not be confused with progress. It should be placed within an environmental context not as an “imposition” but rather as an adaptation to this context that guarantees a company’s positive long-term contribution to a community/territory. This perspective of sustainability of rural communities is corroborated by other studies. For example, Hall, Daneke and Lenox (2010) and Parrish (2010) advocate that some entrepreneurs show as the main drive to create a successful business the wish to contribute to a more sustainable society. On the other hand, motives related to sustainability values also contribute to the economic success of businesses, particularly in the context of increasing market demand for socially responsible businesses (Kastenholz & Ladero, 2009), resulting in a win-win situation. The research in the field of lifestyle entrepreneurship also indicates that these entrepreneurs contribute to a higher perceived quality of the tourist experience because the products benefit from these entrepreneurs’ well-known sense of “mission”, identification with the product, and unique and dedicated way of doing business (Keen, 2004; Lewis, 2005).

Tourism Entrepreneurs in Rural Areas The importance of an expanded supply, capable of delivering an appealing overall experience of the rural, responding to diverse and varied motivations of tourists and making the best use of resources available, is currently recognised (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012; Lane, 2009). Rural tourism should thus provide integration in an environment different from the urban, which includes opportunities for enjoyment of the countryside and nature, appreciation of culture and traditions, and social interaction, characterised by a dimension of genuine hospitality, also resulting from a personalised service (Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009;

248

Chapter Eleven

Tucker, 2003). It is in this context that the owner of small rural tourism businesses can play a crucial role because many of these entrepreneurs create a business not only to work but to live in it (Lewis, 2005). This concept of entrepreneurship can be the basis of a more personalised supply and services that carry a genuine concern about place and community, integrating local people, resources and “distinctive features”, aspects highly valued by target segments of small rural tourism businesses. They may, indeed, assume the function of “cultural brokers” (Cohen, 1988), facilitating the guests’ understanding of and integration into local culture and community life (Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009). Tourism lifestyle entrepreneurs can be defined as tourism business owners actively seeking a particular lifestyle, typically related to personal or family priorities, which correspond to a life choice rather than a career decision (Marcketti, Niehm & Fuloria, 2006). Motivations to create the business are centred on quality of life and local environmental variables (Bosworth & Farrell, 2011). Therefore, many of these family-run businesses remain small, as a consequence of motivations, values and sentimental attachment to the business (Morrison, 2006). Despite this, success can be a reality in these business contexts and their integration in local community permits that the money earned in the business is more likely to be retained locally (Morrison, 2006). Particularly in rural tourism, these entrepreneurs are characterised as showing high levels of innovation, diversity and uniqueness, aspects which are highly valued by today’s hyper-segmented markets. Studies suggest that the benefits sought by the “new” niche markets with high potential (including the unique, the authentic, the different experience, independence, knowledge, interpersonal relations) are more easily found in small-scale tourism services, promoted and managed by entrepreneurs motivated by non-economic factors (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000). Furthermore, many of the rural entrepreneurs reveal a strong identification with the place and show management practices that enhance sustainability without compromising business profits. Particularly, in small tourism businesses, “growth in quality but not in volume” should be considered an important goal (Kompulla, 2004; Lewis, 2005) and the most appropriate one, given that rural tourism may be considered a “niche” market composed of several other “market niches” (Clemenson & Lane, 1997). Additionally, the ability to interact positively with the community is, in the context of small rural businesses, recognised as critical for the success of these enterprises, as well as for the development of a sustainable tourism industry (Keen, 2004). In this line of argument, lifestyle entrepreneurship is associated with the creation of “social capital”

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

249

essential to the sustainability of many communities, especially the small and rural ones (Morrison, 2006). It is also argued that it is precisely outside the economic field that significant contributions of these small tourism businesses are found. In Portugal, the owners of small rural tourism businesses frequently enjoy a high socio-economic and cultural status and do not form a homogeneous group. As identified by Silva (2006), they can be classified into three groups, namely (1) Owners linked to the ancient nobility of the province, motivated mainly by the desire to restore and maintain family heritage; (2) Farmers and ranchers seeking income from old farm buildings; (3) Entrepreneurs who adapt old houses for tourism usage, also for economic reasons. The aspects valued by these business owners are the exchange with people from different geo-cultural origins, the maintenance and recreation of some traditions, architectural heritage and landscape, and effective contribution to the socio-economic development of rural regions, apart from economic benefits (Silva, 2006). Although heterogeneous, they seem to have in common “the family first” orientation towards their business (Getz & Carlsen, 2000; Jesus, 2012), whose management is substantially influenced by an “ownership heritage strategy”, meaning that owners are mainly concerned with the maintenance of heritage, and see in tourism a source of income to keep the houses well preserved and owned by the family (Ribeiro, 2003).

An Exploratory Study of Business Owners in Three Portuguese Villages Methodology This chapter is based on partial results of a three-year research project entitled “The overall rural tourism experience and sustainable local community development (ORTE project)” (PTDC/CS-GEO/104894/ 2008), financed by the Portuguese Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (co-financed by COMPETE, QREN and FEDER). The project aims to understand the complex rural tourism experience, mostly through interviews and surveys of several groups of stakeholders of rural areas, including tourists and local population, in three Portuguese villages where the research project was conducted (Fig. 11-1.): Janeiro de Cima, Favaios and Linhares da Beira.

250

Chapter Eleven

Fig. 11-1. The villages’ location

Source: adapted with permission of © Portuguese Directorate General for Territorial Development (DGT) (2015)

The entrepreneurial features and lifestyle choices are explored through interviews held with different tourism agents of the Portuguese villages under analysis. In this chapter, we will consider the exploratory part of the study based on the semi-structured interviews held with 25 supply agents (all the supply agents except one who refused to answer). These interviews took place between April 2011 and February 2012, in the respondents’ original contexts of living and work, so that a more realistic understanding of the phenomenon could be obtained. The supply agents are owners managing 12 café and restaurant establishments, four tourism accommodation units, two craft shops, five other shops (like small supermarkets) and two wine producers. The interview script includes ten open-ended questions related to supply agents’ perceptions of tourists’ expectations and experiences lived in the villages, entrepreneurial aspects such as reasons for creating a local tourism business, the support obtained, strategies and management practices and plans for the future. The questions were suggested by the project researchers, based on a literature review of rural tourism entrepreneurship and on the knowledge obtained in previous research on diverse facets of the rural tourism phenomenon. A pre-test was

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

251

performed to improve the script. All interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed and subjected to content analysis. The data was organised and codified using the software WebQDA (Web Qualitative Data Analysis); dimensions and categories were identified and validated by experts (project researchers). Each discourse was codified (case-by-case analysis) and then a comparative analysis was carried out (cross-case analysis), examining the link between discourse and literature, trying to identify consistencies and contradictions between different observations (McCracken, 1988). The last stage of content analysis, interpretation of results and conclusions, was supported by both the previously mentioned literature review, which helped interpret the discourses of respondents, associate them to relevant constructs (like motivations, emotions or perceptions) and compare them with results obtained in other studies (Kastenholz, Lima & Sousa, 2012). The qualitative methodology in the context of a case-study approach was chosen because it contributes to understanding of a highly complex and subjective phenomenon, like the tourist experience lived and shared by diverse stakeholders, taking place in a particular destination context, from diverse perspectives (Jennings & Nickerson, 2006), where boundaries between the phenomenon and the real context are sometimes difficult to distinguish (Stake, 2007; Yin, 2010). The analysis described here focuses on the entrepreneur and the firm level and comprises the following most important aspects: (1) motivations for establishing a business in the village; (2) particular motivations for establishing a tourism business; (3) strategies and management practices; (4) plans for the future. The analysis will help understand motivations and attitudes of entrepreneurs and identify lifestyle choices as well as entrepreneurial behaviour. Dimensions of this “entrepreneurial behaviour”, including the respective motivational context, are the desire to live in a certain place, pursuing a new style of life, the acceptance of risk, the evidence of strategic thought and orientation, as well as the desire to create a successful business based on an opportunity identified. The analysis attempts to find evidence that may support the idea of lifestyle owners eventually also being oriented towards business success.

Presentation and Discussion of Results The entrepreneurs studied run small family businesses. Most are local people whose venture is their main and only source of income. Others are urban dwellers moving to the village where they maintain family links, individuals who decided to return to their origins and found in tourism a good opportunity to establish a business and live (again) in the

252

Chapter Eleven

countryside. Family links to the village, attachment to the landscape and rural way of life are the most common motives referred to by respondents for choosing their business location, showing that these entrepreneurs generally start their businesses and choose the business location based mainly on the wish for a certain lifestyle. The desire to achieve a balance between professional and personal life, time for the family and the desire to live in the countryside can be found in respondents’ discourses: “I have a very strong link with the village (Janeiro de Cima) because I grew up there, lived here until the age of 12 (…), since my parents, my whole family and friends have been living here and I have returned for weekends and holidays. The links I have kept with the village are very strong… until today”.

A young entrepreneur from Favaios reports: “I had lived most of my life in the city (…) and after concluding university studies, I returned to my village, to establish this business. I love to be here; I love what I am doing… the countryside brings us great challenges”.

The maintenance of family heritage is among the most cited reasons for establishing a small tourism business. However, the desire to contribute to improved quality of life in the village is also present. As observed in other studies (Kastenholz, Eusébio, Carneiro & Figueiredo, 2013; Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009; Keen, 2004), the entrepreneurs interviewed here realise that tourism businesses can bring new people to the village, stimulate the local economy and induce generally appreciated contacts between locals and tourists. This is illustrated by the owner of a small rural accommodation unit: “I thought I could make some contribution to the recovery of the village (...), to improve the residents’ lives and also my own life”; or in the discourse of another local entrepreneur: “The local population, even if not engaged in business, shares the tourists’ presence (…) the old man, alone in the street, happily talks to tourists and tells old stories about the village and its residents…”.

The business opportunity was grasped, in some cases, with the hope that the second generation would continue the project. Sometimes management is already shared with the owners’ children because these are better prepared to do it (particularly referring to some dimensions of the business) and show a declared interest in pursuing the project in the future:

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

253

“My children have a formal education; one is a lawyer and the girl an accountant (…) the Internet has to be used nowadays [for communicating with markets]… but this is the responsibility of my children. They will also be in charge of managing the new project” (owner of a café and a small bar that would open soon).

Evidence was found that this “second generation” also demonstrates lifestyle concerns because their professional and personal choices include the village as an important element of their lives. On the other hand, the recognised importance of public support for business financing shows the economic concerns of the entrepreneurs. Businesses are created to succeed economically, even if also other purposes are relevant for the decision to invest in tourism. We noticed several cases in which the satisfaction of achieving business success is enhancing the business commitment of these entrepreneurs, who refer to increased responsibility also to others, as illustrated in the discourse of this young entrepreneur: “so, my project was going very well and was demanding my full time… so I thought, well now this is serious, I have to manage it in a way to succeed, because it’s my full-time job, and I have responsibilities like the deals assumed with my network partners… I have to make it work”.

The strategies evidenced in the statements of the owners show a clearly informal, personalised, flat management, where relations and cooperation with other entrepreneurs, tourists and local people represent good opportunities to improve business. Some of them report that they understand the complex and articulated nature of the overall tourism experience, based on elements such as heritage, the surrounding landscape, people’s way of life and their memories, requiring the involvement of many destination actors and features. Therefore, they realise the importance of all these elements in the tourists’ evaluation and in corresponding cooperation at the destination level: “yes, [the integrated offer is] very important because tourists would know in advance where to sleep, where to have a meal, what to see… people usually like the products and buy them… I think all of us would benefit from this [articulated approach]”.

Networks, both formal and informal, are also already present in the daily management of these businesses, like when recommending services from other village actors or integrating these services in “experience packages” offered, as in the case of the Enoteca of Favaios, which offers

254

Chapter Eleven

bakery experiences in the village to the day visitors of their interactive wine museum: here visitors have the opportunity to see how the typical Favaios bread is cooked in a stone oven, even participating in the process by forming the bread and tasting it at the end, hot with butter. In the village of Janeiro de Cima, one must recognise the importance of the “Schist Villages” network to support local tourism businesses to start up and market their offers. This network includes several villages of the region, and one of its most important objectives is the promotion of an appealing integrated image of the region as a tourism destination, which simultaneously enhances each member’s chance of success. Support has been provided at several levels to local businesses, is understood and valued by entrepreneurs. The perceived positive contribution of some of the ventures to the village’s development and resulting pride is well illustrated in the discourse: “my vision about village development is that the contribution of my rural accommodation unit was a very positive one; [it] is located in the centre of the village, and because of that, has attracted many tourists. All the surroundings (houses, roads, gardens, and other elements of natural and built heritage) have been improved in the last few years. I consider my house as a key element in all the village development, and that fact has pleased me a lot, of course”.

The entrepreneurs’ notion of their contribution to village development is quite present, sometimes considering themselves pioneers or examples for others to follow. They understand that an articulated strategy of diverse stakeholders could benefit all and in the end enhance village development and its competitiveness as a tourism destination. Some of the businesses analysed, especially those offering bed & breakfast services, present quite well-defined marketing strategies, such as using the Internet as their main channel to reach their target market. Also, the work with established tour operators is a strategy commonly mentioned. The discourses of entrepreneurs highlight some of these strategies: “for us, what is working is the Internet (…) the site and also Facebook. These channels make information flow in seconds and this is working well (…)”, or: “we look for international sites, in England for example, sites that promote rural tourism in Europe, and then when people look for Portugal, some north destination in the country, we are there (…)”.

Outside the Internet channels, other strategies are also followed:

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

255

“We work with Vida é Bela and Smartbox, they are leaders in the [experience package] business and we have a lot of people who come through these channels”.

The entrepreneur’s future projects are a common theme in the interviews, also revealing ambitions of business success and (controlled) growth. Many different examples of plans were described. We can find an accommodation unit owner who has a project for a new house (already with public financial support approved), intending, despite the risk involved at a time of economic and social crisis in Portugal affecting the domestic market particularly, to start it soon: “we have another house to restore, and we know that maybe this is not the best timing for new investments. However we cannot waste this opportunity (…) we realise there’s a growing interest about the village, about the whole region as an interesting tourism destination, and that’s why we will not wait or give up the project”.

Diversification is also a strategy considered for the future. Tourism is seen in a holistic way; entrepreneurs consider that tourist accommodation is a good beginning to increase business in complementary areas like biological agriculture, catering or selling handicraft or even exporting local products. Business expansion is thus viewed as an opportunity by these entrepreneurs in multiple ways, but the idea of business growth is very present in the cases analysed: “we have a handicraft project… being planned. There is a small shop associated… the objective is to encourage tourists, who come to our restaurant, to buy in our shop the products they eat here. We are referring to cheese, wine… and we are planning to export these products, too, to commercialise them using the Internet and target, in the first phase, the countries where Portuguese communities are more represented”.

The business perspective is clearly present here, with growth not limited to the tourism services provided, but also benefitting associated activities and products, and the scope of action ambitiously reaching out to global markets.

Conclusions Previous research has provided evidence that small rural businesses are not established solely on the grounds of profitability or growth potential (Bosworth & Farrell, 2011; Morrison, 2006; Paniagua, 2002). Lifestyle

256

Chapter Eleven

motives have been found central to the desire to live in the countryside. The preference for the rural way of life, closeness to nature, more time for the family or interest in developing a hobby, are frequently mentioned motives to start a rural tourism business (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000; Hall & Rusher, 2004; Shaw & Williams, 2004). Entrepreneurship that is much characterised by lifestyle goals is frequently associated with small family businesses which present low levels of job and wealth creation, or business growth, which is sometimes referred to as the phenomenon of “constrained entrepreneurs” (Shaw & Williams, 2004) who deliberately prevent their ventures from growing in order to avoid risk and maintain their lifestyles (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000; Getz & Peterson, 2005; Ioannides & Petersen, 2003). Lifestyle is also clearly the basis of most tourism business start-ups in the three Portuguese villages analysed because the most common motives mentioned for starting a rural tourism business were family links to the village, the desired balance between professional and personal life, time for the family and the desire to live in the countryside. This lifestyle drive seems, however, to be complemented by other kinds of concern. Several entrepreneurs interviewed mentioned their willingness to increase the business, the desire to make it more “professional”, to make further investments in the short run, despite recognizing the country’s negative economic context. Risk taking may not be only driven by the desire for profits, but family tourism businesses are often taking rewards from a risky action or opportunity seeking as a matter of pride in their business, social recognition or simply as an investment in future family income and lifestyle maintenance, for the business owners themselves and the following generation/s (Bosworth & Farrell, 2011), which was also visible in the analysed sample. The managers of these businesses recognise the importance of collaboration for improving both their business and the global destination offer, with some being integrated in formal and informal networks, thus acknowledging the potential of business and informal networks to achieve success through the exchange of previous experience or skills, particularly relevant for some small tourism ventures (Bosworth & Farrell, 2011). The results presented here provide evidence of a combination of lifestyle and entrepreneurial attitudes observable in the rural tourism businesses studied. The sometimes presented assumption that lifestyle entrepreneurs in tourism are risk-averse, lack growth ambition and are unwilling to employ staff (Getz & Peterson, 2005; Morrison, 2006) is not generally confirmed here. Small tourism businesses show a capacity to implement strategies to survive and even grow through alternative forms of

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

257

entrepreneurship in the rural tourism context (Bosworth & Farrell, 2011). Here, lifestyle factors may actually be beneficial to successful entrepreneurial strategies since identification and involvement with the business is very high and entrepreneurs tend to understand better and therefore target and satisfy specific market segments/niches more successfully (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000). Apart from this, the entrepreneurs show attachment to the village and an understanding of the potential and desirable connections between local resources and stakeholders to create an overall more appealing tourist destination, while contributing to the village’s and community’s development. Through their initiatives they not only are able to stay and make a living in the villages studied, countering the strong trend towards desertification of the interior rural regions in Portugal, they also serve as an example to others, help preserve heritage and traditions, e.g. the use of traditional food, and, last but not least, stimulate the local economy through the arrival of tourists (Cavaco, 2000; Silva, 2006). This tourist movement additionally contributes to a lively atmosphere in the small, isolated villages, which is very much appreciated by local populations (Kastenholz et al., 2013). All this corroborates the perspective of small rural lifestyle-oriented tourism enterprises potentially contributing to sustainable destination development (Bosworth & Ferrell, 2011; Keen, 2004; Morrison, 2006), with these businesses’ implications on local communities lying in economic, social and cultural domains. The evidence provided on entrepreneurs’ motivations in this rural tourism context does not suggest a clear relation between the motivations and actual business behaviour, though. Since entrepreneurial motivations are considered important explanatory factors for a variety of entrepreneurial behaviours (Carsrud & Brannback, 2011), additional research on rural entrepreneurship would be useful to clarify this relation. The present research is also limited to an exploratory case study focusing on a limited number of businesses in three Portuguese villages, but an extension of this research to a larger number of rural businesses and to other geographical areas would be interesting. This would additionally permit comparisons of results, according to distinct business features and context variables (e.g. comparing different types of business—accommodation, food & beverage—and different regions). Also, distinct factors in the entrepreneurs’ profile may be studied as moderating variables with larger numbers of cases included, since personal characteristics of the entrepreneurs, like age, gender, family lifecycle or academic and professional background, may affect motivations to create a rural tourism firm as well as its performance and potential (Ioannides & Petersen, 2003; Reijonen & Komppula, 2007).

258

Chapter Eleven

References Ateljevic, I., & Doorne, S. (2000). Staying Within the Fence: Lifestyle Entrepreneurship in Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(5), 378-392. Beaver, G. (2002). Small Business, Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development. London: Financial Times/Prentice Hall. Bolton, B., & Thompson, J. (2003). The Entrepreneurs in Focus: Achieve Your Potential. London: Thompson Learning. Bosworth, G., & Farrell, H. (2011). Tourism entrepreneurs in Northumberland. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1474-1494. Carsrud, A., & Brannback, M. (2011). Entrepreneurial Motivations: What Do We Still Need to Know? Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 9-26. Cavaco, C. (2000). Turismo, comércio e desenvolvimento rural. In J. A. Almeida & M. Riedl (Orgs.), Turismo Rural Ecologia, Lazer e Desenvolvimento (pp. 69-94). Bauru, SP, Brasil: EDUSC. —. (2003). Permanências e mudanças nas práticas e nos espaços turísticos. In O. Simões & A. Cristóvão (Orgs.), TERN Turismo em Espaços Rurais e Naturais (pp. 25-38). Coimbra: Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra. Clemenson, H. A., & Lane, B. (1997). Niche markets, niche marketing and rural employment. In R. D. Bollman & J. M. Bryden (Eds.), Rural Employment: An International Perspective (pp. 410-426). Wallingford: CAB International. Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and Commoditization in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 371-386. Drucker, P. F. (1991). Inovação e Espírito Empreendedor—Práticas e Princípios (3rd ed.). São Paulo: Livraria Pioneira. Echtner, C. (1995). Entrepreneurial training in developing countries. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 119-134. Gelderen, M. V. (2007). Life Style entrepreneurship as a contributor to variety in the economy. Massey University, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.massey.ac.nz/~cprichar/OIL/OIL3_papers.htm#Lifestyle, accessed in 20/06/2009. Getz, D., & Carlsen, J. (2000). Characteristics and goals of family and owner-operated businesses in the rural tourism and hospitality sectors. Tourism Management, 21(6), 547-560. Getz, D., & Carlsen, J. (2004). Family business in tourism, state of the art. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 237-258.

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

259

Getz, D., & Peterson, T. (2005). Growth and profit-oriented entrepreneurship among family business owners in the tourism and hospitality industry. Hospitality Management, 24, 219-242. Hall, C. M., & Rusher, K. (2004). Risky Lifestyles? Entrepreneurial Characteristics of the New Zealand Bed and Breakfast Sector. In R. Thomas (Org.), Small Firms in Tourism International Perspectives (pp. 83-97). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Hall, K. J., Daneke, G. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable development and entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 439-448. Hisrich, R. D., & Peters, M. P. (1998). Entrepreneurship. Boston (MA): Irwin/McGraw Hill. Hollick, M., & Braun, P. (2005). Lifestyle Entrepreneurship: The unusual nature of the tourism entrepreneur. Centre for Regional Innovation & Competitiveness, University Of Ballarat, Victoria, Australia. Ioannides, D., & Peterson, T. (2003). Tourism ‘non-entrepreneurship’ in peripherial destinations: a case study of small and medium tourism enterprises on Bornholm, Denmark. Tourism Geographies, 5(4), 408435. Jennings, G., & Nickerson, N. P. (2006). Quality Tourism Experiences. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Jesus, L. (2012). As dinâmicas do Turismo Rural—impactos em termos de desenvolvimento rural. PhD Thesis, University of Aveiro, Aveiro (Unpublished). Kaplan, J. (2003). Patterns of Entrepreneurship. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Kastenholz, E. (2003). A gestão da procura turística como instrumento estratégico no desenvolvimento de destinos rurais. In O. Simões & A. Cristóvão (Orgs.), TERN Turismo em Espaços Rurais e Naturais (pp. 203-216). Coimbra, Portugal: Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra. Kastenholz, E., & Sparrer, M. (2009). Rural Dimensions of the Commercial Home. In P. Lynch, A. MacIntosh & H. Tucker (Eds.), Commercial Homes in Tourism: An international perspective (pp. 138149). London: Routledge. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Marques, C. (2012). Marketing the rural tourism experience. In R. H. Tsiotsou & R. E. Goldsmith (Eds.), Strategic Marketing in Tourism Services (pp. 247-264). Bingley: Emerald. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M. J., & Figueiredo, E. (2013). Host-guest relationships in rural tourism: evidence from two Portuguese villages. Anatolia, 24(3), 367-380.

260

Chapter Eleven

Kastenholz, E., & Ladero, M. M. G. (2009). Turismo accesible como ejemplo de responsabilidad social en las empresas y destinos turísticos. El caso de Lousã (Portugal). ROTUR—Revista de Ócio y Turismo, 2/2009, 175-194. Kastenholz, E., Lima, J., & Sousa, A. J. (2012). A metodologia qualitativa no estudo da experiência turística em contexto rural: o caso do Projeto ORTE. GOVCOPP Tourism Working Paper No. 1/2012. Keen, D. (2004). The Interaction of Community and Small Tourism Businesses in Rural New Zealand. In R. Thomas (Org.), Small Firms in Tourism International Perspectives (pp. 139-151). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Komppula, R. (2004). Success and Growth in Rural Tourism MicroBusiness in Finland: Financial or life-Style Objectives? In R. Thomas (Org.), Small Firms in Tourism International Perspectives (pp. 115138). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Lane, B. (2009). Rural Tourism: An Overview. In T. Jamal & M. Robinson (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Tourism Studies (pp. 354370). London: Sage Publications. Lewis, K. (2005). New Zealand SME owners: In it for ‘Lifestyle’ or ‘freestyle’? New Zealand Centre for SME Research, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand. Marcketti, S. B., Niehm, L. S., & Fuloria, R. (2006). An exploratory study of lifestyle entrepreneurship and its relationship to life quality. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 34(3), 241-259. Martz Jr., B. W. M., Biscaccianti, A., Neil, T. C., & Williams, R. J. (2005). A Multi Culture Perception of the Entrepreneurial Lifestyle. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 13(4), 359-381. McCracken, G. (1988). The Long Interview. California: Sage. Morrison, A. (2006). A contextualisation of entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 12(4), 192-209. Morrison, A., Carlsen, J., & Weber, P. (2007). Lifestyle oriented small tourism (LOST) firms and tourism destination development. In S. Richardson, L. Fredline & M. Ternel (Eds.), CAUTHE, Proceedings of the 18th Annual CAUTHE Conference. Gold Coast: Griffith University. Morrison, A., Carlsen, J., & Weber, P. (2010). Small Tourism Research— Change and Evolution. International Journal of Tourism Research, 12, 739-749. Paniagua, A. (2002). Urban-Rural Migration, tourism entrepreneurs and rural restructuring in Spain. Tourism Geographies, 4(4), 349-371.

Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism

261

Parrish, B. D. (2010). Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship: Principles of organization design. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 510-523. Reijonen, H., & Komppula, R. (2007). Perception of success and its effect on small firm performance. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14(4), 689-701. Ribeiro, M. (2003). Pelo Turismo é que vamos/podemos ir? Sobre as representações e as visões dos responsáveis das administrações públicas de âmbito local, acerca do turismo para o desenvolvimento rural. In O. Simões & A. Cristóvão (Orgs.), TERN Turismo em Espaços Rurais e Naturais (pp. 41-56). Coimbra: Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra. Ribeiro, M., & Marques, C. (2002). Rural tourism and the development of less favored areas—between rhetoric and practice. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(3), 211-220. Schumpeter, J. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Shaw, G., & Williams, A. M. (2004). From Lifestyle Consumption to Lifestyle Production: Changing Patterns of Tourism Entrepreneurship. In R. Thomas (Org.), Small Firms in Tourism International Perspectives (pp. 99-113). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Silva, L. (2006). Os impactos do turismo em espaço rural. Antropologia Portuguesa, 22/23, 295-317. Stake, R. E. (2007). A arte da Investigação com Estudos de Caso. Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Thomas, R., Shaw, G., & Page, S. J. (2011). Understanding small firms in tourism: A perspective on research trends and challenges. Tourism Management, 32, 963-976. Timmons, J. A. (1994). New Venture Creation. Boston (MA): Irwin. Tucker, H. (2003). The Host-Guest relationship and its implications in Rural Tourism. In D. L. Roberts & M. Mitchell (Eds.), New Directions in Rural Tourism (pp. 80-89). Aldershot: Ashgate. Veal, A. J. (2000). Lifestyle and Leisure: A Review and Annotated Bibliography. School of Leisure, Sport and Tourism, University of Technology Sydney, On-line Bibliography 8. Retrieved from www.business.uts.edu.au/leisure/research/bibs.html Yin, R. K. (2010). Estudo de Caso, Planejamento e Métodos (4th ed.). Porto Alegre: Bookman.

CHAPTER TWELVE RESIDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS, ATTITUDES AND SUPPORT TOWARDS RURAL TOURISM LÚCIA PATO

Introduction It is known that community participation and its cultural traditions are key elements to the success of tourism development, particularly in rural areas. Knowledge of the residents’ perceptions and attitudes helps the process of destination planning and marketing and helps steer existing and future tourism development programmes (Ap, 1992; Gursoy, Jurowski & Uysal, 2002; Jurowski & Gursoy, 2004; Ko & Stewart, 2002). We understand the importance of studying the residents’ perspective, when considering that they interact with visitors informally, with friendly or hostile behaviour potentially affecting the visitors’ experience (Brida, Osti & Faccioli, 2011; Middleton & Clarke, 2001), even if they do not consider themselves as part of the tourism business. On the other hand, when residents are involved in the planning, developing the destination will tend to be more sustainable in that its effects will be considered more appropriate by the host community (Robson & Robson, 1996). In many underdeveloped regions, however, tourism has been controlled by large companies, which have paid little attention to local economic and socio-cultural conditions (Timothy & Ioannides, 2002). Moreover, many destinations lack power, making them somewhat prone to decision-making often outside their control (Timothy, 2002). That is to say that decisions which affect the lives of communities are taken without their consent, and what is worse, without them even being aware of that. As Mitchell and Reid (2001, p. 114) point out, tourism can be seen as a “double-edged sword”, in that, while it may provide some benefits, many in the community may not feel those benefits. In other words, in many territories, “the local people and their communities have become the

264

Chapter Twelve

objects of development but not the subjects of it” (Mitchell & Reid, 2001, p. 114). This situation has led us to look into the study of perceptions and attitudes towards tourism. The vast majority of these studies are based on the social exchange theory which states that residents who receive the benefits of tourism tend to value it. Indeed, several authors (e.g. Saxena, 2005; Wang & Pfister, 2008) according to this theory have argued that people who receive benefits from tourism develop more positive perceptions than those who do not and therefore tend to support the activity. Despite the subject of rural tourism in Portugal having captured the attention of researchers, there is, with few exceptions (Eusébio & Figueiredo, 2014; Figueiredo, 2003; Pato, 2012; Souza, 2009), a lack of knowledge of residents’ perceptions regarding tourism and the type of relationship between different constructs that affect these perceptions. The main aim of this study is, therefore, to observe the various perceptions of residents towards rural tourism, and interpret how those perceptions influence residents’ attitudes and support. The research addresses two inland rural regions of Portugal (the DãoLafões Region and the Douro Region) known for their landscape, cultural and touristic attributes. Even though much has been said about rural tourism in these regions, very little has been researched about residents’ perceptions and support concerning tourism. It is hoped that the results presented here can contribute to a model of tourism development which, as Timothy (2002) says, puts people in the spotlight and can thus contribute to planning and managing these regions more appropriately. The chapter consists of six parts. After the introduction, Section 2 contains the literature review of perceived positive and negative impacts of tourism and residents’ attitudes and support towards tourism. The research model integrating residents’ perceptions, satisfaction and support is presented in Section 3. The study design is explained in Section 4 while Section 5 presents and discusses the results of the empirical study. Finally, the conclusion of the study is presented.

Literature Review The Perceived Positive and Negative Impacts of Tourism In the past decades, much academic attention has been paid to the perceived impacts on tourism in general (Sharpley, 2014) and rural tourism, in particular. The results of the studies carried out suggest that a

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

265

resident is influenced by the perceived impact of tourism in three basic categories of benefits and costs: economic, environmental and social or socio-cultural (Figueiredo & Eusébio, 2014; Ko & Stewart, 2002; OviedoGarcia, Castellanos-Verdugo & Martin-Ruiz, 2008; Pato, 2012). The economic tourism impacts are often perceived by residents in a positive way, as a means to attract investments and employment opportunities in the community (Figueiredo & Eusébio, 2014; Gursoy & Rutherford, 2004; Ko & Stewart, 2002; Lindberg & Johnson, 1997; Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008) and as a means to lead to a higher standard of living due to tourism spending and additional income from tourism (Brida et al., 2011; Haralambopoulos & Pizam, 1996; Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008). On the other hand, much literature has stressed the benefits stimulated by tourism in the man-made environment or even in the natural environment. In particular, the potential of tourism activities in contributing to new environmental programs and to the restoration of historical buildings (Brida et al., 2011), the local infrastructures (water, electricity, etc.), public facilities (road network, civic centres, etc.), and the creation of parks and leisure areas for local residents (Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008) has been observed. Johnson, Snepenger and Akis (1994) and Perdue, Long and Allen (1987) also emphasise the environmental benefits of tourism related to the improvement of the landscape and community image. In addition to these positive perceptions, other studies highlight perceived socio-cultural benefits of tourism, in particular the cultural exchange between tourists and residents (Akis, Peristianis & Warner, 1996; Besculides, Lee & McCormick, 2002; Brunt & Courtney, 1999; Figueiredo & Eusébio, 2014; Gursoy & Rutherford, 2004; Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008), positive impacts for the cultural identity of the community (Figueiredo & Eusébio, 2014; Gursoy & Rutherford, 2004; Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008) and the conservation and revitalization of cultural activities and traditions by local residents (Figueiredo & Eusébio, 2014; Gursoy & Rutherford, 2004; Ko & Stewart, 2002). As previously mentioned, apart from these benefits it is expected that tourism will also give rise to costs. Firstly, from an economic point of view, if it is true that the activity can create employment, income and related benefits, it is also true that the activity also benefits only a small group of people in the community and/or can create more jobs for outsiders than for local people (Akis et al., 1996). Indeed, as many authors (e.g. Cánoves, Villarino, Priestley & Blanco, 2004; Cavaco, 1999b; Figueiredo, 2011; Ribeiro & Marques, 2002) underline, the doubts

266

Chapter Twelve

concerning the “real benefits” of rural tourism lie in these questions, especially due to an unequal distribution of the benefits of tourism, which leads to the activity increasing the gap between poor and rich people in rural areas (Pato, 2012). Apart from this, and still from an economic point of view, the activity can lead to an increase in the price of goods and services and therefore to an increase in the cost of local living (Ko & Stewart, 2002; Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008). From an environmental point of view, if tourism can lead to some type of improvements in the natural and man-made environment, it can also be responsible for environmental damage. Since the quality of the environment is essential to tourism, this is, in fact, a very delicate question and it is necessary to adopt measures to minimise this type of damage. One of the most frequently mentioned is related to an increase of environmental pollution—litter, water, air and noise (Ko & Stewart, 2002; Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008)—and therefore the damage of the natural environment and landscape (Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008). Last, but not the least, the negative socio-cultural perceptions are also emphasised by authors. For instance, Gursoy and Rutherford (2004) and Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008) stress those related to the exploitation of the culture of local residents. This is certainly the case where local people have become the objects of development, but not the subjects of it (Mitchell & Reid, 2001).

Understanding Attitudes and Support of Residents towards Tourism Tourism, as a dynamic exchange process, mostly involves a direct relationship between local residents and users of the tourism product. In fact, many of the core resources of a destination, e.g. culture and hospitality, are deeply rooted and embodied in the host community (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012). The local community may also play an active role in creating the tourism experience, helping tourists to discover and know more about the place and its culture, history, and natural heritage (Albacete-Sáez, Mar Fuentes-Fuentes & Javier Lloréns-Montes, 2007; Kastenholz et al., 2012). On the contrary, the apathy or hostile behaviour of residents can contribute to a negative or less positive experience for tourists (Brida et al., 2011; Middleton & Clarke, 2001). In fact, the “happy host” (Snaith & Haley, 1999, p. 597) is considered essential, since the success and sustainability of the destination depend on the goodwill of local residents (Jurowski & Gursoy, 2004). For this

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

267

reason, it is paramount to understand the factors that may have an influence on the perceptions of residents regarding tourism. Concerning this, some researchers have developed models which in the first place evidence the personal benefits residents gain from tourism as the factor that influences positive and negative perceptions towards this activity. One of the first studies that highlights the importance of personal benefits was undertaken by Perdue, Long and Allen (1990). The authors conclude that when controlling for personal benefits from tourism development, tourism impact perceptions are not related to residents’ characteristics. Ko and Stewart (2002) and Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008) also conclude that residents who obtain private benefits from tourism activity (e.g. employment) tend to value the positive aspects of tourism and devalue negative consequences of the activity. In other words, the more personal benefits people perceive from tourism, the more likely they are to increase the support for tourism development and the more likely they are to attribute the improvement of their community to tourism development (Wang & Pfister, 2008). In fact, residents who perceive themselves as benefiting from tourism are likely to view it positively, while residents who perceive themselves as incurring costs are likely to view the activity negatively (McGehee & Andereck, 2004). It is also expected that, if residents perceive that the benefits are greater than the costs, they support tourism and are more involved in the activity and thus endorse future development in their community (Allen, Hafer, Long & Perdue, 1993). Likewise, Ko and Stewart (2002) and Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008) have examined structural models of residents’ attitudes towards tourism and concluded that the community’s satisfaction is influenced by the perception of tourism impacts and may be useful in planning tourism or support of the activity. The above mentioned is in accordance with the “social exchange theory”, as suggested by Ap (1992). As described by the author, people engage in an interaction process once they have evaluated the rewards and costs of such an exchange and if the benefits are greater than the costs.

Research Model Integrating Residents’ Perceptions, Satisfaction and Support Based on the literature review, the research model proposed was adapted from Ko and Stewart (2002), McGehee and Andereck (2004) and Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008). The model consists of five latent constructs and represents four path hypotheses, which refer to the relationships

Chapter Twelve

268

among these five latent constructs: personal benefits, perceived positive impacts, perceived negative impacts, overall tourism satisfaction and support for tourism development (Fig. 12-1). Fig. 12-1. Conceptual model

H1A

Perceived positive impacts

Personal benefits

H3A

H2

H1B

Perceived negative impacts

Satisfaction

H3B

H4 Support

Source: Adapted from Ko and Stewart (2002), McGehee and Andereck (2004) and Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008)

The hypotheses proposed are: H1: The personal benefits obtained from rural tourism influence residents’ positive and negative perceptions (H1A and H1B) H2: The personal benefits obtained from rural tourism influence residents’ satisfaction H3: Residents’ positive and negative perceptions towards rural tourism determine their satisfaction (H3A and H3B) H4: Residents’ satisfaction with rural tourism contributes to the support given to the activity.

Methodology This work is the result of a broader investigation, which was part of a doctoral project co-financed by the Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation (FCT). The collection of data regarding the way residents view tourism was based on a survey, by questionnaire, administered at the end of 2010 in two rural regions in the country’s hinterland: the Dão Lafões Region (DLR) and the Douro Region (DR) (Fig. 12-2).

Resideents’ Perceptionns, Attitudes and d Support towaards Rural Tourrism

269

These tw wo regions were w chosen from fr the veryy beginning siince they were both innland and pooor regions. In n fact, both reegions possesss few job opportunitiees and poor liiving conditio ons, with a Grross Domesticc Product (GDP) as w well as the peer capita indiccator and perrcentage of pu urchasing power beloow the natiional averag ge (INE, 20009, 2010a, 2010b). Nonethelesss, due to their outstanding resources, r thesse two region ns hold an enormous ttourism potenntial. The DR D has been considered a World Heritage Sitte since 2001 and the DLR R holds the m most attractivee thermal spas of Portuugal. Moreover, both region ns have signifficant wine prroduction, along with hhistorical, culttural and envirronmental attrractions. Fig. 12-2. Dãão-Lafões Regioon and Douro Region R

Douro Reegion • Nineteen N municcipalities • Located L in the ffirst demarcated d wine region r of the w world • AWorld A Heritag age Site since 20 001 • 85 8 rural tourism m units • Diverse D touristiic resources succh as heritage h attractiions and high environmental e qquality Dão-Lafões Region • Fourteen F municcipalities • Part P of a wine rregion • Has H the most atttractive Spas of o Portugal • 59 5 rural tourism m units • Diverse D touristiic resources succh as heritage h attractiions and high environmental e qquality

For consstituting the sample of residents in eacch region stu udied, we selected the parishes of thhese regions with w at least tw wo rural touriism units, which were not municipaality seats. Th hese criteria oof selection are a due to our interestt in the effeccts of tourism m in more iinterior and/o or remote villages, far from the munnicipal centress of decision-m making. In tottal, seven parishes in the DLR (Foorninhos, São João de Areeais, Manhouce, Santa Cruz da Trap apa, Carvalhais, Baiões, Pov volide) and sev even parishes in i the DR

270

Chapter Twelve

(Valdigem, Parada do Bispo, Cambres, Oliveira, Covas do Douro, São Miguel de Lobrigos, Campeã) were selected. In each of the regions, the number of interviews to be conducted was determined by quota sampling (which took into account the criteria of residents’ gender and age). Each parish was assigned a share of surveys in proportion to its population distribution. On the whole, 190 responses were obtained in the two regions: 95 in the DLR and 95 in the DR (see Table 12-1 and Table 12-2). For structuring the survey, we took into account the fact that the questionnaires were filled in by interviewers, with face-to-face contact, the general objectives of the questions, their organisation and the type of questions, including open, closed and Likert scale questions (which had 5 degrees of agreement: 1 for strongly disagree and 5 for strongly agree). This questionnaire was structured in five topics: 1. generic attitudes about tourism and tourists; 2. perceptions towards rural tourism and personal benefits obtained; 3. perceived positive and negative effects; 4. overall satisfaction and support towards tourism; 5. characteristics of residents. For questions related to positive and negative perceived effects of rural tourism and about the overall satisfaction with and support for tourism we used Likert scale questions, whereas for questions related to personal benefits and the characteristics of residents, we used closed questions. After gathering the information, the data was treated with the Software Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20. Hypotheses regarding different constructs that affect residents’ perceptions and support were tested with Mann-Whitney and Spearman Rho tests for D = 0.050.

741 1181 1490 254 1933 245 1636 7480

Manhouce S. C. Trapa Carvalhais Baiões S. J. Areias Forninhos Povolide Total

TNR 1 3 4 0 4 0 4 16

TNM 0 1 2 0 2 0 2 7

15-24 TNR 5 8 11 2 14 2 13 55

TNM 2 4 5 1 7 1 6 26

25-64 TNR 3 4 4 1 7 1 4 24

>=65 TNM 1 2 2 1 3 0 2 11 9 15 19 3 25 3 21 95

TNR

271

1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.3

TR/TRes (%)

Note: TNR—total number of responses; TNM—total number of responses by men; TR/TRes—total responses/total residents Source: Own elaboration based on INE (2010a)

Residents > 14 years old

Parishes

Table 12-1. Distribution of responses by parish in DLR

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

Chapter Twelve

15-24 TNR TNM 1 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 0 6 3 1 0 18 7

25-64 TNR TNM 4 2 10 5 10 5 9 4 1 1 21 10 3 1 58 28 TNR 2 4 3 3 0 6 1 19

>=65 TNM 1 1 1 1 0 3 0 7 7 17 16 15 2 33 5 95

TNR

TR/TRes (%) 1.5 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.2 1.5 1.3 1.4

Note: TNI—total number of responses; TNM—total number of responses by men; TR/TRes—total responses/total residents Source: Own elaboration based on INE (2010b)

C. Douro Campeã S. Miguel Valdigem P. Bispo Cambres Oliveira Total

Residents > 14 years old 462 1405 1092 997 171 2226 372 6725

Table 12-2. Distribution of responses by parish in DR

Parishes

272

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

273

Discussion of Results Socio-demographic Profile of Residents Table 12-3. Socio-demographic characteristics of residents .

Variables N Gender Female Male Age (years) < 24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 > 65 years Literacy Cannot read or write 1st Cycle (1-4 years) 2nd Cycle (5-6 years) 3rd Cycle (7-9 years) General Secondary Higher Education Other Situation Don’t know/didn’t answer Occupational status Employed Retired Professional activity related to tourism in the last five years Yes No Integration in some local recreational association Yes No Source: Own survey data

DLR %

N

DR %

DLR + DR N %

51 44

53.7 46.3

58 37

61.1 38.9

109 81

57.4 42.6

16 9 10 16 20 24

16.8 9.5 10.5 16.8 21.1 25.3

18 9 9 20 20 19

18.9 9.5 9.5 21.1 21.1 20

34 18 19 36 40 43

17.9 9.5 10 18.9 21.1 22.6

2 56 3 14 17 2 1 0

2.1 58.9 3.2 14.7 17.4 2.1 1.1

2 47 6 21 10 6 0

2.1 49.5 6.3 22.1 10.5 6.3 0

4 103 9 35 27 8 1

2.1 54.2 4.7 18.4 14.2 4.2 0.5

0

3

3.2

3

1.6

34 61

35.8 64.2

47 48

49.5 50.5

81 109

42.6 57.4

13 82

13.7 86.3

22 73

23.2 76.8

35 155

18.4 81.6

0 95

0 100

3 92

3.3 96.8

3 187

1.6 98.4

As shown in Table 12-3, the proportion of men and women interviewed was similar. Approximately one quarter of the residents

274

Chapter Twelve

surveyed in both regions were over the age of 65, reflecting the structure of the aging population in the regions concerned. In terms of schooling, we noticed a relatively low level of education. Over half of the total residents surveyed in both regions reported four years of schooling. Moreover, residents report low levels of participation in local recreational groups or associations and they are mainly retired people who have not had any professional activity related to tourism within the past five years.

Residents’ Perceptions and Support Table 12-4 shows the mean values for residents’ perceptions regarding different types of benefit, registered as ratings on 5-point Likert scales. Overall, residents do not reveal positive perceptions about rural tourism. Rather, these perceptions are negative or indifferent, in that resident respondents tend to “neither agree nor disagree” with the statements. In other words, despite the “environmental benefits” factor being, among the three, the one which shows more positive mean scores in both regions, its values are still not very encouraging. In fact, unlike other studies, including Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008) and Souza (2009), which reported that residents develop positive perceptions in terms of socio-cultural, economic and environmental effects resulting from tourism, in these regions residents do not observe such effects. Table 12-5 shows the mean values of the responses with regards to different types of cost. Overall, respondents confirmed that residents develop negative socio-economic perceptions, but not negative perceptions in terms of environmental and socio-cultural impacts. Table 12-4. Perceived positive impacts (mean scores)

Socio-cultural

Stimulation of cultural initiatives Preservation of local customs and traditions Support of handicrafts and traditional crafts Investment in local economic activities

DLR

DR

DLR+DR

2.23

2.11

2.57

2.28

2.20

2.24

2.22

2.08

2.15

2.01

2.12

2.06

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

Environmental

Socio-economic

275

DLR

DR

DLR+DR

Global score Improvement of environmental zones Restoration of historical heritage Improved image of the community Global score

2.19

2.13

2.16

2.85

2.83

2.84

2.78

2.67

2.72

3.22

2.79

3.01

2.95

2.76

2.86

Local job creation Development of new services Improved economic conditions of residents Global score

2.20

2.21

2.22

2.01

1.99

2.00

2.28

2.26

2.27

2.16

2.15

2.16

Source: Own survey data

Table 12-5. Perceived negative impacts (mean scores)

Socio-cultural

Environmental

Socioeconomic

Exploitation and alteration of local customs and traditions Global score Damage to plant and animal life Increased pollution Global score Economically benefits a small number of people Accentuates the differences between rich and poor Global score

Source: Own survey data

DLR

DR

DLR+DR

2.11

2.07

2.09

2.11

2.07

2.09

2.02

1.97

1.99

1.98

1.98

1.98

2.00

1.97

1.99

3.79

4.06

3.93

3.63

3.60

3.62

3.71

3.83

3.77

Chapter Twelve

276

In terms of perceptions regarding the negative socio-economic effects the evidence corroborates the results of other studies (e.g. Akis et al., 1996). Nevertheless, differently from results reported by Gursoy et al. (2002), residents concerned did not observe any negative impacts (neither environmental nor socio-cultural). The scale used to measure residents’ satisfaction is composed of only two items (Table 12-6). As expected from the previous results, overall satisfaction with rural tourism is not too high, since the mean value of both statements is around three. Table 12-6. Residents’ satisfaction (mean scores)

Satisfaction

DLR

DR

DLR+DR

3.56

3.29

3.4

2.97

2.87

2.9

The overall impact of rural tourism units is positive I am pleased to have rural tourism in my community

Source: Own survey data

Indeed, these results appear to support other authors’ ideas (e.g. Valente & Figueiredo, 2003) when reporting that existing tourism is not the tourism which the community actually desires. We also asked residents if they would like to increase their involvement with rural tourism. However, in both regions residents do not seem very aware of the potential of the activity, so that the residents’ willingness to collaborate with the activity is also relatively low (Table 127). Table 12-7. Resident’s support (mean scores)

Support

DLR

DR

DLR+DR

More rural tourism may help the community to develop

3.57

3.36

3.5

I would like to collaborate with rural tourism initiatives

2.79

2.86

2.8

Source: Own survey data

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

277

In fact, unlike Souza’s study (2009) which shows that residents have some willingness to participate in projects to boost tourism, the results found here are not very optimistic.

Relationship between main Constructs Relationship between Personal Benefits and Residents’ Satisfaction The test results are shown below on the existence of significant causal relationships between the five latent constructs: “personal benefits”, “perceived positive impacts”, “perceived negative impacts”, “satisfaction” and “support”. Since the quality of the results improves with sample size, we chose to perform inferential analysis tests, aggregating sample information from both regions. Given that the data violates the assumption of normality, nonparametric tests were used. Thus, the hypotheses that analyse the relationship between personal benefits, perceived positive and negative impacts and satisfaction were tested through the nonparametric Mann-Whitney tests. With regard to the relationship between personal benefits and perceived positive impacts, the results (Table 12-8) show that the distributions differ in central tendency, in accordance with the MannWhitney tests. Table 12-8. Relationship between personal benefits and perceived positive impacts

Socio-cultural Environmental Socio-economic

Personal benefits No Yes No Yes No Yes

N 179 11 178 11 179 11

Mean rank 93.0 136.2 91.3 155.1 93.2 132.8

Z

p

-3.99

0.00

-3.88

0.00

-2.90

0.04

Source: Own survey data

In fact, residents surveyed who report having personal benefits develop more positive perceptions about the socio-cultural benefits (z=-3.99, p=0.00), environmental benefits (z=-3.88, p=0.00) and socio-economic benefits (z=-2.90, p=0.04) derived from rural tourism, differences which

Chapter Twelve

278

were statistically significant. These findings are consistent with other studies, in particular with Ko and Stewart (2002), Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008) and Perdue et al. (1990). As seen in Table 12-9, the data only show a statistically significant relationship between personal benefits from tourism and perceived socioeconomic costs. In fact, residents who say they have no personal benefits develop more negative perceptions about the socio-economic costs of rural tourism, and these differences were statistically significant (z=-2.43, p=0.02). The levels of significance of the Mann-Whitney tests for the other negative aspects analysed (environmental costs, socio-cultural costs) lead to non-acceptance of differences between the groups, given that p>0.050. The lack of significant differences regarding these other aspects may be due to the fact that the relationship between personal benefits and perceived negative impacts is strongly dependent upon the level of tourism development or residents’ education level (Ko & Stewart, 2002). Table 12-9. Relationship between personal benefits and perceived negative impacts

Socio-cultural Environmental Socio-economic

Personal benefits No Yes No Yes No Yes

N 179 11 178 11 179 11

Mean rank 94.8 106.3 95.4 96.6 97.6 61.6

Z

p

-0.11

0.11

-0.21

0.84

-2.43

0.02

Source: Own survey data

Concerning the relationship between personal benefits and residents’ satisfaction, evidence also shows that the two distributions differ in central tendency, in accordance with the Mann-Whitney test, with p”0.050 (Table 12-10). In fact, the satisfaction of residents who have personal benefits in relation to rural tourism is significantly superior to the satisfaction of residents who do not have such benefits (z=-3.14, p=0.02). The results obtained here are also consistent with other studies, in particular with Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008), in line with social exchange theory.

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

279

Table 12-10. Relationship between personal benefits and satisfaction Personal benefits I’m satisfied with rural tourism in the community

No Yes

N

Mean rank

17 92.7 9 11 140.45

Z

p

0. 3. 02 14

Source: Own survey data

Relationship between Perceived Impacts, Satisfaction and Support Given that the data violates the assumption of normality, we used nonparametric Spearman Rho1 tests to test the suggested relationship between perceptions developed (positive and negative), overall satisfaction with rural tourism and tourism support. Table 12-11 shows the relationship between perceived positive impacts and residents’ satisfaction. As also evidenced by Ko and Stewart (2002), there are statistically significant positive relationships (p=0.000). The correlation is highest in the case of perceptions regarding environmental benefits. Table 12-11. Relationship between perceived positive impacts and residents’ satisfaction Spearman Rho correlation

Environmental Socio-economic Socio-cultural

r p r Socio-economic p r Socio-cultural p I am pleased to r have rural tourism in my p community

0.313 0.000

Environmental

0.462 0.000 0.274 0.000

0.313 0.000 0.462 0.000 0.455

0.274 0.000 0.304

0.284

0.000

0.000

0.000

Source: Own survey data

Table 12-12 shows the relationship between perceived negative impacts and residents’ satisfaction. There is only a significant, while weak

Chapter Twelve

280

(r=-0.315), relationship (p=0.000) with negative perceptions regarding socio-economic impacts, indicating that the higher these costs, the lower residents’ satisfaction. With regard to other relationships, the significance values (perceived negative environmental and socio-cultural impacts) tell us that these are not statistically significant. As mentioned above, these results may be due to limited tourism development in these territories and/or due to the fact that residents have little sensitivity to these impacts. Table 12-12. Relationship between perceived negative impacts and residents’ satisfaction Spearman Rho correlation

Environmental Socio-economic Socio-cultural

r p r Socio-economic p r Socio-cultural p I am pleased to r have rural tourism in my p community

0.047 0.524

Environmental

0.016 0.831 -0.214 0.003

0.047 0.524 0.016 0.831 0.000

-0.214 0.003 -0.315

0.033

0.999

0.000

0.656

Source: Own survey data

Finally, evidence shows that relationships were found with statistical significance (p=0.000) regarding the relationship between residents’ satisfaction and residents’ support of rural tourism (Table 12-13). Table 12-13. Relationship between satisfaction and residents’ support I am I would like to pleased… collaborate…

Rho de Spearman correlation I am pleased to have rural tourism in my community I would like to collaborate with rural tourism Source: Own survey data

r p r p

0.421 0.000 0.421 0.000

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

281

As observed, there is a moderate correlation (r=0.421) between the variables, indicating that on average, the higher the satisfaction of residents with rural tourism, the greater their willingness to support and collaborate with the activity.

Conclusion The role of local people is vital to the success and development of rural tourism. When residents are involved, destination development tends to be more sustainable since its effects will be considered more appropriate by the host community (Robson & Robson, 1996), additionally leading to more favourable tourist experiences (Brida et al., 2011; Middleton & Clarke, 2001). However, our results suggest that in the regions studied the population has been neglected in the process of tourism development. It is observed that residents do not generally develop positive perceptions regarding the effects of rural tourism. Despite not perceiving any negative impacts, the population addressed says that rural tourism “benefits only a small number of people”, thereby accentuating differences between rich and poor (residents). These remarks are in line with Cavaco (1999a), who over ten years ago said that the benefits of rural tourism, in economic and social terms as well as regarding other services to local communities, are scarce. For this reason, it is worth giving emphasis to Valente and Figueiredo (2003), when they state that the existing tourism in rural areas is not the tourism that the community wants. In order to win the support of residents, it is vital to change this scenario. In addition to observing residents’ perceptions towards tourism, another goal of this study was to test the relationship between different constructs that affect the satisfaction and support of residents. Firstly, it is confirmed that personal benefits derived from the tourism activity influence positive perceptions (socio-economic, environmental, sociocultural), but also negative socio-economic perceptions in the case of nonexisting personal benefits. Personal benefits, perceived positive impacts and perceived negative socio-economic impacts, in turn, influence the level of satisfaction that residents experience. The data obtained thus are in line with the social exchange theory. Indeed, as several authors (e.g. Saxena, 2005; Wang & Pfister, 2008) have argued, people who receive benefits from the activity develop more positive perceptions than those who do not. In order to increase residents’ satisfaction, therefore, it is important to bear this evidence in mind. It is also confirmed that residents’ satisfaction is related to their support of tourism. In short, the four hypotheses presented are confirmed.

282

Chapter Twelve

As argued by Ko and Stewart (2002) and Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008), this knowledge is important in developing programs for tourism development. It is also believed that community-based tourism is a more sustainable form of tourism development because it allows local communities to break from being dominated by an oligopoly of wealthy elites at the local level (Timothy, 2002). In fact, this form of communitybased tourism seeks to meet the needs and aspirations of the community in a harmonious way, supporting their economies instead of the economies of others, and above all, trying to ensure that tourism does not destroy their culture, traditions (Fitton, 1996 in Timothy, 2002) and environment. In terms of limitations, it is noted that the present analysis only focuses on rural tourism accommodation. It would, therefore, be interesting to extend the study to all forms of tourism undertaken in rural areas. On the other hand, the dimension of the sample (n=190) could in some way limit the results of this study; it would also be interesting to have a larger sample.

Notes 1. According to Maroco (2007) we can describe the strength of the correlation using the following guide for the absolute value of rs: 0.0-0.19 “very weak”; 0.20.39 “weak”; 0.4-0.69 “moderate”; 0.7-0.89 “strong”; 0.9-1 “very strong”.

References Akis, S., Peristianis, N., & Warner, J. (1996). Residents’ attitudes to tourism development: the case of Cyprus. Tourism Management, 17(7), 481-494. Albacete-Sáez, C. A., Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, M., & Javier Lloréns-Montes, F. (2007). Service quality measurement in rural accommodation. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(1), 45-65. Allen, L. R., Hafer, H. R., Long, P. T., & Perdue, R. R. (1993). Rural residents’ attitudes toward recreation and tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 31(4), 27-33. Ap, J. (1992). Residents’ perceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(4), 665-690. Besculides, A., Lee, M. E., & McCormick, P. J. (2002). Residents’ perceptions of the cultural benefits of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2), 303-319. Brida, J. G., Osti, L., & Faccioli, M. (2011). Residents’ Perception and attitudes towards tourism impacts: a case study of the small rural

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

283

community of Folgaria. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 18(3), 359-385. Brunt, P., & Courtney, P. (1999). Host perceptions of sociocultural impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(3), 493-515. Cánoves, G., Villarino, M., Priestley, G. K., & Blanco, A. (2004). Rural tourism in Spain: an analysis of recent evolution. Geoforum, 35(6), 755-769. Cavaco, C. (1999a). O mundo rural português: desafios e futuros. In C. Cavaco (Ed.), Desenvolvimento Rural Desafio e Utopia (pp. 135-148). Lisboa: Centro de Estudos Geográficos da Universidade de Lisboa. —. (1999b). Turismo Rural e Turismo de Habitação em Portugal. In C. Cavaco (Ed.), Desenvolvimento Rural Desafio e Utopia (pp. 293-318). Lisboa: Centro de Estudos Geográficos da Universidade de Lisboa. Eusébio, C., & Figueiredo, E. (2014). Desenvolvimento sustentável de destinos rurais. In E. Kastenholz, C. Eusébio, E. Figueiredo, M. J. Carneiro & J. Lima (Eds.), Reinventar o turismo rural em Portugal Cocriação de experiências turísticas sustentáveis (pp. 51-58). Aveiro: Universidade de Aveiro. Figueiredo, E. (2003). Um rural para viver, outro para visitar—o ambiente nas estratégias de desenvolvimento para as áreas rurais. PhD, Universidade de Aveiro, Aveiro. —. (2011). Um rural cheio de futuros? In E. Figueiredo (Ed.), Rural Plural (pp. 13-19). Castro Verde: 100Luz. Figueiredo, E., & Eusébio, C. (2014). A experiência turística vivida e cocriada pela população local. In E. Kastenholz, C. Eusébio, E. Figueiredo, M. J. Carneiro & J. Lima (Eds.), Reinventar o turismo rural em Portugal Cocriação de experiências turísticas sustentáveis (pp. 89-106). Aveiro: Universidade de Aveiro. Gursoy, D., Jurowski, C., & Uysal, M. (2002). Resident attitudes: A Structural Modeling Approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1), 79-105. Gursoy, D., & Rutherford, D. G. (2004). Host attitudes toward tourism— An improved structural model. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 495-516. Haralambopoulos, N., & Pizam, A. (1996). Perceived impacts of tourism: The case of samos. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(3), 503-526. INE (2009). Study on municipal purchasing power, 2007. Lisbon: INE. INE (2010a). Statistical Yearbook of the Centre Region. Lisbon: INE. INE (2010b). Statistical Yearbook of the North Region. Lisbon: INE. Johnson, J. D., Snepenger, D. J., & Akis, S. (1994). Residents’ perceptions of tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(3), 629-642.

284

Chapter Twelve

Jurowski, C., & Gursoy, D. (2004). Distance effects on residents’ attitudes toward tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(2), 296-312. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience—The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Ko, D. W., & Stewart, W. P. (2002). A structural equation model of residents’ attitudes for tourism development. Tourism Management, 23(5), 521-530. Lindberg, K., & Johnson, R. L. (1997). Modeling resident attitudes toward tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(2), 402-424. Maroco, J. (2007). Análise Estatística com utilização do SPSS. Lisboa: Edições Sílabo. McGehee, N. G., & Andereck, K. L. (2004). Factors predicting rural residents’ support of tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 43(2), 131140. Middleton, V., & Clarke, J. (2001). Marketing in Travel and Tourism (3rd ed.). Oxford: 3rd Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann. Mitchell, R. E., & Reid, D. G. (2001). Community integration: Island tourism in Peru. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1), 113-139. Oviedo-Garcia, M. A., Castellanos-Verdugo, M., & Martin-Ruiz, D. (2008). Gaining Residents’ Support for Tourism and Planning. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10(2), 95-109. Pato, L. (2012). Dinâmicas do turismo rural—impactos em termos de Desenvolvimento Rural. PhD, University of Aveiro, Aveiro. Perdue, R. R., Long, P. T., & Allen, L. (1987). Rural resident tourism perceptions and attitudes. Annals of Tourism Research, 14(3), 420-429. Perdue, R. R., Long, P. T., & Allen, L. (1990). Resident support for tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 17(4), 586-599. Ribeiro, M., & Marques, C. (2002). Rural Tourism and the Development of Less Favoured Areas—between Rhetoric and Practice. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(3), 211-220. Robson, J., & Robson, I. (1996). From shareholders to stakeholders: critical issues for tourism marketers. Tourism Management, 17(7), 533-540. Saxena, G. (2005). Relationships, networks and the learning regions: case evidence from the Peak District National Park. Tourism Management, 26(2), 277-289. Sharpley, R. (2014). Host perceptions of tourism: A review of the research. Tourism Management, 42(1), 37-49.

Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Support towards Rural Tourism

285

Snaith, T., & Haley, A. (1999). Residents opinions of tourism development in the historic city of York, England. Tourism Management, 20(5), 595-603. Souza, C. A. (2009). Turismo e Desenvolvimento: percepções e atitudes dos residentes da Serra da Estrela. Master Thesis, University of Aveiro, Aveiro. Timothy, D. J. (2002). Tourism and Community Development. In R. Sharpley & D. T. Telfer (Eds.), Aspects of tourism Tourism and development Concepts and issues (pp. 149-164). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Timothy, D. J., & Ioannides, D. (2002). Tour-Operator Hegemony: Dependency, Oligopoly, and Sustainability in Insular Destinations. In Y. Apostolopoulos & D. J. Gayle (Eds.), Tour operator hegemony: Dependency and oligopoly in insular destinations (pp. 181-198). Westport, Ct: Praeger. Valente, S., & Figueiredo, E. (2003). O Turismo que existe não é aquele que se quer... In O. Simões & A. Cristóvão (Eds.), TER Turismo em Espaços Rurais e Naturais (pp. 95-106). Coimbra: IPC. Wang, Y. S., & Pfister, R. E. (2008). Residents’ Attitudes Toward Tourism and Perceived Personal Benefits in a Rural Community. Journal of Travel Research, 47(1), 84-93.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN UNDERSTANDING RURAL RESIDENTS’ EXPERIENCES WITH TOURISTS: THE PERCEPTIONS OF RESIDENTS IN THE ISLANDS OF GRACIOSA AND SÃO JORGE (THE AZORES) LUÍS SILVEIRA, PAULO ESPÍNOLA AND NORBERTO SANTOS

Introduction Tourism is being incorporated into development processes increasingly often, and may now be considered the preferred strategy for the rapid and inexpensive promotion of local/regional resources. It is also seen as a standard practice that in order “to gain support for tourism projects and initiatives, many planners now strive to understand how the public perceives the tourism industry” (Harrill, 2004, p. 1). Together with the assumption that sustainability issues are increasingly universal and unavoidable in tourism development, it is of vital importance to consider the communities who live and work in areas which offer tourist attractions or tourism products. The experience of rural residents is one of the elements which the tourism system should bear in mind, specifically with regard to the hospitality offered to tourists. Interactions between the local population and visitors have a great influence on tourist satisfaction and, in turn, may positively affect the impact of this economic activity on local/regional development. The aim of this text is to understand the perceptions of local communities on the islands of Graciosa and S. Jorge in the Azores (Portugal) with regard to the impact of tourists visiting their local areas. Within the framework of the qualitative attributes ascribed by tourists to

288

Chapter Thirteen

the Azores (mainly associated with natural features and traditional culture), this chapter identifies behaviours and attitudes resulting from host-guest interactions. It contributes towards tourism studies of the perceptions of residents living on small islands. Local communities can contribute significantly towards creating a segmented and targeted Azores tourism product that can better compete with other destinations, including tourism associated with heritage, customs, and local identity (such as religious festivals, pilgrimages, or gastronomy), ranging from nature and sustainable tourism to cultural tourism niches within the global market. This chapter analyses the results of a survey, although it is important to mention that there are some gaps in the research regarding the attitudes of the local community to tourism, mainly due to the fact that participatory strategic planning is still considered marginal in comparison to interventions by public bodies and public-private partnerships. The authors do not aim to study the Azorean population as a whole, but to focus on the profile of its rural inhabitants. Most of the population of the archipelago has, however, a relatively urbanised rural identity. The authors chose the islands of São Jorge and Graciosa for this study, although neither the smallest nor the most rural in the archipelago because some of them have lived there and have considerable knowledge of these territories. It is assumed that tourism planning must include protection of the socio-economic and environmental quality of life of the local residents, thus enhancing the quality of the tourism offered. An understanding of the tourism system cannot be restricted to the experienced traveller and explorer of many places, whether exotic or not, but also needs to consider the local residents who understand the value of tourism for their community and have an interest in protecting the quality of life in the place where they live (Harrill, 2004).

Literature Review The rural world has been affected by dramatic changes in recent decades, which have had an impact on its various features. Landscape, as a very important representation of the rural world, invokes nature, a way of life and culture, attracting visitors based on a variety of resources. Rural areas have a low density of human activity, although this does not necessarily coincide with reduced functionalities. Gaspar (2004, p. 181) states that “rural spaces are becoming less and less stable, if in fact they ever were stable” (our translation); however, these changes depend heavily

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

289

on representations and demands by urban populations. In the positive sense of valuing the ideology of profit, rural areas are nowadays being valued as heritage, as assets and as social representations (Cardoso, 2011). This process has resulted in an increasing number of interventions by both public and private agents to recover their endogenous potential, particularly nowadays since they function as an aspect of identity, a sanctuary or a refuge for the past, in a world caught up in the process of cultural globalization. The potential of rural tourism is associated with higher levels of tourist education and experience, as well as a growing interest in “the authentic”, reflected in the natural and cultural heritage, and a growing concern for the environment visited, the mental and physical well-being of the visitor, and a tendency to take holidays throughout the year (Kastenholz, 2003, cited by Pato, 2012). As stated by Pinto (2011), the emergence of rural multifunctionality launched new opportunities for regeneration in a world that has been marginalised, but is remembered for its endogenous resources and the potential these territories can offer to their populations and external agents. Many commentators find an “empathic relationship which is being established between nature and culture” (Santos, Cravidão & Cunha, 2010, p. 155, our translation), which is increasingly dynamic and intuitive. However, the relational context and content are different from that of the urban world, since cosmic time, as opposed to clock time, is still very evident. There is, nevertheless, a significant spatio-temporal expression of multiple activities (Santos & Cunha, 2007). The days when the countryside could be perfectly defined are gone, both in physical and functional terms, and the same has happened to urban space, its opposite (Teixeira, 2013). It seems that the beginning of the 21st century can be characterised by an increasing difficulty in cataloguing the territories in which people’s daily lives unfold (Carvalho & Fernandes, 2002). Movement and travel interpenetrate and subvert space-time as a whole, creating scenarios and simulations, but also an increasing number of experiences based on real facts and the cultural memory of territories. Due to a sense of belonging and ownership of geographical space, and the concept of place attachment, in which borders are important, territory “implies planning and identification by a social group” (Gaspar, 2004, cited by Pinto, 2011, p. 14, our translation). The attitudes and perceptions of local residents are important because they are more directly affected by tourism-related activity in their own “backyard” and hence have a strong moral case for their points of view which should be heard and heeded (Fischer, 2000, cited by Weaver & Lawton, 2013, p. 166). It is important to understand residents’ attitudes

290

Chapter Thirteen

towards tourism in order to gain their active support, without which it is difficult to develop tourism in a sustainable and socially compatible manner (Nunkoo, Smith & Ramkissoon, 2013). Kim, Uysal and Sirgy (2013) state that previous studies reveal a positive relationship between the social impact of tourism and local residents’ sense of community wellbeing, meaning that as residents increasingly recognise the positive social impact of tourism, their satisfaction with community well-being increases. Nowadays, the involvement of the local population is a necessary condition for the development and sustainability of any new form of tourism (Poon, 1994). However, a wide range of situations should be considered. Zhang, Inbakaran and Jackson (2006, p. 183) claim that “residents who do not support the development of tourism have been identified in almost all segmentation studies concerning attitudes towards tourism, namely ‘Haters’ (Davis et al., 1988; Madrigal, 1995), ‘Cynics’ (Williams & Lawson, 2001) or ‘Somewhat Irritated’ (Ryan & Montgomery, 1994)”. Nevertheless, “local participation in tourism has been regarded as a positive force for change and a passport to development” (Claiborne, 2010, p. 8), although “the potential social benefits can only be possessed by a transparent and community-oriented approach, which understands the local image and views tourism as a local resource” (Murphy, 1985, cited by Claiborne, 2010, p. 8). The local population is central in all cases. From this perspective, geoconservation and geomorphological heritage studies are very important in the Azores, studies about places, landscapes and regions (including the geomorphological heritage, geomonuments and geosites). In addition to their intrinsic importance as heritage forms, they form clusters with other elements of biodiversity and cultural diversity (Santos, 2006). “Globalization has had great importance in the valuation of places, when we associate the territories’ identities, the specific know-how, the ‘ex-libris’, the property inheritance and the traditions” (Santos & Cunha, 2007, p. 210, our translation), and it is in this sense that the rural world becomes important. Associated, in recent history, with the different forms of rural tourism, “tourism only makes sense within a framework of spatial asymmetries mitigation (...), the protection and the valorisation of the landscape and environment balances and links to the regional and local identities of integrated management” (Simões, 1993, p. 82, our translation). However, unlike the density found in urban space, the natural heritage and elements of culture, symbolism and imagery of the countryside can be organised as attractions and products and may serve as development factors. This potential exists because recreational and entertainment

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

291

activities, associated with these assets through heritage interpretation systems, can be created, enabling rural areas to emerge as leisure areas based on locally accessible tangible and intangible products. In an urban world, eager to find ways of escaping routines, stress and speed, rural areas are becoming leisure areas, seen as reserves of resources and environmental assets, as well as places that preserve memory and cultural heritage. It is recognised that today “rural tourism has a wider role to play in the rural environment, such as job creation, farm diversification, promotion of local food and drink, destination resource stewardship and community cohesion” (The Scottish Parliament, 2002, cited by Haven-Tang & Jones, 2012, p. 28).

The development and promotion of tourism have been widely accepted as a positive economic step, especially in underdeveloped countries/destinations (Cooke, 1982, cited by Ko & Stewart, 2002, p. 521). Therefore, economic activity anchored in tourism can “help the host community to retain its members, particularly unemployed or under-employed youths in economically marginal areas...” (Cohen, 1984, cited by Haralambopoulos, 1996, p. 504). Understanding how the host community relates to tourists clearly demands a strategic participatory approach. As noted by Cui and Ryan (2011, p. 605), “within the tourism literature, an examination of residents and their views of tourism has a long history, and continues to attract attention and additionally has been again brought to the fore by issues of sustainability and the increasing role of governmental and non-governmental agencies”.

Methodology Quantitative research was the method chosen for investigating perceptions of the socio-cultural impacts of tourism in host communities in this case. After examining the meanings that the rural world may represent in development processes that include tourism, it is important to understand the local residents’ perceptions of people who visit the islands as tourists and the investments that are directed specifically towards tourism. This study chose to collect the opinions of local people by means of a questionnaire, whose elaboration took into account the purpose of the study as well as the experience of other earlier surveys of local populations. This research instrument was administered to 98 residents in

292

Chapter Thirteen

two islands in the Azores, São Jorge (61.2%) and Graciosa (38.8%): Graciosa Island has 4,391 residents and São Jorge Island 9,171. The nonprobability sampling method was used, more specifically, the purposive sample. Following this method, the respondents were selected by the researchers (one member from each household). The survey was administered randomly, with the interviewers choosing their starting points, for example, the beginning of a street, and then conducting the survey in the existing homes with available respondents. The data processing and analysis was carried out using Microsoft Excel software, since the graphs and pivot tables enabled two or more variables to be combined, thus aiding the process of drawing up conclusions. The questionnaire was structured with open/closed questions and questions that used the Likert scale to achieve the most meaningful results. It was organised into two major groups of questions. The first section referred to the respondent’s biodata, seeking information on mobility, holiday periods, and fluency in foreign languages. The second section referred to the respondent’s relations and interactions with tourism and tourists, focusing on his/her perceptions of the importance of tourists for the development of their island and tourists’ direct impact on their lifestyle and quality of life. Also, the residents’ perceptions of the amount and quality of interactions with tourists were investigated, as was the image they had of tourists, the investment opportunities that tourism might create and, thereby, their perceptions regarding the potential of tourism-triggered development, based on local resources.

The Socio-Spatial Context The Azores have unique and diverse characteristics, which differ from mainland Portugal. The archipelago of the Azores is located 1,600 km west of the Portuguese mainland and consists of nine islands. It has been one of two Portuguese autonomous regions since 1976. In 2011, the Azores had a population of 246,772; Graciosa Island had 4,391 residents and São Jorge Island 9,171. The population of both islands has fallen since 2001, experiencing a decline of 8.1% and 5.2% respectively, unlike the Azores population as a whole, which has increased by 2.1%. The spatial and population distribution is, in general, uneven across the nine islands. The islands of São Miguel, Terceira and Pico occupy 70% of the 2,322 km² surface of the archipelago, whereas Graciosa occupies 2.6% (60.7 km²) and São Jorge, 10.5% (243.6 km²). In terms of population, 55.9% of the inhabitants live on São Miguel Island, which, together with Terceira, accounts for almost ¾ of the

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

293

population of the Azores. Only 5.5% live on the islands of São Jorge and Graciosa. In 1997, under the VII Regional Government, an original tourism development scheme began in the region, with the creation of a tourism development plan (POTRAA). Although only published in 2008, the various earlier drafts were useful in defining and evaluating the Azores as a tourism destination. The main tourism product of the Azores is landscape/nature, individualised within the national context and relying on a complex insular landscape, volcanic based landscapes, an unusual climate and a way of life that are closely linked to the sea. Emigration was also a response to these features in certain historical periods, due to the lack of jobs and the natural conditions. As a result, awareness and understanding of how to improve tourism through sustainable development strategies have emerged in this territory. In this context, mass tourism has been considered of secondary importance. The focus is on quality niche market tourism and the clear added value of the product offered, which is directed towards foreign markets with greater economic power and consumers with higher levels of education and income. The rural characteristics of the territory mean that there are only six cities, five of which are small. The majority of settlements on the Azores are small villages in which the main economic sectors are fishing, agriculture and the industrial processing of products from local primary sector activities. Jobs in the service sector are concentrated in the centres of the respective municipalities, where the public sector has a very significant stake in the employment market. Within the regional tourism scenario, accommodation provision has increased significantly in the Azores in the past 15 years. This growth was the result of making tourism a political priority for the diversification of the regional economy, which had already begun to invest in tourism as a development vector. In 2001, the Azores had an accommodation capacity of 5,217 beds; by 2011, this had risen to 10,304 (an increase of over 9% per year, totalling more than 97%). The figure increased in Graciosa from 85 to 208 beds and in São Jorge from 243 to 264 beds. Rural tourism businesses increased, compared to other typologies, with Graciosa and São Jorge expanding their stake in the whole of the Azores by 19.2% and 21.2%, respectively (Table 13-1). The increase in the number of beds available for rural1 tourism, and the consequent increase in its share of global accommodation, is due to the priorities established in the Regional Tourism Plan, implemented by the private sector in the form of small and medium companies in the smaller islands, such as São Jorge and Graciosa.

294

Chapter Thirteen

Table 13-1. Accommodation by type (%)

Hotels Rural Tourism Other

Azores 2001 2011 84.1 86.1 6.2 8.5 9.7 5.4

Graciosa 2001 2011 100 80.8 0.0 19.2 0.0 0.0

São Jorge 2001 2011 67.1 63.6 4.1 21.2 28.8 15.2

Source: Created from INE 2002 and 2012

The overall number of tourists accommodated in the Azores in rural tourism establishments increased between 2001 and 2011, but not by enough to increase its comparative representation during this period (2.1% to 1.7%). This was due to the growth of package holidays (flight plus accommodation), which are still associated with the traditional hotel segment. However, the reverse occurred in the study area, where Graciosa increased its representation by 4.9% and São Jorge by 2% (from 1.9% to 3.9%) (Table 13-2). In the case of S. Jorge, this increase in rural tourism was due to the fact that the majority of tourists who arrived had already chosen their hotel via the Internet. In general, tourists may purchase a package holiday for the island of Faial but decide to spend one or two nights in São Jorge as part of their stay. With regard to Graciosa, the presence of tourists seeking rural tourism (TER) became possible, once this specific type of accommodation emerged, mainly as a result of private family initiatives (generally with community support), indicating a capacity for diversification associated with high standards and a particular type of building. It was through the legacy and rehabilitation of a number of old Graciosa windmills, which were transformed into accommodation, that it became possible to launch TER in these areas. Moreover, the owners of these rural establishments mainly marketed their “products” via new technologies (the Internet, and specifically social networks). However, its more peripheral location (in relation to the other island in the study) is less advantageous in terms of tour packages for the group of islands, although it has better connections to Terceira Island. In 2011, 382,464 tourists visited the Azores. The majority (58.7%) (Table 13-3) were from other parts of Portugal, and the remainder (41.3%) were international tourists. The greatest number of foreign visitors came from the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark), totalling 10.2%, followed by Germany, at 7.2%. These figures are explained by cultural and geographic proximity (in the case of mainland Portugal), and an agreement between the regional government and

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

295

Scandinavian tour operators2. Table 13-2. Tourists by accommodation type (%)

Hotels Rural Tourism Other

Azores 2001 2011 85.4 90.1 2.1 1.7 12.5 8.2

Graciosa 2001 2011 88.6 90.2 0.0 4.9 11.4 4.9

São Jorge 2001 2011 77.0 79.7 1.9 3.9 21.1 16.4

Source: Created from INE 2002 and 2012

Table 13-3. Tourists by country/region of residence, 2011 (%) Portugal Nordic Countries (Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark) Germany North America (USA and Canada) Spain Netherlands United Kingdom France Italy Other

58.7 10.2 7.2 4.4 3.9 3.3 2.7 2.4 1.7 5.6

Source: Created from INE 2012

Discussion of Results In the survey, male participants represent 54.1% of the total respondents (Table 13-4). The largest group was aged between 25 and 44 (41.8%), followed by those aged between 45 and 64, totalling (26.5%), then individuals aged under 25 (20.4%). The elderly represented 11.2% of the total. The decision to stratify the sample aimed at identifying segments of the population that could be more easily involved in activities related to tourism. In terms of marital status, the sample consisted mainly of single individuals (43.9%), and married plus cohabiting people (38.9% + 7.1% = 46%). The largest category for qualifications was the 2nd and 3rd cycle of basic education (39.8%), with 22.5% having completed secondary education. In terms of employment status, a large part of respondents

Source: Created from the survey

No answer

3.1 6.1

Divorced Widowed

2 and 3 cycles

rd

Primary

20.4

Less than 25

7.1

nd

Secondary

University

1.0

Cohabiting

41.8

25-44

38.9

43.8

Education

Separated

Married

26.5

45-64

45.9

Single

Female

11.2

Over 64

Marital Status

54.1

Age Groups

Chapter Thirteen

Male

Gender

Table 13-4. Biodata of respondents (%)

296

1.0

17.4

39.8

22.5

19.3

Retired

Selfemployed Not employed

Employee

16.3

24.5

19.4

39.8

Professional Status

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

297

(39.8%) were employees. The unemployed represented almost a quarter of the total (24.5%), including students. The figures for the self-employed and retired were 19.4% and 16.3% respectively. The respondents have, on average, one child, and own, in general, mid-range and low-range cars. The Internet has enabled people to access information and is now undoubtedly a powerful platform: in the most developed societies, a greater proportion of the population has Internet access. In this study, only 16.3% of the respondents did not have Internet access and 37.8% of those who had access used it more than ten times per week (Table 13-5). Table 13-5. Internet accesses per week (%) None 16.3

1 to 5 times 22.4

6 to 10 times 23.5

Over 10 times 37.8

Source: Created from the survey

When asked about fluency in foreign languages only 55.1% reported speaking English, which is a potential obstacle for interaction with tourists. 59.3% of those who answered positively were between 25 and 44 years old (Table 13-6). Table 13-6. English speakers by age groups (%) Less than 25 24.1

25-44 59.3

45-64 12.9

Over 64 3.7

Source: Created from the survey

With regard to holidays spent in destinations where the respondents did not have friends or family (Table 13-7), individuals with higher levels of education, namely those with university degrees, travelled the most (“Usually”—40%), in contrast to those who did not travel (“Lower Secondary”—47.5%). The presence of a university-educated population tends to correlate with better economic conditions and the higher level of education creates a greater need for interaction with other cultures.

Chapter Thirteen

298

Table 13-7. Residents travelling for holidays (%) No Answer

Primary

Lower Secondary

Upper Secondary

University

Never

2.5

27.5

47.5

15.0

7.5

Exceptionally

0.0

41.4

41.4

31.0

13.8

Occasionally

0.0

31.6

31.6

21.1

42.1

0.0 20.0 Usually Source: Created from the survey

20.0

30.0

40.0

In the questions concerning interaction with tourism and the importance of tourists for the island’s development, the respondents were asked to assign a value ranging from one (not important) to seven (extremely important) in their answers. No respondents assigned a score of less than 4. The general recognition of interest in promoting tourism in the islands is evident and is central to the levels of general hospitality which were identified. The average totalled 6.5, although it was higher in São Jorge (6.7) than in Graciosa (6.1). The greatest number of responses in São Jorge reflected a score of 7 (73.8%) while 75% of the responses from Graciosa attributed a score of 5 (moderate importance). The same kind of scale was used for the benefits of the presence of tourists, with respondents being asked to give a score ranging from 1 (no benefits at all) to 7 (immense benefits). The overall average was 4.1 and there was a significant difference between the two islands. Again Graciosa produced the lowest average score, totalling 3.6, whereas São Jorge totalled 4.4. In general, the respondents considered there were medium gains from tourist visits. The lower score was due to the fact that most respondents are not employed in areas that depend directly on tourism (Table 13-8). Table 13-8. Respondents benefiting from tourism (%) Score 7 6 5 4 3

Graciosa 13.2 5.3 26.3 5.3 10.5

São Jorge 30.0 6.7 23.3 8.3 3.3

Total 23.5 6.1 24.5 7.1 6.1

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

Score 2 1 Total

Graciosa 7.9 31.6 100

São Jorge 5.0 23.3 100

299

Total 6.1 26.5 100

Source: Created from the survey

The different explanations (of the benefits from the presence of tourists) were grouped into five clusters (Table 13-9). The highest percentage in São Jorge (21.4%) stated that tourists were clients (restaurants, supermarkets and car and house rentals). Within the proportional average for the two islands, 29.4% reported benefiting indirectly, either by having relatives who deal professionally with tourists or because they are employed in businesses where the customers are tourists (taxis, bakeries, restaurants). Some also perceived benefits for the local economy overall. It is significant that 20.4% of respondents did not justify their answers. Table 13-9. Types of benefit (%)

Tourists are clients Indirectly No answer No professional connections Other Total

Graciosa 7.2 15.3 8.2 7.1 1.0 38.8

São Jorge 21.4 14.3 12.2 9.2 4.1 61.2

Total 28.6 29.6 20.4 16.3 5.1 100

Source: Created from the survey

Over a one-year period, contact with tourists was more intense in São Jorge. Among the respondents who were in contact with tourists more than ten times, 75% lived on the island, compared to 25% in Graciosa. As far as the medium level of contacts (6 to 10 times per year) is concerned, the percentage was 73.3% for the former island and 26.7% for the latter. This figure is almost reversed for the “none” response: seventy percent (70%) of those who had no contact with tourists lived in Graciosa (Table 13-10).

Chapter Thirteen

300

Table 13-10. Residents’ contact with tourists in one year (%)

Over 10 6 to 10 times 1 to 5 times None Total

Graciosa 25.0 26.7 46.5 70.0 39.6

São Jorge 75.0 73.3 53.5 30.0 60.4

Total 100 100 100 100 100

Source: Created from the survey

The situation in which residents interacted most with tourists involved giving information to tourists passing by, either by car or on foot (50.9%) (Table 13-11), given that trekking and travelling between locations are commonplace in these islands. The need for information is due to the few, poor quality signposts, and the tourists’ interest in everyday local situations. The second most frequent type of interaction occurs in workplaces (24.1%) and the third in leisure areas and at festivals (13.8%). It is worth noting that 9.5% reported giving lifts to tourists, something which only happens in places where tourism is still not very developed and local people are curious to make contact with completely unknown people. This also applies to the tourists themselves, who welcome this unusual practice, as some guidebooks note. Table 13-11. Types of contact with tourists over a one-year period

Give information to tourists passing by Giving a tourist a lift At the workplace In leisure areas and at festivals Diving instructor to tourists Inviting tourists to have lunch Total

Answers 59 11 28 16 1 1 116

% 50.9 9.5 24.1 13.8 0.9 0.9 100

Source: Created from the survey

The overall image of tourists is that they are friendly (55%), and talkative (19.3%) (Table 13-12). It is interesting to verify two characteristics attributed to tourists: curiosity about local culture (8.2%) and environmental friendliness (3.5%), which reinforces the positive image which the rural residents have. Other characteristics only have residual values.

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

301

Table 13-12. Residents’ image of tourists

Friendly Talkative Accessible Medium income tourist (backpacker) Interested in local culture Environmentally friendly Old people Total

Answers

%

94 33 5 15 14 6 4 171

55.0 19.3 2.9 8.8 8.2 3.5 2.3 100

Source: Created from the survey

Regarding the reasons why tourists are attracted to the area, unsurprisingly, landscape/nature predominates, representing 33.2% (Table 13-13), since this is the main brand associated with the archipelago. It is a central factor of destinations at the beginning of their cycle when the tourism product is based on nature and is present from an early, or quite early, stage. Proximity to the other islands is the next factor, accounting for 25.7% of the total responses. São Jorge had the highest score because it is very close to two other islands, Pico and Faial, which may represent a benefit (e.g. when planning itineraries for the same tourist groups within the “triangle of islands”). Graciosa has a more peripheral location. Surprisingly, as this is not well publicised outside the Azores, the sample reveals local cuisine to be the third most important reason (12.3%). Attracted to the natural beauty of the Azores, local people see tourists as interested in exploring its heritage (8.2%) and local culture (8.6%), including religious festivals. These small islands offer a more integrated understanding of the territories, due to the time available for a range of different trips. Approximately 10.7% of the São Jorge respondents and 3.3% of those from Graciosa cited extreme sports as a tourist activity. It is important to bear in mind the morphological differences between the two islands as an explanation for these figures: São Jorge has the highest average altitude within the Azorean Islands and a very rugged coastline, whereas Graciosa is both the lowest and flattest island in the archipelago. Consequently, the natural conditions on São Jorge are better suited to extreme sports. It is also important to note that this kind of tourism attracts a younger population, who usually have a different profile to other tourists. Moreover, the health factor, although much less significant, is only

302

Chapter Thirteen

represented in Graciosa, due to the existence of a spa resort on the island that has been successful for a long time. Table 13-13. Reasons why tourists visit the island (%)

Proximity to other islands Landscape/Nature Extreme sports Local cuisine Discovering the local heritage Local customs/Culture Health Other reasons Total

Graciosa 22.0 36.3 3.3 8.8

São Jorge 27.7 31.6 10.7 14.1

Total 25.7 33.2 8.2 12.3

12.1

6.2

8.2

11.0 5.5 1.1 100

7.3 0.0 2.3 100

8.6 1.9 1.9 100

Source: Created from the survey

Individualising the main attractions of the two islands, the respondents were asked about their perceptions of the products, services or places that attract the most attention from visitors (Table 13-14). In São Jorge, the most frequently cited responses were a particular kind of landscape, Fajãs3 (24.9%), followed by a local gastronomic product, namely cheese (23.1%). The latter is recognised in many regions and is mainly exported to mainland Portugal, the United States and Canada, where it has won several awards in gastronomy fairs in recent years. Caldeira de Santo Cristo is also mentioned as significant, (17.9%), due to the presence of the most famous fajã on the Island, a brackish lagoon which is the only place where clams are produced in the Azores. The final factor with a score of over 10% is the traditional sweets (10.3%). In Graciosa, a higher percentage of respondents (26.4%) referred to a specific feature of the landscape considered by most to be the main attraction of the island, namely the Caldeira, including the famous Furna do Enxofre. In fact, this location reached the finals, in the caves category, of a contest to find the seven natural wonders of Portugal. The coastal area of Carapacho had the second highest percentage (16.1%), including the recreational area/natural pool and thermal zone. This was followed by traditional sweets (13.8%), focusing almost entirely on the typical and increasingly well-known Queijadas of Graciosa, which have been marketed more intensively in the last 20 years. The islet of Baleia, another

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

303

natural site, also received more than 10% of the respondents’ nominations (10.3%). It should be noted that the respondents emphasised the most outstanding landscape features of the islands, as well as the main local products that are known abroad, as the main strategies for attracting tourists. Table 13-14. Places, products and services which São Jorge and Graciosa residents consider tourists appreciate most (%) São Jorge Caldeira de Santo Cristo Fajãs Landscape Footpaths Cheese Sweets Local cuisine Other places Other reasons Total

17.9 24.8 8.5 6.0 23.1 10.3 6.8 1.7 0.9 100

Graciosa Caldeira/Furna do Enxofre Ilhéu da Baleia Carapacho Local heritage Sweets Local cuisine Landscape and tranquillity Other places Other local products Total

26.4 10.3 16.1 9.2 13.8 8.0 5.7 5.7 4.6 100

Source: Created from the survey

When asked which local products could be developed to enhance tourism, 31.3% of the respondents did not answer (Table 13-15). This is a very high percentage, possibly indicating a detachment from other economic activities outside the respondent’s area of work. It may also reveal a lack of knowledge of their island’s potential in terms of promoting new products. Local goods totalled 50%, including food, drinks and handicrafts, basically all products from the primary sector. Tourism services represented only 11.5% and included new footpaths and the construction of new local museums with different themes. Maritime activities were only cited by the Graciosa respondents, indicating their concern to improve the island’s links with the sea in order to promote connected tourism activities by upgrading and constructing new bathing areas and building a marina to boost water based sports, such as fishing.

Chapter Thirteen

304

Table 13-15. Products and services that can be created (%)

Local goods Sea activities Tourism services Don’t know Total

Graciosa 16.7 7.3 4.2 10.4 38.5

São Jorge 33.3 0.0 7.3 20.8 61.5

Total 50.0 7.3 11.5 31.3 100

Source: Created from the survey

When asked whether their activities or experience could be used to produce a tourist service or product, 68.8% did not consider themselves prepared to engage in any activity of this kind. Amongst those who responded positively, 29% said their work experience could be helpful in this area. Regarding the kind of innovative experiences that could be provided by the respondents for tourists, the sample showed a marked concentration of “showing places” responses (37.8%), although 33.7% did not know what to propose (Table 13-16). Table 13-16. Tourist activities proposed by the residents (%)

Showing tourists around places Directing tourists to local services Demonstrating traditional cuisine Other Don’t know Total

Graciosa 16.3 5.1 6.1 1.0 10.2 38.8

São Jorge 21.4 1.0 13.3 2.0 23.5 61.2

Total 37.8 6.1 19.4 3.1 33.7 100

Source: Created from the survey

Finally, the respondents were asked for their opinion on the kind of tourism business they would develop if they had financial support (Table 13-17). It should be noted at the outset that 4.1% stated that they would not invest in a business related to tourism. In their opinion this was not a viable investment, demonstrating a certain distrust of tourism in the future. Moreover, a considerable percentage of the respondents said they did not know what business they would invest in (16.3%). Amongst those who said they would invest, there was a great emphasis on leisure activities (28%), including guided tours, extreme sports and businesses related to the sea. In fact, these are some of the recreational areas that could lead to growth in tourism. Opening a restaurant (12.2%)

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

305

and bed and breakfast establishment (13.3%) represented the traditional tourism support activities. They featured in the “accommodation” group and comprised 10.2% of the responses, reflecting the possibility of official recognition for local accommodation included since 2008 in the tourist accommodation types in Portugal. Although innovation is not a key element in the responses, there is an evident willingness to create a quality product, with differentiation based on local attractions and resources, such as agritourism and craft retail services. The development of tourist activities related to agricultural activity is crucial since the existing resources have great potential and can be expanded through a cross-selling process associated with nature tourism, in the case of the spa and general tourism. With regard to the retail trade, the stores specialising in regional products could be improved by including a wider variety of “island souvenirs”. It may, therefore, be concluded that the respondents were able to present viable suggestions for boosting tourism in their island, ranging from the traditional sectors to the less common services. They are willing to be part of the solution and to contribute towards offering a high level of hospitality. Table 13-17. Investment in business areas (%)

Not investing Accommodation Leisure activities Agritourism services Opening a restaurant Local crafts retail Bed & Breakfast Don’t know Total

Graciosa 0.0 1.0 12.2 5.1 6.1 4.1 0.0 10.2 38.8

São Jorge 4.1 9.2 16.3 2.0 6.1 4.1 13.3 6.1 61.2

Total 4.1 10.2 28.6 7.1 12.2 8.2 13.3 16.3 100

Source: Created from the survey

Conclusions The residents of Graciosa and São Jorge revealed different specificities which were typical of locations in the early cycle of tourism (Butler, 2004). Tourism was considered important for development, even though only a quarter of the population benefits directly from visits from tourists. In other words, there is a perception that benefits do exist, even if they are indirect.

306

Chapter Thirteen

Tourists are considered friendly, talkative and middle class, with a backpacker profile. This perception may not match the reality since Nordic tourists have a concept of pragmatic tourism that includes exploring nature and not displaying their economic status. The respondents believe that the main reasons for tourist visits are linked to the landscape and proximity to the larger islands, which have more accommodation to offer and airports with connections to other regional destinations. The residents are aware of how much more can be done to attract tourists and encourage them to spend more money during their stay. This can, they feel, be achieved by creating/improving local food products, demonstrating traditional cuisine, tourist services and guided tours. The population believes that tourism has a future in the islands where they live, stating that they would invest in this if they had the opportunity. They want to be part of the solution (customised, quality tourism) and not part of the problem. The hospitality of the local population is an undoubted asset in terms of the quality of Azorean tourism and the Azoreans clearly recognise tourism as a factor in local development. The possibilities resulting from combining natural and cultural resources are evident to the respondents, together with their willingness to welcome visitors and the financial benefits they may obtain from this. With a clear perception of what they feel is required to create quality products, the Azoreans from São Jorge and Graciosa recognise the importance of authenticity. They also realise that certain gaps need to be filled (accommodation, catering and tourism activities). Some are willing to participate, as entrepreneurs, in the creation of tourism products. Therefore, if appropriately supervised and well informed by policies that support tourism (headed by the POTRAA), the Azorean population is a valuable part of the tourism system.

Acknowledgment This paper has the financial support from national funds through the FCT (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia) within the project reference PEst-OE/SADG/UI4084/2014.

Notes 1. Portuguese legislation defines rural tourism as a form of tourism accommodation, taking place in all areas that have traditional and significant connections to agriculture or in an environment with a markedly rural character (art. 3º Decree-Law 55/2002); the accommodation in these areas is covered by the Decree-Law 15/2004, which defines them as those destined to provide lodging

Understanding Rural Residents’ Experiences with Tourists

307

services to tourists, preserving, restoring, and enhancing architectural, historical, and natural heritage as well as the landscape of the places and regions where they are located, through reconstruction, rehabilitation or enlargement of existing structures in order to ensure their integration into the rural environment. 2. The Azores are provided weekly by the public regional airline SATA or by Nordic charter companies (including flights, transfers, and accommodation). 3. Small, flat, usually arable areas of land by the sea, formed from materials that have broken away from the cliffs or lava deltas resulting from lava flows that have extended into the sea.

References Butler, R. (2004). The tourism area life cycle in the twenty-first century. In A. A. Lew, C. M. Hall & A. M. Williams (Eds.), A companion to tourism (pp. 159-170). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Cardoso, P. (2011). Dinâmicas do mundo rural no virar do século. O concelho do Sabugal. Universidade de Coimbra. Carvalho, P., & Fernandes, J. L. (2002). Paisagem e apropriação dos territórios. Reflexão em torno de dois exemplos comparativos: a Serra da Lousã e o Parque Natural das Serras de Aire e Candeeiros. In L. Caetano (Ed.), Territórios, Globalização e Trajetórias de Desenvolvimento (pp. 275-320). Coimbra: Centro de Estudos Geográficos. Claiborne, P. (2010). Community participation in tourism development and the value of social capital—the case of Bastimentos, Bocas del Toro, Panamá. University of Gothenburg. Cui, X., & Ryan, C. (2011). Perception of place, modernity, and the impacts of tourism—Differences among rural and urban residents of Ankang, China: A likelihood ratio analysis. Tourism Management, 32, 604-615. Gaspar, J. (2004). Técnica, Território e Poder. In M. A. Brandão (Org.), Milton Santos e o Brasil (pp. 179-188). São Paulo: Fundação Perseu Abramo. Haralambopoulos, N. (1996). Perceived Impacts of Tourism—The Case of Samos. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(3), 503-526. Harrill, R. (2004). Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development: A Literature Review with Implications for Tourism Planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 18(3), 251-266. Haven-Tang, C., & Jones, E. (2012). Local leadership for rural tourism development: A case study of Adventa, Monmouthshire, UK. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 28-35. Instituto Nacional de Estatística (2002). Anuário Estatístico de Portugal— 2001. Lisbon: INE.

308

Chapter Thirteen

—. (2012). Anuário Estatístico de Portugal—2011. Lisbon: INE. Kim, K., Uysal, M., & Sirgy, M. (2013). How does tourism in a community impact the quality of life of community residents? Tourism Management, 36, 527-540. Ko, D., & Stewart, W. (2002). A structural equation model of residents’ attitudes for tourism development. Tourism Management, 23, 521-530. Nunkoo, R., Smith, S., & Ramkissoon, H. (2013). Residents’ attitudes to tourism: a longitudinal study of 140 articles from 1984 to 2010. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(1), 5-25. Pato, M. (2012). Dinâmicas do Turismo Rural—impactos em termos de Desenvolvimento Rural. Phd thesis. Universidade de Aveiro. Pinto, A. C. (2011). Pensar os territórios rurais. Paisagem, Planeamento e desenvolvimento em Sever do Vouga. Universidade de Coimbra. Poon, A. (1994). The “new tourism” revolution. Tourism Management, 15(2), 91-92. Santos, N. P. (2006). Geomonumentos, competição territorial e desenvolvimento. Cadernos de Geografia, 24/25(2005/06), 123-126. Santos, N. P., & Cravidão, F., & Cunha, L. (2010). Natureza, paisagens culturais e os produtos turísticos associados ao território. Atas do 4º Congresso Latino Americano de Investigação Turística, 154-165. Santos, N. P., & Cunha, L. (2007). Novas oportunidades para o espaço rural. In N. P. Santos & A. Gama (Eds.), Lazer. Da libertação do tempo à conquista das práticas (pp. 209-225). Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, Centro de Estudos Geográficos de Coimbra. Simões, J. M. (1993). Um olhar sobre o turismo e o desenvolvimento regional. Inforgeo, VI, 71-82. Teixeira, L. (2013). Dinamismo territorial e multifuncionalidade dos espaços rurais. Universidade de Coimbra. Weaver, D., & Lawton, L. (2013). Resident perceptions of a contentious tourism event. Tourism Management, 37, 165-175. Zhang, J., Inbakaran, R. J., & Jackson, M. S. (2006). Understanding Community Attitudes Towards Tourism and Host-Guest Interaction in the Urban-Rural Border Region. Tourism Geographies, 8(2), 182-204.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN ENDOGENOUS AND EXOGENOUS RESOURCE USE IN ECOTOURISM PROMOTION: EVIDENCE FROM IRELAND THÉRÈSE CONWAY AND MARY CAWLEY

Introduction The concept of endogenous resource use is linked to the endogenous model of rural development, proposed by van der Ploeg and van Dijk (1995) some two decades ago and is based on place and “on the valorisation of local resources through small-scale and flexible capital investment and response to niche demand, and on the capacities and values of local people” (Oliver & Jenkins, 2003, p. 298). It involves financial investment but also physical capital in the form of infrastructure, natural capital in the guise of the natural resource base, human capital incorporating the knowledge and experience of the population, and the cultural capital inherent in local traditions and heritage (Cawley & Gillmor, 2008; Oliver & Jenkins, 2003; Saxena, Clark, Oliver & Ilbery, 2007). Finding new ways of engaging endogenous resources through locally based, so-called “bottom-up”, initiatives has been viewed for some time as a method of contributing to the economy of areas where agriculture is in decline and alternative sources of income are necessary to support a resident population (Jenkins, 2000). Tourism is one of the strategies advocated to use the existing resource base in new ways and benefit from growing demand for outdoor activities and contact with traditional ways of life as alternatives to sun holidays (Hall, Roberts & Mitchell, 2003). A broad spectrum of rural holiday experiences has been developed, including farm-based tourism, heritage and cultural tourism and activity based experiences more generally (Garrod, Wornell & Youell, 2006; Roberts, 2001). Ecotourism, which has been associated, for some decades, with ecologically rich tropical and sub-tropical areas, is being

310

Chapter Fourteen

advocated as a niche strategy which has potential for reinventing rural tourism in some parts of developed countries (Buckley, 2009). The types of area involved include wilderness landscapes but also locations where agriculture or other forms of primary activity are in decline, where ecological systems are recovering, and which offer opportunities for outdoor activities and encounters with nature of a type and scale that do not pose threats to the quality of the physical environment and the local culture (Buckley, 2009; Che, 2006; Fennell, 2008). In this sense ecotourism may be viewed as forming part of a co-creative tourism experience with local communities. Endogenous resources are necessary for rural tourism development to take place; however, they are not always sufficient. Access to external investment from national government or European Union sources (in the EU) may be necessary (e.g., through the Leader programme—Liaison between the rural economy and development actions) in order for local people to develop appropriate infrastructure (Saxena et al., 2007). Access to training and knowledge and to channels to promote products to external tourists may also be very important (Cawley & Gillmor, 2008). External or exogenous resources are therefore usually required to enable the endogenous resource base to be developed effectively and in appropriate ways. Exogenous resources often come from external agencies. They also include the human and social capital of the resident population and business owners that have been acquired through externally sourced education and/or experience (Bosworth & Farrell, 2011; Cawley, Gaffey & Gillmor, 1999; Kalantaridis & Bika, 2006). Import of knowledge and experience in this way is recognised as being pertinent to business development in areas where local entrepreneurship may be weakly developed (Kalantaridis & Bika, 2006). Thus, it is appropriate that the role of exogenous resources in the promotion of ecotourism, as in other forms of tourism, should be taken into account. This chapter reports the results of research that was conducted in Ireland’s first ecotourism destination, known as the Greenbox, which was established in 2003 and is located in a peripheral rural environment on the border between the Republic of Ireland (referred to as Ireland) and Northern Ireland (Fig. 14-1). The aim of the chapter is to assess the resource context in which ecotourism may be promoted in a developed country. This resource base involves both endogenous (of local origin) and exogenous (of external origin) attributes. Broad findings are presented relating to 14 ecotourism businesses. Three case studies are then used to illustrate how principles of ecotourism are combined with endogenous and exogenous resources to create tourism experiences that draw on local

Endoggenous and Exoogenous Resourrce Use in Ecotoourism Promotiion

311

natural and cultural resoources in beniign ways. Thhe types of eccotourists attracted arre discussed as are issuess that arose with establisshing the destination as an ecotouurism destinaation and whhich have imp plications beyond the iimmediate conntext. Fig. 14-1. Thee Greenbox areea

© Ordnance Survey Irelandd/Government of o Ireland Copyright Perrmit No. MP 0003514

Ecotou urism as a Sustainable S e Form of R Rural Tourrism Ecotouriism is being pursued incrreasingly as a niche rurall tourism strategy to appeal to an a environmeentally consccious market segment (Fennell, 20008). Being socially consstructed, ecottourism is deefined in various wayys in different contexts, but the concept iss based on a number n of underlying principles. These principles are usuallly assigned as a having been first deeveloped by Claus-Dieter C Hetzer, H a Califfornian academic, who led tours to the Yucatan Peninsula P duriing the early 1960s, although he did not use the tterm ecotourissm (Fennell, 2009). 2 Hetzer’’s (1965) apprroach was

312

Chapter Fourteen

based on four principles which are now associated with ecotourism: minimal environmental impact, minimal impact on and respect for host communities, maximum economic benefits for local people and maximum recreational satisfaction for the tourists (Fennell, 2009). Ceballos-Lascuráin, a Mexican architect, is recognised as having first defined ecotourism as “travelling to relatively undisturbed or uncontaminated natural areas with the specific objective of studying, admiring and enjoying the scenery and its wild plants and animals, as well as any existing cultural manifestations (both past and present) found in these areas” (Ceballos-Lascuráin, 1987, p. 14). This definition, which incorporates the central principles enunciated by Hetzer was adapted by the International Ecotourism Society (TIES) in 1990 to read: “responsible travel to natural areas which conserves the environment and improves the welfare of the local people” (TIES, 2010). Educating the visitor about the need to protect the natural and cultural environments in which ecotourism is based is now recognised as an additional objective (Fennell, 2008). Thus, ecotourism is recognised as having unifying features that are: based in nature; relate to minimal impact on the environment; provide maximum gains for host communities (as distinct from commercial tour operators); provide maximum satisfaction for tourists; and serve an educational function for local people and for tourists. The concern of ecotourism with using natural (and cultural) resources in sympathetic ways that do not reduce their inherent value, and with creating awareness among tourists and populations more generally about the need for environmental protection, shares similarities in common with the concept of sustainability (Weaver, 2005). The ideas behind sustainable tourism date back over four decades and have received extensive treatment in the academic literature; like ecotourism sustainable tourism is surrounded by debate relating to its definition (Bramwell & Lane, 2011; Sharpley, 2009; Weaver, 2005). In the case of ecotourism, increasingly, regulation through certified labelling is being used to promote environmental and socio-cultural sustainability in destinations (Buckley, 2002). Ecotourism labels are also surrounded by considerable debate because of proliferation in their number, many of which are poorly defined and associated, in a somewhat loose way, with forms of green and nature tourism (Font, 2002). In other cases, the award of the label is based on strict compliance with defined criteria, which are externally evaluated, and the label is awarded for a limited period of time after which reapplication and re-evaluation must take place for its retention. The measures adopted relate to processes and performances in tourism businesses with reference to their impact on the environment, such as the energy reduction strategies

Endogenous and Exogenous Resource Use in Ecotourism Promotion

313

adopted, methods of waste disposal and the cleaning products used (Font & Harris, 2004). This form of label is based on so-called “grey” technical criteria which are usually easier to monitor than “green” criteria where the quality of the environment per se (air, water, land) and the local impacts of tourism on that environment are assessed (Ó Cinnéide, 1999). The EU Flower Ecolabel used in the area studied here is based on “grey criteria”.

The Greenbox Study Area The Greenbox study area consists of the following areas in the north of Ireland: counties Fermanagh and Leitrim, west Cavan, north Sligo, south Donegal and northwest Monaghan (Fig. 14-1). It is bounded to the west by the Atlantic Ocean, to the north by the Erne River and Lakes and to the south by the River Shannon. Reasons for the designation of the area as an ecotourism destination included features of underdevelopment arising from its neglect during a period of civil unrest in Northern Ireland, between the late 1960s and the 1990s. The Belfast, or Good Friday Agreement, signed on the 10th April 1998, was intended to foster ongoing peace through a newly established power-sharing government between the different political interest groups (Mac Ginty, Muldoon & Ferguson, 2007). As part of attempts to advance peace, cross-border funding was allocated for a number of viable projects that would stimulate cross-border collaboration and increase the attractiveness of the region for investment, improve the standard of living and create a more secure living environment. The Greenbox was one such project (Conway & Cawley, 2012). The TIES definition of ecotourism (i.e. “responsible travel to natural areas which conserves the environment and improves the welfare of the local people”) was adopted for the purpose of designating the Greenbox as an ecotourism destination. The key aims of the project were: the creation of new tourism products in less visited locations; the adoption of the EU Flower eco-certification label by accommodation providers in the area; the development of a range of ecotourism packages to attract tourists; and the delivery of economic benefits (WDC, 2011). The area per se is one of small farms, worked in a traditional way, rolling topography with some low hills and a dense network of rivers and lakes. Part of the Greenbox falls within a Geopark based on the limestone landscape and underground cave system of south Fermanagh. There is also a range of historical and archaeological sites within the area. The natural and cultural resources are therefore conducive to the promotion of forms of rural tourism that might be described as ecotourism. The EU Flower Ecolabel was adopted for

314

Chapter Fourteen

business certification purposes in order to provide validity for the title “ecotourist destination” (European Commission, 2012). The EU Flower is a certification label for businesses that achieve certain environmental standards in their operations. The former manager of the Greenbox reported that the label was chosen because it was well established, readily available, accepted in other countries and monitored externally by the National Standards Authorities in Ireland and Northern Ireland (OI#1). The certification allowed for increased media attention and marketing of the area as a compliant ecotourism destination. The essential criteria on which the Flower is based relate to the more efficient use of energy, water saving, general management, waste reduction, information for guests on the environmental policy and on the label per se. It is possible to gain bonus points to qualify for accreditation under an optional criteria section by providing food services, leisure and green areas on-site. Training and funding were provided by the Greenbox to enable businesses to obtain accreditation. Funding was also available to modify buildings to meet the criteria (the amounts awarded ranged from €4,000 to €150,000). The provider paid an annual fee (reported as being up to €90) to retain the EU Flower and a renewal audit fee every five years. Some €3 million were allocated in total to the Greenbox project, 75% of which came from the EU Interreg IIIA programme and the remainder from the International Fund for Ireland and two local authorities. Because of the non-availability of new funding from the end of 2007, the Greenbox project finally ceased to function in 2011, although some providers continue to retain the label. In 2011, a number of providers established a new ecotourism label, the Greenbook, and receive support from the tourism authorities in Ireland and Northern Ireland to maintain a website (Conway & Cawley, 2012). The Greenbook accepts businesses that have attained the EU Flower certification but also other forms of eco-certification which may be less expensive and less onerous to attain.

Methods The research followed a qualitative approach to data collection and analysis. Data were collected through face-to-face, semi-structured, interviews of approximately 1.5 hours in duration. Pertinent businesses were identified from websites and tourism membership group brochures. The businesses were selected based on criteria relating to their ecotourism credentials and included past members of the Greenbox and other enterprises that complied with the definition of an ecotourism business, as defined in the academic literature and by the Greenbox (Carter &

Endogenous and Exogenous Resource Use in Ecotourism Promotion

315

Lowman, 1994; Page & Dowling, 2002). Some 200 businesses were identified in total. From these, 37 were selected using purposive sampling in order to include former members of the Greenbox and examples of the main types of tourism businesses in the area. The sample was refined following discussion with the former manager of the Greenbox. The discussion here relates to 14 businesses that were EU Flower certified ecotourism providers. The interviewee in each case was the owner or manager who had most responsibility for the day-to-day running of the business. All interviews were digitally recorded with the interviewee’s permission, transcribed verbatim and entered into a database. The analysis was conducted following thematic principles (Bryman, 2004). Textual statements were analysed qualitatively using an iterative approach in order to identify key themes and subthemes. The respondents were assured confidentiality during the interviews and quotations are attributed accordingly. Three of the businesses are discussed here in greater detail, as examples of the role of endogenous and exogenous resources in facilitating the development of ecotourism enterprises. They were selected as niche businesses that draw on personal and local resources and, in some cases, on external experience and knowledge, in developing ecotourism services for clearly identified client groups. They also illustrate differing benefits associated with eco-labelling.

Analysis and Results The 14 EU Flower-certified businesses provided accommodation, either alone or in association with an activity (Table 14-1). They are distributed throughout the Greenbox area and represent the various types of accommodation that held the EU Flower; namely, B&Bs, exclusive country homes, self-catering units, caravan parks, hostels, small hotels, outdoor activity centres and a spa. Nine of the businesses were owned by a family or a couple, three by individual males, and two were community owned. A gender balance was a feature of ownership. The owners were predominantly aged 45 years or older. Their levels of education were high: four had completed secondary education; nine held a degree and one held a PhD. Two held additional qualifications as outdoor activity instructors, which were necessary to operate their business, and one as a filmmaker. Eleven interviewees were from the locality where they now live and eight had spent time living in another country which, as one of the examples below illustrates, was conducive to bringing exogenous knowledge or experience to the business, following Kalantaridis and Bika (2006). Eight of the businesses predated the establishment of the Greenbox, some by

316

Chapter Fourteen

decades, and six post-dated that event. In one of the latter cases, the availability of funding from the Greenbox to purchase bicycles and solar panels was referred to as an influence on the establishment. In another case, alignment between the owner’s interest in well-being and nature and the philosophical tenets of ecotourism, as promoted by the Greenbox, was cited as influencing the establishment of an eco-hostel and wellness centre. In the case of the other businesses, the cessation of violence in the border area and perceived opportunities to develop a tourism activity appeared to have been more influential in the decision to invest in a tourism enterprise. Therefore, ecotourism, as promoted by the Greenbox through labelling, was a form of diversification for existing or new businesses more than being a reason for the establishment of businesses. All but one enterprise had received grant support for establishment or expansion from external sources such as the International Fund for Ireland, the EU Peace Fund (as part of measures to promote economic and social development in the Ireland-Northern Ireland border area) and the Leader programme. All received support and advice in qualifying for the EU Flower label from the Greenbox, which promoted the area and its products on a web site; most of the Greenbox funding came from the EU. External financial resources were therefore involved in establishing the businesses and in attaining compliance with ecotourism criteria. The certified providers had a deep understanding of ecotourism, an appreciation of the quality of the natural environment locally and a commitment to its protection. Most stated that they applied to obtain the EU Flower because the Greenbox had offered to support them in seeking certification through funding and advice. Meeting the criteria to qualify for the accreditation was described as being an onerous and difficult process, unless a business had already introduced environmentally sympathetic practices. The availability of funding emerged as being important; all said that they would not have undertaken the expense themselves, reflecting the influence of the cost of accreditation that has emerged in other studies (Buckley, 2002). The three examples discussed below provide insights into the motivations for applying for certification and the business advantages perceived to arise from holding the EU Flower Ecolabel. In each case natural and cultural resources associated with the geographical location have been used to develop ecotourism experiences which are advertised as such, although all also receive tourists whose interests may be in rural recreation more generally or in features of the property. The three examples that will be presented reveal a personal commitment to the principles of sustainable use of resources and some had progressed further in adopting environmentally friendly practices, before applying for EU

Endogenous and Exogenous Resource Use in Ecotourism Promotion

317

Flower certification. The education and personal experience (social capital) possessed by the owners emerge as being influential in this regard. Table 14-1. Eco-business characteristics Enterprise Type B&B

Role in Business Owner Owner Owner Owner Manager Owner

F F F M M M

Owner Manager Manager Owner

M F M M

¥ ¥ ¥

¥

Small Hotel

Owner

M

¥

¥

Outdoor Activity Centre

Owner

M

¥

¥

Owner Owner

F F

¥

¥ ¥

Country Homes Self-Catering Caravan Park Hostel

Spa

Gender

From locality ¥ ¥

Exogenous experience ¥ ¥

¥ ¥ ¥ ¥

Source: Survey data, Thérèse Conway, NUI Galway

Bed and Breakfast Premises (B&B) The first example is a B&B in County Leitrim that developed ecotourism experiences in association with a German tour operator. This B&B is owned by a husband and wife and was inherited from the male partner’s parents who had catered for coarse angling tourists in the past. The female owner was interviewed because her husband was absent working on the family farm. She reported that they were both interested in environmental conservation and had spent some time in San Francisco (where she had worked as a hotel receptionist), where their awareness developed, reflecting the role of exogenous knowledge in business development. “If you weren’t recycling (in San Francisco) you wouldn’t get your garbage picked up and if you missed the collection forget about it, it was

318

Chapter Fourteen yours! You know that was part of our ethos, we were very outdoors people and we biked and backpacked and camped, and all that, that was a big part of our lives, and we thought, well, maybe it is going to come here (to Ireland), and it is something we would like, and when you have a business you do it the way you want to and how you want to do things and it makes life easier.” (BI #18) (The source of quotations is given the first time the respondent is cited and is not repeated because one source only is involved in each example).

Their main source of clients is a German tour operator who organises ecotourism holidays in Ireland. The owner explained how the relationship developed: “We were just really fortunate… one weekend they had double booked the hotel (that the tour operator was using in the area), and they had nowhere to stay with a group of their cyclists, and they came out here to stay… just from talking to their tour guides I said to him that we would be really interested in getting involved, and the person responsible came over that summer and visited and stayed with us, and we took over then, being their base (in Ireland) from then on.”

In response to the requirements of the tour operator, the business provides three types of ecotourism holidays, each lasting either one week or a fortnight, depending on the requirements of the group. These holidays are structured around the type of accommodation available on site, which holds the EU Flower label, the recreational experiences offered by the surrounding environment and the social capital of the owner in being able to source ecologically friendly accommodation (if not always certified as such) and experiences from a network of providers in the wider area. The tourists arrive in Dublin by air and travel to the B&B with a local tour operator. Travel to ecological destinations clearly merits attention, if a reduction in the carbon footprint of the tourist is to be an objective; this was sought mainly by using minibuses for transport to the site in this business and in the third business discussed. Some tourists opted to use public transport or bicycle to access the holiday location. The first experience offered by the provider is a cycling holiday where the guests complete a circuit through adjoining counties and return to the B&B. “They start and end here, so the first and last nights of the week are here”. The respondent liaises with accommodation providers in the other locations who follow broad principles of ecotourism and provide bicycle storage, although all are not eco-certified. Her social network of contacts and capacity to encourage compliance with ecotourism principles are clearly central to meeting the requirements of the tourists.

Endogenous and Exogenous Resource Use in Ecotourism Promotion

319

The second type of experience offered is a canoeing holiday, usually of one week’s duration. The tourists camp in tents in the gardens of the property for the first and last nights. Using canoes provided by the B&B, they travel along the River Erne across the border to Northern Ireland and camp outdoors for three nights. They are then collected from Enniskillen (the main town on Lough Erne), brought back to the B&B and return to Germany the next day. The final experience is a farmhouse week: “The ‘farmhouse week’ stays here for the entire week. They spend a day walking, a day cycling, and a day canoeing. They go up to Sligo (the nearest large town)... and spend a day or two here”.

The respondent and her husband developed the eco-tourist experiences deliberately to meet a niche demand for outdoor holidays in natural settings: “these are eco-tourists and that is what they are buying”. Where possible the owners purchase food and other supplies locally and make some contribution to the local economy. A local coach-hire company benefits from transporting the guests to and from Dublin. The guests also contribute through buying food and meals in the areas that they visit. The business is seasonal, from Easter to September, and the contribution to social capital is limited to providing employment for the respondent and two teenage daughters. The business also contributes indirectly to employment for the accommodation providers with whom their guests stay. The certified ecological status of this business is central to attracting German eco-tourists. This is based on installing solar panels and managing domestic waste and water. It was explained that the “guest bedrooms are on the top floor, so we don’t even have the heat on up there during the off season.” The respondent referred to the process of obtaining the certification as being complex: “To get the EU flower... if you were to go about getting it yourself you would never get it... it was only because it was funded and all the costs are paid... for a small business like us you couldn’t, it would be too difficult.”

Country House An eighteenth-century country house in County Sligo, which is a protected structure, provides an example of the use of local cultural and capital resources (in the form of the estate farm), to provide a niche “farm to fork” food experience. The male owner inherited the property from his parents, who established the accommodation business in the 1960s,

320

Chapter Fourteen

reflecting the duration of involvement in rural tourism. A 202-hectare farm adjoining the house is managed by a farm manager. This business is a member of Ireland’s Blue Book, a membership marketing network that consists of high-quality country houses, manor houses, castles and restaurants, which promotes environmental awareness among members (The Bluebook, 2013). The owner became aware of the Greenbox and the EU Flower at a meeting of Blue Book members, pointing to the role of exogenous knowledge. As a result of acquiring this information, he decided to adapt the business in order to provide an ecotourism experience. The main clientele is composed of discriminating American tourists who seek a luxury stay that is kind to the environment. A contribution is made to social capital locally through the employment of the owner and six part-time staff. The presence of a restaurant that serves quality local food is a distinctive feature of Blue Book properties and is used in promotion and marketing. Local food resources are of particular importance in this case. Fruit and vegetables grown on the farm are served, as is venison from a herd of fallow deer. The deer are slaughtered locally and the venison is also offered for sale to those who stay at the house and the general public (BI #33). It is also sold at the local farmers’ market where the owner buys eggs and other produce not harvested on the farm. Chicken, beef and lamb are purchased from a local supplier and fish is sourced at the nearest harbour directly from local fishermen. Thus, endogenous quality resources are used and contributions are made to the local economy. Menus are changed regularly according to the fresh produce available. Guests may walk in the grounds to view the produce that they will eat later and may walk or cycle through the estate, adding a further distinctive environmentally benign dimension to their stay. The reasons cited for becoming involved in ecotourism and applying for the EU Flower in this instance related to reducing costs by adopting energy saving practices because the house is large and expensive to heat. The availability of funding to assist in meeting the EU Flower criteria helped to defray the associated costs. As a result of applying for accreditation, other practices were modified which contributed to an environmentally friendly experience for the guests. There were no particular difficulties reported in obtaining the EU Flower but it was said to be an education laden process: “to get your label, you have to know the whole thing inside out, and go back to school and it is ridiculous and going through it is a pain but it really does make you know these things inside out”. The owner noted that “people find it surprising that a mansion like this can be low energy but it can be and when they built them they had that

Endogenous and Exogenous Resource Use in Ecotourism Promotion

321

in mind!... to use natural light and all of that”. That was one of the reasons why it was relatively easier for him than for others, to obtain the EU Flower related to the property. “Because we are a protected structure we don’t have to put in things like double glazing... we have got window shutters anyway”. In order to comply with the principles of ecotourism this provider managed household waste by composting food waste, minimising on packaging in purchases and recycling. He referred to involving the guests in recycling, by having “separate bins in the rooms (for different types of waste)... we have these hessian bags (for dry recyclables) and they (guests) can actually buy them as well and it is nice and it fits in”. They also provide an “outdoors experience and organic food” which conferred bonus points in the accreditation process. The farm follows low input production methods in fruit and vegetable cultivation but does not have an organic label. The respondent did not feel, however, that the EU Flower contributed very much to increase the number of guests staying in the property: “in general some people will say ‘I like your environmental ethos’, but I do not feel that people actually care that much”. Consequently, he did not renew the label: “My environmental measures haven’t changed and I think it is great, but the main reasons here are cost saving through reducing energy costs. The auditing process of the EU Flower was horrendously expensive… and I didn’t see a marketing value in it”.

The property won a national green hospitality award in 2012 and has an environmental policy on its web page illustrating that protection of the environment remains a central tenet of its operations and guests are invited to participate in that mission.

Hostel A hostel developed by a community environmental group in County Sligo, which is oriented, in particular, at low impact outdoor enthusiasts, illustrates a different example of the use of endogenous resources for ecotourism. The hostel is an extension to a former primary school and funding was obtained through rural development sources for its construction and staffing. The school was closed some years ago because of small student numbers, arising from its peripheral location, and was adapted as a cultural resource for the local community where events of various kinds take place. It is administered by a community committee and a manager is employed. Following the cessation of violence in this cross-

322

Chapter Fourteen

border area in the late 1990s, a niche was seen to exist to develop relatively low-cost accommodation for walkers, cyclists and cavers; the latter are attracted by the extensive underground cavern system in the limestone landscape of County Fermanagh, which has UNESCO Geopark status. Because of the location, the market is more or less evenly divided between visitors from Northern Ireland and Ireland, across a wide range of age groups. The hostel is located in a remote scenic area at a distance from towns and lacks a public bus service; features that were viewed as requiring locally based outdoor activities to be developed, if tourists were to be attracted to stay for some days. Cavers travel by vehicle because of the need to transport equipment but arrangements are made to collect walkers and cyclists in nearby towns, if necessary. The members of the community environmental group include professionals (an engineer, an architect, a heritage specialist) who bring a wealth of social capital and knowledge to the project. The manager reported that the group formed because of a shared interested in environmental conservation. “They felt there was a need for a clean-up in the area, there was a lot of illegal dumping; it was a beautiful scenic area and they wanted to do something about it so they called a day and for everyone who wanted to get involved to come and get involved” (BI # 36).

Walking and cycling trails have been developed with guidance from the county heritage officer. Information boards have been devised relating to the local physical environment, flora, fauna, cultural heritage and activities, drawing on the knowledge of local experts. These are located at the hostel and along the walking and biking trails and are supplemented by leaflets. Bicycles are provided for those who wish to cycle but many walk because the sites of interest are nearby. Information is provided about the local industrial archaeology (a closed barites mine and a water mill site) in a booklet. Efforts are being made to create an eco-tourist experience based on the local natural and cultural heritage resources. The manager reported that they decided to apply for the EU Flower “because we had 99% of things in place anyway” because the new hostel building was energy efficient. Limited changes (an A rated fridge and environmentally friendly cleaning products) had to be introduced in order to obtain accreditation. However, she reported that the EU Flower accreditation process was time-consuming because of the long list of compulsory criteria that had to be complied with. A positive outcome of holding the EU Flower label was that the hostel was shortlisted for the Responsible Tourism Award, which gave media visibility and helped in promotion. The label did not result in a larger number of eco-tourists

Endogenous and Exogenous Resource Use in Ecotourism Promotion

323

coming to stay, however: “it is nice to have, and for people who are looking for that, responsible tourism... we are hoping it brings a bit of awareness but if we were relying on people coming here because it was green I would say ‘no’”. The hostel makes a contribution to social capital locally by employing three full-time and three part-time staff and purchases food and supplies locally, depending on price.

Conclusion Ecotourism is increasingly advocated as an innovative niche form of tourism that has potential for development in marginal locations in developed countries. Whilst often being motivated economically, ecotourism provides potential for local communities and tourists to collaborate in protecting the quality of the physical and cultural environments. Labelling and accreditation are viewed as being necessary for environmental protection and the attraction of eco-tourists (Buckley, 2002). The labels may apply to either the quality of the natural environment or to technical processes which serve to protect that quality. Usually, technically based labels are easier to monitor than are criteria that measure change in the environment per se. For this reason, the EU Flower accreditation label, which applies to accommodation premises, was adopted as a certification system when Ireland’s first ecotourism destination, the Greenbox, was established in 2003. Funding was available from national and international sources to provide training in the application procedure for the label and to help fund the modification of premises and the introduction of environmentally friendly procedures. This funding continued for five years only and its termination had implications for the withdrawal of some providers from the accreditation system because they felt that the number of specialist tourists attracted did not compensate for the costs involved. The documented experience of the providers discussed here illustrates the ways in which endogenous resources, in the form of the natural environment, human, social and cultural capital, provide a basis for ecotourism development and attain benefits from it. It also reveals the importance of exogenous resources in establishing the businesses originally and in the adoption of ecotourism as a rural development strategy supported by the Greenbox. Knowledge gained externally was also influential in disposing the entrepreneurs to apply for EU certification. In the case of the three EU Flower holders discussed, appropriate infrastructure was available and there was strong human capital in terms of appropriate experience and/ or access to information. Varying modifications

324

Chapter Fourteen

had to be made to buildings and practices to comply with the accreditation criteria. Modest contributions were made to social capital through employment and to the local economy. In one case, having an accredited label was central to attracting the main clientele, in another it was viewed as being a positive feature but not essential, in that the business attracted eco-tourists and more general tourists with interests in outdoor recreational activities. In a third case, the label was not being reapplied for because of the cost involved, although the owners felt that they provided an ecotourism experience whether or not the property was certified. More generally, the bureaucracy associated with complying with the assessment criteria was considered to be excessive. The findings highlight some of the issues that surround the labelling of a new ecotourism destination, specifically the need to find a balance between a robust method of certification and the importance of ensuring that it falls within the financial and time resources of providers who are sympathetic to the ethos of ecotourism. Otherwise, the potential for environmental protection through ecotourism promotion may be diminished.

Acknowledgements The research on which this chapter is based was funded as a PhD Fellowship by the Irish Higher Education Authority’s Fourth Programme of Research for Higher Level Institutions, through the Irish Social Sciences Platform and the Whitaker Institute at NUI Galway. Dr. Mary Cawley supervised the research and co-authored the chapter. Dr. Siubhán Comer is thanked for preparing the map of the study area.

References Bosworth, G., & Farrell, H. (2011). Tourism entrepreneurs in Northumberland. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1474-1494. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2011). Editorial introduction: Critical research on the governance of tourism and sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4/5), 411-421. Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Buckley, R. (2002). Tourism ecolabels. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1), 183-208. —. (2009). Ecotourism: Principles and Practices. Wallingford: CABI. Carter, E., & Lowman, G. (Eds.). (1994). Ecotourism: A Sustainable Option. New York: Wiley.

Endogenous and Exogenous Resource Use in Ecotourism Promotion

325

Cawley, M. E., Gaffey, S. M., & Gillmor, D. A. (1999). The role of quality tourism and craft SMEs in rural development: evidence from the Republic of Ireland. Anatolia, 10(1), 45-60. Cawley, M., & Gillmor, D. A. (2008). Integrated rural tourism: concepts and practice. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 316-337. Ceballos-Lascuráin, H. (1987). The future of ecotourism. Mexico Journal (January), 13-14. Che, D. (2006). Developing ecotourism in First World, resourcedependent, areas. Geoforum, 37(2), 212-226. Conway, T., & Cawley, M. (2012). Organizational networking in an emerging ecotourism destination. Tourism Planning and Development, 9(4), 397-409. European Commission. (2012). EU Ecolabel. Retrieved from http//ec/europa.eu/environment/ecolabel Fennell, D. A. (2008). Ecotourism: An Introduction (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. —. (2009). Ecotourism. In R. Kitchin & N. Thrift (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Human Geography (pp. 372-376). Oxford: Elsevier. Font, X. (2002). Environmental certification in tourism and hospitality: progress, process and prospects. Tourism Management, 23(3), 197205. Font, X., & Harris, C. (2004). Rethinking standards from green to sustainable. Tourism Research, 31(4), 986-1007. Garrod, B., Wornell, R., & Youell, R. (2006). Re-conceptualising rural resources as countryside capital: the case of rural tourism. Journal of Rural Studies, 22(1), 117-128. Hall, D., Roberts, L., & Mitchell, M. (2003). New Directions in Rural Tourism. Aldershot: Ashgate. Hetzer, C.-D. (1965). Environment, tourism, culture. LINKS (July, no pagination); reprinted in Ecosphere (1970), 1(2), 1-3. Jenkins, T. N. (2000). Putting postmodernity into practice: endogenous development and the role of traditional cultures in the rural development of marginal regions. Ecological Economics, 34(3), 301314. Kalantaridis, C., & Bika, Z. (2006). In-migrant entrepreneurship in rural England: beyond local embeddedness. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development: An International Journal, 18(2), 109-131. Mac Ginty, R., Muldoon, O. T., & Ferguson, N. (2007). No war, no peace: Northern Ireland after the Agreement. Political Psychology, 28(1), 111.

326

Chapter Fourteen

Ó Cinnéide, M. S. (1999). Using an area based mark of environmental quality as a means of promoting bottomǦup sustainable development. European Environment, 9(3), 101-108. Oliver, T., & Jenkins, T. (2003). Sustaining rural landscapes: the role of integrated tourism. Landscape Research, 28(3), 293-307. Page, S., & Dowling, R. K. (2002). Ecotourism. Harlow: Prentice Hall. Roberts, L. (Ed.). (2001). Rural Tourism and Recreation: Principles and Practice. Wallingford: Cabi. Saxena, G., Clark, G., Oliver, T., & Ilbery, B. (2007). Conceptualizing integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies, 9(4), 347-370. Sharpley, R. (2009). Tourism Development and the Environment: Beyond Sustainability? London: Earthscan. The Bluebook. (2013). The Bluebook. Retrieved from https://www.irelands-blue-book.ie TIES (The International Ecotourism Society). (2010). What is ecotourism? Retrieved from http://www.ecotourism.org/ties-overview van der Ploeg, J. D., & van Dijk, G. (Eds.). (1995). Beyond Modernisation. Assen: Van Gorcum and Company. WDC (Western Development Commission). (2011). Green Box. Retrieved from www.wdc.ie/regional-development/tourism/green-box Weaver, D. B. (2005). Comprehensive and minimalist dimensions of ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(2), 439-455.

PART III. RURAL TOURISM AND SUSTAINABLE DESTINATION DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER FIFTEEN TOURISM AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF RURAL DESTINATIONS CELESTE EUSÉBIO, ELISABETH KASTENHOLZ AND ZÉLIA BREDA

Introduction Although the origins of sustainability can be recognised to have come about in the middle of the 19th century, as a response to problems which originated with industrialisation and urbanisation (Choi & Sirakaya, 2005), the increasing popularity of this development paradigm can be traced back mainly to the end of the 1980s, when the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) presented the report “Our Common Future” at the United Nations (Anderson, Bakir & Wickens, 2015; Eusébio, Kastenholz & Breda, 2014). After this date, sustainable development, defined as the development that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987, p. 43), has become very popular both in political and academic discourses (Choi & Sirakaya, 2005; Eusébio et al., 2014). Consequently, this concept has replaced old development paradigms centred exclusively in the economic growth (Eusébio & Figueiredo, 2014), and is considered one of the major governance challenges of the 21st century. Choi and Sirakaya (2006, p. 127) emphasise this idea, stating that “the notion of sustainable development (sustainability) emerged as an alternative to the traditional neoclassical model of economic development”. Since the Brundtland Report (WCED, 1987), the term “sustainable development” has been widely incorporated into tourism development policies and strategies (Anderson et al., 2015). Consequently, by now hundreds of studies have been published on this topic. This proliferation confirms the relevance of designing adequate tourism development strategies to achieve sustainability. Moreover, this growing need for

330

Chapter Fifteen

sustainability in the tourism industry is also a result of increased knowledge regarding tourism impacts and environmental problems in general (Saarinen, 2006). Sustainability should be linked to all kinds and scales of tourism activities, though. As a matter of fact, the fragile character of some tourism destinations, such as rural areas, makes this issue a critical element for their survival. Since the 1980s the demand for more environmentally sensitive and sustainable practices in the tourism industry has experienced a fast growth (Eusébio et al., 2014), leading to several rural areas around the world becoming popular tourism destinations. Therefore, tourism planning based on a multidimensional concept of sustainable development is required in rural tourism destinations, in order to maximise the positive impacts and minimise the negative ones. Rural tourism has been identified as potentially contributing to sustainable destination development (Sharpley, 2005). However, the development of tourism in rural destinations will be sustainable in the medium and long term, only if it both satisfies the needs and desires of all stakeholders involved in the process (visitors, residents and supply agents—public and private entities) and if it contributes to the conservation of the resources that underpin its development (Eusébio et al., 2014). This chapter, based on a proposed sustainable development model and having in mind the specificity of rural areas as tourism destinations, focuses on five dimensions of sustainability—economic, ecological/environmental, socio-cultural, technological and political—, providing an analysis of these dimensions, which should be incorporated in all rural tourism strategies, in order to achieve sustainable development.

Challenges of Sustainable Tourism Development in Rural Areas Globally, rural tourism can have positive and negative impacts depending on how it is planned, developed and managed. In this context, a set of enabling conditions is required so that rural tourism can contribute to sustainable development, producing net benefits for all stakeholders involved (residents, visitors and supply agents) (Farsani, Lima, Eusébio, Costa & Coelho, 2013). The literature reveals that rural tourism may constitute a valuable tool for the sustainable development of rural communities (Eusébio et al., 2014; Peña, Jamilena & Molina, 2012). Anderson et al. (2015) corroborate this idea, referring that tourism may have an important role in the development of peripheral rural areas in which traditional economic activities, such as agriculture and forestry,

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

331

have declined. Since the 1970s, several rural areas have been undergoing restructuring, both as a result of endogenous and exogenous forces (Anderson et al., 2015). Consequently, tourism has played a crucial role in many rural areas worldwide and is frequently considered more effective in generating economic benefits, such as employment and income, when compared with other economic activities (Anderson et al., 2015). Rural tourism can be broadly defined as tourism taking place in rural areas (Ghaderi & Henderson, 2012). However, several authors highlight the definitional ambiguities about rural areas and rural tourism, emphasising that these are two multifaceted concepts that have been the object of various interpretations (Sharpley & Roberts, 2004). Although the concept of “rural” may be socially constructed and differs according to country and culture, some specific attributes common to many rural areas can be identified, namely (i) relatively low physical densities of population, buildings and activities (Bramwell, 1994); (ii) a more traditional social structure (Ghaderi & Henderson, 2012); (iii) less social and cultural heterogeneity (Bramwell, 1994); (iv) less economic diversity; (v) a comparative physical isolation from social, economic and political networks (Bramwell, 1994); (vi) the presence of nature and traditional economic activities (e.g. agriculture and forestry); (vii) a specific way of life of the residents, which is valued by the visitors to these areas (Eusébio et al., 2014). Rural areas frequently reveal considerable fragilities at economic, environmental and socio-cultural levels, requiring tourism development in accordance with the principles of sustainable development. Indeed, the survival of these areas and their enjoyment by future generations can be strongly jeopardised if they are the target of development strategies that are not guided by the principles of sustainable development (Eusébio & Figueiredo, 2014). Nonetheless, as mentioned by Choi and Sirakaya (2006), there are still too many tourism destinations where sustainable development principles are ignored. Despite all efforts carried out in this field, and the recognition of its importance (Rio & Nunes, 2012), little progress has been made in terms of assessing and monitoring the impact of tourism on sustainable development of rural tourism destinations. Tourism can, in fact, provide considerable social, economic and environmental impacts on rural areas. As Látkova and Vogt (2012) state, tourism, being a non-traditional rural development strategy, provides valuable opportunities for entrepreneurship. When this activity is developed with the participation of small local businesses and the involvement of local government, using endogenous resources and local employment, social and economic benefits are higher than if its development was based on

332

Chapter Fifteen

outside firms or large companies. In this line of thought, Ghaderi and Herdenson (2012) mention that it is crucial to promote development strategies based on sustainable development principles in rural areas in order to balance the demands of conservation and development, to preserve the peculiar and intrinsic characteristics of these areas, and to stimulate community-based economic growth. In recent decades, rural tourism has intensified its important role in the economic and social regeneration of peripheral rural areas (Peña et al., 2012). Therefore, tourism contributes to sustainable development of rural areas if it: (i) improves the residents’ quality of life (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006); (ii) minimises environmental and cultural damage (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006; Penã et al., 2012); (iii) provides optimum use of environmental resources, preserving natural assets and biological diversity (Fons, Fierro & Patiño, 2011); (iv) optimises visitor satisfaction (Peña et al., 2012); (v) maximises long-term economic growth (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006; Peña et al., 2012); (vi) provides long-term economic linkages between destination communities and industries (Eusébio et al., 2014); (vii) sustains the culture of host communities, respecting socio-cultural authenticity, preserving their traditional values, customs, cultural and architectonic assets (Fons et al., 2011; Lane, 1994a); (viii) sustains a tourism industry that should be economically viable in the long term; (ix) provides widely distributed socio-economic benefits to all stakeholders involved (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006; Fons et al., 2011). Globally, as Hunter (1997) emphasises, tourism development strategies in rural areas should be multipurpose, yielding satisfaction of the needs and desires of all stakeholders involved (community, visitors, private industry operators and public entities), as well as the protection and preservation of natural and cultural resources (Fig. 15-1). To accomplish these goals, it is of paramount relevance to apply sustainable principles in all dimensions of rural tourism development (e.g. environmental, economic, socio-cultural and political) in a balanced way in order to ensure its long-term feasibility (UNWTO, 2004). Farsari and Prastacos (2001) mention ten important principles of sustainable development that may assume a crucial relevance to developing tourism in a sustainable way, specifically: (i) using natural (e.g. water, energy, landscape, biodiversity), cultural and social resources sustainably; (ii) reducing over-consumption and waste; (iii) maintaining diversity (including biodiversity, socio-cultural diversity, as well as diversity in terms of products and tourism recreation activities); (iv) integrating tourism into local planning; (v) supporting local communities; (vi) involving local communities; (vii) consulting stakeholders and the public;

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

333

Fig. 15-1. Tourism and sustainable development of rural areas: An integrated approach

Interaction and coordination of resources and stakeholders of rural areas

Visitors

Local Community

Satisfaction of needs and desires

Supply Agents (private and public)

Protection of natural and cultural resources of rural areas on which tourism is based Source: Eusébio et al. (2014)

(viii) training staff; (ix) marketing tourism responsibly; (x) undertaking research. From all these principles, the literature in rural tourism development has emphasised: the promotion of the involvement of all stakeholders, stimulating locals’ participation in tourism decision-making (Anderson et al., 2015); the attraction of responsible visitors, who are respectful of traditions, values and customs, and preserve natural resources and the environment (Ghaderi & Henderson, 2012; Kastenholz, 2004); and the integration and coordination of a whole range of activities that offer products to visitors (Anderson et al., 2015; Butler, 1999). In this line of thought, the concept of “integrated rural tourism” was proposed by Saxena, Clark, Oliver and Ilbery (2007), an idea also followed by

334

Chapter Fifteen

Kastenholz, Eusébio, Figueiredo, Carneiro and Lima (2014) when analysing and suggesting more sustainable management of the “overall rural tourism experience” in three Portuguese villages. This concept, based on the coordination of resources and stakeholders involved (visitors, residents and supply agents) and on sustainable development principles, capable of maximising positive outcomes and minimising the negative (Kastenholz et al., 2014), is crucial for the survival of these areas, due to the multifaceted, however fragmented, small-scale and highly sensitive character of rural tourism (Eusébio et al., 2014). Similarly, Anderson et al. (2015) highlight the fragmented nature of the rural tourism industry as a factor that may hinder the development of this industry in a sustainable way. Other authors argue that is not easy to implement sustainable tourism at the local level (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006). In many rural tourism destinations, residents are excluded from the decision-making process; there is an absence of stakeholder collaboration or community participation while external control over the development process is common (Anderson et al., 2015; Choi & Sirakaya, 2006). However, despite these difficulties, as Anderson et al. (2015) remark, it is urgent to balance visitor and community needs, to protect the environment and to develop highquality tourism products able to compete in an increasingly global tourism market. In sum, it is crucial that the whole range of economic activities associated with rural tourism is integrated and coordinated for rural tourism to be sustainable. To monitor the development of tourism in rural areas is of utmost relevance in creating systems and measures to analyse the sustainability of tourism activities (Blancas, Caballero, González, Lozano-Oyola & Pérez, 2010). Moreover, rural tourism destinations need to be managed to accomplish the principles of sustainable development in the long term. To achieve this, it is crucial that all stakeholders (visitors, residents and supply agents—private and public) are involved in the definition and implementation of measures and indicators required to evaluate the role of tourism in the sustainable development of rural tourism destinations. Some recently published studies (e.g. Blancas et al., 2010; Rio & Nunes, 2012) have designed systems of sustainability indicators that provide a basis for planning and decision-making at rural tourism destinations. However, neither a common management framework nor commonly accepted indicators exist to track and monitor the consequences of tourism in rural areas, in a systematic manner. In this context, the definition of sustainable tourism indicators for rural areas and the monitoring of rural tourism development are most important to identify the measures that should be

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

335

implemented to maximise the contribution of tourism to sustainable development. As Castellani and Sala (2010) mention, the definition of sustainability indicators and their evaluation over time could represent a useful tool for decision-makers to assess policy efficacy in implementing models of sustainable tourism, particularly in marginal and transforming areas. In this vein, some studies defend that sustainability in the tourism industry is normally an ambition, rather than a quantifiable or achievable goal (Ko, 2005). Consequently, as Ko (2005, p. 431) highlights, “the application of the concept of sustainable development as an achievable and practical objective for tourism has not yet matured”. However, although sustainability has been widely considered as a vehicle for addressing the problems of negative tourism impacts and maintaining its long-term feasibility (Liu, 2003), the route is still very long and depends on all of us. As Butler (1999, p. 2) emphasises, “to assess the real impacts of tourism and the level of sustainability achieved requires in-depth longitudinal research and environmental, economic and social auditing”.

Dimensions of Sustainable Rural Tourism Development Sustainable development is a complex, multifaceted and multidimensional concept. The initial studies related to sustainable development of tourism destinations mainly addressed the environmental and economic dimensions (Choi & Sirakaya, 2005), which was soon considered a very limited vision of the concept, though. Sustainable development has a multidimensional nature (Butler, 1999; Eusébio, Castro & Costa, 2013; Ko, 2005; Liu, 2003), with the majority of the literature published on rural tourism destinations (e.g. Blancas et al., 2010; Fons et al., 2011; Peña et al., 2012) encompassing three important dimensions (economic, sociocultural and ecological/environmental) (Fig. 15-2). As Choi and Sirakaya (2006, p. 1275) state, “much of the literature on sustainable tourism has focused on the traditional dimensions: economic, social, cultural and ecological”. However, recently, two important dimensions have also been added: the technological and political (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006). Consequently, the sustainable development model proposed in this chapter includes five dimensions—economic, ecological/environmental, sociocultural, technological and political—, all being interconnected (Fig. 153). The next section provides a more detailed and in-depth analysis of these dimensions, which should be incorporated in all rural tourism development strategies.

Chapter Fifteen

336

Fig. 15-2. Dimensions of the sustainable development concept: The traditional approach

Economic

Ecological

Socio-cultural

Source: Elaborated based on Choi and Sirakaya (2006) Fig. 15-3. Dimensions of the sustainable development concept: The proposed approach

Economic

Institutional/ Political

Technological

Socio-cultural

Environmental

Source: Elaborated based on Choi and Sirakaya (2006)

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

337

Economic Sustainability Recently, rural tourism has been identified as a catalyst for regeneration and economic development of rural areas, especially for areas where traditional economic activities, such as agriculture, forestry and grazing, are in decline. Tourism development in rural areas is seen as a means to increase opportunities for local commerce, agriculture and crafts, to develop new economic activities, to diversify the local productive structure, to create employment, to generate revenues and to increase public revenues (Eusébio et al., 2013). However, the danger of overdependence on tourism, the seasonality of production, the low rate of return on investment, the increase in propensity to import and negative externalities (e.g. inflation rate) emerge as the most often mentioned economic costs of tourism in the literature (Eusébio et al., 2013; Farsani et al., 2013). To promote the economic development of rural tourism destinations, it is therefore most important to adopt a business model that promotes the use of local resources, economic diversification and cooperation among all local stakeholders, given that the total economic benefits of rural tourism depend not only on tourism expenditures but also on multiplier effects of these expenditures on rural economies. In tourism destinations, where a large proportion of visitors’ needs are locally supplied, tourism multiplier effects tend to be higher (Farsani et al., 2013). Therefore, tourism development strategies in rural areas should ensure feasible long-term activities, providing widely distributed socio-economic benefits to all stakeholders (Fons et al., 2011). The proponents of rural tourism as a tool for sustainable development of rural areas frequently mention the economic role of tourism in fighting poverty and improving residents’ quality of life. Tourism is a labourintensive sector that has direct, indirect and induced benefits on local incomes. According to Choi and Sirakaya (2006, p. 1276), economic sustainability implies “optimising the development growth rate at a manageable level with full consideration of the limits of the destination environment”. Another very important concern regarding economic sustainability is that economic benefits of tourism must be well distributed throughout the community. Moreover, for maximising economic benefits, it is crucial to stimulate linkages between tourism and local and regional resources, activities, products and communities. Local suppliers should work together to obtain synergies, contributing to an increase in tourism multiplier effects (Anderson et al., 2015; Eusébio et al., 2013). However, some authors (e.g. Cavaco, 1999; Eusébio et al., 2014; Ribeiro & Marques, 2002) show that in many remote rural areas, the

338

Chapter Fifteen

connection between tourism and sustainable economic development is not so convincing. In several areas, the positive economic impacts of tourism (frequently in small-scale and family-based activities) on small rural communities are often limited to a few groups, not creating many new paid jobs nor contributing to enhancing residents’ quality of life. In order to overcome this reality, it is important that tourism in rural areas: (i) promotes employment growth in the sector and the economy as a whole, (ii) provides equal employment and promotion opportunities to women and local residents; (iii) contributes to an increase in residents’ income, inter-sectorial linkages/ partnership in the tourism industry and the use of local products in the tourism industry and in its suppliers; (iv) stimulates the creation of tourism businesses by local people and the reinvestment of profit/revenue in the community.

Socio-cultural Sustainability Sustainable rural tourism development only occurs when the host community is recognised as a relevant stakeholder in this development, when local residents’ interests are taken into account and when local community, in fact, benefits from tourism development, not being negatively affected by it, or at least positive impacts on the community outweighing possible negative ones (Figueiredo, Kastenholz & Pinho, 2014; Saxena et al., 2007). Tourism impacts have been widely studied and are, indeed, not only positive (Andereck, Valentine, Knopf & Vogt, 2005). Given that rural communities tend to be of small scale, they are characterised by very specific personalised relationships between residents and by distinct traditional, social structures (Lane, 1994b), features that are sometimes particularly enhanced by isolation and remoteness (from the more vibrant, modern urban areas, dominating society’s economic, social and cultural progress). Large visitor flows tend to leave more visible impacts on rural than on urban destination communities. Doxey (1975) suggested the widely known and cited irritation index (Irridex) to explain how the community’s attitude towards tourism may evolve over time, associated with increasing numbers of tourists visiting the destination. Byrd, Bosley and Dronberger (2009) showed that distinct stakeholder groups (local entrepreneurs, government officials, residents and tourists) presented different attitudes towards and support for tourism in eastern North Carolina while Kuvan and Akan (2005) identified different types of residents with diverse attitudes regarding tourism. Economic dependency on tourism or direct (mostly economic) benefits obtained from tourism has been identified as one of the most relevant

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

339

factors explaining positive attitudes of residents towards tourism in their communities. This is in accordance with social exchange theory, which assumes that stakeholders’ attitudes towards and support for tourism should be influenced by their evaluations of perceived outcomes of tourism in their community (Andereck et al., 2005; Ap & Crompton, 1998; Perdue, Long & Allen, 1987). As relevant negative social and cultural impacts, the literature suggests a decline in traditions, commoditisation of culture, increasing materialism, social conflicts, crowding and crime (Andereck et al., 2005; Brunt & Courtney, 1999; Pizam, 1978). As positive effects, improvement of services within communities, additional recreation and cultural opportunities are often referred to, as well as stimulation of traditional arts. In the rural tourism context, the setting into value of countryside resources, local history, rural products and traditions are mentioned as positive impacts, also being recognised as leading to an enhanced feeling of local identity, self-esteem and even increased social capital (Figueiredo et al., 2014; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012; Rodrigues, Kastenholz & Rodrigues, 2009). Additionally, enhanced quality of daily social life through new contacts and reduction of isolation in remote locations have been identified as relevant positively perceived impacts of tourism on communities (Figueiredo et al., 2014; Kastenholz, Carneiro, Eusébio & Figueiredo, 2013). As a matter of fact, without stakeholder support in the community, it is nearly impossible to develop tourism at a destination in a sustainable manner (Andereck & Vogt, 2000; Byrd et al., 2009). Additionally, the social dimension of the visitor experience, with host-guest interaction assuming an important role, is nowadays increasingly recognised as an essential component of an appealing, involving and memorable rural tourist experience (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012; Kastenholz et al., 2013). Local residents often play an active role in co-creating this experience, making visitors feel welcome, helping them “discover”, sharing their knowledge of (and attachment to) the place, its history, identity and special features or offering opportunities for a closer contact with their way of life, thereby acting as “cultural brokers” (Cohen, 1988) and potentially helping tourists to have a more intense experience of these places (Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009; Pina & Delfa, 2005).

Ecological/Environmental Sustainability The demand for more environmentally sensitive and sustainable practices in the tourism industry has been growing since the 1980s

340

Chapter Fifteen

(Saarinen, 2006). Tourism development in rural areas not only changes the social life of the communities, but it also changes the physical environment, which is a critical asset for tourism development in rural areas. In these areas, natural resources frequently play an important role in attracting visitors (Anderson et al., 2015). However, paradoxically, tourism could also destroy these resources (Fons et al., 2011). The natural environment must be protected for its intrinsic value and as a valuable tourism resource for present and future generations. Tourism has the potential of generating negative environmental impacts, potentially jeopardising the preservation of natural resources, landscapes and biodiversity; causing air, water and noise pollution; wildlife destruction; severe damages in natural habitats and geological formations; and deforestation. However, if tourism development is planned and managed according to environmentally sustainable principles, this activity has the potential of generating positive environmental impacts, contributing to the preservation of ecosystems and environmental education. To overcome the negative impacts, tourism strategies for rural areas should contribute to the adequate use of environmental resources, preserving natural assets and biological diversity (Fons et al., 2011). According to Choi and Sirakaya (2006, p. 1276), “environmental sustainability recognises that natural resources of the individual community and the world should be no longer viewed as abundant and are, in fact, constantly being depleted” and therefore require protection. According to Hunter (1997, p. 858), “the illusion still apparently persists that the tourism development can occur in a manner which absolutely preserves natural resources”. This author, however, suggests that it is, in reality, impossible to imagine any tourism activity being developed and operating without, in some way, reducing the quantity and/or quality of natural resources somewhere. However, the tourism industry faces the challenge of minimising negative environmental impacts and contributing to the preservation of natural resources. In order to achieve these goals, it is crucial to provide information about environmental practices of the tourism industry; to define the carrying capacity in order to control use intensity; to produce environmental impact assessment studies; to use renewable energy resources; to reduce over-consumption and waste; to train staff; to control noise levels; to manage visual impacts of tourism facilities and infrastructures; to provide an adequate integration of tourism facilities with the landscape; to promote environmentally friendly transports; and to define limits of acceptable change (Blancas et al., 2010; Blackstock, White, McCrum, Scott & Hunter, 2008; Choi & Sirakaya, 2006). Globally, the minimisation of negative environmental impacts of

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

341

tourism in rural areas necessarily implies the adoption of environmental management practices by the tourism industry and, simultaneously, more environmentally friendly behaviour from visitors and the host community alike.

Political/Institutional Sustainability In order to offer a global and integrated tourism product, where interests of diverse stakeholders, as well as requirements of territorial management and heritage protection, are taken into account, destinations must adopt a specific management approach, different from that used in traditional products. The nature of tourism pushes service providers to develop formal and informal relationships, leading to the emergence of inter-organisational networks in destinations. These networks can be seen as groups that are articulated freely, with the goal of providing a comprehensive tourism product (Scott, Baggio & Cooper, 2008), while simultaneously yielding long-term goals and sustainable destination development. In today’s networked society and economy, where business and personal relationships exist between companies and managers in a wide range of services, networks and partnerships allow us to overcome the problems associated with the fragmented and geographic dispersion of the tourism sector (Scott et al., 2008). In addition to bringing competitive advantages to tourism firms, by identifying the relationships between public entities, businesses and the community, network governance has a huge potential to guide the development of tourism destinations. The literature has focused its attention mainly on destination management and planning, where cooperative relationships are considered a means for achieving sustainable development (Breda & Pato, 2014). The network perspective is highly appropriate in the tourism industry, as tourism destinations usually include different types of organisation, of different structures and sizes, interacting and competing, and also shaping the destination’s overall tourism experience product. This creates a dichotomy in that competition and cooperation coexist (Pavlovich, 2003), thus being necessary “coopetitive” strategies. Collective actions, thus, become important for the development and, in some cases even the survival of tourism destinations. Another peculiarity of tourism, which justifies a network management approach, is the fact that it develops in areas that are consumed by visitors, but are, at the same time, also used by other types of publics, namely the residents. The participation of the local community in the tourism

342

Chapter Fifteen

management and planning process is, therefore, essential (Gunn & Var, 2002). Through a network management system, local stakeholders have more chances of effective participation. There are other reasons why networks are presented as a more suitable form of governance for tourism destinations. The fragmented nature of tourism, especially in remote rural areas where small companies dominate (Fyall & Garrod, 2005), makes relationships between the various stakeholders of a destination a strategically most relevant factor. Another reason is knowledge management, which has to be understood as a mutual collaboration task (Gnoth, 2007). Attempts have been made to sustainably develop tourism destinations by using indicators, monitoring, eco-labelling, codes of conduct, educating the tourist and other best practices. However, many of these approaches seem to “lack quality, technical content, reliability, maturity, equity and effectiveness” (van der Duim & van Marwijk, 2006, p. 449). According to Choi and Sirakaya (2006), there is no commonly consensual management framework or scale of indicators to track and monitor political changes in communities, in a systematic way. In their view, community managers and planners need to provide information and training programmes to all destination stakeholders in order to raise public and political awareness of the planning and conservation of the community’s tourism resources. Accordingly, this information, monitoring systems and processes may help adjust destination planning and management in a manner yielding sustainable development.

Technological Sustainability Since a few decades ago technological development has been recognised as an effective means to enhance economic growth and socio-economic development. On the other hand, the inappropriate use of technology may threaten the future development of society; therefore, both development and use of technology need to be managed properly (Sharif, 1992). Technological development has a profound and long-term impact on income distribution, economic growth, employment, trade, environment, industry structure, defence and security matters (Ahmed, 2004). Therefore, poor technological capability remains one of the constraints to sustainable development. Rural actors and communities need improved access to knowledge and technologies and adequate skills to use them to strengthen their ability to participate in today’s knowledge-based society while, conversely, an inadequate base of skills and the absence of both a socio-

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

343

economic and technological infrastructure prevent development from taking place. Several authors (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006; Ko, 2005) suggest the use of environmentally friendly, culturally acceptable and socially appropriate technologies for sustainable community tourism development. Examples of these technologies are soft mobility systems (bicycles, electric and hybrid buses), efficient energy resources and Geographic Information Systems (GIS). In addition, the use of technology by the local communities and other stakeholders is central to information exchange and destination promotion. In recent years, societies have experienced rapid growth in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). As a result, the tourism sector has been transforming, as ICT have changed the way organisations and tourists access and exchange information and interact with each other (Azevedo, Dinis & Breda, 2010). The transversality and specific characteristics of the tourism sector make it dynamic and dependent on information, which needs to be updated, timely and concise. According to Sheldon (1997), the stakeholders involved in travel and tourism have different information needs. In this sense, a bilateral relationship should be highlighted: public destination management organisations (DMOs) that without economic interests manage and promote a tourism destination, representing all local stakeholders, providing information to all individual destination agents (private and public); in turn, DMOs need these agents to collect statistical information to serve as basis for policy formulation and the development of strategies. The advantages of adopting ICT tools, such as the Internet, mobile technologies, navigation systems and, more recently, social networks, were rapidly acknowledged by the different destination stakeholders. The use of these technologies can be a practical approach which destinations may use to mitigate some of tourism’s negative impacts and effectively achieve sustainable tourism development.

Conclusion The topic of sustainability has become increasingly popular since the late 1980s, as a result of the report “Our Common Future”, which highlights a series of threats mankind is facing due to modern society’s self-destructive way of life. The report suggests the fulfilment of the needs of the current generation without affecting those of future generations. Sustainability, which is also sometimes referred to as a type of development that aims at a maximisation of positive results and minimisation of negative impacts,

344

Chapter Fifteen

according to the so-called “triple bottom line”—economy, society, nature (or the 3Ps: profits, people and planet)—, is currently recognised as a key element in all tourism destinations. For rural areas, this approach assumes even greater relevance due to the specific characteristics of these territories and their communities. Rural tourism has been identified as potentially contributing to sustainable destination development, guaranteeing the satisfaction of all stakeholders involved, both from the demand and supply side, without jeopardising natural, cultural and social resources, if carefully developed, integrating relevant endogenous resources and skills and involving local communities (Eusébio et al., 2014; Saxena et al., 2007; Sharpley, 2005). However, there is some empirical evidence pointing to a relatively modest role of rural tourism as a development tool, contrasting with a sometimes exaggeratedly optimistic discourse of some policy makers (Ribeiro & Marques, 2002). In order to counteract this, the development of tourism in rural areas should be developed based on principles of sustainability, with multidisciplinary teams and all destination stakeholders involved in defining respective strategies so as to minimise potential negative impacts and maximise the positive. It should also be based on local resources and competences to reduce leakages and increase the multiplier effects of tourism on the local/ regional economy. Much of the literature on sustainable tourism has focused on the three previously mentioned traditional dimensions of sustainability (economic, socio-cultural and ecological) while two recently added dimensions— namely the political and technological—have been less discussed. As a matter of fact, these more recently added dimensions may also be considered transversal and somehow instrumental to the other three dimensions, but their separation may be interesting for analytical purposes while also adequate political and technological development should be considered. The economic dimension of development has long been, and continues to be the main concern of large parts of the society, with the expectation of income and job creation amongst the most relevant purposes. However, fair distribution of profits and the fight against poverty—i.e. economic wellbeing for an increasing number of people—, both for today’s and future generations, are also important concerns. In rural areas, tourism has been identified as a potential tool for economic development, but this potential should depend on the way tourism is implemented, with intelligent links to the market, adequate product development targeting specific segments, the use of endogenous resources and competences, all

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

345

necessary for achieving the goal of economic wellbeing for the largest possible part of the local community. In this respect, social sustainability also plays a role since only in a community that welcomes tourism and disposes of “social capital” are people able to actively participate in tourism and other linked activities that may be opportunities to develop. Local residents of destinations must be recognised as most relevant stakeholders since they are in fact the most affected by tourism development. They also share conditions and co-create tourist experiences, being thus decisive for tourist attraction and satisfaction. In rural tourism contexts, there is some evidence of residents welcoming tourists and tourism. However, expectations seem to be sometimes too high, leading to frustration that benefits are considered unequally distributed. The final outcome will depend on the way tourism is implemented and managed at the local level. Community involvement is, in this context, frequently called for (Anderson et al., 2015; Saxena et al., 2007) and should not be neglected in designing destination development strategies. The environmental dimension of sustainable development has received much attention, both politically and academically, and has probably been the initiator of the sustainability discussion, as a result of the Brundtland report (WCED, 1987) with dramatic revelations regarding the impact of modern civilisation on the environment. Tourism is, by nature, an activity that is based on natural resources, but it is also an activity that can cause negative effects on the natural assets on which it is based. This is of particular concern for rural tourism, where nature and the rural, manshaped natural environment is one of the most attractive and impacting elements of the tourist experience (Kastenholz, Carneiro, Marques & Lima, 2012). That is why it is paramount to minimise any possible negative effects, trying to preserve the natural assets and set them into value. This implies accountability of all stakeholders, the adoption of environmental management practices by tourism companies, and measures of environmental education, making sure that both visitors and residents have environmentally friendly behaviours. Technology and the political/institutional framework should help achieve these goals and may need particular attention, for their fair and intelligent, overall development enhancing use. This would mean the transparent flow of information, innovation-enhancing and peopleempowering communication, the development and adequate management of networks, through inclusive governance structures, aiming at involving all local stakeholders, with links to other dimensions of sustainability being obvious and desirable.

346

Chapter Fifteen

For the implementation of any kind of strategies yielding sustainability, it is not enough to establish objectives and design measures for achieving them. Control is essential, so reliable indicators to measure the impacts of tourism in all dimensions of development referred to in this chapter are needed to monitor development and evaluate its sustainability, so as to be able to take corrective action. Although we have witnessed an increase in research on the role of tourism in developing destinations in recent decades, there are still many questions open. The way to go is still long, but there are signs that, if planned and managed properly, rural tourism may indeed contribute to sustainable development of rural areas.

References Ahmed, A. (2004). Science, technology and sustainable development: A world review. World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 5-24. Andereck, K. L., Valentine, K. M., Knopf, R. C., & Vogt, C. A. (2005). Residents’ perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4), 1056-1076. Andereck, K. L., & Vogt, C. A. (2000). The relationship between residents’ attitudes toward tourism and tourism development options. Journal of Travel Research, 39, 27-36. Anderson, E., Bakir, A., & Wickens, E. (2015). Rural tourism development in Connemara, Ireland. Tourism Planning & Development, 12(1), 73-86. Ap, J., & Crompton, J. L. (1998). Developing and testing a tourism impact scale. Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 120-130. Azevedo, C., Dinis, M. G., & Breda, Z. (2010). Understanding visitors’ spatio-temporal distribution through data collection using information and communication technologies. In Proceedings of the 10th International Forum on Tourism Statistics 2010. Retrieved from http://10thtourismstatisticsforum.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpid=INE&xpgi d=tur_papers&PAPERSest_boui=101892004&PAPERSmodo=2 Blackstock, K. L., White, V., McCrum, G., Scott, A., & Hunter, C. (2008). Measuring responsibility: An appraisal of a Scottish National Park’s sustainable tourism indicators. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(3), 276-297. Blancas, F. J., Caballero, R., González, M., Lozano-Oyola, M., & Pérez, F. (2010). Goal programming synthetic indicators: An application for

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

347

sustainable tourism in Andalusian coastal countries. Ecological Economics, 69(11), 2158-2172. Bramwell, B. (1994). Rural tourism and sustainable rural tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1), 1-6. Breda, Z., & Pato, L. (2014). O papel das redes no desenvolvimento de destinos rurais. In E. Kastenholz, C. Eusébio, E. Figueiredo, M. J. Carneiro & J. Lima (Coords.), Reinventar o turismo rural em Portugal: Cocriação de experiências turísticas sustentáveis (pp. 5969). Aveiro: UA Editora. Brunt, P., & Courtney, P. (1999). Host perceptions of socio-cultural impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(3), 493-515. Butler, R. (1999). Sustainable tourism: A state-of-the-art review. Tourism Geographies, 1(1), 7-25. Byrd, E., Bosley, H. E., & Dronberger, M. G. (2009). Comparisons of stakeholder perceptions of tourism impacts in rural eastern North Carolina. Tourism Management, 30, 693-703. Castellani, V., & Sala, S. (2010). Sustainable performance index for tourism policy development. Tourism Management, 31, 871-880. Cavaco, C. (1999). O turismo rural nas políticas de desenvolvimento do turismo em Portugal. In C. Cavaco (Coord.), Desenvolvimento rural: Desafio e utopia (pp. 281-292). Lisboa: CEG. Choi, H.-S., & Sirakaya, E. (2005). Measuring residents’ attitude toward sustainable tourism: Development of sustainable tourism attitude scale. Journal of Travel Research, 43, 380-394. Choi, H.-S., & Sirakaya, E. (2006). Sustainability indicators for managing community tourism. Tourism Management, 27, 1274-1289. Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and commoditization in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 371-386. Doxey, G. V. (1975). A causation theory of visitor-resident irritants: Methodology and research inferences. Proceedings of the 6th Annual Conference of the Travel Research Association (pp. 195-198). San Diego, California. Eusébio, C., Castro, E. A., & Costa C. (2013). The economic impact of tourism in the central region of Portugal: A regional economic impact study with marketing implications. In C. A. Tisdell (Ed.), Handbook on tourism economics: Analysis, new applications and case studies (pp. 543-572). New Jersey: World Scientific. Eusébio, C., & Figueiredo, E. (2014). Desenvolvimento sustentável de destinos rurais. In E. Kastenholz, C. Eusébio, E. Figueiredo, M. J. Carneiro & J. Lima (Coords.), Reinventar o turismo rural em

348

Chapter Fifteen

Portugal: Cocriação de experiências turísticas sustentáveis (pp. 89106). Aveiro: UA Editora Aveiro. Eusébio, C., Kastenholz, E., & Breda, Z. (2014). Tourism and sustainable development of rural destinations: A stakeholders’ view. Revista Portuguesa de Estudos Regionais, 36(2), 13-22. Farsani, N. T., Lima, J., Eusébio, C., Costa, C., & Coelho, C. (2013). Green economy in rural areas through geotourism and geoparks. In G. Boscarino & D. Notte (Eds.), Economic development and emerging markets of the 21st century: Global practices, strategies and challenges (pp. 211-228). New York: Nova Publishers. Farsari, Y., & Prastacos, P. (2001). Sustainable tourism indicators for Mediterranean established destinations. Tourism Today, 1(1), 103-121. Figueiredo, E., Kastenholz, E., & Pinho, C. (2014). Living in a rural tourism destination: Exploring the views of local communities. Revista Portuguesa de Estudos Regionais, 36, 4-11. Fons, M. V. S., Fierro, J. A. M., & Patiño, M. G. (2011). Rural tourism: A sustainable alternative. Applied Energy, 88, 551-557. Fyall, A., & Garrod, B. (2005). Tourism marketing: A collaborative approach. Cleveland: Channel View Publications. Ghaderi, Z., & Henderson, J. C. (2012). Sustainable rural tourism in Iran: A perspective from Hawraman Village. Tourism Management Perspectives, 2-3, 47-54. Gnoth, J. (2007). Destinations as networking virtual service firms. International Journal of Excellence in Tourism, Hospitality and Catering, 1(1), 1-18. Gunn, C. A., & Var, T. (2002). Tourism planning: Basics, concepts, cases (4th ed.). New York: Routledge. Hunter, C. (1997). Sustainable tourism as an adaptive paradigm. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(4), 850-867. Kastenholz, E. (2004). “Management of demand” as a tool in sustainable tourist destination development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5), 388-408. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M. J., & Figueiredo, E. (2013). Host-guest relationships in rural tourism: evidence from two Portuguese villages. Anatolia, 24(3), 367-380. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Marques, C. (2012). Marketing the rural tourism experience. In R. H. Tsiotsou & R. E. Goldsmith (Eds.), Strategic marketing in tourism services (pp. 247-264). Bingley: Emerald. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience: The case of

Tourism and Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations

349

a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Figueiredo, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Lima, J. (Coords.). (2014). Reinventar o turismo rural em Portugal: Cocriação de experiências turísticas sustentáveis. Aveiro: UA Editora. Kastenholz, E., & Sparrer, M. (2009). Rural dimensions of the commercial home. In P. Lynch, A. MacIntosh & H. Tucker (Eds.), Commercial homes in tourism: An international perspective (pp. 138-149). London: Routledge. Ko, T. G. (2005). Development of a tourism sustainability assessment procedure: A conceptual approach. Tourism Management, 26, 431445. Kuvan, Y., & Akan, P. (2005). Residents’ attitudes toward general and forest-related impacts of tourism: The case of Belek, Antalya. Tourism Management, 26(5), 691-706. Lane, B. (1994a). What is rural tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1), 7-21. —. (1994b). Sustainable rural tourism strategies: A tool for development and conservation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1), 102-111. Látkova, P., & Vogt, C. A. (2012). Residents’ attitudes toward existing and future tourism development in a rural community. Journal of Tourism Research, 47, 84-93. Liu, Z. (2003). Sustainable tourism development: A critique. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(6), 459-475. Pavlovich, K. (2003). The evolution and transformation of a tourism destination network: The Waitomo Caves, New Zealand. Tourism Management, 24(2), 203-216. Peña, A. I. P., Jamilena, D. M. F., & Molina, M. A. R. (2012). The perceived value of the rural tourism stay and its effect on rural tourist behaviour. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(8), 1045-1065. Perdue, R. R., Long, P. T., & Allen, L. (1987). Rural resident tourism perceptions and attitudes. Annals of Tourism Research, 14(3), 420-429. Pina, I. P. A., & Delfa, M. T. D. (2005). Rural tourism demand by type of accommodation. Tourism Management, 26(6), 951-959. Pizam, A. (1978). Tourism’s impacts: The social costs to the destination community as perceived by its residents. Journal of Travel Research, 16(4), 8-12. Ribeiro, M., & Marques, C. (2002). Rural tourism and the development of less favoured areas: Between rhetoric and practice. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4, 211-220.

350

Chapter Fifteen

Rio, D., & Nunes, L. M. (2012). Monitoring and evaluation tool for tourism destinations. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 64-66. Rodrigues, A., Kastenholz, E., & Rodrigues, A. (2009). Cultural events and tourism in rural communities: An opportunity for host encounters and consumer emotions. Proceedings of the ATMC2009 “Advances in Tourism Marketing Conference”, Bournemouth/ England, 6-9 September. Saarinen, J. (2006). Traditions of sustainability in tourism studies. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(4), 1121-1140. Saxena, G., Clark, G., Oliver, T., & Ilbery, B. (2007). Conceptualizing integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment, 9(4), 347-370. Scott, N., Baggio, R., & Cooper, C. (2008). Network analysis and tourism: From theory to practice. Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Sharif, N. (1992). Technological dimensions of international cooperation and sustainable development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 42(4), 367-383. Sharpley, R. (2005). Managing the countryside for tourism: A governance perspective. In L. Pender & R. Sharpley (Eds.), The management of tourism (pp. 175-186). London: Sage Publications. Sharpley, R., & Roberts, L. (2004). Rural tourism: 10 years on. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6(3), 119-124. Sheldon, P. (1997). Tourism information technology. Oxford: CAB International. UNWTO (2004). Indicators of Sustainable Development for Tourism Destinations: A Guidebook. UNWTO. van der Duim, R., & van Marwijk, R. (2006). The implementation of an environmental management system for Dutch tour operators: An actornetwork perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14, 449-472. WCED (1987). Our common future. Oxford: New York.

CHAPTER SIXTEEN DETERMINANT FACTORS OF THE LINKAGE BETWEEN LOCAL BRAND FARM PRODUCTS AND TOURISM: QUANTITATIVE EVIDENCE FROM RURAL JAPAN YASUO OHE AND SHINICHI KURIHARA

Introduction These days many countries propose policy measures in an attempt to strengthen the connection between agriculture and tourism. Since it is expected that diversification of the rural economy will enhance rural revitalisation, how to strengthen the connection between the two activities, that is, tourism and local brand products, is an issue that needs to be explored. The relationship between the two is not predetermined, but only if they both become joint local products, the combination of local brand products with the tourism activity will become most effective. Thus, this chapter investigates the relationship between the direct economic effects generated by local brand farm products, such as increases in revenue and employment, and the indirect economic effects caused by the development of the tourism activity. To the best of our knowledge, there is no economic analytical framework that enables us to evaluate the relationship between local brand products and tourism in rural areas as joint products. The concept of economies of scope is a traditional economic framework that deals with the issue of joint production (Panzar & Willig, 1981). The case in this paper, however, differs from conventional cases, for the reasons described below, and thus requires another framework capable of dealing with complementary relationships. Therefore, exploring an analytical framework for the evaluation of that complementary relationship for local joint products, both conceptually and empirically, will permit the addition of an

352

Chapter Sixteen

economic framework for rural tourism. This is needed given the ongoing diffusion of rural tourism in many both developed and developing countries, which still lacks a consistent economic framework compared with tourism in general. The first reason why another framework is needed is that it is hardly possible to obtain cost data for the tourism activity in comparison with agricultural production for which cost data are relatively easily available. Secondly, what differs from conventional joint production is that the case in this paper is one that is not technically predetermined, but intentionally made by a local collective effort. In this respect, we can call these intentional joint products. Thirdly, local brand products generate positive externalities as local resources in the production area. Bearing these features in mind, we present an analytical framework by incorporating the externality of local brands and economies of scope and empirically evaluating, as intentional joint products, the complementary relationship between local brands and tourism and by finally clarifying working factors that strengthen that relationship. Thus, first, based on a literature review, the researchers present an analytical framework that describes the complementary relationship between the two economic effects. Second, under that framework, the researchers conduct an empirical investigation through statistical tests and by applying an econometric model estimation based on data collected by a questionnaire survey of agricultural cooperatives in Japan. Finally, we present policy recommendations for local resource management to enhance the complementary relationship studied here. The reason why to focus on local brand farm products rather than on local food, in general, is to control for issues of authenticity of local products. The term local food is too ambiguous for investigation. The researchers define local brand farm products from a wide perspective, in that they are considered as locally connected farm products, which includes those products having regional collective trademarks (for the system of the regional collective trademark, see Ohe and Kurihara, 2013), a trademark and/or designation at the prefectural level, and a reputation as a local product despite no official designation.

Literature Review Results of the literature review on the relationship between local food and tourism are presented in Table 16-1. Local food has attracted growing attention as having a high potential to leverage sustainability of rural development (Vaz, Nijkamp & Rastoin, 2009). In addition, local food is

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

353

often discussed in connection with tourism in rural areas where resources for tourism are relatively limited (Renko, Renko & Polonijo, 2010; Sims, 2009, 2010). In this context, local food can play an important role in the sustainable diversification of farm and rural economies. Policymakers also aim at reinforcing this complementary relationship between local food and tourism (for instance, for the European policy context, see Sims, 2010). Such a complementary relationship is expected to generate a wide range of effects on the local community (Sims, 2010). These include economic effects and social effects such as identity issues (Brandth & Haugen, 2011; Everett & Aitchison, 2008). Of these effects, this paper focuses on the economic effects that accrue to the local community and classifies these as direct and indirect economic effects. The direct economic effects are sales and employment accrued from local food production due to the development of production, processing, and distribution systems. The indirect economic effects are generated as a result of diversification of the rural economy through taking advantage of brand names of local food. Indirect economic effects refer to the sales and employment generated from visitor spending on accommodation in local rural tourism facilities and food services consumed in local restaurants. If the indirect effects increase, then sales of local products will also increase because visitors will buy local food on site or through the Internet. Thus, if these two effects are simultaneously generated, a large economic benefit will be generated for the local economy. Table 16-1. Results of literature review on the complementary relationship between local food and tourism Topic

Local food and tourism

Sub topic

Publication

Rural development/rural tourism

Ohe & Kurihara, 2013; Renko et al., 2010; Sims, 2009, 2010; Vaz et al., 2009

Authenticity

Sims, 2009

Social effects

Brandth & Haugen, 2011; Everett & Aitchison, 2008

Rural cultural heritage

Ohe & Ciani, 2011; Szlanyinka, 2009

Food tourism

Hall, Sharples, Mitchell, Macionis & Cambourne, 2003

Chapter Sixteen

354

Topic

Sub topic

Wine tourism

Publication Hall, Sharples, Cambourne & Macionis, 2000; Kim, Yuan, Goh & Antun, 2009

Horng & Tsai, 2010; Montanari & Staniscia, 2009 Organic agriculture Kuo, Chen & Huang, 2006 and agri-ecotourism Bélisle, 1983; Ohe, 2008; Telfer & Wall, 1996 Differentiation of tourism Haven-Tang & Jones, 2006 destinations Kim, Eves & Scarles, 2009; Skuras, Food consumption Dimara & Petrou, 2006 by tourists Culinary tourism

Rural tourism

Economic effects of local food and tourism

Backward economic linkage Hedonic pricing approach

Agricultural and rural field

Economies Agricultural of scope cooperatives Non-agricultural field Theoretical development

Telfer & Wall, 2000 Ohe & Ciani, 2011 Azzam, 1998; Chavas, 2008; Chavas, Chambers & Pope, 2010; FernandezCornejo, Gempesaw II, Elterich & Stefanou, 1992; Hartarska, Parmeter & Nadolnyak, 2011; Melhim & Shumway, 2011 Kondo, 1997; Schroeder, 1992 Chavas, Barham, Foltz & Kim, 2012; Prior, 1996 Baumol, Panzar &Willig, 1988; Chavas & Kim, 2007; Panzar & Willig, 1981

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

355

In this respect, the complementary relationship between local food and the tourism-related sector must work well. Rural cultural heritage has been recognised as being closely connected with this complementarity (Ohe & Ciani, 2011; Szlanyinka, 2009). Types of tourism that are named after a crop, beverage or food-related activity are examples of complementarity between food and tourism; examples are food tourism (Hall et al., 2003), wine tourism (Hall et al., 2000; Kim, Yuan et al., 2009), culinary tourism (Horng & Tsai, 2010; Montanari & Staniscia, 2009), organic agriculture and agri-ecotourism (Kuo et al., 2006), etc. Authenticity is a crucial issue in both local food production and the food-related tourism activity (Sims, 2009). As a preceding study based on the same data set used in this study, Ohe and Kurihara (2013) statistically clarified that the complementarity between local brand farm products and tourism is stronger in the producing areas of fruit or beef than in the context of other types of farm products. Nevertheless, any econometric evaluation on the complementary between local farm products and tourism has not been conducted so far. Previous studies on the economic effects of local food in tourism are related to differentiation of tourism destinations (Haven-Tang & Jones, 2006), effects of food consumption by tourists (Kim, Eves et al., 2009; Skuras et al., 2006), backward economic linkage (Telfer & Wall, 2000) and hedonic pricing evaluation (Ohe & Ciani, 2011). A relationship between local food and tourism, however, is not always guaranteed from the beginning but must be established through much effort (Telfer & Wall, 1996). Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that such a relationship is worth exploring to evaluate the potential for development of tourism in rural areas in either developed or developing countries (Bélisle, 1983). In particular, we need to clarify under what conditions this connection works most effectively, which would allow suggestions to be made to rural communities on developing tourism by taking advantage of local food and heritage. Turning to tourism in rural areas, a program for rural tourism, which is called “green tourism” in Japan, was inaugurated in 1994. The number of farmers who provide rural tourism activities has grown gradually, but many issues remain problematic, such as lack of management skills and ageing of the rural population (Ohe, 2008). These obstacles involve issues that are commonly observed not only in rural Japan but also in rural communities in other parts of the world. In this domain, Chavas and colleagues (Chavas, 2008; Chavas et al., 2010) reviewed a set of studies on economies of scope in agriculture, including their own papers. Further, Chavas and Kim (2007) conducted a theoretical exploration of the topic, and Chavas et al. (2012) evaluated

356

Chapter Sixteen

respective R&D activities undertaken by universities, which is beyond the agricultural field. Azzam (1998) conducted a test of vertical economies of scope in the US pig production. Melhim and Shumway (2011) investigated economies of scale and scope in the diversification of US dairy farming. Hartarska et al. (2011) evaluated the economies of scope of microfinance institutions, and Fernandez-Cornejo et al. (1992) extended the static concepts of economies of scale and scope into a dynamic setting and applied them to German agriculture. In studies of agricultural cooperatives, Schroeder (1992) estimated scale and scope economies regarding agricultural supply and marketing cooperatives in the USA, and Kondo (1997) performed similar estimations on the Japanese counterparts. However, no study has evaluated economies of scope of agricultural cooperatives in connection with tourism-related services or activities, yet. In the non-farming arena, Prior (1996) examined the technical efficiency and economies of scope of hospitals. To summarise, results of the above literature review indicate that research on the complementarity between local food production and tourism as joint products that have economies of scope has hitherto not been conducted in tourism economics or agricultural economics. Thus, we explore this point below.

Analytical framework The complementarity of joint products is widely known in economics as economies of scope. Economy of scope has a feature termed subadditivity, which is expressed as (1) (Baumol et al., 1988; Panzar & Willig, 1981): C (0, q1) + C (q2, 0) > C (q1, q2) (1) This expression indicates that the production cost for joint production, C (q1, q2), is lower than the sum of production costs when two products are produced separately, C (0, q1) + C (q2, 0), and provides the theoretical background for diversification of an activity (Besanko, Dranove & Shanley, 2000; Saloner, Shepard & Podolny, 2001). The most common example is the joint production of sheep meat and wool, which is technically predetermined, and thus, it is impossible to produce them separately. As mentioned earlier, for an empirical evaluation it is required to obtain data on production costs of the targeted products. This is probably one of the reasons why studies so far have focused on an

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

357

individual unit of an economic entity rather than the unit as a producing area. The relationship between local brand farm products and tourism in rural areas is not predetermined but is rather created through efforts to utilise common local resources for two products. In this regard, the framework for the economy of scope is also applicable where products are jointly produced based on the utilisation of common local resources. Nevertheless, this case imposes severe data constraints on empirical evaluations, which are hardly possible to eliminate. Thus, we need to undertake an approach different from conventional approaches. First, it is necessary to consider the initiative taken by a local management body because this paper focuses on intentional joint products rather than technical ones. Second, it is supposed that there is endogeneity; firstly, the direct economic effects are determined, and then those direct economic effects determine the indirect economic effects. Third, the success of local brand products generates an umbrella brand that has externalities that cover the entire producing area, but only when the brand name has been established. In this regard, the externality here is different from externalities generated from the widely observed multifunctionality in agriculture. This brand externality can reduce risk in developing a new market and assuming the production cost of a new product. This externality is not utilised until a new product is developed in the producing area. In this context, we can say that the tourism activity is an activity that internalises the externalities generated by local brand products and the degree of internalisation depends on the capability of a local management body. Consequently, the generation of indirect economic effects is a result of economies of scope that accompany the process of internalisation of externalities by the utilisation of common local resources. Put differently, the existence of both economic effects means that local brand externalities are internalised and economies of scope exist. To simplify the discussion we assume that the brand externality to be internalised is the same as the amount of cost reduction by economies of scope, i.e., downward shift of the marginal cost curve from MCf+MCt, sum of marginal costs for separate production of local farm brand and tourism products, to MCf+t, for joint production of the two (Fig. 16-1). Fourth, a partnership among concerned local bodies is crucial for successful internalisation in the production area.

Chapter Sixteen

358

Value

Fig. 16-1. Downward shift caused by the economy of scope

Internalisation of externality caused by the local brand =the economy of e n

MC +MC f

t

MC

f+t

e es

MR

O

Activity level

From the above considerations, when the two economic effects appear, we understand that the marginal cost of joint production of the two products is shifted downwardly. This consideration is illustrated in Figure 16-1 under a microeconomic framework. Figure 16-1 depicts a subjective equilibrium model of a local management body that produces a local brand product and tourism services in the rural area measuring the activity level horizontally and values vertically. The right downward MR curve represents the marginal revenue of the local management body and the two right upward curves represent marginal cost of the two products; MCf+t when the two products are produced jointly while MCf+MCt when products are produced separately and the two marginal costs are added. The right downward marginal revenue demonstrates the existence of consumers’ brand loyalty. If economies of scope exist, the joint-product marginal cost MCf+t becomes lower than the cost of production separately MCf+MCt as is illustrated in Figure 16-1. Thus, the vertical distance between the two marginal cost curves indicates economies of scope and also the brand externality to be internalised. At the subjective equilibrium point en on the upper marginal cost curve MCf+MCt, the externality is not

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

359

internalised yet, while at point ens on the lower curve MCf+t the externality is internalised, which means that economies of scope are attained. The process of internalisation is not automatic but is achieved by local managerial efforts. In particular, through the process of local brand formation of farm products, local identity, that can be shared by the people concerned, is established in the producing area and enables the realisation of more efficient local resource management including territorial marketing. Thus, whether this process exists or not is considered a condition for the attainment of economic effects in tourism, which is depicted as the downward shift of the marginal cost curve that results in the realisation of economies of scope in the figure. As a result of the internalisation, although a demand upward shift might happen as MR upwardly shifts, we assume a constant MR to simplify the discussion here. This assumption might cause the underestimation of the two economic effects. Since it is, however, quite difficult to specifically measure the MR shift, we adopt this assumption.

Data and Statistical Tests The researchers consider agricultural cooperatives as a local management body. Data were obtained from a questionnaire survey of all agricultural cooperatives in Japan conducted from January to February in 2009 by mail. The survey was conducted jointly by the Organisation for Urban-Rural Interchange Revitalisation and the authors in consultation with the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF), which funded this survey project. The response rate was 29.7% (225/757 cooperatives), which is about normal for this kind of survey in Japan. The questions asked concerned various aspects of local brand products and the cooperatives, such as what they produce, the size of production, history of production and branding, the positioning of the local brand, quality standards, etc. Information was also elicited on the effects of local brand products such as direct and indirect economic effects and non-economic effects and issues including tourism development, and necessary support measures for the future. This survey was the first comprehensive one in terms of local brand farm products in this country, as far as we know. The sample size was largest for producers of vegetables and field crops (Table 16-2).

Chapter Sixteen

360

Table 16-2. Profiles of local brand products Composition of local brand products

Sample size

%

Vegetables & other field products

103

45.8

Fruits

43

19.1

Rice

35

15.6

Beef

19

8.4

Others: tea, mushrooms, flowers & fish

11

4.9

No answer

14

6.2

Total

225

100.0

Source: A questionnaire survey conducted jointly by the Organisation for UrbanRural Interchange Revitalisation and the authors. The response rate was 225 out of 757 cooperatives (29.7%).

The next question to be clarified is to explore empirically the factors that produce economies of scope. For empirical evaluation, the survey results permit a classification of four cases of combinations of direct and indirect effects associated with food production and the identification of economies of scale (Table 16-3). Table 16-3 indicates four cases regarding the appearance of economies of scope based on the above framework. Case 1 is the case in which both direct and indirect economic effects are observed. In this case, the economies of scope apparently appear by the downward shift of marginal cost caused by the realised efficient local resource management by the partnership among the people concerned, based on enhanced local identity. In Cases 2 and 3, only one of the two economic effects appears and thus no economy of scope is observed. In Case 4 neither economic effect is observed. The left column indicates the composition of respondents from results of the questionnaire survey of agricultural cooperatives. Percentage-wise, Case 4 accounts for 45.8% of the sample, which is the most common among the four cases. On the other hand, the sample size in Case 1, the case in which economy of scope is observed, represents only 21.8%. In the remaining two cases, only one of the two effects is observed. Thus, only one fifth of the total producing areas responded that they achieved both economic effects. This means that producing areas that realised local joint production of local brand farm

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

361

products and tourism are not very common at present in Japan. Empirically, therefore, we investigate conditions to attain the downward shift of the marginal cost curve under the analytical framework. Table 16-3. Cases of equilibrium points and economies of scope

Case

Equilibrium point

Direct Indirect Economies Sample size effect effect of scope

1

ees

Yes

Yes

Yes

49㻌(21.8%)

2

en

Yes

No

No

66㻌(29.3%)

3

en

No

Yes

No

7㻌(3.1%)

4

neither en nor ees

No

No

No

103㻌(45.8%)

Source: Data are the same as for Table 16-2.

Now, the authors examine the effects of local brand products. Evaluation of the effects was done according to four stages: more than expected, as expected, less than expected, and do not know. We integrated these four stages into two categories to conduct statistical tests: more than expected and as expected (yes=1), other answers (no=0). Variables related to activities and attributes were also transformed to binary data (yes=1, no=0) from the original five-stage evaluation of the questionnaire data: upper two stages=1 as yes, others=0 as no. This is because preliminary statistical tests conducted with the original data did not show any statistically acceptable results. We examined the relationship between direct and indirect economic effects and confirmed a statistically significant connection between the two (Table 16-4). These results verify that an indirect economic effect needs to be preceded by the achievement of a direct economic effect. Table 16-4 reveals a statistically significant relationship between economic effects and non-economic effects and also demonstrates that the attributes of the producing areas and activities undertaken there had statistically significant connections with both economic effects. These attributes and activities are classified into two types: product brand management and local resource management.

Chapter Sixteen

362

Table 16-4. Relationship between direct/indirect economic effects and activities undertaken (Chi-square/Fisher’s Exact tests) Direct economic effect Items Yes

No

Test result

Indirect economic effect Yes

No

Test result

Economic effects Direct economic effect (yes=1, no=0)

ˉ

ˉ

ˉ

Indirect economic effect (yes=1, no=0)

42.6

6.4

***

87.5 39.1 ˉ

ˉ

*** ˉ

Non-economic effects Improvement in name recognition of local 72.2 37.3 community (yes=1, no=0) Increased understanding of local food heritage 74.8 35.5 (yes=1, no=0) Revitalisation of local community 72.2 26.4 (yes=1, no=0)

***

94.6 42.0

***

***

85.7 45.6

***

***

87.5 37.3

***

Activities/ attributes Degree of brand name recognition (nationwide or abroad=1, others=0) Existence of quality/certification standards (yes=1, no=0) Defining product value such as taste, nutrition (yes=1, no=0)

48.7 26.4

***

42.9 36.1

ns

76.5 47.3

***

83.9 55.0

***

48.7 28.2

***

48.2 35.5

*

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

Direct economic effect Items Yes Maintenance & improvement of quality (yes=1, no=0) Partnership with tourism and restaurant sectors (yes=1, no=0) Expectation of unity of local community (yes=1ˈno=0)

No

Test result

363

Indirect economic effect Yes

No

Test result

62.6 32.6

***

30.9 15.1

***

31.3 18.2

**

48.2 17.2

***

79.1 63.6

**

92.9 64.5

***

Source: Same as for Table 16-2. Note: 1. ***, **, * means 1%, 5%, 10% and nsƠnot significant. 2. Evaluation of the effects was done according to four stages: more than expected, as expected, less than expected, and do not know. We integrated these four stages into two categories to conduct statistical tests: more than expected and as expected (yes=1), other answers (no=0). Variables related to activities and attributes were also transformed to binary data (yes=1, no=0) from the original five-stage evaluation of the questionnaire data: upper two stages=1 as yes, others=0 as no because preliminary statistical tests conducted with the original data did no show statistically acceptable results.

It is most likely that the effect of accumulating brand-forming experiences, i.e. the experience effect, exists. To verify this point, the researchers statistically tested the relationship between the two economic effects and these two experience variables, with the results indicating that brand formation of local farm products has an experience effect (Table 165).

Chapter Sixteen

364

Table 16-5. Relationship between production/branding experiences and economic/non-economic effects (Chi-square/Fisher’s Exact tests˅

Economic effects

30 years or more of production Yes

No

Test result

15 years or more of branding Yes

No

Test result

Economic effects (more than expected or as expected=1, others=0) Direct economic effect (yes=1, no=0)

53.9

48.2

ns

60.6

44.3

**

Indirect economic effect (yes=1, no=0)

29.1

20.4

+

35.1

17.6

***

Non-economic effects (more than expected or as expected=1, others=0) Increased understanding of local food heritage (yes=1, no=0) Revitalisation of local community (yes=1, no=0)

58.1

52.8

ns

68.1

46.6

***

53.0

46.3

ns

59.6

42.8

**

Attributes Degree of brand name recognition (nationwide or abroad=1, others=0) Existence of quality/certification standards (yes=1, no=0)

46.2

28.7

***

51.1

28.2

***

65.8

58.3

ns

71.3

55.7

**

Source: Same as for Table 16-2. Note: ***, **, + means 1%, 5%, 20% (as reference) and nsƠnot significant.

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

365

Model Estimation and Results Based on the above considerations and findings, the estimation model is a simultaneous determinant model, with the indirect economic effect being determined endogenously after the direct economic effect is determined: the indirect economic effect as an endogenous variable and the direct economic effect as a predetermined endogenous variable. The model is a two-stage estimation model. The first equation (2) determines the direct economic effect and then this estimated direct effect determines the indirect economic effect. We also consider other factors that influence the direct and indirect economic effects as mentioned below. Direct=f (vector of determinant factors of the direct economic effect) (2) Indirect=f (eDirect, vector of determinant factors of the indirect economic effect) (3) where, Direct= the direct economic effect, Indirect= the indirect economic effect eDirect= the estimated direct economic effects from (2) We considered variables for product brand management and a wide range of perspectives on local resource management for the direct effect while the indirect effect is based only on aspects associated with local resource management. Specifically, among variables that determine the direct economic effect, as product-related variables, the degree of brand name recognition was used (recognised nationwide: yes=1, no=0), as were two variables related to quality control (quality/certification standard: yes=1, no=0; maintenance and improvement of quality: yes=1, no=0). As localcommunity variables, rising understanding of local cultural heritage (yes=1, no=0) and revitalisation of local community (yes=1, no=0) were considered. It is also plausible that these variables determine the economic effects simultaneously or that an opposite cause and effect relationship exists in so far as a direct economic effect influences these variables. Nevertheless, since this paper takes the perspective that the economic effects are realised through local resource utilisation based on our analytical framework, we take the above cause and effect relationship. As variables that determine the indirect economic effect, we used the direct economic effect (yes=1, no=0) as a predetermined endogenous variable as already mentioned. As variables related to the local community, improvement in name recognition of the local community

366

Chapter Sixteen

(yes=1, no=0), partnership between tourism and the restaurant sector (yes=1, no=0) and expectation of unity in the local community (yes=1, no=0) were used. As mentioned, these variables were taken from the perspective of local resource management. The signs of all parameters are expected to be positive. All these variables were qualitative dummy variables. Other variables that were observed as having statistical significance are not used here since test estimations using these variables did not yield statistically acceptable results. The variable of the experience effect of branded products was not used to avoid multicollinearity because that variable has a correlation with other variables used here. In this respect, this model implicitly assumes the experience effect. The method of estimation was an instrumental variable probit estimation due to the simultaneous estimation of two equations using the normal standard error and robust standard error. Results showed that all parameters were positive, as expected, with statistical significance (Table 16-6). Since the Wald test of exogeneity was rejected, we could confirm the endogenous model structure. Cases of normal and robust standard errors did not show major differences in terms of statistical significance between the two cases. With respect to the direct economic effect, from the empirical estimation result, we can say that quality control of products, effects of understanding the local food heritage and revitalisation of the local community can contribute to generating a direct economic effect. These results are consistent with previous studies as mentioned in the literature review (Ohe & Ciani, 2011; Szlanyinka, 2009). Also, we could confirm that the direct economic effect allowed the indirect economic effect to take place, which means that there is a complementary relationship between the two economic effects. Regarding the indirect economic effect, parameters of the community-related variables were all positive with statistical significance. Thus, the importance of local resource management should be recognised in realising an indirect economic effect.

Constant

Direct economic effect (yes=1, no=0)

-

Maintenance & improvement of quality (yes=1, no=0) Degree of brand name recognition   (nationwide or abroad=1, others=0) Increased understanding of local food heritage     (yes=1, no=0) Revitalisation of local community (yes=1, no=0)

Existence of quality/certification standards (yes=1, no=0)

Explanatory variables

-

Local resource management

Product management

Type of variable

(2.66) 0.5531*** (2.64) 0.9569*** (4.59) -1.5642*** (-6.58) ˉ ˉ

(2.65) 0.5531*** (2.64) 0.9569*** (4.56) -1.5642*** (-6.77) ˉ ˉ

Direct economic effect Ordinary Robust standard standard error error 0.5788*** 0.5788*** (2.84) (2.86) 0.3843* 0.3843* (1.87) (1.88) 0.5329*** 0.5329***

367

ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ 2.1673*** (6.35)

ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ 2.1673*** (6.97)

Indirect economic effect Robust Ordinary standard standard error error ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ

Table 16-6. Estimation results of determinant model of direct and indirect economic effects

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

Improvement in name recognition of local community (yes=1, no=0) Expectation of unity of local community   (yes=1, no=0) Partnership with tourism and restaurant sectors yes=1, no=0) Constant

Local resource management

-

Note: ***, **, * means 1%, 5%, 10% and nsƠnot significant.

ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ 225 probit -112.9866 64.17*** ˉ

ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ 225 probit -112.9866 85.83*** ˉ

Chapter Sixteen

Sample size Estimation method Log likelihood Wald Chi-square (LR Chi-square) Wald test of exogeneity Source: Same as for Table 16-2.

368

0.6100** (2.52) -3.3675*** (-6.83) 225 iv probit -190.1066 88.52*** 7.87***

0.5718* (1.81)

1.0133*** (2.70)

0.6100** (2.39) -3.675*** (-6.30) 225 iv probit -190.1066 91.56*** 6.84***

0.5718* (1.69)

1.0133** (2.41)

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

369

Overall, quality management is crucial to allow for a direct economic effect, and a common factor for both economic effects is given from the perspective of local resource management; especially a partnership with non-agricultural sectors is effective in achieving an indirect economic effect. These local factors help those concerned with local identity, based on local brand products, to argue for its preservation and setting into value, since sharing that identity contributes to mobilising local resources for a common goal. Thus, these can be said to be effective factors that can internalise the externality of local brands and eventually realise economies of scope. At the same time, however, the existence of the experience effect in brand formation means that the producing areas must have brand externality as a prerequisite for an economy of scope. In other words, producing areas need to have brand externality that can be internalised to produce an economy of scope effect.

Conclusion This paper examined the complementarity between direct economic effects such as increases in income and employment of producers and indirect economic effects such as tourism development through local brand farm products and factors that define this relationship based on results of a questionnaire survey directed at agricultural cooperatives in Japan. The most important points clarified in this paper are as follows. First, we presented an analytical framework in which economies of scope are generated by the internalisation of a brand externality to create an indirect economic effect in addition to a direct economic effect, which is interpreted as the downward shift of the marginal cost curve. Second, we estimated an empirical model showing that the economic effects are endogenously determined and confirmed the complementarity of the two economic effects. The result of the model estimation also revealed the importance of not only traditional production aspects, such as quality control of brand products but also a perspective of local resource management, such as the nurture of local food heritage and a partnership between tourism and culinary sectors. These wider perspectives contribute to internalising brand externality and to generating economies of scope. Consequently, it will become increasingly important to have a wider perspective regarding not only traditional agricultural resource management but also local resource management that covers non-agricultural resources. Nevertheless, it takes time to develop brand externalities, termed as the “experience effect” in this paper. Therefore, the producing areas of local brands with low recognition need first to raise or create brand recognition

370

Chapter Sixteen

that generates a brand externality, which is then available for internalisation. That should be recognised as a constraint on tourism development in rural areas through a connection with local farm product brands. As a matter of fact, producing areas that have realised both economic effects constituted only one fifth of the total respondents. Consequently, support measures on how to organise effective local resource management enhancing local product brand building and consolidation should be scrutinised for diversification of farm and rural economies. The limitation of this study is that this paper only looks at respondents’ subjective evaluation of the discussed economic effects, although it is very likely that objective economic effects are reflected by these subjective evaluations. Efficiency evaluation based on actual economic indicators in rural tourism areas is to be addressed in the future.

Acknowledgements This study was funded by the Organisation for Urban-Rural Interchange Revitalisation and the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research, No. 24658191, No. 26283017, No. 25450342 Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). The original shorter version of this study was published in Tourism Management, 38 in 2013. The authors are grateful for Elsevier to allow us to rewrite this paper for this chapter.

References Azzam, A. M. (1998). Testing for vertical economies of scope: An example from US pig production. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 49(3), 427-433. Baumol, W. J., Panzar, J. C., & Willig, R. D. (1988). Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure, Revised Edition. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Bélisle, F. J. (1983). Tourism and food production in the Caribbean. Annals of Tourism Research, 10, 497-513. Besanko, D., Dranove, D., & Shanley, M. (2000). Economics of Strategy (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Bramwell, B. (1994). Rural tourism and sustainable rural tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1), 1-6. Brandth, B., & Haugen, M. S. (2011). Farm diversification into tourism— implications for social identity? Journal of Rural Studies, 27(1), 35-44.

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

371

Chavas, J. P. (2008). On the economies of agricultural production. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 52, 365380. Chavas, J. P., & Kim, K. (2007). Measurement and sources of economies of scope: A primal approach. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 163, 411-427. Chavas, J. P., Barham, B., Foltz, J., & Kim, K. (2012). Analysis and decomposition of scope economies: R&D at US research universities. Applied Economics, 44(11), 1387-1404. Chavas, J. P., Chambers, R. G., & Pope, R. D. (2010). Production economics and farm management: A century of contributions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 92(2), 356-375. Everett, S., & Aitchison, C. (2008). The role of food tourism in sustaining regional identity: A case study of Cornwall, South West England. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(2), 150-167. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Gempesaw II, C. M., Elterich, J. G., & Stefanou, S. E. (1992). Dynamic measures of scope and scale economies: An application to German agriculture. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74(2), 329-342. Hall, C. M., Sharples, L., Cambourne, B., & Macionis, N. (2000). Wine Tourism around the World: Development, Management and Markets. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Hall, C. M., Sharples, L., Mitchell, R., Macionis, N., & Cambourne, B. (2003). Food Tourism around The World: Development, Management and Markets. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Hartarska, V., Parmeter, C. F., & Nadolnyak, D. (2011). Economies of scope of lending and mobilizing deposits in microfinance institutions: A semiparametric analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 93(2), 389-398. Haven-Tang, C., & Jones, E. (2006). Using local food and drink to differentiate tourism destinations through a sense of place: A story from Wales-dining at Monmouthshire’s Great Table. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 4(4), 69-86. Horng, J.-S., & Tsai, C.-T. S. (2010). Government websites for promoting East Asian culinary tourism: A cross-national analysis. Tourism Management, 31, 74-85. Kim, Y. G., Eves, A., & Scarles, C. (2009). Building a model of local food consumption on trips and holidays: A grounded theory approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28, 423-431.

372

Chapter Sixteen

Kim, Y. H., Yuan, J. J., Goh, B. K., & Antun, J. M. (2009). Web marketing in food tourism: A content analysis of web sites in West Texas. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 7(1), 52-64. Kondo, T. (1997). Scale and scope economies of agricultural cooperatives (in Japanese). In T. Hasebe (Ed.), Quantitative Analysis on Management of Agricultural Cooperatives (pp. 24-41). Tokyo: Association of Agriculture and Forestry Statistics. Kuo, N.-W., Chen, Y.-J., & Huang, C.-L. (2006). Linkages between organic agriculture and agro-ecotourism. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 21(4), 238-244. Melhim, A., & Shumway, C. R. (2011). Enterprise diversification in US dairy: Impact of risk preferences on scale and scope economies. Applied Economics, 43(26), 3849-3862. Montanari, A., & Staniscia, B. (2009). Culinary tourism as a tool for regional re-equilibrium. European Planning Studies, 17(10), 14631483. Ohe, Y. (2008). Characteristics and issues of rural tourism in Japan. In F. D. Pineda & C. A. Brebbia (Eds.), Sustainable tourism III (pp. 305316). Ashurst: WIT Press. Ohe, Y., & Ciani, A. (2011). Evaluation of agritourism activity in Italy: Facility-based or local culture-based? Tourism Economics, 17(3), 581601. Ohe, Y., & Kurihara, S. (2013). The links between local brand farm products and tourism. In C. M. Hall & S. Gössling (Eds.), Sustainable Culinary Systems: Local foods, Innovation, Tourism and Hospitality (pp. 135-155). London and New York: Routledge. Panzar, J. C., & Willig, R. D. (1981). Economies of scope. The American Economic Review, 71(2), 268-272. Prior, D. (1996). Technical efficiency and scope economies in hospitals. Applied Economics, 28(10), 1295-1301. Renko, S., Renko, N., & Polonijo, T. (2010). Understanding the role of food in rural tourism development in a recovering economy. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 16(3), 309-324. Saloner, G., Shepard, A. & Podolny, J. (2001). Strategic Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Schroeder, T. C. (1992). Economies of scale and scope for agricultural supply and marketing cooperatives. Review of Agricultural Economics, 14(1), 93-103. Sims, R. (2009). Food, place and authenticity: Local food and the sustainable tourism experience. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(3), 321-336.

Linkage between Local Brand Farm Products and Tourism

373

—. (2010). Putting place on the menu: The negotiation of locality in UK food tourism, from production to consumption. Journal of Rural Studies, 26, 105-115. Skuras, D., Dimara, E., & Petrou, A. (2006). Rural tourism and visitors’ expenditures for local food products. Regional Studies, 40(7), 769-779. Szlanyinka, E. (2009). Role of cultural values in rural development. In T. D. N. Vaz, P. Nijkamp & J. L. Rastoin (Eds.), Traditional Food Production and Rural Sustainable Development: A European Challenge (pp. 101-118). Surrey: Ashgate. Telfer, D. J., & Wall, G. (1996). Linkages between tourism and food production. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(3), 635-653. Telfer, D. J., & Wall, G. (2000). Strengthening backward economic linkages: Local food purchasing by three Indonesian hotels. Tourism Geographies, 2(4), 421-447. Vaz, T. D. N., Nijkamp, P., & Rastoin, J. L. (Eds.). (2009). Traditional Food Production and Rural Sustainable Development: A European Challenge. Surrey: Ashgate.

CHAPTER SEVENTEEN CLIMATE CHANGE AND ADAPTATION IN RURAL AREAS: AN INTEGRATED CASE STUDY OF WINTER TOURISM AND MOUNTAIN AGRICULTURE IN THE CATALAN PYRENEES GABRIEL WEBER AND IGNASI PUIG-VENTOSA

Introduction The growth of rural tourism is common to most regions in Europe as a possible complementary activity for rural areas and, particularly, for farmers. Especially in the case of winter tourism, many rural areas market themselves as an exemplar of “sustainable development” (Stoddart, 2012). Environmental groups accuse winter tourism of spreading into wilderness areas and displacing valuable wildlife habitats. Farmers and other locals also often criticise rapid winter sports development. Land-use conflicts between rural winter tourism and mountain agriculture are common. These occur for example over the use of meadows (previously used to maintain farms) and the development of tourist infrastructure (urbanization, sports resorts, roads, etc.) (Lasanta, Laguna & Vicente-Serrano, 2007). As a consequence, peasants and farmers are marginalised in many areas. Often this conflictual situation is further strained by climate change and its consequences (e.g. droughts), as well as climate change adaptation actions, which are often land intensive (e.g. development of additional higher terrain slopes, development of bike/hiking trails) or water intensive (e.g. snow cannons) or both (e.g. indoor swimming pools) (Hoffmann, Sprengel, Ziegler, Kolb & Abegg, 2009). This chapter presents an empirically based, qualitative insight into climate change and adaptation measures adopted in rural areas, more precisely in winter tourism and mountain agriculture. These two sectors account for the most important

376

Chapter Seventeen

economic activity in the Catalan Pyrenees. The research design used in this explorative research incorporated an integrated case study approach. This chapter is structured as follows. The next section contains a short overview of rural tourism and mountain agriculture. Next, a literature review on climate change in mountain areas is presented. Afterwards, the empirical research objectives, its methodology, and the research design of the study are set out. Finally, the main results of our analysis are illustrated, followed by a discussion and concluding reflections.

Rural Tourism and Mountain Agriculture The growth of rural tourism is common to most regions in Europe as a possible complementary activity for rural areas and, particularly, for farmers. Several studies (e.g. Cánoves, Villarino, Priestley & Blanco, 2004; Gannon, 1994; Roberts & Hall, 2001; Sharpley & Sharpley, 1997) have identified different types of benefits associated with rural development. These include the diversification of the rural economy through the creation of new business within the service sector. The social benefits comprise the maintenance of local facilities such as public transport, schools and health care, augmented social contact in remote areas, re-population of some rural areas, and the enhancement of the role of women as rural tourism managers. The environmental benefits include support for the protection of landscapes and enhanced motivation for the conservation and preservation of the natural environment (Cánoves et al., 2004). Nonetheless, several studies also point out disadvantages of rural tourism (e.g. Roberts & Hall, 2001; Sharpley & Sharpley, 1997). All types of tourism create some form of negative impact on the physical and sociocultural environment in destination areas. The scale of these influences differs according to various factors, such as the number of tourists, type of undertakings, the resilience of the local environment and the presence and dominance of local cultures as well as traditions (Cánoves et al., 2004). Climate change effects and adaptation actions may signify another potential negative impact upon the physical and socio-cultural environment in rural areas. In order to shed more light on the interplay between winter tourism and mountain agriculture and the effects of climate change and adaptation, we performed an integrated assessment of the Catalan Pyrenees’ situation.

Climate Change and Adaptation in Rural Areas

377

Climate Change in Mountain Areas A wide body of literature has studied climate change adaptation in winter tourism focusing on ski resorts, ski lift operators and resorts as the protagonists in the commodification and marketing of rural mountain areas (Bicknell & McManus, 2006; Brouder & Lundmark, 2011; Hoffmann et al., 2009; Moen & Fredman, 2007; Pickering, 2011; Scott, McBoyle, Minogue & Mills, 2006; Soboll & Dingeldey, 2012; Steiger, 2012). Bicknell and McManus (2006) find that climate change will not result in a physical “meltdown” of ski slopes, and show in the case of the Australian Alps that the collapse of the ski industry is neither certain nor unavoidable. Furthermore, the prospect of climate change as a threat can be more damaging than the impact of climate change itself (Bicknell & McManus, 2006). In this sense, the authors show that the dependence of resorts on private investment from the sale of apartments and on the vital support of financial institutions makes them reliant on their ability to demonstrate they have a viable future (Bicknell & McManus, 2006). Hoffmann et al. (2009) investigate climate change adaptation in the Swiss Alps and identify three major actions adopted by ski lift operators. First, many have taken measures that protect the affected business (e.g. artificial snowmaking, developing higher terrain for slopes, development to reduce required snow cover, installing blankets for snow conservation). Second, various lift operators have expanded beyond the affected business (establish and develop hiking trails, offer theme hiking, organise summer events, establish snowshoeing or winter hiking trails). A third option that has been taken is to share the risks of financial impacts (snow insurance, splitting costs with local industry and the local authority). However, the authors do not consider the potential environmental impacts of adaptation actions and the social costs related to further attraction of non-local capital and additional commodification of mountain areas. Furthermore, the authors focus on ski lift operators. We argue that for sustainable development an analysis of the adaptation actions of all rural actors, including those in mountain agriculture and in local communities, is needed. Only a few studies (Behringer, Buerki & Fuhrer, 2000; Bürki, Elsasser & Abegg, 2003) have focused on climate change adaptation by other actors (e.g. farmers, rural residents) in rural mountain regions. Accordingly, there are a very limited number of studies that have focused on climate change adaptation of mountain agriculture in rural winter tourism areas. Behringer et al. (2000) perform an integrated assessment of climate change adaptation in Swiss Alpine tourism and mountain

378

Chapter Seventeen

agriculture. The authors find that, because of the dependence of farmers on “off-farm” income, the loss due to declining winter tourism in specific areas may cause more important indirect effects. Also, the loss of income from the tourism industry may support the re-evaluation of the various functions agriculture assumes in mountain regions, beyond the production of food. Apart from Behringer et al. (2000), in-depth, integrated assessments of climate change adaptation in winter tourism and agriculture are rare. We aim to close this gap by investigating the interplay of actors. Thereby, we build on the literature, which investigates the economic, social, and environmental interrelationship between the various stakeholders of rural mountain areas. There are only a few studies (e.g. Garcia-Ruiz, Lasanta, Ruiz-Flano, Ortigosa, White, González & Martí, 1996; Holden, 2000; Lasanta et al., 2007) investigating the different forms of land-use and environmental conflict related to winter tourism in rural areas. Garcia-Ruiz et al. (1996) investigated land-use changes in the Pyrenees and found: (i) farmland abandonment, reforestation, diminution of livestock pressure; and (ii) development such as reservoir construction for irrigation or power production; upgrading of international roads; tourism development, including urbanization and construction of hotels, ski resorts, and campsites (Garcia-Ruiz et al., 1996). Lasanta et al. (2007) investigate the effects of tourist activities, especially skiing, and more explicitly the effects of ski resort development on the human population (change in the number of inhabitants, demographic structure and structure of the working sector) and the primary production activities of the area (number of farms and livestock) in the Pyrenees. Results show that the area influenced by ski resorts is restricted to the municipalities nearest to them. These municipalities show positive demographic changes and a negative evolution of primary activities. The municipalities more distant from the ski resorts show the opposite pattern (Lasanta et al., 2007). While giving a detailed picture of land-use changes relating to mountain agriculture and ski resort development, studies have rarely paid attention to climate change. This is surprising as climate change is a serious threat to both rural winter tourism and mountain agriculture in Mediterranean mountain regions which are vulnerable to it. To fill this gap, we investigate climate change and adaptation within an in-depth study of the Catalan Pyrenees. The literature streams mentioned above have investigated: (i) climate change adaptation of winter tourism protagonists; (ii) that of other stakeholders in rural mountain areas; (iii) land-use conflicts between ski resort development and winter tourism development in rural regions. However, many studies lack a theoretical reference and have a

Climate Change and Adaptation in Rural Areas

379

considerably restricted focus, not encompassing the three above mentioned issues. The aim of this chapter is to combine these three literature streams and to investigate climate change effects and adaptation in a rural area, which is characterised by both modern ski resorts and more or less traditional agriculture. Based on this approach, another aim is to identify strategies for dealing with climate change and to re-invent rural tourism through sustainable tourist experiences.

Research Objectives, Method and Research Design The method used in this chapter is an in-depth case study. The case study method is a research strategy widely used in tourism research (e.g. Darcy, Cameron & Pegg, 2010; Horng, Hu, Teng & Lin, 2012; Lynes & Dredge, 2006). In comparison to an experiment, in this case study setting, no control over behavioural events is needed. We are investigating the macro level and the interplay of actors and landscapes, without taking into account micro-level behavioural aspects. Furthermore, we investigate contemporary events and the current effects of climate change and climate change adaptation for the rural landscape. In our study we answer the following research questions: i.

ii. iii.

How are environmental, social and economic costs and benefits of climate change and adaptation actions in rural areas distributed among rural residents and tourists? How does climate change and adaptation affect rural resources (countryside capital)? How can climate change adaptation be used as a strategy to reinvent sustainable rural tourism?

Due to the lack of accessible case studies investigating climate change adaptation of winter tourism and mountain agriculture in rural areas, an exploratory case study method was used (Morse, 1991). The study aimed not to generate theory, but to describe specific adaptation actions within the political ecology framework. The research design includes a threestage process: analysis of the literature, expert interviews and analysis of results. First, a literature analysis was performed investigating above all the literature streams on climate change and winter tourism as well as winter tourism and mountain agriculture in rural areas. Second, a semi-structured interview was designed to conduct interviews with experts. The interview comprised questions regarding: (i) awareness of the need for climate

380

Chapter Seventeen

change adaptation in rural mountain areas; (ii) new business opportunities in the process of adapting to climate change; (iii) specific actions to deal with climate change in mountain areas; (iv) conflicts regarding climate change adaptation (land-use conflicts, ecological distribution conflicts); (v) potential contradictions between climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. Interviews with experts from the Catalan Office for Climate Change and the Catalan Association of Ski Resorts and Mountain Activities were conducted in 2012 and 2013. The first interviewee is head of climate change adaptation in the Catalan Office for Climate Change. The second interviewee is the director of the Catalan Association of Ski Resorts and Mountain Activities. Each of the two-hour interviews was conducted in person and recorded. Later, a transcription of each interview was made. Finally, we performed a content analysis of the interview transcripts focusing on the topics of land-use conflicts, commodification of nature, environmental justice, marginalization, countryside capital and rural residents’ experience of tourism. After performing the content analysis, we compared our findings with the literature and recorded the results. Both the results of the interviews and the literature review focused on the research objectives are presented in the next sections.

Results Environmental Costs and Benefits of Climate Change Two types of land-use changes are predominant in the Catalan Pyrenees. First, since the mid-20th century, rural-urban migrants have abandoned farmland leading to increased forest cover. Less intensive farming also led to a diminution of livestock pressure and substitution of cereal crops with meadows (Garcia-Ruiz et al., 1996). A second stream of land-use changes were actions related to tourism development. This very rapid change started in the 1970s and led to a long period of instability and the loss of internal management capability. Whereas large areas have been abandoned, other areas, in contrast, are intensively exploited and must compete with traditional land uses and recently introduced activities, some of them clearly motivated by the urban centres such as the Barcelona Metropolitan Area (Garcia-Ruiz et al., 1996). However, the rural landscape not only has to cope with changes induced by winter tourism and farmland abandonment. Over the last 60 years, the region has been very sensitive and already subject to climate change with a corresponding temperature rise of 1.4oC (Peñuelas & Boada, 2003). This has led to an advanced replacement of European beech (Fagus

Climate Change and Adaptation in Rural Areas

381

sylvatica) by Holm oak (Quercus ilex) at medium altitudes (800—1,400 m) (Peñuelas & Boada, 2003). The main reasons were reduced recruitment and increasing defoliation of beech (Lindner et al., 2010). Winter tourism managers do not see significant changes in the Pyrenees: “Neither the temperature nor the rainfall needed to produce snow have changed a lot. The only trend we can observe is that it rains or snows the same amount of water (or snow) but in less time. But we have registered information about the temperature since 1912, and the data shows that the average temperature has not changed” (Interviewee from the Catalan Association of Ski Resorts and Mountain Activities).

Nevertheless, other businesses have recognised climate change and have adapted by introducing new crops in the region: “For example in the last ten years, the wine production sector has bought farms to plant vines in the Pyrenees. Because they have seen that the optimum temperature for the wine grape has moved north. At this latitude and extent, this was unthinkable 30 or 40 years ago. Now there are a thousand vineyards in the Pyrenees at an altitude of 1,200 metres” (Interviewee from the Catalan Office for Climate Change).

Winter tourism managers know the potential impact of climate change: “The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) predicts that, in the worst case scenario, the ski resorts have a ‘life expectancy’ of 30 years” (Interviewee from the Catalan Association of Ski Resorts and Mountain Activities).

A moderate scenario predicts a less dramatic impact and a temperature increase of 2.4oC (B1 moderate scenario) in the next 100 years (BarreraEscoda & Cunillera, 2011). According to different climate model projections, the thickness and duration of snowpack in the Catalan Pyrenees will decrease dramatically over the next century especially at low or middle altitude regions (López-Moreno, Goyette & Beniston, 2009). The maximum accumulated snow water equivalent may decline by up to 78%, and the season for snow cover may be shortened by up to 70% at 1,500 metres above sea level. The magnitude of the effects declines rapidly with increasing altitude; largely similar snowpack characteristics will endure in the highest zones (López-Moreno et al., 2009). The changing climate in mid-altitude Pyrenees will result in significant plant species loss (62%) (Thuiller, Lavorel, Araújo, Sykes & Prentice, 2005). In comparison to other regions of Catalonia, the Pyrenees are highly

382

Chapter Seventeen

vulnerable: “Because the highest temperature increase in Catalonia will be in the Pyrenees” (Interviewee from the Catalan Office for Climate Change). Forest fires are likely to happen more frequently in the Pyrenees and to become a relevant disturbance factor in temperate mountain ranges (Schumacher & Bugmann, 2006). Given the ongoing process of climate change, artificial snow is increasingly used to ensure good snow cover at low altitude areas or to lengthen the skiing season. This trend has caused various environmental effects. Biological additives derived from certain bacteria are regularly used to make artificial snow and can create certain health risks for professional workers involved in snowmaking (Lagriffoul, Boudenne, Absi, Ballet, Berjeaud, Chevalier… & Zini, 2010). Furthermore, the increased snowmaking puts additional pressure on available water resources. The water demand for snowmaking improvement increases, especially in March, to lengthen the season and in December for base snowmaking (Vanham, Rauch & Fleischhacker, 2009). Therefore, reservoir storage for base snowmaking may be necessary. This is critical as in the Pyrenees there have already been summer deficits in dry years (Bachimon, Dérioz & Marc, 2009).

Social Costs and Benefits of Climate Change The socio-economic changes, which accompany the introduction of ski resorts in the last 40 years in the Pyrenees, have been largely restricted to the few municipalities that contain ski resorts or those relatively close and able to access the ski resort-based infrastructure. In these municipalities, most populations have remained stable or grown (Lasanta et al., 2007). The growth in the number of inhabitants is caused by migrants coming from neighbouring areas and by “neo-rural” people who have developed some tourism-linked businesses (Loscertales, 1993). In contrast, villages located further from ski resorts suffered from population decrease over the same period and present a low proportion of young people (Lasanta et al., 2007), which causes disharmony between the municipalities that benefit from ski resorts and those that do not (Lasanta et al., 2007). The Catalan Pyrenees reveal some of the socio-economic problems that rural regions are presently facing, such as very few job opportunities and low income levels, ageing population, out-migration of young people, and low availability of services (Bori-Sanz & Niskanen, 2002). Ski resort development at least partly counteracted the rural-urban migration. This was accompanied by exogenous capital inflow and the arrival of “neorural” people investing in tourism-related businesses (Lasanta et al., 2007;

Climate Change and Adaptation in Rural Areas

383

Loscertales, 1993). Consequently, the economic benefits of tourism are unequally distributed between both “neo-rurals” and “old-rurals”, as well as between “winter tourism centres” and the “winter tourism periphery”. Climate change is not likely to relax this strained relationship. Ski resorts have already carried out adaptation actions, which are likely to be insufficient and unsustainable in time. “We have already been taking actions since the 1980s, even before climate change was ‘trendy’ because that was when skiing became a popular winter tourism attraction and we needed to guarantee our product. The actions we have been taking are investing in snow cannons, positioning the ski slopes on north faces, at high snow levels or not facing the sun directly and storing water to produce snow” (Interviewee from the Catalan Association of Ski Resorts and Mountain Activities).

Almost all the adaptation actions mentioned have negative impacts on the water cycle in the vulnerable Mediterranean mountain ecosystems. Increased pressure on water sources will further increase conflicts between farmers and ski lift operators. Lower water levels will also provoke effects downstream. At least in the lower ranges of the Catalan Pyrenees, climate change will eventually seriously diminish snow-related winter sports activities, and ski resorts here will shift towards other products of rural tourism. “What the ski resorts are doing is diversifying what they offer, not only in their winter activity programme but also other activities in spring, summer and autumn; because they have seen that even with snow cannons, the profitability of the stations cannot be ensured. They have to diversify, offer bicycle routes, horse riding, walking, archery, canoeing, bird watching and other forms of ecotourism to be economical” (Interviewee from the Catalan Office for Climate Change).

Depending on the adaptive capacity of ski resorts, they will diversify (as explained by the interviewee) or the tourism life cycle may come to an end.

Economic Costs and Benefits of Climate Change Historically the main economic output of the Pyrenees comes from summer pastures. During the twentieth century, however, the system of transhumance was disrupted as a consequence of agricultural intensification in the centre of the Ebro valley (Lasanta et al., 2007). The fall in livestock overlapped with a period of industrial development in urban areas, which

384

Chapter Seventeen

fuelled the migration of residents from rural areas, particularly those in mountainous regions (Caravaca & Mendez, 1994). The number of people, especially young people, decreased. As in other rural areas, this went hand in hand with farmland abandonment and a decrease in workers in the primary sector (Lasanta et al., 2007). Rural tourism has resulted in a social revival in many areas of the Catalan Pyrenees. The region is visited by a high number of tourists, and therefore, tourism and commercial activities are significant for the economy of the area. The relative demographic recovery observed in some of the Pyrenean districts can be related to economic transformation and diversification. New residences are built and old ones are refurbished to provide secondary homes for city dwellers (Vaccaro & Beltran, 2009). The service industry generated significant revenue in terms of wages and profits from land speculation. Following its rapid rise, winter tourism has become, along with mountain agriculture, the most important economic sector in the rural area. Both are highly sensitive to changing climatic conditions. Similarly to Behringer et al. (2000), we also find that climate change may have various severe direct impacts on the tourism industry. “In Catalonia, there is not so much mountain tourism in the summer, when compared to Central Europe. People are just not used to it. What works in the winter is skiing as opposed to other winter activities in the mountains. Consequently, there are not many business opportunities due to climate change unless people change their habits” (Interviewee from the Catalan Association of Ski Resorts and Mountain Activities).

In comparison to winter tourism, agriculture may generally benefit from changed climatic conditions and adaptation actions. The latter are increasingly successful especially on the small scale: “For example, this year the school of shepherds in the Pyrenees will celebrate its fifth anniversary. We need shepherds in the Pyrenees as an adaptation action. Because we have plenty of forests, what we need is the management of forests by the use of animals eating the undergrowth” (Interviewee from the Catalan Office for Climate Change).

Discussion and Conclusion In comparison to the more established winter tourism resorts, the Catalan Pyrenees have been exposed to fast and radical land-use changes in a very short time-frame. Now, as a vulnerable Mediterranean mountain ecosystem, the area has to adapt faster than the more climate change-

Climate Change and Adaptation in Rural Areas

385

resilient European Alps. The adaptation actions will go hand in hand with further land consumption and increased pressure on hydro ecosystems due to their water footprint (e.g. snow cannons, indoor pools). Hence, the challenges of climate change adaptation in winter tourism will lead to a depletion of natural resources and to further land-use conflicts. In some villages land-use conflicts occur between the use of meadows (previously used to maintain farms) and development of tourist infrastructure (urbanization, sports resorts, roads, etc.) (Lasanta et al., 2007). This leads to the marginalization of primary activities and the loss of agricultural and pastoral resources. Nevertheless, due to climate change, some agricultural activities are likely to become more productive. This may lead to a reevaluation of the various functions agriculture plays in mountain regions, beyond the production of food. However, empirical investigations providing quantitative data on the economic and employment effects of climate change and adaptation in winter tourism and mountain agriculture are still missing and therefore provide avenues for further research. Several scholars have emphasised the need to sustain mountain agriculture and livestock in tourism-based development models (e.g. Dax, 2001; Kostopoulou & Kyritsis, 2003; Wyder, 2001). Landscape conservation in mountain areas can only be ensured by maintaining settlements as well as social and economic activities and by conserving cultural landscapes. In general, this is not possible without maintaining mountain agriculture. If, on the other hand, the tourism industry makes it difficult to maintain extensive livestock lands, one source of income is lost and excessive dependence on tourism results (Lasanta et al., 2007). The strategies for dealing with climate change in the Catalan Pyrenees have been the improvement of farming activities such as pastures and the development of horticulture in the Pyrenees. These developments have implications for the development of rural tourism. Tourism managers in the Catalan Pyrenees should promote not only ski-related winter tourism but also rural wine tourism and walking, pilgrim or bicycle tracks which offer free range sheep or cow pastures as part of the sustainable tourism experience. The main focus should be on the remote areas of the Pyrenees, which did not participate in the winter tourism boom and at the same time suffered a severe loss of (young) population. Ways have to be identified for linking these municipalities to winter sports hubs such as by offering bird watching, agritourism and canoeing. Despite not participating in the economic income generated by the boom in winter tourism, farmers had been suffering from the ecological consequences of skiing tourism and climate change adaptation. Already since the 1980s, the adaptation strategies of investing in snow cannons, positioning ski slopes on north

386

Chapter Seventeen

faces, and storing water to produce snow had several implications for winter tourism but also for farmers and other residents of the region. Reservoir storage of water has led to increased pressure on water ecosystems and thereby diminished farming activities and the income of the winter tourism periphery. Our findings suggest that to overcome these tensions between winter tourism protagonists and farmers, the latter should be integrated more seriously into the income streams of tourism. One strategy could be cooperation between protagonists of ski resorts and farmers in terms of diversifying the tourism portfolio beyond winter tourism. In many of these activities, such as agritourism, residents of the winter tourism periphery could be included. Another way to increase income possibilities for more rural areas of the Pyrenees is to concentrate on what is historically the main economic activity—summer pastures. By opening a school for shepherds five years ago, a first step was achieved. Educating a new generation of shepherds and thereby promoting new pastures creates not only a re-invented economic activity but also a new sense of landscape, which can be part of the overall sustainable tourism experience. Pastures are also a way to achieve sustainable forest management and mitigation of the increased climate change risk of forest fires. Flocks of sheep prevent an increase in undergrowth biomass and the establishment of large areas of highly combustible wood. In addition to eco-friendly tourism activities around agriculture, horticulture and animal husbandry, conventional winter tourism can be re-invented sustainably. It may be inferred from our study that more environmentally responsible forms of water storage, such as a more efficient use of rainwater, are needed. Also, other ways to reduce the water footprint of tourism activities should be developed, for example, a smarter use of snow cannons, reducing the number of indoor pools and encouraging hotel customers to save water. The case of the Catalan Pyrenees shows that tourism can lead to both the exploitation and conservation of countryside capital (Clarimont & Vlès, 2009). A more sustainable rural tourism is being put into practice slowly and with difficulty in the Pyrenees. However, for its successful implementation, more long-term planning, motivation and willingness for multi-stakeholder processes regarding future forms of land use are needed. Tourism planners, managers and farmers should work together to improve the marketing of eco-friendly non-skiing related activities in the Pyrenees to attract nature tourists.

Climate Change and Adaptation in Rural Areas

387

Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the interviewees for their assistance. We gratefully acknowledge financial support from Marie Curie-Initial Training Networks-FP7-3022, contract nº 289374-ENTITLE.

References Bachimon, P., Dérioz, P., & Marc, M. (2009). Tourism development and sustainability in French Cerdagne. Journal of Alpine Research| Revue de Géographie Alpine, (online) 97-3|2009. doi: 10.4000/rga.1071 Barrera-Escoda, A., & Cunillera, J. (2011). Climate change projections for Catalonia (NE Iberian Peninsula). Part I: regional climate modeling. Tethys, 8, 75-87. Behringer, J., Buerki, R., & Fuhrer, J. (2000). Participatory integrated assessment of adaptation to climate change in Alpine tourism and mountain agriculture. Integrated Assessment, 1(4), 331-338. Bicknell, S., & McManus, P. (2006). The canary in the coalmine: Australian ski resorts and their response to climate change. Geographical Research, 44(4), 386-400. Bori-Sanz, M., & Niskanen, A. (2002). Nature-based tourism in forests as a tool for rural development: analysis of three study areas in North Karelia (Finland), Scotland and the Catalan Pyrenees. Finland: European Forest Institute. Brouder, P., & Lundmark, L. (2011). Climate change in Northern Sweden: intra-regional perceptions of vulnerability among winter-oriented tourism businesses. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(8), 919-933. Bürki, R., Elsasser, H., & Abegg, B. (2003). Climate change—Impacts on the tourism industry in mountain areas. 1st International Conference on Climate Change and Tourism, 9-11 April 2003, Djerba. Zurich: Economic Geography. Cánoves, G., Villarino, M., Priestley, G. K., & Blanco, A. (2004). Rural tourism in Spain: an analysis of recent evolution. Geoforum, 35(6), 755-769. Caravaca, I., & Mendez, R. (1994). Industrial revitalization of the metropolitan areas in Spain. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 18(2), 220-233. Clarimont, S., & Vlès, V. (2009). Pyrenean tourism confronted with sustainable development: partial and hesitant integration. Journal of Alpine Research| Revue de Géographie Alpine, (online) 97-3|2009. doi: 10.4000/rga.978

388

Chapter Seventeen

Darcy, S., Cameron, B., & Pegg, S. (2010). Accessible tourism and sustainability: a discussion and case study. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(4), 515-537. Dax, T. (2001). Endogenous development in Austria’s mountain regions: from a source of irritation to a mainstream movement. Mountain Research and Development, 21(3), 231-235. Gannon, A. (1994). Rural tourism as a factor in rural community economic development for economies in transition. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1-2), 51-60. Garcia-Ruiz, J. M., Lasanta, T., Ruiz-Flano, P., Ortigosa, L., White, S., González, C., & Martí, C. (1996). Land-use changes and sustainable development in mountain areas: a case study in the Spanish Pyrenees. Landscape Ecology, 11(5), 267-277. Hoffmann, V. H., Sprengel, D. C., Ziegler, A., Kolb, M., & Abegg, B. (2009). Determinants of corporate adaptation to climate change in winter tourism: an econometric analysis. Global Environmental Change, 19(2), 256-264. Holden, A. (2000). Winter tourism and the environment in conflict: the case of Cairngorm, Scotland. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2(4), 247-260. Horng, J.-S., Hu, M.-L., Teng, C.-C., & Lin, L. (2012). Energy saving and carbon reduction management indicators for natural attractions: a case study in Taiwan. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(8), 1125-1149. Kostopoulou, S., & Kyritsis, I. (2003). Local people’s perceptions of sustainable tourism development in protected mountain areas: the case of Mount Olympus, Greece. Sustainable World, 6, 47-58. Lagriffoul, A., Boudenne, J.-L., Absi, R., Ballet, J.-J., Berjeaud, J.-M., Chevalier, S.,… Zini, S. (2010). Bacterial-based additives for the production of artificial snow: what are the risks to human health? Science of the Total Environment, 408(7), 1659-1666. Lasanta, T., Laguna, M., & Vicente-Serrano, S. M. (2007). Do tourismbased ski resorts contribute to the homogeneous development of the Mediterranean mountains? A case study in the Central Spanish Pyrenees. Tourism Management, 28(5), 1326-1339. Lindner, M., Maroschek, M., Netherer, S., Kremer, A., Barbati, A., Garcia-Gonzalo, J.,… Marchetti, M. (2010). Climate change impacts, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability of European forest ecosystems. Forest Ecology and Management, 259(4), 698-709. López-Moreno, J. I., Goyette, S., & Beniston, M. (2009). Impact of climate change on snowpack in the Pyrenees: horizontal spatial

Climate Change and Adaptation in Rural Areas

389

variability and vertical gradients. Journal of Hydrology, 374(3), 384396. Loscertales, P. B. (1993). Jacetania. De espacio agrario a espacio turístico. Zaragoza: Prames. Lynes, J. K., & Dredge, D. (2006). Going green: motivations for environmental commitment in the airline industry. A case study of Scandinavian Airlines. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(2), 116138. Moen, J., & Fredman, P. (2007). Effects of climate change on alpine skiing in Sweden. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(4), 418-437. Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing research, 40(2), 120-123. Peñuelas, J., & Boada, M. (2003). A global changeǦinduced biome shift in the Montseny mountains (NE Spain). Global Change Biology, 9(2), 131-140. Pickering, C. (2011). Changes in demand for tourism with climate change: a case study of visitation patterns to six ski resorts in Australia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(6), 767-781. Roberts, L., & Hall, D. (Eds.). (2001). Rural tourism and recreation: principles to practice. Wallingford: CABI Publishing. Schumacher, S., & Bugmann, H. (2006). The relative importance of climatic effects, wildfires and management for future forest landscape dynamics in the Swiss Alps. Global Change Biology, 12(8), 14351450. Scott, D., McBoyle, G., Minogue, A., & Mills, B. (2006). Climate change and the sustainability of ski-based tourism in eastern North America: a reassessment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(4), 376-398. Sharpley, R., & Sharpley, J. (1997). Rural tourism. An introduction. London: International Thomson Business Press. Soboll, A., & Dingeldey, A. (2012). The future impact of climate change on Alpine winter tourism: a high-resolution simulation system in the German and Austrian Alps. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(1), 101-120. Steiger, R. (2012). Scenarios for skiing tourism in Austria: integrating demographics with an analysis of climate change. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(6), 867-882. Stoddart, M. C. J. (2012). Making meaning out of mountains: the political ecology of skiing. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. Stonich, S. C. (1998). Political ecology of tourism. Annals of tourism research, 25(1), 25-54.

390

Chapter Seventeen

Thuiller, W., Lavorel, S., Araújo, M. B., Sykes, M. T., & Prentice, I. C. (2005). Climate change threats to plant diversity in Europe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(23), 8245-8250. Vaccaro, I., & Beltran, O. (2009). The mountainous space as a commodity: the Pyrenees at the age of globalization. Journal of Alpine Research| Revue de Géographie Alpine, (online) 97-3|2009. doi: 10.4000/rga.1072 Vanham, D., Rauch, W., & Fleischhacker, E. (2009). Impact of an extreme dry and hot summer on water supply security in an alpine region. Water Science and Technology, 59(3), 469-477. Wyder, J. (2001). Multifunctionality in the Alps: challenges and the potential for conflict over development. Mountain Research and Development, 21(4), 327-330.

CHAPTER EIGHTEEN HOW SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY CERTIFICATION CAN HELP RURAL TOURISM M. ISABEL SÁNCHEZ-HERNÁNDEZ, DOLORES GALLARDO-VÁZQUEZ AND M. MERCEDES GALÁN-LADERO

Introduction The current business environment is highly dynamic and globalised, with increasing competition and more difficulties in differentiating. It is marked by a trend of falling prices, and consumers are demanding more social and environmental requirements, which forces organizations to find new differentiation and positioning strategies. On the one hand, the importance of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is evident nowadays, for the economy in general, and for the competitive success of each organization in particular, given the competitive advantages resulting from responsible actions (GallardoVazquez & Sanchez-Hernandez, 2014; Weber, 2008). Authors such as Aguinis and Glavas (2012) have undertaken a thorough study of the development of CSR, involving the pursuit of environmental, economic and social goals. On the other hand, the importance of the tourism sector is unquestionable, especially at the regional level (Martin, Jimenez & Molina, 2014; Rived, Alvarez & Ballarn, 2013). The development of regional communities is better with the improvement of this sector. In this sense, the region of Extremadura, in the Southwest of Spain, with beautiful places to visit, privileged by nature, is making a significant effort to develop tourism, with the aim of offering the best possible experiences to visitors.

392

Chapter Eighteen

Tourism managers in Extremadura are aware of the potential of the region, and most of them are continually thinking about how to improve their businesses. Thus, the involvement of public administration seems to be necessary, in order to get a faster development and assure the best conditions for sustainability in the sector. So we can say that the regional government plays a crucial role in fostering responsible tourism. Moreover, the Law 15/2010 (December 9, 2010), defined for the Autonomous Community of Extremadura, regulates CSR. Among other aspects, this law allows the possibility of certifying CSR applied by companies in Extremadura. Given the above, this paper aims to generate relevant information in the study of a responsibility certification as a source of competitive advantage for rural tourism. That is, our objective is to discover what perceptions tourism sector managers have about CSR certification and what benefits they consider could be gained from this. To achieve this goal, we undertook a qualitative analysis of the tourism managers’ attitudes and perceptions about CSR in the tourism sector in Extremadura and the link to regional development. We try to understand how the process of certification, verification and registration of responsible tourism businesses may contribute to creating social value and regional development. The chapter is structured as follows. First, we describe the theoretical background that serves as the basis for our analysis. Second, we present the specific study context. Third, we describe the data collection and methodology used. Fourth, we present the main results, which are also brought to the discussion. Finally, we present a summary of the most relevant conclusions that follow from the research findings, as well as the theoretical contribution and managerial implications. We also include possible limitations and suggest further research.

Theoretical Background CSR refers to a company’s voluntary activities that appear to further some social good, beyond the interests of the firm and legal requirements (Aminia & Bienstock, 2014; McWilliams & Siegel, 2001). Firms are encouraged to work actively for responsible purposes because they represent a business opportunity and, in many cases, they are an answer to the expectations of their stakeholders (Fassin, 2012; Mark-Herbert & Von Schantz, 2007) to achieve superior performance (Inoue & Lee, 2011). In the Green Paper (COM, 2001), the European Commission has defined CSR as “the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society”

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

393

(COM, 2011, p. 7), also outlining what a business should do to meet that responsibility. The implementation of CSR is justified by the many benefits that can result, namely in an improvement of the environment in which organizations operate and the relationships with their key stakeholders, concretely by i) enhancing the firm’s reputation (Brammer & Millington, 2005; Park, Lee & Kim, 2014); ii) increasing the number of customers and their satisfaction, loyalty and identification with the company (Luo & Bhattacharya, 2006; Servaes & Tamayo, 2013); iii) enhancing motivation, productivity and shared company values, amongst employees (Backhaus, Stone & Heiner, 2002; Dogl & Holtbrugge, 2014); iv) increasing investors’ interest in the company due to its CSR (Girerd, Jimenez & Louvet, 2014; Sparkes & Cowton, 2004). The close linkage between CSR and the tourism industry has been well analysed (e.g. Casado, Nicolau, Ruiz & Sellers, 2014; Frey & George, 2009; Kalisch, 2002; Martinez, Perez & Del Bosque, 2013). It should be expressed by working with suppliers and destinations to improve the wellbeing of the destination, favouring local suppliers, and engaging with local stakeholders, conducting corporate climate assessment, improving labour relationships with employees, carrying out impact assessments, and improving environmental performance. Therefore, although CSR is a construct mainly used at the organizational level, the tourism sector perspective analyses CSR in a wider sense by considering CSR of destinations as a whole based on the increasing market sensitivity towards responsible tourism (Krippendorf, 1989). From this perspective, responsible tourism is defined as the tourism which provides better experiences for guests and good business opportunities to enjoy a better quality of life through increased socioeconomic benefits and improved natural resource management (Cheung & Fok, 2014; Goodwin & Francis, 2003). CSR issues related to tourism, as a form of sustainability, have attracted research interest in recent past decades (Camilleri, 2014; Holden, 2000; Sharpley, 2014; Sheldon & Park, 2011). According to Ko (2001), sustainable tourism development meets the fundamental criteria of promoting economic well-being, preserving natural and socio-cultural capital, achieving intra- and intergenerational equity in the distribution of costs and benefits, securing self-sufficiency, and satisfying the needs of tourists. Nowadays, the significance of CSR for tourism-related industries has further increased (Kang, Lee & Huh, 2010; Mitrokostas & Apostolakis, 2013). The challenge is to satisfy travellers who have high social

394

Chapter Eighteen

awareness and are very concerned with CSR. In fact, tourism-related companies are currently engaged in various CSR activities (Holcomb, Upchurch & Okumus, 2007; Holden, 2003; Inoue & Lee, 2011; Mitrokostas & Apostolakis, 2013) with different orientations, including community involvement, environmental management, customer and employee relations. While CSR’s large potential in enhancing the qualitative components of any product (good or service) is evident, this should be even more important in the tourism sector, being largely dependent on service image and reputation. It is recognised that competitiveness practically cannot exist without positive customer perceptions and attitudes (Cheruiyot, Maru & Muganda, 2012), which determine repeat purchases or recommendations, i.e. customer loyalty also in tourism (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Consequently, some particular topics have been specifically considered in the recent CSR-tourism literature, such as the environmental consequences of tourism (Andereck, Valentine, Vogt & Knopf, 2007), sustainability in tourism and rural tourism (Saxena & Ilbery, 2010) or the importance of the overall rural tourism experience and its marketing (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012). It is important to remark that the tourism sector can be a source of socio-economic progress (Di Liberto, 2013; Verheul, Carree & Santarelli, 2009). It can be a tool for reducing poverty and promoting the development of disadvantaged regions and countries because it may encourage, promote and develop infrastructures, create jobs and increase the standard of living (Coles, Liasidou & Shaw, 2008; Verheul et al., 2009). Specifically, rural tourism has been highlighted in literature as a key strategy for sustainable regional development (Cawley & Gillmor, 2008; Fleisher & Felsenstein, 2000; Saxena, Clark, Oliver & Ilberry, 2007) and as a market opportunity for rural areas when their traditional economic activities are in decline (Kastenholz, Carneiro & Marques, 2012). In this sense, it has been traditionally studied from a perspective of planning and community development (Kastenholz, 2000). According to specialised authors (Kastenholz, 2000; Polo, Frias & Rodriguez, 2012; Rodrigues, Kastenholz & Rodrigues, 2010), rural tourism is characterised by (1) small-scale nature and diversity of supply, small-sized enterprises, and heterogeneity; (2) insufficient, scarce or limited resources; (3) diverse nature of the market; (4) difficulties in being competitive in the global market; (5) a trend to focus on client orientation, to the detriment of competitor orientation; (6) low concentration of businesses offering services in each tourist destination; and (7) heightened dependence on the ability of the owner-manager, taking into account that

How w Social Responnsibility Certificcation Can Helpp Rural Tourism m

395

his/her indivvidual decisioons affect the leadership annd overall man nagement of the busineess. Considerring these chaaracteristics, nowadays n the comparison with w other forms of touurism and thee growing co ompetition am mong rural desstinations requires innnovative strateegies (Kasten nholz, Carneirro, Marques & Lima, 2012) to delliver an offer of o sufficient value v (Polo et al., 2012).

C Context of Analysis On Deceember 9, 2010, the Autono omous Comm munity of Extremadura (Fig. 18-1) ppassed Law 15/2010, 1 on CSR. C It intendded to boost, in a noncoercive waay, the responnsible behavio our of compannies in the reg gion. The law assumes that CSR iss a managemeent tool able to put compaanies in a state of perrmanent dialoogue. This is its essence: kkeeping comp panies in touch with their stakehollders. That is, the intentionn of the law is to put companies iin coordinatioon with their customers, c em mployees, sharreholders, suppliers annd distributors, with the gov vernment (at aall levels), and d with the local commuunity, civil soociety and all those directlyy or indirectly y affected by their prooductive activvity. The inteention is alsoo to help to stimulate responsible relationships and to discov ver opportunitties and threatts that the productive ssector will findd in the impleementation of responsible acctions. Fig. 18-1. Geographical posiition of Extrem madura

a what prrinciples and rules the Currentlyy, there is noo consensus about company shhould adopt to be considered d socially respponsible. Thus, the law could help businesses inn Extremadurra to achieve that recogniition at a regional leveel.

396

Chapter Eighteen

In this context, our analysis is based on the perception that the tourism sector has its own CSR, and this perception may contribute to the development of activities which are able to create social value. That is, tourism companies could establish a set of entities recognised as socially responsible. But we also understand that, in the tourism sector, CSR is, or should be, integral to the entities that comprise it and provide basic support for the sustainable development of the region. In this sense, the tourism that is most linked to CSR is rural tourism, because it seeks greater contact with nature and local culture. It is related to healthy living, and less degraded sites that are scarcely influenced by urban lifestyles. Rural tourism has gained increasing importance in recent years (Table 18-1), presenting an important type of tourist accommodation in Spain and especially in Extremadura (the region under study). Nowadays, the priority of tourism in Extremadura is the improvement of its competitive position in traditional markets but also in new ones, namely in international segments with specific motivations, such as rural tourism. From 2008 to 2011, the number of tourism businesses in Extremadura increased by 3% despite the economic crisis that has been deeply felt in this sector, characterised by small-sized companies. Table 18-1. Statistical information about rural tourism in 2011

Overnight stays in rural tourism accommodation Average stay (days) Travellers Establishments Places offered Employees Tourism businesses (% of all companies)

Spain 7,696,369

Extremadura 263,318

2.83 2,715,986 15,035 137,761 21,989

2.32 113,556 473 5,561 718

0.72%

0.80%

Source: Spanish Institute of Statistics (2012) and Statistical Institute of Extremadura (2012)

Research Design The method applied in this work consists of three steps: (1) defining the research question; (2) determining the main topics or dimensions from an inductive process grounded in the principles of constructivism; (3) developing a coding scheme.

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

397

First Step: Defining the Research Question First, and according to the “fourth generation evaluation” guidelines (Guba & Lincoln, 1989), we have followed a global and constructivist process. This perspective assumes that the analysis is performed in a specific socio-political context, determining what questions have to be asked, and what information has to be collected with stakeholder inputs. The main proposition to be tested here is expressed as follows: “Social Responsibility Certification can help rural tourism companies to succeed”. The research question of this study was analysed with qualitative data from a focus group with organizations representative of the Tourism Cluster in Extremadura. According to Porter (1998), clusters are geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, specialised suppliers, service providers, firms in related industries, and associated institutions in particular fields that compete but also co-operate. In 2000, the Regional Government in Extremadura, with the aim of promoting business cooperation to enhance competitiveness, decided to develop a “clustering policy” for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the region, one of which is the Tourism Cluster. Details regarding participants are shown in Table 18-2. Table 18-2. Study Data Sheet

Scope

Method Characteristics Sampling Unit Sample Participation Index

Technical Information Tourism Cluster in Extremadura, 64 organizations in total: 41 companies, 12 associations, 10 institutions, 1 foundation (10 of them are rural accommodation) Focus Group—March 20, 2012 (2 hours) Managers 10 organizations (7 non-rural, and 3 rural) 15.62%

As we can observe, 64 organizations belong to the Tourism Cluster in Extremadura and exactly ten of them are rural accommodation establishments, which represent 15.6%. The sample used for the in-depth focus group analysis was formed by ten organizations, with 30% being

398

Chapter Eighteen

rural ones. We consider the participation index very important regarding the population under study. Although all of them were asked to attend the focus group, and we chose a central location (Caceres) to hold the meeting, given the relatively great distances in Extremadura, and the fact that many establishments contacted are very small family-run companies, with no employees, some owner-managers were not available to participate. Anyway, the sample was large enough for a focus group because the optimal size is six to ten (Esteban & Molina, 2014; Schmidt & Hollensen, 2006) or seven to eleven participants (Merino, 2010). Focus group research is an appropriate method for our exploratory investigation (Smithson, 2000). It allows the collection of qualitative data and participants have the opportunity to express their opinions about the topic in question freely. To obtain information from the participants, a semi-structured and collective interview guide was developed, according to the different aspects of CSR included in the law. This guide served the purpose of steering discussion around common themes but also left the research team to decide on the sequence and wording of questions in the course of the discussion. The interview guide was designed to tackle CSR conceptions, motivations regarding vision, values, principles, and stakeholder management. The meeting was held on March 20, 2012, lasted two hours, was conducted in Spanish, video-recorded with authorization, transcribed, and translated into English. In order to avoid typical limitations of this method, we did not treat the data as identical to individual interview data, as many articles do (Wilkinson, 1998). Instead, opinions were treated as belonging to individuals within the rural group, the non-rural group, or as opinions held by the whole group, and always as discourses which emerge in the regional context.

Second Step: Determining the main Topics or Dimensions The second step in the analysis consisted of determining the main topics or dimensions of CSR in the tourism sector in Extremadura. Dominant categories were identified through a content analysis (Baez, 2007) of the discourses registered and transcribed from the focus group (words were grouped by semantic meaning in the content analysis).

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

399

Third Step: Developing a Coding Scheme A coding scheme was developed and applied in the third and last step, to obtain an overview of which group of managers, rural or non-rural, referred to specific CSR predetermined dimensions. Coding emerges from the interpretation of texts made by analysts according to their good judgement (Baez, 2007). All the information generated was treated with Atlas/ti 7.0 software. This software allows data analysis following a Grounded Theory approach, as formulated by Glaser and Strauss (1967), which involves a data comparison with the theoretical background presented. But Atlas/ti also allowed analysis from other viewpoints. For instance, we did not assume some of the Grounded Theory principles, because we developed a preconceived proposition, supported by theory, to be tested, as defended by Strauss and Corbin (1998). Our research can be considered exploratory because it does not seek causal inferences, but rather to develop theoretically grounded empirical observations and inferences, in a new context that could be useful for future social scientific inquiries. That is, we try to obtain information (there is no information available on the topic), as a previous inductive step for further conclusive (descriptive or causal) research.

Results Previous studies have shown that, although managers in Extremadura are oriented towards CSR, many do not know what to do or how to do it (Gallardo-Vazquez & Sanchez-Hernandez, 2012). In this qualitative study, we hypothesised that the tourism business in the region was especially motivated by CSR. The analysis of the focus group discourse was based on reading the transcripts according to the scientific method, i.e. through a systematic reading of objective, replicable, and valid texts, and interpretation in the context in which the information was obtained. Results obtained are shown step by step in the following paragraphs.

Results Primarily Related to the Meaning of CSR in the Tourism Sector The question “What does Social Responsibility mean for the Tourism industry?” determined the starting point of the analysis. The responses focused mostly on a superficial knowledge of the topic under study and the CSR law, although this sector expresses a great awareness of CSR and

400

Chapter Eighteen

holds it in high regard in daily management. As in the qualitative analysis, the empirical evidence is the quotation, and we noted that the most prominent opinions are that CSR is naturally assumed by this sector, implying consistency and good practice in their businesses. Respondents show respect for the environment, which is part of the product they offer their clients; so, in addition to environmental conviction, managers understand they must preserve nature as a central axis of their business objectives, being intrinsic to its own rationale. The results obtained here contrast with other previous studies about similar concepts, such as sustainable tourism practices. For example, Berry and Ladkin (1997) showed that, although small businesses were willing to engage in sustainable activities, those engaged in the tourism business had little understanding of the concept of sustainability. Later, Vernon, Essex, Pinder and Curry (2003) revealed a complex and diverse response to the concept, and so they considered some measures were needed to increase awareness and integrate sustainability issues into business practice. However, sustainable management practices have often been adopted. For example, Forsyth (1997) considered that British tourism companies studied had adopted a broad range of them. Carlsen, Getz and Ali-Knight (2001) also found that about half of Australian family businesses which formed their sample had implemented a range of them. Recently, and expanding the meaning of CSR, Fassin (2012) stated that CSR should also imply corporate stakeholder responsibility. Servaes and Tamayo (2013) showed that CSR is positively related to firm value for companies with high customer awareness. Thus, they found that the effect of awareness on the CSR-value relation was reversed for firms with a prior poor reputation as corporate citizens. Aminia and Bienstock (2014) also assume that the concept of corporate sustainability is complex, but they refer to the effects of incorporating sustainability into corporate strategy and the consequences of including economic, ecological and social concerns in strategic decisions.

Drivers of CSR in the Tourism Sector in Extremadura All information collected from the focus group (whose script was based on the main aspects of the CSR Law in Extremadura) was analysed via content analysis (according to semantic meanings). At the most basic level, the word cruncher tool in Atlas/ti showed all of the frequencies of the words within data, whose general results are shown in Figure 18-2.

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

401

Fig. 18-2. Drivers of CSR

VOLUNTEERISM/THIRD SECTOR EMPLOYEES/HR PUBLIC SUPPORT/TAX… ETHICS/VALUES/AWARENESS COMMUNICATION/MARKETING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SOCIETY COMPETITIVENESS/CONCURR… LEGALITY LOCAL/REGIONAL PROBLEMS/COSTS CERTIFICATION/QUALITY

33 38 40 41 50 53 53 56 74 86 123 154

The first, clearly dominant category is related to the process of “certifying social responsibility”. At this respect, Forsyth (1997) previously considered that change should be accelerated by labelling sustainable tourism as quality tourism. But CSR certification seems to be limited to the well-known “quality” certification process, which managers do not always perceive as satisfactory. It is widely believed in the tourism industry in Extremadura that “CSR should not be straitjacketed” because bureaucratic processes could mislead the goal. Participants consider that “CSR must be in the DNA of tourism business”, and “public administration should encourage responsible behaviour, not just promote a new certificate”. The fact that the CSR could become one more requirement and a waste of time and money is discouraging companies in the tourism sector. In the second position, “problems” and “costs” resulting from the CSR implementation is another recurring theme, especially affected by the current crisis. Although managers recognise that it is now when CSR matters, they also have a legitimate concern about the efforts necessary for the implementation of CSR arrangements. The reason is that now there is no time to divert attention from the main purpose of every business, nor is it the right moment to devote resources, materials or staff to CSR actions. Factors such as a highly competitive environment, the perceived potential cost of CSR practices, and the danger of entering into a new process of certification (remembering “quality seals”) contribute to

402

Chapter Eighteen

creating a feeling in tourism-related business managers of uncertainty in the future. Consequently, they are demanding support from the Regional Government in order to transform their businesses into responsible tourism enterprises to be able to develop the regional economy in a sustainable way. This mirrors what Berry and Ladkin (1997, p. 43) identified as barriers, namely that: “Attitudes towards government policy and its implementation were significant barriers to the implementation of sustainable tourism practices in small businesses at the regional level”.

Forsyth (1997, p. 270) also considered that sustainable practices are weak regulatory instruments because “ultimate responsibility for change lies with host governments via legislation”. However, a more general interpretation of global results in the analysis of managers’ perceptions shows that CSR actions could have enormous positive impacts on tourism businesses and regional development in Extremadura although the costs and risks are serious and have bottom line implications. In this sense, Rived et al. (2013) present an analysis of tourism employment niches in another Spanish Autonomous Community, the Community of Aragon. The authors identify tourism specializations in the local economy to determine whether the sector has the potential to provide a stable or growing base for the future, highlighting real employment opportunities in the region. Recently, Casado et al. (2014) hypothesised that industry-level effects are highly determinant on the sign and magnitude of the relationship between a firm’s CSR activities and its performance and risk. They estimated the industry-specific effects of CSR initiatives on firms’ performance and risk using a sample of 583 announcements from the Spanish Stock Market. This way, they established a ranking of industries to identify the position of the most prominent tourism-related industries: hotels and airlines. The CSR law in Extremadura, conducting CSR orientation of tourism entrepreneurs, is also perceived as a positive initiative for the sector and a channel for business efforts towards social demands. Sharpley (2014) states that it has long been recognised that it is incumbent on those responsible for the planning of tourism to seek to optimise the well-being of local residents while minimizing the costs of tourism development. As we commented before, Governments are ultimately responsible for change via legislation (Forsyth, 1997). In the present study, participants were asked for reasons that could be important in motivating companies and self-employees—who are numerous and constitute the productive fabric of the region—to be socially

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

403

responsible. The responses varied from the economic aspects and cost saving to improved productivity and image. The issue of CSR certification, favoured by the law, and its connection with quality certification processes experienced by the sector (and not always satisfactorily), was present in their arguments in this regard. This argument was evident in the overall content analysis shown in the previous section, with quotes such as “I like this law very much, which sounds a little like quality for the procedure”. We consider that they have a positive predisposition to the CSR certification, with evidence such as “we have projects in this stream (...), in fact, we would like to be certified”, but without neglecting their frustration, both with the law and its implementation: “I think it is a good law, but the moment we are going through has made me recoil a little because I also had to deal with two other certifications, the ISO quality”, or “the seal and you’re done, that’s what scares me”.

In general, they distrust the deal that can arise from the certification, indicating past experiences, such as: “The CSR reminds me of Quality [certification] very much, for the best and the worst”, or “there was one thing that surprised me reading the law. After two days, a consulting firm offered me its services, and told me: give me your bottom line, your results and all your income, and I’ll do a study for you”.

And they are concerned about the effort that certification may involve: “implementing ISO 9000 and ISO 14000..., and I still have some hair! I almost died in the attempt”. They also indicate that CSR is more than quality, and they are happy because the law comes to structure actions that fall within the responsibility and help the industry implement it. Some of the allegations selected in this regard are: “It sounds great, at least I know where to go and in Extremadura, which is our territory, our scope of work”; “we assume we start with quality and environment; we are speaking about management systems within the enterprise”; “CSR goes beyond quality, beyond the environment; it has many focuses, it has a social, human resource and especially ethics focus. I think it’s a small step forward”; “I think there has been a progress. It has taken a step beyond the simple procedure of how to serve a drink, or how to process an invoice, and we focus on what really matters”; “CSR is a plus for quality”.

Chapter Eighteen

404

These managers think that CSR is an opportunity to start doing things well: “CSR can come to help that undermined quality of which we have spoken get redirected the right way”. But they demand governmental involvement for simplicity in processes and support: “Certification, yes, but simple”, or “all kinds of certifications have to be really provided [easily]; finally, some paper that no one knows how or what to do with it and people are getting tired before obtaining the certification”.

CSR Viewpoints by Rural and Non-Rural Managers At this point, in order to assess the different viewpoints from rural and non-rural participants, we applied a concurrence analysis to determine whether the main topics found were more relevant to rural tourism managers. The total number of quotations registered were 223, with 82 (37%) from rural managers and 141 (63%) from non-rural ones. Table 183 shows the selected topics revealing that rural tourism managers were more oriented to CSR. Table 18-3. Concurrence analysis of selected topics for rural and nonrural tourism managers

Categories

Certification acceptance CSR intrinsic to the tourism sector Legality Concerns CSR related to environmental issues Highly motivated towards CSR Aware of CSR Problems/Costs

Quotes in every category (rural group)

Quote average per participant (rural group)

Quote average per participant (non-rural group)

4.3

Quotes in every category (nonrural group) 30 (70%)

13 (30%) 9 (90%)

3

1 (10%)

0.1

9 (75%) 14 (67%)

3 4.6

3 (25%) 7 (23%)

0.4 1

5 (63%)

1.6

3 (37%)

0.4

7 (50%)

2.3

7 (50%)

1

4.3

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

405

Answering the research proposition, managers assume CSR certification as a useful tool to foster their business, recognizing that CSR is intrinsic to the tourism sector in general, and to rural tourism, in particular. It is true that they link CSR with environmental issues and are aware of the problems and costs associated with responsibility, but they are highly motivated by CSR. Developing a coding scheme was the last stage of deepening our analysis of rural managers’ perceptions about CSR. As there were no coding schemes available prior to the analysis, one had to be developed using the emergent coding technique, which uses the data to be coded to create a coding scheme (Stemler, 2001). By analysing the focus group transcriptions, the sentences or expressions that referred to the corresponding code were grouped together and later codes referring to the same dimension were grouped together in families, also called super-codes. This process identified 69 codes and 9 super-codes, which were named to reflect their content. Figure 18-3 shows the super-coding scheme where the 82 quotations registered were classified. The super-code showing the highest content density has 58 quotations and is related to CSR concern in rural businesses. Other aspects related to the knowledge and enforcement of the CSR law, or the identification and interaction with stakeholders, were also strong emergent topics in rural managers’ perceptions about CSR. With all the contributions mentioned, we believe that the main research question is sufficiently answered, and we can affirm that the tourism sector in Extremadura, especially the rural business, could lead the CSR certification process. Rural managers are also highly motivated towards CSR because they expect benefits from the new regional CSR law. Thus, we highlight the conviction of those attending the focus group that the law is an opportunity for the sector, and the Tourism Cluster can lead a process of making the sector competitive, basing its strategy on CSR: “we are on time making a unique destination in terms of CSR”.

Chapter Eighteen

406

Fig. 18-3. CSR topics in Rural Businesses CSR (RURAL ASPECTS) (0-9) STAKEHOLDERS INTERACTION (RURAL) (1-3)

MOTIVATION TOWARDS CSR AND EXPECTED BENEFITS (RURAL) (3-3)

STAKEHOLDERS IDENTIFICATION (RURAL) (8-3)

KNOWLEDGE OF THE CSR LAW (RURAL) (5-3)

CSR LAW ENFORCEMENT (RURAL) (19-3)

CSR IN PRACTICE (RURAL) (8-3)

CONCERNS FOR STAKEHOLDERS (RURAL) (13-3)

THE MEANING OF CSR (RURAL) (20-3)

CONCERN ABOUT ASPECTS OF CSR (RURAL) (58-3)

Despite the emphasis growth models place on technological progress, Di Liberto (2013) shows that there is recent empirical evidence that tourism, a sector widely regarded as low-skill/low-tech, while one of the fastest growing industries in the world, may also offer a favourable strategy for growth. His results show that the role of the tourism sector is significantly more important in countries with higher aggregate levels of human capital and, consequently, increasing education contributes to growth. Our opinion, especially in rural tourism, is that training of human capital in CSR is a fundamental topic for the commitment of companies, and local government must work in this sense. Finally, we agree with Sharpley (2014), who considers that academic attention has long been paid to the social impacts of tourism, in general, and to the understanding of host communities’ perceptions of tourism and its impacts, in particular. Nevertheless, despite the significant volume and increasing scope of this research, the role of CSR, truly inspiring tourism businesses, in potentially improving the sector’s impact on host communities should not be neglected.

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

407

Conclusions and Implications Roberts and Hall (2001) stress the existing fragmentation in the Tourism Industry, tending to comprise a large number of small businesses, and the difficulties of creating a unique selling proposition. This chapter showed how rural tourism businesses and destinations in Extremadura are facing the particular challenge of creating and projecting effective CSR to enhance their brand identities. One important reason to foster the certification of CSR could be the attempt to change the traditionally limited attraction power that rural destinations present in increasingly competitive and global tourism markets (Ritchie & Crouch, 2003). In this research, participants in the focus group of managers of tourism businesses in Extremadura expressed their opinions about a topic of common interest to them: CSR. Managers from each organization provided information related to CSR. It was not an attempt to impose ideas but to contribute with different opinions (rural and non-rural ones) and to reach consensus on CSR issues related to tourism in the region. The methodology allowed participants to develop ideas collectively because of the group dynamics generated in relation to emerging joint construction processes through strategies of confrontation, opposition and divergence (Fern, 2001; Krueger & Casey, 2002). At present, during the economic crisis, the responsible action of companies from Extremadura towards a long-term sustainable development seems more necessary than ever, but also more difficult to promote and articulate, in a business network with great problems. However, during the crisis, the CSR law in Extremadura can act as a lever of growth and progress. Many of the tourism managers participating in this research clearly think that: “if we get to be the first region to have our own CSR certification, if we really apply it well, and we are innovators and pioneers, in this sense, we are going to win a lot of tourism”.

Sustainable Tourism can add new values and emotional attributes to the service, improving visitor satisfaction and contributing to local development in a positive way. The sector is no stranger to this reality and, according to the Tourism Cluster in Extremadura (2012), responsible behaviours are being encouraged in the region, offering distance learning courses on Sustainable Rural Tourism, new “green” business lines, R&D&I and a supportive environment for regional partnership.

408

Chapter Eighteen

In general, we can say that the implementation of CSR is justified by the many benefits that can result, improving the environment in which organizations operate and relationships with their key stakeholders: the increasing number of customers, as well as their satisfaction, loyalty and identification with the company (higher emotional attachment); more motivated and engaged employees, more productive and loyal to the company, sharing its values; investors interested in investing in companies that, in addition to being cost-effective, also follow CSR criteria; better relations with the public administration; helping to build a safer, better educated, more equitable community, which in turn benefits businesses by creating a stable environment, in which to do better business. In addition to these general benefits, we noted the benefits of Socially Responsible Company Rating from the Autonomous Community of Extremadura: the aid, publicity measures required to present to the society the qualified companies with a declaration under this law, tax benefits, and priority in the award of contracts. To all this we must add the benefits derived from the creation of an “umbrella” brand called “Extremadura— Responsible Tourism”. An “umbrella” brand for Tourism in Extremadura should benefit the CSR concept, differentiating it to respond clearly to the values of an increasing tourist market segment. “Extremadura—Responsible Tourism” would offer a strong, sustainable and competitive tourism product, identifying responsible attributes of the region. This brand would give life to the tourism destination-product-service and help sell it. Findings show that the CSR law in the region, as reported by the managers interviewed, is fostering responsible tourism and sustainable development. This study provides important implications for managerial practice. First, tourism managers should be aware of several benefits that can be gained from the certification of responsible behaviour. Second, the findings show tourism managers how some specific, responsible actions could impact on the successful development of the region. So, tourism managers need to be more proactive trying to create a network around the former tourism cluster, assuming the umbrella of “the Responsible Tourism brand” to promote the region abroad and thus gain competitive advantages. Consequently, an important implication is that, in rural areas, full agreement around CSR is possible, based on which a responsible rural tourism destination image may be projected. In such circumstances, there is the potential for an ambitious and responsible destination image to emerge.

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

409

We believe that our study represents a substantial contribution to the knowledge of CSR in the tourism sector. Qualitative research on the topic within a context favourable to responsible behaviour, as is the case of the region of Extremadura, with a law promoting CSR and businesses apparently supportive of the concept, was non-existent so far. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first that comprehensively investigates both rural and non-rural tourism managers’ perceptions about CSR. Although our research makes significant contributions to understanding the role of a CSR certification in rural tourism, it has some limitations that need further research. First, we restricted our sample to the region of Extremadura. The sample was composed of organizations related to tourism, but not all of them were exclusively related to rural tourism. Secondly, we used the focus group technique as the single way of getting primary information, so results should take into account the disadvantages of this (e.g. statistical representation, possible subjective interpretation of participants’ opinions, or the possibility that the focus group’s members do not want to show their real opinions). Future research in the region and elsewhere would be useful, to possibly confirm our results and validate the thesis of CSR certification being a powerful tool in gaining a competitive advantage in rural tourism.

Acknowledgement This work was supported by the Research Project PRI 10030. We acknowledge the support from the EU, the Spanish Government, and the Autonomous Community of Extremadura.

References Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about Corporate Social Responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932-968. Aminia, M., & Bienstock, C. C. (2014). Corporate sustainability: an integrative definition and framework to evaluate corporate practice and guide academic research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 76, 12-19. Andereck, K. L., Valentine, K. M., Vogt, C. A., & Knopf, R. C. (2007). A cross-cultural analysis of tourism and quality of life perceptions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(7), 483-502. Backhaus, K. B., Stone, B. A., & Heiner, K. (2002). Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and employer attractiveness. Business & Society, 41, 292-318.

410

Chapter Eighteen

Baez, J. (2007). Qualitative Research (In Spanish). Madrid: Esic. Berry, S., & Ladking, A. (1997). Sustainable tourism: a regional perspective. Tourism Management, 18(7), 433-440. Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2005). Corporate reputation and philanthropy: an empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 2944. Camilleri, M. (2014). Advancing the Sustainable Tourism Agenda through Strategic CSR Perspectives. Tourism Planning & Development, 11(1), 42-56. Carlsen, J., Getz, D., & Ali-Knight, J. (2001). The environmental attitudes and practices of family businesses in the rural tourism and hospitality sectors. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9(4), 281-297. Casado, A. B., Nicolau, J. L., Ruiz, F., & Sellers, R. (2014). Industryspecific effect of CSR initiatives: hotels and airlines. Kybernetes, 43(34), 547-564. Cawley, M., & Gillmor, D. A. (2008). Integrated rural tourism: Concepts & Practices. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 316-337. Cheruiyot, T. K., Maru, L. C., & Muganda, C. M. (2012). Reconstructing dimensionality of customer corporate social responsibility and customer response outcomes by hotels in Kenya. Journal of Business, Economics & Finance, 1(3), 5-21. Cheung, L. T. O., & Fok, L. (2014). Assessing the Role of Ecotourism Training in Changing Participants’ Pro-Environmental Knowledge, Attitude and Behaviour. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 19(6), 645-661. Coles, T., Liasidou, S., & Shaw, G. (2008). Tourism and new economic geography: issues and challenges in moving from advocacy to adoption. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 25(3-4), 312-324. COM. (2001). Green Book. Promoting a European framework for Corporate Social Responsibility, 366. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu —. (2011). New CSR Strategy 2011-14. Retrieved from http://eurlex.europa.eu Di Liberto, A. (2013). High skills, high growth: Is tourism an exception? Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 22(5), 749785. Dogl, C., & Holtbrugge, D. (2014). Corporate environmental responsibility, employer reputation and employee commitment: an empirical study in developed and emerging economies. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(12), 1739-1762.

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

411

Esteban, A., & Molina, A. (2014). Marketing Research (In Spanish). Madrid: Esic. Fassin, Y. (2012). Stakeholder Management, Reciprocity and Stakeholder Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(1), 83-96. Fern, E. F. (2001). Advanced focus group research. London: Sage Pub. Fleischer, A., & Felsenstein, D. (2000). Support for rural tourism—Does it make a difference. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(4), 1007-1024. Forsyth, T. (1997). Environmental responsibility and business regulation: the case of Sustainable Tourism. The Geographical Journal, 163(3), 270-280. Frey, N., & George, R. (2009). Responsible tourism management: The missing link between business owners’ attitudes and behaviour in the Cape Town tourism industry. Tourism Management, 31, 621-628. Gallardo-Vazquez, D., & Sanchez-Hernandez, M. I. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility in Extremadura (In Spanish). Badajoz: Fundación Obra Social La Caixa. Gallardo-Vazquez, D., & Sanchez-Hernandez, M. I. (2014). Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility for competitive success at a regional level. Journal of Cleaner Production, 72, 14-22. Girerd, I., Jimenez, S., & Louvet, P. (2014). Which Dimensions of Social Responsibility Concern Financial Investors? Journal of Business Ethics, 121(4), 559-576. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine. Goodwin, H., & Francis, J. (2003). Ethical and Responsable Tourism: Consumer Trends in the UK. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9(3), 271-284. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, I. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage Pub. Holcomb, J. L., Upchurch, R. S., & Okumus, F. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: what are top hotel companies reporting. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19(6), 461-474. Holden, A. (2000). Environment and tourism. London: Routledge. —. (2003). In need of new environmental ethics for tourism? Annals of Tourism Research, 30, 94-108. Inoue, Y., & Lee, S. (2011). Effects of different dimensions of corporate social responsibility on corporate financial performance in tourismrelated industries. Tourism Management, 32, 790-804. Kalisch, A. (2002). Corporate futures: social responsibility in the tourism industry. London: Tourism Concern.

412

Chapter Eighteen

Kang, K. H., Lee, S., & Huh, C. (2010). Impacts of positive and negative corporate social responsibility activities on company performance in the tourism industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(1), 72-82. Kastenholz, E. (2000). The market for rural tourism in North and Central Portugal. A benefit-segmentation approach. In G. Richards & D. Hall (Eds.), Tourism and Sustainable Community Development (pp. 268284). London: Routledge. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Marques, C. (2012). Marketing the rural tourism experience. In T. H. Tshiotsou & R. E. Goldmith (Eds.), Strategic Marketing in Tourism Service (pp. 247-265). U.K.: Emerald. Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C., & Lima, J. (2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism experience—The case of a historical village in Portugal. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207-214. Ko, J. (2001). Assessing Progress of Tourism Sustainability. Annals of Tourism Research, 28, 817-820. Krippendorf, J. (1989). The new tourist—turning point for leisure and travel. Tourism Management, June, 131-135. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2002). Focus groups. A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks Sage. Law 15/2010, 9th December, Business Social Responsibility in Extremadura. DOE, 15th December 2010. Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70, 118. Mark-Herbert, C., & Von Schantz, C. (2007). Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility—Brand Management. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 12(2), 4-11. Martin, J. M., Jimenez, J. D., & Molina, V. (2014). Impacts of seasonality on environmental sustainability in the tourism sector based on destination type: an application to Spain’s Andalusia region. Tourism Economics, 20(1), 123-142. Martinez, P., Perez, A., & Del Bosque, I. R. (2013). Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility in Tourism: Development and Validation of an Efficient Measurement Scale in the Hospitality Industry. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(4), 365-385. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: a theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117-127.

How Social Responsibility Certification Can Help Rural Tourism

413

Merino, M. J. (2010). Marketing Research. Introduction (In Spanish). Madrid: Esic. Mitrokostas, E., & Apostolakis, A. (2013). Research note: Strategic corporate social responsibility and competition in the tourism industry—a theoretical approach. Tourism Economics, 19(4), 967-975. Monografias. (2014). Map of Extremadura. Retrieved from http://www.monografias.com Park, J., Lee, H., & Kim, C. (2014). Corporate social responsibilities, consumer trust and corporate reputation: South Korean consumers’ perspectives. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 295-302. Polo, A. I., Frias, D. M., & Rodriguez, M. A. (2012). Validation of a market orientation adoption scale in rural tourism enterprises. Relationship between the characteristics of the enterprise and extent of market orientation adoption. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 139-151. Porter, M. (1998). On Competition. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press. Ritchie, J. R. B., & Crouch, G. I. (2003). The Competitive Destination, A Sustainable Tourism Perspective. Cambridge: CABI Publishing. Rived, R. A., Alvarez, M. A. G., & Ballarn, G. L. (2013). Research note: Evidence of employment niches in tourism—an intra-regional approach. Tourism Economics, 19(3), 707-717. Roberts, L., & Hall, D. (2001). Rural Tourism and Recreation: Principles to Practice. Wallingford: CABI. Rodrigues, A., Kastenholz, E., & Rodrigues, A. (2010). Hiking as a relevant wellness activity—Results of an exploratory study of hiking tourists in Portugal applied to a rural tourism project. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 16, 331-343. Saxena, G., & Ilbery, B. (2010). Developing integrated rural tourism: Actor practices in the English/Welsh border. Journal of Rural Studies, 26(3), 260-271. Saxena, G., Clark, G., Oliver, T., & Ilberry, B. (2007). Conceptualizing integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies, 9(4), 347-370. Schmidt, M. J., & Hollensen, S. (2006). Marketing Research. An International Approach. England: Prentice Hall. Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2013). The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm Value: The Role of Customer Awareness. Management Science, 59(5), 1045-1061. Sharpley, R. (2014). Host perceptions of tourism: A review of the research. Tourism Management, 42, 37-49.

414

Chapter Eighteen

Sheldon, P., & Park, S. Y. (2011). An Exploratory Study of Corporate Social Responsibility in the US Travel Industry. Journal of Travel Research, 50(4), 392-407. Smithson, J. (2000). Using and analyzing focus groups: limitations and possibilities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 2, 103-119. Spanish Institute of Statistics. (2012). Press release: Occupation Survey in Rural Tourism Accommodations. Retrieved from http://www.ine.es Sparkes, R., & Cowton, C. J. (2004). The maturing of socially responsible investment: A review of the developing link with corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 52, 45-57. Statistical Institute of Extremadura. (2012). Extremadura in Figures 2012. Retrieved from http://estadistica.gobex.es Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17), 137-146. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basic of Qualitative Research. Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. London: Sage Pub. Tourism Cluster in Extremadura. (2012). Bulletin 10, March-April (In Spanish). Retrieved from: www.clusterturismoextremadura.es Verheul, I., Carree, M., & Santarelli, E. (2009). Regional Opportunities and Policy Initiatives for New Venture Creation. International Small Business Journal, 27(5), 608-625. Vernon, J., Essex, S., Pinder, D., & Curry, K. (2003). The ‘greening’ of tourism micro-businesses: outcomes of focus group investigations in South East Cornwall. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12(1), 49-69. Weber, M. (2008). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A company-level measurement approach for CSR. European Management Journal, 26, 247-261. Wilkinson, S. (1998). Focus Group Methodology: a Review. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 1, 181-204. Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M., (2005). An Examination of the Effects of Motivation and Satisfaction on Destination Loyalty: A Structural Model. Tourism Management, 26, 45-56.

CHAPTER NINETEEN THE HIERARCHICAL GAP: BYPASSING COMMUNICATION BARRIERS TO BUILD COLLABORATIVE PROCESSES FOR VALUE CO-CREATION IN RURAL SETTINGS ANA CALAPEZ GOMES, IDALINA DIAS-SARDINHA AND DAVID ROSS

Introduction Cultural and other economic resources can emerge through a process of community1 acknowledgement, valuation and connection of a wide range of elements in a specific space (Lupo, 2007), in this case, used to inform tourism initiatives. This statement raises three problems: which elements are acknowledged as valuable touristic resources by a community; how these elements can interconnect; and in what conditions can the community use them to foster local development and create a new economic resource by connecting formerly isolated activities and/or pieces of information and shaping them through a valuable narrative for tourists. Furthermore, cooperation among different community actors is necessary for successful resource value creation. However, the collaborative process is necessarily tied to the community’s social capital and specific cultural conditions of bonding, bridging and linking capital. Each of these questions is addressed at specific moments within particular contexts. Regardless, two basic common conditions are necessary for this to happen: i) communication and ii) cooperation between the actors involved, which is necessarily based on trust (Fukuyama, 1995; Putnam, 1993 in Koutsou, Partalidou & Ragkos, 2014).

416

Chapter Nineteen

This chapter focuses on the concepts of social capital and trust within networks yielding a better understanding of how touristic services can be co-created (Vargo & Lusch, 2010; Vargo, Maglio & Akaka, 2008) in a socio-cultural context where mistrust is pervasive. The main question we are discussing in this chapter is the lack of bridging social capital and simultaneously a prevalence of a one-way, topdown linking capital as well, which prefigures a dependent society (Eklinder-Frick, Eriksson & Hallén, 2011). This hierarchical communication gap becomes even more apparent when one considers that trust needs to be constantly and systematically negotiated and renegotiated (Curry & Fisher, 2012; Putnam, 2000 in Batt, 2008). In Portugal, instead of a culture of negotiation, which implies transversal communication, there is a tendency to hold back information, keeping it within the bonded group and forging personal but not system trust (Brownlie & Howson, 2005). This situation contributes to increased levels of uncertainty, which are already high (Hofstede, 1991) and, in a vicious circle, the higher levels of mistrust among community members (Beck, 1992). We argue that collaborative networks based on a technological interface may enhance cooperative potential and boost trust and communication among stakeholders, insofar as technology can often be acknowledged as a neutral element. The article relates the concept of social capital with the specificities of the Portuguese culture. We first address the issue of value creation, given that this process is related to the development and maintenance of networks, and we will then derive the ability for choosing and connecting from the quality of the network itself (Eklinder-Frick et al., 2011; Rosas & Camarinha-Matos, 2009). The study is part of a broader research project2 that focuses on the value creation of cultural heritage, namely through tourism. This research project examines the Alentejo region, particularly the area affected by the construction of the Alqueva dam, where important archaeological discoveries were made. Thirty-five (35) extended semi-structured interviews were held with local and regional stakeholders of the tourism and cultural sectors with the aim of understanding the social capital dynamics in the region. The results indicate that, despite the absence of open conflict among the local actors, there is difficulty in strategically connecting diverse resources and a clear hierarchical communication gap between municipal authorities, resource controllers and small businesses, is visible. This hierarchical gap reveals itself through top-down communication, isolated and uncoordinated actions and territorial fragmentation. Aware of the need to build collaborative processes for local development, we present a

The Hierarchical Gap

417

human and technologically assisted model specially conceived for cultural and economic value creation in rural contexts where there are high levels of mistrust and lack of communication among local actors.

Network building for Local Development Cooperation among local actors in a given region plays an important part in the process of local development (Onyx & Leonard, 2010). Social networks may acquire different forms; however, for the purpose of this chapter we will focus on strategic territorial networks as it is the network model that best suits the case and the proposition we are going to present. Strategic territorial networks can be best understood in light of the social capital theory (Eklinder-Frick et al., 2011; Woolcock & Narayan, 2000). Social capital can assume several forms, such as bonding, bridging and linking capital. Bonding refers to the relationships within closed networks whose members are connected by tight and personal relationships. Bridging, on the contrary, refers to more formal relationships between individuals and organizations and among players that belong to different networks (Crowe, 2007; Woolcock & Narayan, 2000). The third form of social capital is linking social capital, which refers to the links between actors from different levels of power and with different access to resources. Bonding capital, strong in cohesive networks, is often thought of as a favourable condition for regional development (Woodhouse, 2006). However, there are negative aspects that may arise from strengthening the existing relationships, such as situations of over-embeddedness and lockins that restrict the entry of external inputs and hamper innovation (Eklinder-Frick et al., 2011; Saxena, Gordon, Oliver & Ilbery, 2007). On the other hand, several studies have shown that, by reaching out to actors from outside the restricted network, bridging relationships can help local members come up with new ideas. Additionally, although superficial, the ties between members of different networks can better foster economic development (Granovetter, 1973; Woolcock & Narayan, 2000). This is consistent with the idea of value co-creation, which is part of the notion of the service ecosystem proposed by Vargo and Lusch (2010, p. 185). This kind of approach goes beyond the idea of value created within an organization and offered as a commodity to a targeted client. It replaces it with an image of a dynamic and ever-evolving type of loose bounded multi-stakeholder network (Bäckstrand, 2006), more dynamic and flexible to create unique integrated value propositions, the uniqueness of which stems from the costumer’s perception of the experience in context

418

Chapter Nineteen

(Prahalad & Ramaswany, 2004). Context, in this sense, is not restricted to the particular space and time of the perceived experience but also includes the unique human dimension of service delivery. This is highly relevant for the tourism industry, namely for rural tourism, where often neither important built heritage elements nor sun and sea attractions are available. In this case, multifaceted co-created value propositions are essential to building and offering unique tourist experiences.

Mistrust and Dependence: the Hierarchical Communication Gap in the Portuguese Society Some authors place trust as the basis of social capital (Fukuyama, 1995; Putnam, 1993 in Koutsou et al., 2014). Trust is the element that supports the relationship between two actors, it is the “glue” that holds everything together in a network (Batt, 2008, p. 488). Therefore, collaborative action and networking can only happen where there is trust among actors (Dupuy & Torre, 2004 in Koutsou et al., 2014). Trust is necessarily a process. It may be rooted in long established win-win relationships or even in the social obligation of relying on each other and collaborating inside the kin-group (Fukuyama, 1995), or may be externally enforced by formal regulation, the law and an effectively functioning justice system. In this sense, trust may emerge based on two converse but complementary processes: the development of horizontal ties or the topdown enforcement of collaboration, followed by immediate positive feedback (Kotter, 2012) in order to sustain collaboration and make it standard practice. These networks are focused on developing and enhancing products together, i.e. co-creation, and this is a rather difficult endeavour in a cultural context such as the Portuguese, where family collectivism and power distance are very strong (Hofstede, 1991; House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman & Gupta, 2004; Jesuíno, Reis & Cruz, 1988). Such traits configure a dependence-oriented culture where the individuals’ autonomy and participation in collective action tend to be stifled. In such contexts, most networks are small with few but very tight relationships, a characteristic that hinders collaboration beyond the boundaries of the restricted group and inhibits the flow of information. The information flow is weak, remains within closed groups and/or is transmitted from above, filtered and without feedback. The effective cooperation that happens in such a context is of a dependent kind, led by hope of immediate personal gain, personal or statutory trust in power holders or fear of group marginalization, i.e. in circumstances where the risk of not trusting

The Hierarchical Gap

419

someone becomes higher than trusting them (Curry & Fisher, 2012, p. 360). The historically built dependence in relation to authoritative figures reinforces the one-way vertical connection and hinders the establishment of more productive networked links (Gomes & Maneschy, 2011), i.e., the reverse situation of empowerment (Kanter, 1990; Steward, 1994). This tendency contributes to hampering collective action, advising for a more focused approach in developing collaborative interdependencies among the several individual entities by establishing common objectives, i.e. where the parties realise they can better succeed both individually and collectively by collaborating. In this sense, it is possible to avoid the idea of collective gain and turn it into individual gains by interdependent actors (Lopes, 2012), i.e. social actors who collaborate in order to obtain a reward which they would not be able to attain alone, but keep untouched their sense of independence of being “the master of their own backyard” (Gomes, 2010). Considering that greater uncertainty is also associated with lack of knowledge (Coleman, 1990 in Curry & Fisher, 2012), and that information tends to be concentrated in the upper social levels (public authorities and resource controllers), then it is logical to expect that a clear hierarchical communication gap emerges and remains within Portuguese society. At this point, a question is raised: who or what institution and tools can enable the creation of these favourable conditions? If we are dealing with uncertainty and mistrust towards the generality of the social players, except particularistic relationships, frequently based on family and/or neighbourhood ties, how can trust be fostered? Our hypothesis rests on the involvement of an external, as far as possible neutrally perceived mediation agent. In this context, a technological device could be an active contribution to facilitate effective collaborative action, which is the focus of the following section.

The Neutrality Perception: External Actors and the Contribution of Technology Collaborative networks are created to support the interaction between autonomous (heterogeneous) players who work together with the aim of achieving common advantages in a broad economic sense. CamarinhaMatos and Afsarmanesh (2005) associate collaborative networks with the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), arguing that it contributes to increased information flow, facilitates access to it and helps create the “hardware” conditions for participation. Nevertheless “the level

420

Chapter Nineteen

of readiness of an organization to join a collaborative process depends on ‘hard’ factors such as competency fitness or technological compatibility, but also on several other factors of a ‘soft’ nature such as an organization’s character, willingness to collaborate, or affectivity/empathy relationships” (Rosas & Camarinha-Matos, 2009, p. 4711). This means that the human factor cannot be underestimated for the success of the collaboration process. Collaborative networks seem to benefit from improved knowledge and information management. Therefore, it is relevant to work on the systematization of information by creating databases capable of crossing information in order to assist, for example, in decision-making, organizing a particular event or activity, providing a tourism experience. Cabbidu, Lui and Piccoli (2013) refer to the benefits of using Information Technology (IT) platforms for the tourism industry, although they reiterate that the degree of benefit depends on the involvement and contribution of partners in order to achieve some common strategic fit and synergy, which may be difficult to attain otherwise. De-la-Fuente-Aragón and Ros-McDonnell (2013) developed a web platform for a collaborative horticultural production network managed and technically assisted by a designated network member. However, if one of the members is in charge of management, distrust may automatically emerge since he/she is himself a player, i.e. an interested part of the “game” and may also be unwilling or unable to develop bridging ties. De Kraker, Cörvers, Valkering, Hermans and Rikers (2013) refer to the concept of learning networks, which focus on knowledge transfer and collaborative knowledge development based on the growing popularity of social networking software. However, there are two problems in these networks: a) they can easily drift into an exchange of meaningless and trivial communication; and b) bonded groups may easily form within the network, which unintentionally end up marginalizing other users. A possible solution for these problems could be to reward those who effectively participate, for instance through exchanges of services or offering benefits to other members’ businesses. In any case, conditions must be created in order to assure that active participation and free information flow are simultaneously directly and indirectly rewarding and reliable, due to the trust deficit endemic in Portuguese society (Gomes, 2010; Gomes & Maneschy, 2011; Hofstede, 1991).

The Hierarchical Gap

421

Case Study Contextualization and Research Methods The broader research project focuses on three sites in Portugal: the Foz Côa Valley Archaeological Park, in northern Portugal; the Campo de São Jorge, in the central region; and the Alqueva dam, in southern Portugal. All three case studies are sites with important archaeological heritage whose value as a tourism resource requires an unconventional approach for its valorization (Dias-Sardinha, Ross & Loureiro, 2014; Gomes & Souza, 2013). For the present chapter, we focus on the case of the Alqueva dam, located in the Alentejo region. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) required for the construction of this massive enterprise revealed a vast amount of archaeological finds, namely Neolithic funerary complexes, which profoundly changed the knowledge of the past of the region. The great majority of these sites were studied and later lost to give way to the dam and irrigation system infrastructure. Therefore, in order to create value from the knowledge obtained from such EIA studies for tourism, a network model is required which can involve all stakeholders in the collaborative value co-creation process. For analysing the context and potential of this process, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with local and regional stakeholders of the tourism and cultural sectors of the Alentejo (Table 19-1). Given the extensive area affected by the Alqueva dam, interviews were held in three municipalities located near the dam where important Neolithic funerary complexes were found: Vidigueira, Serpa, and Moura. Table 19-1. Sample of stakeholders interviewed Stakeholders interviewed Municipal and Regional Authorities Site Managers

Tourism and Regional Development Regulators Businesses and Associations Schools

Function Parish council presidents; city councilman; highly qualified technical staff Directors of museums, archaeological sites and natural parks Presidents; directors; highly qualified technical staff Owners and managers Directors and teachers

Nº of interviewees 5

4

5 18 3

422

Chapter Nineteen

The main aim of the interviews during the previous exploratory phase was to understand the perception of the stakeholders concerning the value of the archaeological sites, the changes brought by tourism and how it affected their lives and businesses, as well as the degree of communication, cooperation and networking existing among stakeholders. The interviews were recorded on site, fully transcribed and then subjected to thematic content analysis (Bardin, 1993). The analysis was partially focused on the last issue, namely communication, cooperation and networking and this led to the following main categories, which were used to produce the interview script for the inquiry phase: i) perception of cooperation; ii) perception of communication; and iii) acceptance of an external coordination entity. Following the same method of the exploratory phase, all interviews in the Alqueva dam region were recorded on tape, fully transcribed and subjected to thematic content analysis carried out by encoding and counting of significant expressions.

Results The analysis of the final interview data collected in the Alqueva dam region permitted the identification of two additional categories to the previous three: iv) perception of the nature of the relationship between the stakeholders; v) perception of the presence or absence and the quality of integrated strategic thinking. Overall, 1,131 textual expressions were encoded, and the following charts were built based on the total number of significant expressions (Table 19-2). The main results are presented in graphic format for easier reading. The charts show the quantitative expression of the interviewees’ perceptions concerning the previously mentioned categories and some of their themes and subthemes. Although the results were disaggregated in two broad types of respondents, public and private, as well as local and regional, they are presented here in aggregate form. This excludes the category iii) acceptance of an external coordination entity, because a clear divide between public and private entities was observed.

The Hierarchical Gap

423

Table 19-2. Global results of the content analysis: categories, themes and subthemes Category Actors

Theme Public authorities

Coordination

External intervention

Attitudes

Cooperation

Communication

Subtheme

Total

%

Government Institutional thickness Socio-cultural difference Institutional proliferation Coordination entity Positive external actor Negative external actor Effective cooperation Participation Commitment Cooperation if there is perceived gain Desired or requested cooperation Failed cooperation Disappointment Lack of cooperation Competition as rivalry Vertical top down Vertical bottom up Horizontal Desired communication Lack of communication

26

2.30

12

1.06

7

0.62

13

1.15

Ȉ

3.98

15.48 8.05

78

6.90

24

2.12

15

1.33

95

8.40

18 2

1.59 0.18

15

1.33

46

4.07

20

1.77

17

1.50

33

2.92

16

1.41

25

2.21

6

0.53

24

2.12

7

0.62

56

4.95

3.45

15.57

53.48 7.6

10.43

Chapter Nineteen

424 Category Attitudes

Theme Relationship

Judgement Actions

Power

Strategy

Subtheme

Total

%

Sense of individualism Property Mistrust Power conflicts Protocol Lack of conflict Informality Knowledge Incompetence Leadership Decisionmaking power Initiative Private initiative Investment Costs Strategy Innovation Dissemination Integrated action Desired integrated action Integrated supply Absence of strategy Specialised supply Occasional action Top down occasional action

54

4.77

12 48 36 28 10 7 17 13 31

1.06 4.24 3.18 2.48 0.88 0.62 1.50 1.15 2.74

14

1.24

10 15 19 2 21 5 4

0.88 1.33 1.68 0.18 1.86 0.44 0.35

29

2.56

15

1.33

17

1.50

14

1.24

47

4.16

40

3.54

68

6.01

1,131

100

Ȉ

17.23

2.65

6.19

1.86

8.04 31.04

14.95

100

100

The Hierarch hical Gap

425

Perception of cooperation n Fig. 19-1. Perrception of coopperation

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

955

46 33 18

20

17

There iss a clear peerception by the intervieewees concerrning the existence off effective coooperation, meeaning perceivved common action in order to achhieve specific goals, and in n a requested or desired form. Even though exprressions conccerning decep ption or failedd attempts, ass well as admitted lacck of cooperattion sum up to o 70, they aree far from reaaching the 159 positivee expressions regarding r thiss category (seee figure 19-1). Much oof this cooperration is bassed on strongg communitarian ties, revealing thee prevalence of o bonding social capital: “I wouldnn’t say that theere is not one or o another fightt once in a while, but we just ignore it. We all a know each other well, wee have been heere for —restaurant ow wner). many yeaars, we know eaach other well” (interview #22—

But it alsso reveals a keeen sense of opportunity: o “With thiis company thaat makes those tours in the A Alqueva reservo oir, we work a loot in partnershhip with them (…). ( When theey have a grou up that

Chapter Nineteen N

426

ment (…) they contact us. Wh hen we wants a ffew more gamees as a complem have largger groups needding to add one thing to anothher, we speak to o them and have an integrated offer” (intervieew #8—tourism m recreation bu usiness person).

Percception of co ommunicatioon Fig. 19-2. Peerception of communication c n 60

56

50 40 30

25

24

20 10

6

0 Veertical top down

V Vertical bottom up

Horizonntal

No comm munication

Seeminggly paradoxiccally we are dealing witth the admitttance of cooperation without com mmunication because, althhough 95 ex xpressions admitted efffective coopeeration, 56 su uggest the laack of comm munication among stakeeholders (see figure 19-2). Nonetheless,, some comm munication is still admiitted, albeit mainly m in a vertical top-doown (25) or horizontal h direction (244). The residuual presence of o significant expressions admitting a vertical botttom-up com mmunication (6) allows us to concllude that cooperation has a directiive rather thaan a participaative nature. The T local government offers an oppportunity whicch is taken byy the economiic agents, but revealingg some passivvity. “What woorks here in the county are th he Town Counccil events. The Town Council ssends us a letterr, and if we are interested, we ffill out the form m, send

The Hierarch hical Gap

427

it back annd participate in the event. Yees, the Town C Council advertisses the event andd asks us to partticipate” (interv view #20—restaaurant owner).

The folloowing categorry explores ho ow stakeholdeers perceive th he quality of their relaationships in such a situattion of directiive cooperatio on where communicattion flows are clearly confin ned.

Perrception of relationship r p Fig. 19-3. Perrception of relattionship

60

54 48

50 40 30

36 288

20 10 10

7

0

The perrception is cllearly negativ ve. Relationshhips are percceived as largely baseed on legal andd administratiive (28) protoocol, rather thaan having a more infoormal characteer (7). These are beset wiith power and d partisan conflict (366), mistrust (48) ( and thee notion thatt people only y defend individual innterests. Thiss perceived seense of indiviidualism (54) includes

428

Chapter Nineteen

not only the fear of free riding attitudes but also a notion of acting inside strict territorial and subject boundaries, exemplified by the selfcontainment in municipal and/or professional borders. Cooperative action seldom surpasses the limits of the specific county and/or the activity, so that, for example, archaeology is rarely associated with cheese or wine production. “The businesspeople are suspicious of the Town Council and the Town Council is suspicious of the businesspeople. That is also a problem. The Town Council wants to create a business association here in Serpa, but then people enter a phase of ‘who will lead the troops? Who is the captain?’” (interview #5—hotel manager) “I was talking to him [the owner of the vineyard] and said ‘look, here’s a very interesting thing [archaeological finds] that was found in your vineyards, I think it could be very interesting if we can count on you for this development [associate the wine brand to the archaeological heritage]’ and he found it very interesting but then nothing happened” (interview #33—wine producer).

What are the consequences for strategic thinking of such a tightly closed approach unable to overcome barriers between categories and spaces? This is addressed in the next category.

Perception of strategy Although respondents perceive that territorial development policies are, to a certain point, strategically led (21), they emphasise the specialised, top-down driven occasional action (155) rather than the integrated strategically oriented action and product offer, both effective and desired (61). These figures are particularly interesting because they seem to indicate a widespread lack of knowledge of what strategy effectively means since, on the one hand, there are a few expressions assertively pointing to the lack of strategy (14). On the other hand, there are many who perceive those actions, focused on specific and specialised subjects, which take place within the borders of a given municipality, as strategic. This is further aggravated when the actions are top-down driven and admittedly weak in innovation (5) and poorly disseminated (4), as visible in the following responses to the question regarding strategy. “Everybody participates eventually. In this matter, at least as far as I am concerned, whenever there is a request by the Town Council or a local development association or something, we try to collaborate to achieve

The Hierarch hical Gap

429

some endd. There is no reeal isolation of the entities. Noow, it is clear th hat the problem hhere is, in factt, a leadership that t has to exi st, even for fin nancial reasons, eventually it ends up theere” (interview w #29—directtor of professionnal school). “Everywhhere there are events, even iff they are simillar. There was a fair here, the Bread and Oraanges Fair, heree in Portel, 12 kkm away, there was a similar faair, the Açordaas Fair on the same day, inn Ourique, therre was another, tthe Pig Fair, onn the same day, and in Mértolla, there was an nother, the River Fish Fair. Thatt’s not possible”” (interview #225—private artissan).

Fig. 19-4. Peerception of strategy 80 8 68

70 7 60 6 47

50 5

40 4

40 4 30 3

29 21 15

20 2 10 1

5

17

144

4

0

Awareneess of the neeed for coordin nation is high,, but at the saame time, many responndents point out and criticcise the prolifferation of enttities that assume or are supposedd to assume this function (78). This is i clearly expressed inn the chart below.

Chapter Nineteen N

430

D Desire for coordination Fig. 19-5. D Desire for coorrdination 90 9 80 8

78

70 7 60 6 50 5 40 4 30 3

24 2

20 2

15

10 1 0 Coordiination entity

Positive ex xternal actor Negative exteernal actor

In fact, coordinatingg entities aree considered necessary, but their proliferationn and fear of partiality p is bllamed. Hencee, a certain ap pproval of the involvem ment of an exxternal coordiinator (24 exppressions in favour f vs. 15 expressiions against), even because excessive dependence on local authorities is negatively juudged (see fig gure 19-5). “But alsoo for businesspeeople and thosee who are in thhe field, in the private p sector, thhere is no capacity c to asssume leadershhip and to assume a coordinattion among theemselves which h they fit intoo and establish h these structuress themselves. Siince you cannot constantly askk the public enttities, I don’t thinnk it should alw ways be the pub blic entities to aassume the lead dership role of w what can bring some economiic return” (inteerview #11—reegional developm ment institution officer).

Yet, the external coorrdinator is ofteen seen as an entity that co omes with capacity to iinvest and takke command of the operationns.

The Hierarch hical Gap

431

“I think ppeople do valuee [archaeologicaal heritage], but ut now we have to see one thingg: there must bee, here in the county, c there hhas to be a big boost, there muust be, like, ann entity or wh hatever, whichh will tell the Town Council: ‘Look, you havve an enormouss potential, andd we will do a project p here and w we will work on it’ because it seems that lateely there is no money, m the Townn Council has no money to invest in this potential” (inteerview #28—bussiness owner).

Interestinngly, this bacckground tells a different sttory, and this becomes much cleareer when the data d on respo onses obtainedd from public entities (typically tthe power holders) and d private enntities (mosttly local entrepreneurrs) is disaggreegated (see fig gure 19-6). Puublic stakehold ders more often expresss distrust of an external coordination, c arguing ratheer for the self-organization of thosee local actorss, including pprivate stakeho olders, in order to prom mote endogennous developm ment. Fig. 19-6. Possitive and negaative perception ns of the advanttages of an exteernal actor: public vs. privvate respondentts

17

18 16 14 12

10

10 8 6

Public

7 5

Private

4 2 0 P Positive extern nal Negative eexternal actor actoor “I think tthat frequently the obstacles that t are createdd hindering outsiders from inteerfering in certaain matters are related to the ffact that they may m be not very knowledgeablee of the reality of these same issues and locations, where theey want to interrfere or managee. This soon creeates situations where there is a complete inadeequacy of the objectives and ppurposes of thosse who

432

Chapter Nineteen are here and those who come because sometimes there is a superficial or medium knowledge of the realities, but not a deep knowledge and then it always starts an uproar” (interview #17—local municipal museum director). “It doesn’t have to be the State [to promote local development], the Alentejo Houses [Casas Brancas Project] is not the State and they set up a product, and they sell it in London, they go to fairs and they made a prizewinning film and are doing an interesting work on the ground, a very large work indeed (...) and it’s good that the State intervenes less and less” (interview #34—regional tourism director).

Discussion Strong community cohesion can be observed in rural areas in general, linked to a very strong sense of ownership and self-interest (Saxena & Ilbery, 2008). Portugal is no exception, more so as there is a long tradition of family and in-group collectivism (House et al., 2004; Jesuíno et al., 1988) and vertical and dependent binding in relation to the institution that holds the power, usually the State. The findings of this paper illustrate the lack of bridging ties in the studied regions. As a result, there is a far greater focus on product specialization than on integrated offer, which is aggravated by the low levels of innovation. Thus, it becomes clear that bonding in these communities affects the implementation of value co-created tourism experiences. As mentioned, bonding social capital is related to the strengthening of social ties and cohesion in a community (Curry & Fisher, 2012). While this may be advantageous, in the sense that it ensures high levels of collaboration between relatives and neighbours, bonding carries the risk of over-embeddedness and therefore of closeness and groupthink, with all its consequences, namely for innovation and collaboration involving internal dissidents or non-members (Baron, 2005; Janis, 1982). It is evident that effective cooperation among stakeholders in the studied cases does indeed take place, however participation is scarce, and this kind of bridging is not emergent as there is no communication other than vertical top-down. For instance, local business owners who are contacted by the town council will undertake some collaborative venture. However, cooperation among local actors happens upon command by those in power, a trait peculiar to a dependence-oriented culture. Furthermore, these collaborative endeavours occur only sporadically and show little regard to strategic planning, as this framework seemingly

The Hierarchical Gap

433

indicates a simplistic notion of strategy and the acceptance of any kind of activity as strategic implementation of policies. The desire to have a player able to coordinate and manage cooperation among actors is also evident. Nonetheless, the difference between public and private respondents concerning this need is relevant. Public respondents show less interest than the private respondents in appointing an external mentor to help manage the collaborative process, from which two conclusions can be drawn. On the one hand, the public actors are resource controllers, but having an external body oversee the valuecreation process would mean a loss of their power. On the other hand, the private actors’ high level of interest can be explained by the low level of trust in the institutions that hold the power. The state is often criticised by a broad range of actors, whether it is the central state, too distant from local realities, or the local administration, too caught up in “politicking tricks”. Therefore, as in the case of Greece (Koutsou et al., 2014), we consider that, in Portugal, there is a dependent (one-way) form of linking social capital, strong bonding social capital and a clear lack of bridging social capital. These characteristics are in line with the findings of two of the most comprehensive and extended empirical cultural models (Hofstede, 1991; House et al., 2004). As such, the challenge to create the conditions for the establishment and maintenance of strategic territorial networks lies in both increasing feedback competencies in linking social capital and developing the bridging social capital. In both cases, transversal information flows must be stimulated as a way to reduce uncertainty, increase trust and develop strategic thinking and innovation. This, in turn, is strongly related to the ability to overcome groupthink (Baron, 2005; Janis, 1982) or other established social barriers to communication. In sum, what is needed is a process of social or collective learning that occurs when different individuals with common yet divergent interests negotiate to meet superordinate goals (Sherif, 1958). In this context, we present a facilitation model designed to support value co-creation through collaborative processes in high mistrust contexts with great power distance.

Facilitation Model In order to develop the model presented below, several theoretical perspectives were combined, namely the three-step design perspective by Lupo (2007), the interrelationship of the various stakeholders in the process of resource creation suggested by Saxena and Ilbery (2008), and

434

Chapter Nineteen N

the idea of the inverted pyramid add dressed by Loopes (2012). We read those approaaches in the liight of the emp pirical resultss exposed abov ve, which also confirm m the generaal cultural prrofile traced tto Portugal by b major empirical m models, namelyy Hofstede (19 991) and the G GLOBE projecct (House et al., 2004)). The idea off introducing a mixed, humaan and techno ologically assisted meentoring elem ment in the model, m stemss from the notion n of collaborative network prroposed by Camarinha-Ma C atos and Afsaarmanesh (2005) (Fig. 19-7). Fig. 19-7. F Facilitation moodel designed to support vaalue co-creation n through collaborative processes in hiigh mistrust con ntexts with greaat power distancce

The process of resou urce co-creatiion and valoriisation comprises three interrelated steps (Lupo, 2007): 2 i. identiffication and mapping m of potential p sourrces of value creation: materrial and immaaterial elements such as landdscapes, builtt heritage, activities, knowleddge, traditionss, narratives, m music, industrial and or agriccultural produccts, etc.;

The Hierarchical Gap

435

ii. interconnection of the potential modular sources of value creation mapped during the previous step, which can enable the creation of new resources and innovation; iii. diffusion and implementation of value creation initiatives. This last step is the most complex because it involves the effective implementation of the projects designed in the previous steps, and as such it is even more dependent on the active involvement of the various stakeholders. These are the local resource creators, meaning those who were involved in the identification and design steps, who must cooperate with the local resource controllers, that is, those in charge of the management of existent resources previously mapped. Moreover, this interaction at the local and regional level must take place within the broader framework of national and supranational policymaking. The balanced development of the three forms of social capital (bonding, bridging, and linking) is a prerequisite for: x the emergence of strategic thinking which fosters and is a condition of leadership (Minzberg & Waters, 1985); x communication, which in turn fosters trust; x and empowerment, necessary for the implementation of value cocreation projects. These are the conditions necessary for the implementation step of the value co-creation process to be successful. The introduction of the external mentor in the form of an inverted pyramid (Lopes, 2012) has two main objectives: to stimulate strategic thinking and to enforce information flows in order to develop trust and promote cooperation. The inverted pyramid represents the human side, the attitude of the external mentors who should listen to the local stakeholders and provide feedback and coaching instead of simply asking for or ordering something to be done. The technological feature, in the form of a database connected to a social network, functions as an assistant rather than a replacement of the human factor. Technology can facilitate: i. the identification and more efficient mapping process and facilitate interconnection; ii. a greater sense of trust, in so far as technology is generally perceived as a neutral element; iii. a greater sense of empowerment, in that participation can be

436

Chapter Nineteen

acknowledged and rewarded through a process of direct community exchange of services (e.g. through a system of point accumulation for effective participation, exchangeable for goods and services). It is important to note that the mentoring element does not pretend to create leaders. Instead, it is argued that by developing the strategic thinking of actors within a community, which is enhanced by the awareness of everybody else’s ideas and projects, leaders will naturally emerge around specific ideas and clusters. The same relates to trust. The model does not intend to increase trust directly among players, but rather it is a natural consequence that results from increased communication between them. The same applies to empowerment as a consequence of implementation (Ahearne, Mathieu & Rapp, 2005; Amabile, Schatzel, Moneta & Kramer, 2004; Zhang & Bartol, 2010). The Portuguese society, especially in rural areas, presents many dependence characteristics, and the empirical data corroborate this assertion. This means that one must act at least at two levels: information flow and empowerment. Considering a long tradition of family-centred collectivism (Jesuíno et al., 1988) and dependence towards the state and/or the Church, Portuguese society never really developed collective representative structures. Nevertheless, dissatisfaction is evident towards a situation where admittedly some fragmented and mostly inoperative coordinating entities are unable or unwilling to carry out their mission, in a context of distrust and lack of cross-communication. This seems to explain the positive attitude towards the intervention of a hypothetical external coordinating actor, especially by private stakeholders, which reflects a desire to change a situation envisioned with suspicion and even bitterness. The facilitation model we propose aims to meet this desire in order to bypass the hierarchical gap and help to foster communication and trust so that a positive service eco-system may emerge (Vargo & Lush, 2010).

Conclusion The data presented here allows us to draw a facilitation framework, which may contribute to effective cooperation among various stakeholders. This framework acknowledges a dependent society, possibly suffering from over-embeddedness (Eklinder-Frick et al., 2011). It seems clear that there is a prevalence of the bonding type of social capital, some linking social capital limited to power holders (local and regional) and absence of the bridging type of social capital (Granovetter, 1973), which effectively reduces the capacity for co-creating valuable tourism

The Hierarchical Gap

437

experiences. Corroborating this idea is the perception of a relationship environment marked by mistrust, political conflict and a sense of selflimitation in territorial and professional/subject barriers. The empirical data collected in the case study presented in this paper and the framework of previous similar projects reveals the dependent character of the society and the need to overcome it by helping to create the basic conditions for achieving this goal (Gomes, 2010; Gomes, 2016; Gomes & Maneschy, 2011; Gomes & Souza, 2013). Furthermore, the intervention of an external coordination and mentoring agent to facilitate the value co-creation process associated with a technological device to foster information exchange and management, as well as communication, appears to be indispensable in this context and in general well accepted by stakeholders, even if actual power holders are somewhat reluctant. Although the present study has focused on archaeological heritage as the central resource, it must be underlined that the facilitation model presented may be applied to any resource that may contribute to the development of tourist experiences. As such, further research should be centred on the effective validation or refutation of the proposed facilitation model.

Acknowledgements This project was co-funded by the FEDER Funds of the Operational Competitiveness Programme–COMPETE; and by the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia within the project «PTDC/HISARQ/114077/2009» and «Pest-OE/SADG/UI0428/2013».

Notes 1. Community understood as the diversity of local and regional stakeholders. 2. «Funerary Practices in Alentejo’s Recent Prehistory and Socio-economic Proceeds of Heritage Rescue Projects» (PTDC/HIS-ARQ/114077/2009).

Bibliography Ahearne, M., Mathieu, J., & Rapp, A. (2005). To empower or not to empower your sales force? An empirical examination of the influence of leadership empowerment behaviour on customer satisfaction and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 945-955.

438

Chapter Nineteen

Amabile, T., Schatzel, E., Moneta, G., & Kramer, S. (2004). Leader behaviours and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 5-32. Bäckstrand, K. (2006). Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: Rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. European Environment, 16, 290-306. Bardin, L. (1993). L’analyse de contenu. Paris: Presses Univérsitaires de France. Baron, R. (2005). So right is wrong: Groupthink and the ubiquitous nature of polarised group decision making. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 219-253. Batt, P. (2008). Building social capital in networks. Industrial Marketing Management, 37, 487-491. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage Brownlie, J., & Howson, A. (2005). Leaps of faith’ and MMR: an empirical study of trust. Sociology, 39(2), 221-239. Cabbidu, F., Lui, T., & Piccoli, G. (2013). Managing value co-creation in the tourism industry. Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 86-107. Camarinha-Matos, L., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2005). Collaborative networks: a new scientific discipline. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 16, 439-452. Crowe, J. (2007). In search of a happy medium: how the structure of interorganizational networks influence community economic development strategies. Social Networks, 29, 469-488. Curry, N., & Fisher, R. (2012). The role of trust in the development of connectivities amongst rural elders in England and Wales. Journal of Rural Studies, 28, 358-370. De Kraker, J., Cörvers, R., Valkering, P., Hermans, M., & Rikers, J. (2013). Learning for sustainable regional development: towards learning networks 2.0? Journal of Cleaner Production, 49, 114-122. De-la-Fuente-Aragón, M., & Ros-McDonnell, L. (2013). Designing a web platform for a fruit-and-vegetable collaborative network. Procedia Technology, 9, 247-252. Dias-Sardinha, I., Ross, D., & Loureiro, S. (2014). Rescue archaeology heritage valuation in Europe’s largest dam—Alqueva: ex-situ products as elements of creative tourism. PASOS Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 12(3), 623-634. Eklinder-Frick, J., Eriksson, L., & Hallén, L. (2011). Bridging and bonding forms of social capital in a regional strategic network. Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 994-1003.

The Hierarchical Gap

439

Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: the social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press. Gomes, A. (2010). Frutos em rede: estrutura e dinâmica da Pêra Rocha do Oeste. In A. Gomes, M. C. Maneschy, S. Magalhães, & J. M. Carvalho Ferreira (Eds.), Organização Social do Trabalho e Associativismo no Contexto da Mundialização: Estudos em Portugal, África e Amazónia (pp. 241-271). Belém, PA: UFPA/NUMA. —. (2016) Challenging immateriality: outline for a valuation model of invisible (and visible) heritage. PASOS Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 14(1), 57-72. Gomes, A., & Maneschy, M. (2011). Communication and power in collaborative networks: the hypothesis of technology as confidence enhancer. In L. Camarinha-Matos, A. Pereira-Klen, & H. Afsarmanesh (Eds.), Adaptation and Value Creating Collaborative Networks (pp. 19-26). Heidelberg: Springer. Gomes, A., & Souza, C. (2013). The missing link: a critical analysis of the roots of non-cooperation. Lusophone Management and Administration Review, 1(1), 5-15. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw Hill. House, R., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, Leadership and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Janis, I. (1982). Groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Jesuíno, J., Reis, E., & Cruz, E. (1988). Motivações Empresariais em Portugal. Revista de Gestão, 2-3, 43-50. Kanter, R. (1990). When Giants Learn to Dance. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kotter, J. (2012). Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Koutsou, S., Partalidou, M., & Ragkos, A. (2014). Young farmers’ social capital in Greece: trust levels and collective actions. Journal of Rural Studies, 34, 204-211. Lopes, A. (2012). Fundamentos da gestão de pessoas: para uma síntese epistemological da iniciativa, da competição e da cooperação. Lisboa: Sílabo. Lupo, E. (2007). Intangible cultural heritage valorization: a new field for design research and practice. Emerging Trends in Design Research.

440

Chapter Nineteen

Hong Kong: International Association of Societies of Design Research, 1-19. Minzberg, H., & Waters, J. (1985). On strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal, 6, 257-272. Onyx, J., & Leonard, R. (2010). The conversion of social capital into community development: an intervention in Australia’s outback. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 34(2), 381-97. Prahalad, C., & Ramaswany, V. (2004). Co-creating experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 514. Rosas, J., & Camarinha-Matos, L. (2009). An approach to assess collaboration readiness. International Journal of Production Research, 47(17), 4711-4735. Saxena, G., & Ilbery, B. (2008). Integrated rural tourism: a border case study. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(1), 233-254. Saxena, G., Gordon, C., Oliver, T., & Ilbery, B. (2007). Conceptualizing integrated rural tourism. Tourism Geographies, 9(4), 347-370. Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict. The American Journal of Sociology, LXIII(4), 349-356. Steward, A. (1994). Empowering people. London: Pitman Publishing. Vargo, S., & Lush, R. (2010). It’s all B2B… and beyond: Toward a systems perspective of the market. Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 181-187. Vargo, S., Maglio, P., & Akaka, M. (2008). On-value and value cocreation: A service systems and service logic perspective. European Management Journal, 26, 145-152. Woodhouse, A. (2006). Social capital and economic development in regional Australia: a case study. Journal of Rural Studies, 22, 83-94. Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: implications for development theory, research, and policy. The World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225-249. Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 107-128.

CHAPTER TWENTY IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINABLE RURAL TOURISM: LESSONS FROM RURAL RAIL-BASED SLOW TOURISM BERNARD LANE

Introduction The development of rural tourism across much of Europe and elsewhere in the 1970s and 1980s (Lane & Kastenholz, 2015) coincided with an increasing discussion about the need for new and more sustainable forms of tourism (Bramwell & Lane, 1993; Krippendorf, 1987; Krippendorf, Zimmer & Glauber, 1988). The immediate and major drivers for the development of rural tourism were several. On the demand side, there was growing interest in outdoor recreation, individualised recreation, contact with nature and exploration of the many forms of countryside. On the supply side, there was a strong need for rural economic diversification, to slow or end de-population, and to support small and/or marginal farms, especially family farms (see Lane, Weston, Davies, Kastenholz, Lima, & Majewski, 2013). At the same time, post-1960 rising levels of disposable income allowed households to take not just one holiday per year, but two, or even more, making it possible for people to experiment with new destinations, instead of always travelling to traditional seaside, or spa resorts. And society was changing more generally: Stanley Plog—an American travel analyst—found growing numbers of educated and inquisitive explorers keen to travel to new and sometimes adventurous places (Plog, 1991). Plog named these people the “allocentrics”. It was the allocentrics and others who helped create the wider experience economy (Pine & Gilmore, 1999) of which rural tourism is now a part. But was the often repeated claim that rural tourism was

442

Chapter Twenty

almost always “sustainable tourism” correct? Has rural tourism been able to satisfy triple bottom line analysts that its impact across the rural economy, environment, cultural heritage and society has always been benign, or even beneficial? Did it provide an alternative form of tourism? The widespread fears about tourism’s growth, and its forms of growth, in the second half of the twentieth century, were based on its scale, its speed of growth, and its mass appeal to large numbers of visitors. The ultimate slur became the term “mass tourism”. Tourism was seen as connected to big business, to major tour operators, based not locally, but in tourism’s source markets. Host areas had little influence on, or control of, the businesses which brought tourists to their communities. And tourism was seen to be damaging to local environments through excessive land use, an international style of construction, and because it was careless of fragile environments, heritage features and local cultural norms. Profits were repatriated to businesses in the source markets. In contrast, and at exactly the right period of history, rural tourism was seen as quite the opposite. It certainly offered an alternative form of tourism. And it was felt to be sustainable because it was essentially small-scale, locally based and locally owned. It was said to be “environmentally friendly”, and its practitioners were because they were local, said to be interested in the long term sustainability of their land and its people. But have those claims ever been tested or proven? Carlsen, Getz and Ali-Knight (2001), working in rural Australia, found that the large majority of rural tourism businesses were not owned by local people, but by incoming middle-aged couples, new to the business, with strong motivation to live and work in the countryside. Lifestyle and familyrelated goals were predominant, but the business had, above all, to be profitable. There was little mention of pro-environmental or cultural heritage conservation activities. Barbieri (2013), in her detailed survey of 873 US farms working in agritourism, was more positive. She found that while there was room for increasing sustainability in the environmental dimension among agritourism farms, they produced good results in terms of local employment generation, increased farm profits (allowing better wages) and other beneficial inputs into surrounding communities. The role of agritourism businesses in helping to conserve rural agricultural heritage, especially through adaptive reuse of buildings, was extremely strong. There have, however, been no detailed regional or national surveys of the sustainability record of rural tourism in any country. That is not surprising. Rural tourism consists of innumerable small businesses, many part-time in nature, with neither the time nor skills to record their impacts. There is normally no governance body advising and guiding rural tourism

Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism

443

enterprises towards greater sustainability. Lack of effective destination governance is shown by Lane and Kastenholz (2015) to be a problem for the future development and management of rural tourism in the twentyfirst century. But perhaps the wrong questions about sustainability are being asked. Lane (1994a, 1994b) saw rural tourism as a tool for conservation and the sustainability of the countryside, by easing the need for intensive food production, supporting rural services, and valorising the work of protected area managements, as well as by offering wellness benefits to urban populations (Wolf, Stricker & Hagenloh, 2015). He envisaged rural tourism as an enabling agent for beneficial support for sustainable rural living across the whole rural economy, rather than a closed sustainable system in itself. He also welcomed the arrival of lifestyle entrepreneurs from urban areas, bringing new skills, additional capital, ideas, and market knowledge. In some cases, they also brought much needed local leadership (see Ateljevic & Doorne, 2000; Clarke, 1999; McGehee, Knollenberg & Komorowski, 2015). There is one key, and often unspoken, weakness in the sustainable rural tourism discussion. Rural tourism grew in the second half of the twentieth century because of the increase in the widespread availability of transport by private car. Given the role of road transport as a major source of greenhouse gases, is there any way in which rural tourism could reduce its reliance on cars as a means of transport? This discussion leads back to the enabling role of rural tourism as a sustainability tool and in many places to the question of the survival of rail transport in rural areas. Rail transport has strong credentials as a low emissions sustainable transport system with low land use requirements. Rural railway lines, however, have been closing across the developed world in increasing numbers over the last 60 years, as declining usage by both passengers and freight have caused rail networks to shrink back to the more heavily used and profitable inter-city and intra-urban routes (Salveson, 1997). Some argue that this is perhaps inevitable, but there are losses for many segments of the population. Young people, older people, and those unable to afford car ownership are known to experience mobility loss. Rural rail closures bring loss of infrastructure capital, like bridges, tunnels, and routeways are written off. There is loss of local employment. There is loss of built heritage, and there is experiential loss. The special nature of a rural rail journey, often providing elevated and stately vistas across the countryside and its landscapes and buildings, was noted by Hoskins (1955), the doyen of the scholarly study of the English landscape: “the railway has been absorbed into the landscape, and one can enjoy the consequent pleasure of trundling through (the countryside) in a stopping-

444

Chapter Twenty train on a fine summer morning: the barley fields shaking in the wind, the slow sedgy streams with their willows shading meditative cattle. The elegant... stone (church) spires across the meadows... the warm brown roofs of villages half buried in the trees, and the summer light flashing everywhere” (Hoskins, 1955, p. 206).

Hoskins, writing in 1955, could not know that 50 years later his words would fit the promotional agendas of the slow travel advocates, who find slow travel to be both environmentally friendly and psychologically beneficial (Dickinson & Lumsdon, 2010).

Implementing New Forms of Rail-Based Rural Tourism One of the oddities of the tourism world is that tourism requires transport systems, and transport systems require tourists to use their facilities, but there is often little working collaboration between the two activities. And while commentators note that there is little collaboration between the tourism industry and local communities, the same lack of linkages can be found between the transport industry and local communities. Railways were central to the growth of nineteenth-century resort development. They were also involved in early forms of rural tourism. Runte (1990) shows how the railroads in the USA brought tourists from the eastern cities to the Rocky Mountains, creating a demand for protected areas in the 1860s and 1870s. But in the second half of the twentieth century, railways in many—not all—countries lost interest in rural areas, and often in tourism traffic generally, partly because of competition from aviation, cars and coaches. There have been two types of rural railway operation that have become interested in tourism again. Some conventional railway organizations, once mostly state-owned, now often privatised, have begun to explore ways of becoming involved with partners, often community-based partners, and sometimes with Universities, to boost their passenger numbers on rural routes, and in doing so, have begun to create forms of rail-based sustainable tourism. The UK has been deeply involved in this process, but similar processes have been at work in Germany and Scandinavia (see www.paulsalveson.org.uk). The second type of operation is one that is especially common across Europe, and in some other parts of the developed world. These are railways which have closed, and abandoned as commercial undertakings, but have been taken over by volunteers and special interest groups, are managed and operated by largely unpaid volunteer labour using heritage locomotives and rolling

Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism

445

stock, and rely almost entirely on leisure/tourist travellers. They can be designated as heritage railways. Neither of the above types of operation plays the sustainable tourism card to any large extent. They rely very much on the growing awareness of heritage, on nostalgia, and on an increasing interest in the community and special interest group management of local railways. Sustainability is a bonus. Both types of operation are examined below, drawing on the literature and the author’s many years of consultancy experience in the field.

The Conventional Community Railway Conventional forms of either private or public ownership normally apply to these railways. Economic viability remains their central goal, but they encourage and involve a range of non-railway stakeholders, including local communities, local governments, protected area managements, local tourism groups, national countryside agencies, and sometimes rail traveller groups, in management discussions, and to assist in some management tasks. This broadening of management inputs allows the concepts of sustainable rural tourism to be developed using partnership techniques (Bramwell & Lane, 2000). It reflects a growing interest in localism generally, and especially localism in railway transport (Chapman, 2015). It also reflects both enlightenment and opportunism across railway managements. Most conventional community railways have an interest in rural tourism; all also serve non-recreational passengers, going about their everyday lives. That sets them apart from the volunteer operated heritage railways mentioned above. In the UK, the development of community-linked rural railways dates back to the mid-1980s, with its origins shared between the Settle and Carlisle railway, a 72 mile long rural trunk railway through a remote, sparsely populated upland part of northern England, and a group of six short rural branch lines in the south-western counties of Devon and Cornwall. Both of the above pioneered rural railway partnerships that brought other stakeholders into partnership with train operators because of fears of total railway closure, and in the case of the Settle and Carlisle, fears of imminent closure. “The prospect of loss haunts heritage” (Shannan Peckham, 2003, p. 7) is a very relevant phrase. Railways are very public forms of heritage and the prospect of closure, the need to act to “save” heritage, can galvanise non-railway stakeholders, including communities and local politicians, into action much more powerfully than the prospect

446

Chapter Twenty

of sustainable development. Both of the above railway partnerships have evolved into rail partnerships with extensive community links. The Settle and Carlisle Railway The Settle and Carlisle Railway’s supporters formed a protest group against closure in 1981. Following the government’s decision in 1989 to keep the line open, the protesters set up, in 1990, three organizations to help conserve the line and its buildings and to develop it, with partners, as a sustainable transport system and as a sustainable tourism organisation. The umbrella organisation for the three “active” community entities is the Settle-Carlisle Partnership, that brings together the state-owned company, Network Rail, who owns the railway’s infrastructure, the privately owned Northern Rail, who operates the diesel trains that provide the service (and many other rail services in northern England), the Yorkshire Dales National Park, the three local governments along the line, and a range of other key stakeholders (http://91.215.185.110/~settlecarlisle/about-scp/). The three active entities are: The Settle and Carlisle Railway Trust (www.sandctrust.org.uk) was established to care for historic railway buildings along the line. In 1991, it helped obtain conservation area status along the full length of the line to guarantee that its Victorian character is conserved as both a unique selling point and as a set of heritage objects. It has developed an interpretation plan to explain the history and purpose of the buildings, and assisted with civil engineering and conservation works along the line, creating an important heritage tourism product. Charitable Trust status allows its access to the UK’s Heritage Lottery Fund, a major funder of heritage conservation and development in the UK (www.hlf.org.uk). The Settle-Carlisle Development Company (www.scrdc.co.uk) was formed in 1992 as a limited by guarantee, not-for-profit community partnership to encourage sustainable development. Senior figures in the region help provide a powerful network to stimulate appropriate development involving regional and local authorities and public sector bodies. The company markets both the Settle-Carlisle line and the adjacent route between Leeds and Morecambe. A programme of projects is agreed each year, involving local councils, the train operating company, two Tourist Boards and the Friends of the Settle-Carlisle line. Projects include a full-colour line guide/timetable twice a year, funding the guided walks programme and leaflet, the operation of a railcard scheme and an I-phone line guide. The website gives details of places to visit, places to stay and

Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism

447

places to eat along the sustainable tourism rail corridor that the railway serves. The company manages infrastructure projects such as three new passenger waiting shelters, a new footbridge and heritage station lighting. It handles ticket sales at the line’s two most important stations, the retail management of a range of railway-related merchandise, and on-train refreshment services. The Friends of the Settle-Carlisle line (www.foscl.org.uk) continues the work of attracting public support for the railway, begun by the original protesters. It acts as a rail-user group and a support group. Its 3,500 members pay an annual membership fee of £10 (2015) to receive news, special offers and to lobby authorities and other organisations whenever necessary. It also provides a strong volunteer labour force, which donates c. 40,000 hours of voluntary work annually, worth around £500,000 at the national average wage. It is closely involved in the guided walks programme that attracts numerous rail tourists every year. Its website provides full details. By 1989, passenger numbers on the railway had declined to 450,000. By 2012, under the new management measures outlined above, passenger numbers have risen to 1.2 million. Eight closed rural stations had reopened. The railway had become an iconic sustainable rural tourism experience for the many cities of northern England. The Devon and Cornwall Rail Project The approach taken to developing sustainable rural rail-based tourism in Devon and Cornwall has similarities, but also differences, to the Settle and Carlisle railway’s approach. Devon and Cornwall are the leading counties in coastal beach resort tourism in the UK. The main line railway link from those resorts to the rest of Britain was never in doubt. The six branch lines radiating from the main line into rural Devon and Cornwall were, however, under threat of closure. Those relatively short lines offered a potential for the development of rail-based sustainable rural tourism. There was no large community protest against rural rail closures in Devon and Cornwall. The six little railways had not excited public attention in the way that the long and lonely mountain crossing route of the Settle and Carlisle railway had gripped northern city dwellers’ imagination. But the planners and politicians in the county councils of Devon and Cornwall, and in the Plymouth City Council, were keenly aware of the potential of the lines, and so the regeneration of rural railways here was a locally backed but “top-down” project. And the University of

448

Chapter Twenty

Plymouth, based on the border between Devon and Cornwall, with partners in both counties, recognised the local importance of the project and saw opportunities for staff and students to become involved in action research and local development. Consequently, useful research on community rail partnerships has been produced (Charlton, 1998; Dallen, 2007; Mowforth & Charlton, 1996; Seedhouse, 2012). The train operating company is also very much involved. The Partnership was launched in 1991 as a non-profit organisation, to: x promote travel on both counties’ branch lines; x seek improvements to services and facilities; x promote the places served by the branch lines and help the local economy; x promote engagement and two-way communication between the community and the rail industry. As part of the rural tourism development process, the six lines involved each received brand names. They were: The Atlantic Coast Line, from Par to Newquay (21 miles); The Looe Valley Line, from Liskeard to Looe (9 miles); The Maritime Line, from Truro to Falmouth (12 miles); The St. Ives Bay Line, from St.Erth to St.Ives (4 miles); The Tamar Valley Line, from Plymouth to Gunnislake (14 miles); The Tarka Line, from Exeter to Barnstaple (38 miles). The current work of the Devon and Cornwall Rail Project can be studied on their website (http://greatscenicrailways.co.uk/). They have an extensive programme of circular self-guided walks from railway stations, as well as station-to-station walks. All are offered at various lengths to suit all abilities. There are “adopt a station” schemes, involving local people in station maintenance. There are special Rail-Ale Trails, designed to support local pubs, and discourage car driving while under the influence of alcohol. There is a very intensive annual marketing programme. All the routes covered by the Partnership have seen strong growth in passenger usage, with additional services, and services retimed to suit the market where necessary (Citizens Rail, 2014). Four useful research publications have originated from the University of Plymouth link. There was a publication about how to assess the value of rural railways (Mowforth & Charlton, 1996). Charlton (1998) reviewed public transport and sustainable tourism, based on the Partnership’s early

Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism

449

work. Dallen (2007) published valuable research looking at the type of people who use rural rail tourism, providing essential market knowledge. It found that just over 50% of travellers on one of the Partnership lines in a week in July were tourists (N=544). Of total passengers, 23% were classified as Regular Train Devotees, over 25 years old, typically travelling in couples, male influenced, able to drive but had no car, despite being able to afford one, interested in environmental issues, social and chatting to other passengers, enjoying walking and cultural sightseeing, and, of course, they enjoyed the train. Another 14% were Infrequent Enthusiasts, regular car users who nevertheless enjoyed train travel, but were not so social or environmentally aware, over 46 years of age, taking a day trip while on holiday. Train Tolerators comprised 30% of travellers, under 25, often had no driving license and used the train because they had no car. They neither enjoyed nor disliked the train. Contented Car Users, aged 26-45, formed 21% of the sampled passengers, they had a car but, for various reasons, it was not available on the day, and they rarely used the train. They, too, had neutral opinions about trains. Last resort riders made up 12% of passengers questioned. They were under 25, did not enjoy train journeys, only using it because they had to. In 2012, Andrew Seedhouse produced a PhD thesis at the University of Plymouth, available on the web, on “A Critical Evaluation of Community Rail Policy and Practice During the New Labour Years 2003-2010”. Amongst many issues, it researched the vital question of how rail partnerships worked (or did not work), their internal and external politics, and the central role of the Chairperson in making or breaking a partnership. The Wider Implications of Conventional Community Rail Partnerships in the UK The most immediate impact of the two rail partnerships discussed above was to attract the attention of the press and other media, thus encouraging other communities and players to consider rail partnerships. Media attention has been high for all the partnerships across the UK. The media provided them with low-cost marketing very effectively, unlike the railway companies or some public sector organizations. It appears to like the innovative, positive and good news stories that the partnerships provide. Just north of Devon and Cornwall, in 1994, the University of Bristol helped eight local councils, and a train operating company to form a rail partnership on the 20 station, 87-mile rural railway from Bristol to

450

Chapter Twenty

Weymouth. Its core objectives were to increase awareness and use of the line, contribute to local economic growth, carbon reduction and other priorities, by marketing the line and its destinations. The partnership, branded as the Heart of Wessex Line by listeners to local radio, has gradually transformed from a council-led group into a wider community venture, with participation from local groups, organisations and businesses, and most importantly, a growing army of volunteers who give over 13,000 hours of their personal time annually, enhancing stations, promoting the railway in their communities, improving links to stations and designing and leading guided walks. Although one local council has left the partnership, its annual reports, available on its website, www.HeartofWessex.org.uk, show passenger numbers continue to rise. Interest in community rail partnerships soon became national. Other partnerships were created. In 2000, a national umbrella group, the Association of Community Rail Partnerships (ACORP), was formed and has thrived (www.acorp.uk.com). ACORP’s manifesto on putting new life into lines (n.d.) is essential reading. There are now over 50 community rail partnerships and rail promotion groups. Many are rural. They received central government recognition, and some support following the publication of the Community Rail Development Strategy (2004) by the UK’s Strategic Rail Authority. Rail partnerships have strongly outperformed other railway lines in attracting passengers (Austin, 2014) over the last ten years. Rural rail, using Local/Community Rail Partnerships, can be successful, and can help support rural tourism and rural development generally, as well as limiting the unsustainable travel impacts of tourists. They have tapped into pro-rail enthusiasm and the recent growth in localism in the UK. Awareness of rail has increased, marketing has improved, and innovative services have been introduced. But progress has been slow. Rural rail is no swift panacea, and many, often most, tourists still use cars. There are wider lessons for the implementation of sustainable tourism to be discussed later.

Heritage Railways Heritage Railways are a modern invention. Unknown until post-1950 in Europe, they have become very popular tourist attractions and postretirement hobby opportunities for many skilled people. Their mainly volunteer labour forces mean that they rarely operate services outside the holiday seasons—typically Easter until late October, plus Christmas season Santa Specials. Few can, or do, provide services for local

Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism

451

passengers on everyday journeys. They are typically owned by groups of rail enthusiasts, not all of which live close to their railways. While most conventional community partnership railways operate modern diesel trains, heritage railways operate either largely historical steam locomotives or a mix of steam and diesel motive power. Heritage railways are typically slow. Slow travel is seen as a positive feature, increasing landscape viewing opportunities, lengthening the heritage travel experience. A report on the social and economic value of heritage railways by the UK’s All-Party Parliamentary Group on Heritage Rail, (2013), showed that heritage railways in Britain had a gross national value in excess of £248 million in 2011, employed 3,700 paid staff and had well over 18,000 active volunteers. The report concluded that the railways were successful without significant direct public subsidy, were a valuable part of the tourist industry and helped provide positive social activity through volunteering opportunities for the growing older generation, and health benefits to all generations by providing access to attractive walking routes. The UK’s Heritage Railways Association lists 108 active heritage railways in the UK and Ireland, with a total turnover of c. £106 million in 2013 (http://www.heritagerailways.com/). Europe’s FEDECRAIL (the European Federation of Museum and Tourist Railways) has 649 members across 27 countries; about 75% of those members operate trains (http://www.fedecrail.org/). Lane et al. (2013) provide further information. Three examples illustrate the current and potential roles of heritage railways in providing and supporting sustainable rural tourism. The West Somerset Railway, UK The 23 mile long West Somerset Railway, (www.westsomersetrailway .vticket.co.uk/) was completed in 1874, closed as a conventional railway in 1971, but re-opened by a group of local people and enthusiasts as a heritage line in 1976. It is a registered charity and not for profit company (http://www.wsra.org.uk/) supported by a 5,000 strong membership organisation. The railway operates from February to November, with additional trains over the Christmas holidays. Many, but not all, trains are hauled by heritage steam locomotives. There are c. 200,000 passengers per year. The line is ranked in the top 10 of the UK’s heritage railways, and recognised as an example of best practice management. Its turnover exceeds £2.2 million annually and its total economic impact on the local economy, including direct, indirect and multiplier effect, is over £4 million (International Centre for Research and Consultancy, 2004). It has over 500 active volunteers.

452

Chapter Twenty

The railway contributes towards sustainable tourism in many ways. It takes c. 100,000 car journeys off local roads. It attracts many overnight visitors, especially for gala weekends. Trains with dining facilities are extremely popular: local food and beer suppliers are specifically highlighted on the menus. In a reciprocal arrangement, the railway promotes local accommodation providers on their website who in turn earn a small commission as ticket agents for them. The Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland Railways, Wales These railways are of 597 mm gauge and are purely heritage tourism lines, with a combined length of 40 miles. Both lines were closed as commercial railways, in 1946 and 1935 respectively; both were reopened as heritage railways, owned by not for profit companies, in 1955 (but not fully opened until 1982) and 1997 (but not fully opened until 2011) respectively. The primary income from their 128,000 passengers is c. £4.3 million; secondary indirect and induced income injects c. £3.6 million more into the local economy. An estimated 12,000 of its passengers visit the area primarily because of the heritage railway. The peak gross income of the railway is forecast to be c. £10 million by 2015 as the brand image and marketing work of the lines grows. The average firm in the rural area surrounding the railway employs 6.6 people: the railways employ the fulltime equivalent of 60 people (Williams, 2008). Both railways are part of the Great Little Trains of Wales marketing scheme launched in 1970 that encompasses ten narrow gauge railways in northern and mid-Wales. Both the above railways illustrate some of the strengths of heritage railways. They can experiment with a range of collaborative arrangements that could be difficult for commercial companies. They obtain low cost, and usually high quality and enthusiastic, labour through volunteering. Capital costs are reduced by being membership organisations, often with shareholdings held by members who receive travel privileges rather than cash dividends. But few heritage railways explicitly recognise the concepts and practices of sustainable tourism. They are dedicated to the job of conserving and operating heritage trains. Even tourism itself is not an area where they have a very professional approach. Sustainable tourism practices are adopted on an ad hoc basis where possible, and when advantageous.

Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism

453

The Lynton and Barnstaple Railway, Devon, UK This 19 mile 597mm gauge railway was opened to serve the small nineteenth-century seaside resorts of Lynton and Lynmouth in 1898. It closed in 1935. In 1979, a group of people came together to discuss the restoration of this lost line. They formed the Lynton and Barnstaple Railway Association, which became the Lynton and Barnstaple Railway Trust, a registered charity, in 2000. The charitable trust now has c. 2,500 members. By 2004, an initial mile of track was re-opened to traffic, and in 2014, c. 46,000 passengers were carried on that mile (see http://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/). The trust plans to reopen the majority of the railway over the next five years. It is—in contrast to some heritage railways—working closely with local communities, with local tourism stakeholders, and with the Exmoor National Park (through which part of the line runs). Their proposals make full use of a range of techniques designed to support sustainable rural tourism regions (Lane, 2015). Key ideas include: x Working with local stakeholders to create an Edwardian Heritage1 Region through which the railway will provide unique Edwardian travel experiences. This will draw on the Heritage Regions concept developed in the 1980s & 90s by Heritage Canada (Brown, 1996); x Implementing and testing related ideas from the Slow Tourism literature (Dickinson & Lumsdon, 2010); x Develop a Visitor Experience Plan, using the USA’s National Park Service’s ideas, to guide infrastructure development, improve staff skills and satisfaction, and maximise community benefits (US National Park Service, 1997); x Develop on- and off-train heritage interpretation programmes. x Creating a slow travel activity corridor, to encourage walking and cycling from stations along the line; x Work with communities to boost use of local shops, pubs and accommodation facilities; x Work with local bus services, and adjacent heritage and conventional rail services, to develop a Sustainable Tourist Travel Zone.

Chapter Twenty

454

Lessons for Sustainable Rural Tourism What are the lessons to be learned for sustainable tourism generally from the experience of implementing rail-based rural tourism? Ten points stand out: i. That progress will inevitably be slow. But protagonists must not lose heart. ii. That partnership working between stakeholders can deliver sustainability and financial success. But partnerships involve complex negotiations and both burden and benefit sharing. Understanding how and why partnerships and governance work is important. iii. Marketing is central to success. Rail partnerships attract media attention because they are good news stories, innovative, local, and people centred. Market knowledge, and product relevance to the market is necessary. iv. Leadership, risk taking, and personalities are keys to success; v. For many railways and other stakeholders, sustainable tourism is not a central goal but is seen as a bonus. vi. Links between tourism and public transport are often poor and should be strengthened. vii. There are many forms of partnership, and many types of business arrangements available, to reach sustainable tourism’s goals. viii. Universities and similar institutions have rewarding roles to play in many forms of rural tourism, including transport—see Lane and Kastenholz, 2015. ix. The evaluation of sustainability in rural tourism is a complex and lengthy process. x. Workers, managements and planners, regulators and researchers need to know what has and can be achieved, and be incentivised to innovate and persevere. Bon Voyage!

Notes 1. The Edwardian period in the UK begins with the death of Queen Victoria in 1901, and the accession of King Edward VII, ending at the outbreak of the First World War. The period is one of perceived peace and prosperity between the hectic industrialisation and colonisation of the nineteenth century, and the shock of the war, and has distinctive architecture, music and literature.

Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism

455

References Association of Community Rail Partnerships (ACoRP). (n.d.). Putting new life into local lines. Retrieved from http://acorp.uk.com/ All Party Parliamentary Group on Heritage Rail. (2013). Report on the Value of Heritage Railways. London: All Party Parliamentary Group on Heritage Rail. Ateljevic, I., & Doorne, S. (2000). Staying within the Fence: Lifestyle Entrepreneurship in Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(5), 378-392. Austin, C. (2014). Community Rail development, 10 years on: What have we learned and what is next? Retrieved from http://www.citizensrail.org/devon-cornwall-rail-partnershipconference/ Barbieri, C. (2013). Assessing the sustainability of agri-tourism in the US: a comparison between agri-tourism and other farm entrepreneurial ventures. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(2), 252-270. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (1993). Sustainable Tourism: An Evolving Global Approach. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1(1), 1-5. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (Eds.) (2000). Tourism Partnerships and Collaboration: Politics, Practice and Sustainability: Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Brown, V. (1996). Heritage, Tourism and Rural Regeneration: The Heritage Regions Programme in Canada. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 4(3), 174-182. Carlsen, J., Getz, D., & Ali-Knight, J. (2001). The Environmental Attitudes and Practices of Family Businesses in the Rural Tourism and Hospitality Sectors. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9(4) 281-297. Chapman, D. (2015). The rise of localism in railway infrastructural development. In B.P. Loo & C. Comtois (Eds.), Sustainable Railway Futures: Issues and Challenges (pp. 145-166). Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate. Charlton, C. (1998). Public transport and sustainable tourism: The case of the Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership. In C. M. Hall & A. A. Lew (Eds.), Sustainable Tourism: A Geographical Perspective (pp. 132145). Harlow: Longman. Citizens Rail. (2014). The proceedings of the Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership Conference. Retrieved from http://www.citizensrail.org/devon-cornwall-rail-partnership-conference/

456

Chapter Twenty

Clarke, J. (1999). Marketing Structures for Farm Tourism: Beyond the Individual Provider of Rural Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(1), 26-47. Dallen, J. (2007). Sustainable Transport, Market Segmentation and Tourism: The Looe Valley Branch Line Railway, Cornwall, UK. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(2), 180-199. Dickinson, J. E., & Lumsdon, L. M. (2010). Slow Travel and Tourism. London: Earthscan. Devon & Cornwall Rail Partnership. (n.d.). Great Scenic Railways—It’s all about the journey. Retrieved from http://greatscenicrailways.co.uk/ European Federation of Museum & Tourist Railways (FEDECRAIL). (n.d.). Welcome at FEDECRAIL. Retrieved from http://www.fedecrail.org/ Friends of the Settle-Carlisle Line. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.foscl.org.uk/ Heritage Lottery Fund. (2015). Investing to make a difference for people and heritage. Retrieved from https://www.hlf.org.uk/ Heritage Railway Association. (2015). The voice of the Heritage Railway Movement. Retrieved from http://www.heritagerailways.com/ Hoskins, W. G. (1955). The Making of the English Landscape. London: Hodder & Stoughton. International Centre for Research and Consultancy. (2004). West Somerset Railway: Local Economic Impact Study. Manchester: Manchester Metropolitan University. Krippendorf, J. (1987). The Holiday Makers. London: Heinemann. Krippendorf, J., Zimmer, P., & Glauber, H. (1988). Fuer einen andern Tourismus (Towards an alternative tourism). Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag. Lane, B. (1994a). What is Rural Tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1&2), 7-22. —. (1994b). Sustainable Rural Tourism Strategies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1&2), 102-112. —. (2015). The Lynton & Barnstaple Railway Restoration Project: Its role as a catalyst for sustainable tourism, heritage conservation and regional regeneration. Stonehouse, UK: Red Kite Environment. Lane, B., & Kastenholz, E. (2015). Rural Tourism: the evolution of practice and research approaches—towards a new generation concept? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(8&9), 1133-1156. Lane, B., Weston, R., Davies, N., Kastenholz, E., Lima, J., & Majewski, J. (2013). Industrial Heritage and Agri/Rural Tourism in Europe: a

Implementing Sustainable Rural Tourism

457

review of their development, socio-economic systems and future policy issues. Brussels: European Union. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/4958 40/IPOL-TRAN_ET(2013)495840_EN.pdf McGehee, N. G., Knollenberg, W., & Komorowski, A. (2015). The central role of leadership in rural tourism development: a theoretical framework and case studies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(8&9), 1277-1297. Mowforth, M., & Charlton, C.A. (1996). Valuing Rural Branch Lines: A Methodology for Investigation and Guide for Potential Researchers. Plymouth: Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership. Pine, J., & Gilmore, J. (1999). The Experience Economy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Plog, S. C. (1991). Leisure Travel: Making it a Growth Market Again. New York: Wiley. Runte, A. (1990). Trains of Discovery: Western Railroads and the National Parks. Niwot, CO: Roberts Rinehardt. Salveson, P. (1997). What Use are Rural Railways? The Social, Economic and Environmental Benefits of Rural Railways. Huddersfield: Transport 2000, and the Transport Research and Information Network. Seedhouse, A. (2012). A Critical Evaluation of Community Rail Policy and Practice During the New Labour Years 2003-2010. PhD Thesis, University of Plymouth. Shannan Peckham, R. (Ed.) (2003). Rethinking Heritage: Cultures and Politics in Europe. London: I.B.Tauris. Strategic Rail Authority (SRA). (2004). Community Rail Development Strategy. London: SRA. The Heart of Wessex Line. (2015). The scenic railway from Bristol to Weymouth. Retrieved from http://www.heartofwessex.org.uk/ The Settle-Carlisle Partnership. (2005). About the Partnership. Retrieved from http://91.215.185.110/~settlecarlisle/about-scp/ The Settle and Carlisle Railway Trust. (2010). Welcome to the SCRT website. Retrieved from http://www.sandctrust.org.uk/ The Settle-Carlisle Railway. (2015). Building a future for the railway and the region. Retrieved from http://www.scrdc.co.uk/ US National Park Service. (1997). The Visitor Experience and Resource Protection Framework: A Handbook for Planners and Managers, US National Park Service. Retrieved from http://www.fs.fed.us/cdt/carrying_capacity/verphandbook_1997.pdf West Somerset Railway. (2015). The Longest Heritage Railway in England. Retrieved from

458

Chapter Twenty

http://www.westsomersetrailway.vticket.co.uk/ West Somerset Railway Association. (2015). West Somerset Railway Association. Retrieved from http://www.wsra.org.uk/ Williams, M. L. (2008). The Economic Impact of the Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland Railways on Gwynedd. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Available from the University of Bangor, UK. Wolf, I. D, Stricker, H. K., & Hagenloh, G. (2015). Outcome-focused national park experience management: transforming participants, promoting social well-being, and fostering place attachment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(3), 358-381.

CONTRIBUTORS

Dora Agapito ([email protected]) holds a PhD in Tourism, a Master’s in Marketing, and a graduate degree in Communication Sciences. She is Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Economics at the University of Algarve and a member of the CIEO—Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, in Portugal. She is a member of the scientific committees for the Master’s in Tourist Organizations Management and the Master’s in Communication Design for Tourism and Culture at the University of Algarve. Her research interests include tourism marketing, rural tourism, consumption experiences, sensory marketing, and social marketing. For further information, please see http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dora_Agapito/publications Helena Alves ([email protected]) is Assistant Professor of Marketing in the Business and Economics Department and a researcher at NECE, University of Beira Interior, Portugal. Her areas of expertise include customer satisfaction, services marketing, tourism marketing and public and nonprofit marketing, having authored and co-authored several articles and book chapters on these themes. Her teaching experience includes degree, Master’s and PhD levels, in Portugal and Spain (University of Extremadura, University of León and University of Valência). Currently, she is the editor of the International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing and is also on the editorial review board of journals such as The Service Industries Journal, The Management Decision Journal, the Service Business Journal, and the Journal of Business Research. She is responsible for publications and is vice president of the International Association of Public and Nonprofit Marketing. For further information on her publications see https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=L6XdQmcAAAAJ&hl=es Hugo de Almeida ([email protected]) holds a PhD in Psychology and Cognitive Neurosciences. He is Assistant Professor at ISCA (Higher Institute for Accountancy and Administration) and researcher at CIMAD—Research Centre in Marketing and Data Analysis, at the University of Aveiro, Portugal. He is also the Director of the Centre for Neuroscience and Cell Biology, University of Tiradentes, Brazil. His

460

Contributors

current research interests include applied neuroscience to consumption, genetic, chronobiological effects on consumption, neuropsychology and stress on work ability. Jerzy BaĔski ([email protected]) is Full Professor of Human Geography. His main research interests include: rural geography, land use, regional policy, spatial organization, and local development. Since 2008 he has been the head of the Department of Rural Geography and Local Development at the IGSO PAS (Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization, Polish Academy of Sciences) and was the President of the Polish Geographical Society from 2006 to 2012. He is the author of 280 publications, including 17 books and more than 120 peer-reviewed papers. He has been the co-ordinator of 33 research projects and a member of 30 other projects, including ESPON, FP6 and FP7 projects. Maria Bednarek-SzczepaĔska ([email protected]) is Assistant Professor at the IGSO PAS (Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization, Polish Academy of Sciences). Her main research interests include rural geography, rural tourism, social aspects of spatial planning and siting conflicts. She is the author of dozens of papers and several monographs. She was a member of FP7, Espon and national projects. She is deputy editor of the Polish Journal Rural Studies. Zélia Breda ([email protected]) holds a PhD in Tourism, an MA in Chinese Studies (Business and International Relations) and a BSc in Tourism Management and Planning from the University of Aveiro, where she is Assistant Professor, in the Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism, holding the positions of Director of the Master’s in Tourism Management and Planning and Coordinator of international mobility for tourism studies. She is a member of the Research Unit ‘Governance, Competitiveness and Public Policies’ of the University of Aveiro; and a founding member of the Observatory of China and the Portuguese Institute of Sinology. She is also a member of the editorial, scientific and review boards of national and international academic journals, as well as a member of the organizing and scientific committees of international tourism conferences. She has authored and co-authored several national and international papers and communications on tourism development, networks, tourism in China and Goa (India), gender and tourism, as well as internationalization in tourism. She has also participated in several research projects in the tourism field, both as a team

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

461

member and as a consultant. For further information on her activities and publications see http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Zelia_Breda Sandra Caçador ([email protected]) is Invited Assistant Professor at the Institute of Accounting and Administration of the University of Aveiro (ISCA-UA), where she teaches International Finance and Fixed Income Products and Markets, among other subjects. She is also a PhD student in Management Science at the University of Coimbra. Her current research interests focus on issues of quantitative social research, operational research, and optimization theory and modelling. For further information on her activities and publications see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sandra_Cacador Ana María Campón-Cerro ([email protected]) holds a PhD from the University of Extremadura, Spain (UEx) with “International Mention”, and the Extraordinary Award of PhD from the UEx. She also holds a Master’s in Tourism (UEx) and a Master’s in Marketing (University of Beira Interior, Portugal). Since 2010 she has taught at the UEx, currently in the Area of Commercialization and Market Research in the Faculty of Business Studies and Tourism, with lecturing experience also in universities in Portugal and Italy. She has participated in research projects and congresses in Spain and Portugal and has published a book, book chapters and articles in Spanish and international scientific journals, some of them included in prestigious indexes. Her research lines are relationship marketing, rural tourism, agrotourism, language tourism, birdwatching tourism, destination image and branding, slow tourism, ecomuseums, gastronomic tourism and the EUROACES region. For further information on her publications see https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=P5WZvvwAAAAJ&hl=es Ana Cláudia Campos ([email protected]) is a PhD student in Tourism, at the University of Algarve. She is a lecturer at the Faculty of Economics, University of Algarve, Portugal, and a researcher at CIEO—Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics. Her research interests include tourism destination marketing, the destination experience, the tourism experience and co-creation, tourist psychology, in particular focusing the concepts of attention and involvement. For further information, please see http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ana_Campos12

462

Contributors

Maria João Carneiro ([email protected]) is Assistant Professor of the Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism, at the University of Aveiro, where she teaches Tourism subjects and is also a member of the University’s Research Unit GOVCOPP. Her research is mainly focused on consumer behaviour in tourism and on the marketing and competitiveness of tourism destinations. She is the author of several book chapters and papers published in international journals, has participated in many international conferences and team member of several research projects. For further information on her publications, please see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Maria_Carneiro Mariana Carvalho ([email protected]) is a PhD Student in Tourism at the University of Aveiro, focusing on the relevance of creative tourism and co-creation enhancing the competitiveness of destinations. She works as an Invited Assistant Lecturer at the Coimbra Higher Education School of the Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra. She holds a degree in Tourism from the University of Coimbra and a Master’s Degree in Tourism Management and Development from the University of Aveiro. Her main research areas of interest are cultural attractions, creative tourism, co-creation and the tourist experience. Mary Cawley ([email protected]) is Emeritus Senior Lecturer in Geography, in the School of Geography and Archaeology, at the National University of Ireland, Galway, and a member of the Whitaker Institute for Innovation and Societal Change. Her research relates to geographies of rural change and development, with particular reference to migration and tourism, and is published in international peer-reviewed journals and books. She has participated in and led projects funded by the EU and the Irish Higher Education Authority Programmes of Research in Third Level Institutions. She is a member of the Steering Committee of the Commission on the Sustainability of Rural Systems of the International Geographical Union. For further information, please see http://whitakerinstitute.ie/person/mary-cawley/ Thérèse Conway ([email protected]) is a Lecturer in Human Geography in the School of Geography and Archaeology, at the National University of Ireland, Galway (NUI Galway). She completed her primary degree in Geography and Sociology at University College Cork (UCC), in 2006, after which she pursued a Master’s in Planning and Sustainable Development at UCC. Following a short planning career, Therese completed her PhD at NUI Galway having been awarded a scholarship

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

463

from the Irish Higher Education Authority Programme of Research in Third Level Institutions, through the Irish Social Sciences Platform and the Whitaker Institute (NUI Galway). Her research interests include rural tourism, ecotourism, networks and networking in tourism and tourism destination planning and development, and her work in these areas has been published in peer-reviewed journals. For further information, please see http://www.nuigalway.ie/our-research/people/geography-andarchaeology/thereseconway/ Carlos Costa ([email protected]) is Full Professor and Head of the Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism at the University of Aveiro. He holds a PhD and MSc in Tourism from the University of Surrey (UK) and a BSc in Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Aveiro. He is also the Director of the Doctoral Programme in Tourism, the Editor of the Journal of Tourism & Development, member of the Board of the Research Unit in ‘Governance, Competitiveness and Public Policies’ and President of the External Evaluation Committee in Tourism of the Agency for Assessment and Accreditation of Higher Education (A3ES). He is also the Scientific Technical Director of the spin-off company in tourism ‘idtour-unique solutions’. For further information on his activities and publications see http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos_Costa44 Conceição Cunha ([email protected]) holds a PhD in Tourism at the University of Aveiro and is also a Lecturer at that University. Her PhD thesis is focused on lifestyle entrepreneurship in rural tourism. She is a researcher at the GOVCOPP Research Unit and holds a degree in Marketing Management (1998) and a Master’s in Science, Technology and Innovation Management (2004). Her current research interests focus on entrepreneurship, small business management and rural tourism. Elide Di-Clemente ([email protected]) is a PhD student in Business Management and Sociology at the University of Extremadura (Spain). She graduated in 2011 in the Economics of Tourism at the University of Perugia (Italy) and in 2012 achieved two Master’s degrees in Management of Touristic Organizations and Resources and in Social Sciences Research, at the University of Extremadura (Spain). Her fields of interest are slow tourism, experiential and relationship marketing, rural tourism and gastronomic tourism. She has presented her research at national and international scientific conferences and authored and co-authored several

464

Contributors

publications in the form of book chapters and articles, some of them published in peer-reviewed scientific journals included in prestigious indexes. She also participated in some research projects in the fields of food tourism, destination branding and tourism statistics. For further information on her publications see https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=zRxmW9UAAAAJ&hl=es Idalina Dias-Sardinha ([email protected]) holds a PhD from the University of Amsterdam (NL), with the thesis “Towards strategic sustainability performance evaluation”; Environmental Eng. MSc. from the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) (CH); and graduated in Geology from the Faculty of Sciences, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal. She is currently an Invited Professor at the PhD Program in Economics and Organizational Sociology, at the School of Economics and Management (ISEG), Universidade de Lisboa, lecturing on Corporate Shared Value; she is executive coordinator of the program of executive education on Business Development and Competitiveness at CEDE/ISEG (ISEG—Harvard Business School/ Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness). She is also Researcher at SOCIUS. She was an environmental consultant in Mozambique (MZ) and adviser to the Environmental Ministry (MICOA) and to FEMA, an environmental Mozambican business forum, project coordinator of various international environmental projects in MZ and Niger. She is currently a member of the College Food, Farming and Forest (F3) of the Universidade de Lisboa and member of the MoC Network, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School and of the EUMoC Chapter. She has published in referenced journals such as the Journal of Cleaner Production, with her main scientific interests being on corporate social responsibility and sustainability. Marília Durão ([email protected]) is a Research Fellow at the University of Aveiro, Portugal, with a research fellowship from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT). She holds an MA in Tourism Planning and Management from the University of Aveiro, where she is currently a PhD student in the Tourism Doctoral Program. Her PhD thesis is focused on organizational commitment and employee turnover in the tourism industry. She is also a member of the Research Unit GOVCOPP (Governance, Competitiveness and Pubic Policies). She has been involved in several research projects, with topics closely related to her research interests and publications, namely development and

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

465

management of tourism destinations, socio-economic impact assessment, employment and gender equality in the tourism sector. Paulo Espínola ([email protected]) is currently doing a PhD in Human Geography, specializing in Islands Mobility, at the University of Coimbra, also a member of the Research Unit CEGOT (Centre of Studies of Geography and Territory Planning). He is also Research Fellow of Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT). He holds an MBA in Islands Migration, undergraduate studies in Human Geography—Territory and Development (University of Coimbra). He is the author of one book and author or co-author of two book chapters and seven articles published at international and national level. He is the author or co-author of ten presentations at national and international conferences. His current research interests focus on issues of island studies and migration, mobility and development in small Atlantic islands (Macaronesian region). For further information on his activities and publications see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paulo_Espinola2 Celeste Eusébio ([email protected]) is Assistant Professor of the Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism at the University of Aveiro (Portugal), where since 1996 she has taught several courses in tourism. She is a full researcher at GOVCOPP (Research Unit on Governance, Competitiveness and Public Policies of the University of Aveiro). She holds a PhD in Tourism from the University of Aveiro, a Master’s in Economy from the University of Coimbra and a Degree in Tourism Management and Planning from the University of Aveiro. Her research interests include tourism economics, tourism impacts, social tourism, tourism forecasts and consumer behavior in tourism. She is Director of the (3 years) Degree in Tourism. She has participated in several research projects and is co-author and editor of 3 books, 36 articles published in international, peer-reviewed scientific journals, 21 book chapters and more than 50 papers in proceedings of Scientific Conferences. She has participated in the organizing and scientific committees of several national and international conferences. She is a member of the editorial committee and review boards of national and international journals. For more information, particularly on her publications, see http://www.researchgate.net/profile/C_Eusebio/publications Elisabete Figueiredo ([email protected]) is a sociologist and Assistant Professor in the Department of Social, Political and Territorial Sciences at

466

Contributors

the University of Aveiro, also a member of the Research Unit GOVCOPP (Governance, Competitiveness and Pubic Policies). She teaches, among other subjects, Rural and Nature Tourism for the Master’s in Tourism Planning and Management. She is the President of SPER (Portuguese Society for Rural Studies), and a member of the Research Study Group— Southern and Mediterranean Europe of the European Society for Rural Sociology. She is also the co-coordinator of the “Environment & Society” section of APS (Portuguese Sociological Association). She coordinates and participates in several research projects, funded both by EU and national bodies. Recently she coordinated the project “Rural Matters— Meanings of the Rural in Portugal: between social representations, consumption and development strategies”. She is the editor and co-editor of 4 books and author or co-author of more than 30 chapters in books and over 30 articles published at international and national levels. She is the author or co-author of more than 100 presentations published in proceedings of national and international conferences. Her current research interests focus on issues of rural development, social and institutional representations about the rural and rural tourism impacts on local communities. For further information on her publications see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Elisabete_Figueiredo3 M. Mercedes Galán-Ladero ([email protected]) is Associate Professor in the Department of Business Management and Sociology at the University of Extremadura (Spain), where she teaches Marketing subjects, also a member of the Research Group M@rkDo (Marketing and Operation Management Research Group). She holds a PhD (Hons) in Marketing, a Master’s in European Communities and Human Rights, a Master’s in Marketing Management and Market Research, and undergraduate studies in “Economics and Business Sciences” (Spain). She has participated in several research projects, is a co-author of three books, ten book chapters, more than ten articles published in international, peer-reviewed scientific journals, and over sixty papers in Conference Proceedings. She serves as a reviewer for several international journals. She belongs to several international associations (Academy of Management—AOM, American Marketing Association—AMA, International Association on Public and Nonprofit Marketing—IAPNM, European Marketing Academy—EMAC, Spanish Marketing Association—AEMARK). Her current research interests lie in corporate social responsibility (in different sectors, including tourism). For more information on her publications, see http://www.unex.es/investigacion/grupos/markdo/estructura/personal/pagi na_personal?listado_lineas=1&idpersonal=1456

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

467

Dolores Gallardo-Vázquez ([email protected]) is Lecturer and Researcher in the Department of Financial Economy and Accounting at the Faculty of Economics Sciences and Business Administration at the University of Extremadura, Spain. She has also held lectureships at a variety of academic institutions and organised seminars, conferences and international summer courses. She is an economist specializing in financial accounting, intellectual capital and corporate social responsibility, an expert in the implementation of International Accounting Standards, has an MSc in Training as University Teaching in European Higher Education, an MSc in Management of Higher Education Institutions; a Fellowship at Cranfield University financed by the Spanish Government. She has managed the Orientation and Teacher Training Service at the University for four years. Now she is managing the University Social Responsibility Office. Her research interests lie in the fields of intellectual capital, corporate social responsibility, corporate volunteering, university social responsibility, social entrepreneurship and social innovation, including public and social policy contexts and the nexus of relationships between accounting, social accounting and accountability, recently also focusing on research applied to University administration. She has published in various peer-reviewed journals, books, international conference proceedings and monographs. Ana Calapez Gomes ([email protected]) holds a PhD in Human Resource Management and is a researcher at SOCIUS (Research Centre on Economic Sociology), School of Economics and Management at the University of Lisbon. She participates in several research projects, funded both by the EU and national bodies. Recently she is a member of the research team of the project “Funerary practices in Alentejo’s Recent Prehistory and socio-economic proceeds of heritage rescue projects”. She is the co-editor, author or co-author of several books, chapters and articles published at international and national levels. Her current research interests focus on issues of territorial development, cooperation and value co-creation in rural settings. To download some of her papers see https://lisboa.academia.edu/AGomes José Manuel Hernández-Mogollón ([email protected]) is Titular Professor at the University of Extremadura (UEx), Spain, holds a PhD in Business and Economic Sciences, and a Master’s in Marketing (ESIC). Since 1998 he has taught Tourism Marketing at the UEx, was Vice-Dean in the Faculty of Business Studies and Tourism, and since 2007 has been the Coordinator of the Faculty’s Master’s in Tourism. Previously he

468

Contributors

worked as director of a financial company, a consultant and trainer for six years, and as a lecturer for two academic years at the University of Seville, Spain. He has participated as a lecturer in Master’s courses and conferences at various universities in Spain, Portugal, France, Italy and Colombia. He has published extensively in the field of tourism management and marketing in books and scientific articles, both nationally and in international high-impact-factor journals. He has been involved in projects for different public administrations and enterprises. His research interests are related to rural tourism, agrotourism, language tourism, birdwatching tourism, hunting tourism, slow tourism, e-tourism, tourism destination image and branding, ecomuseums, tourism intelligence, food tourism, relationship marketing, and the EUROACES region. For further information on his publications see https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=45Lx4mQAAAAJ&hl=es Deborah Jepson ([email protected]) is Associate Lecturer in Tourism at the University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK. Her principal research interest lies in the intersection between rural tourism and contemporary understandings of spirituality; having completed her PhD, which explored the spiritual dimension of tourist experiences of the English Lake District, she continues to research and publish in this area. Elisabeth Kastenholz ([email protected]) is Associate Professor in the Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism at the University of Aveiro, where she teaches Tourism and Marketing subjects, is a member of the Research Unit GOVCOPP (Governance, Competitiveness and Pubic Policies) and serves as the University’s Coordinator of Tourism Studies. She holds a PhD in Tourism, an MBA, and completed undergraduate studies in “Tourism Management and Planning” and “Public Administration- Specificity Foreign Affairs” (Germany). She has participated in several research projects, the most important being “The overall rural tourism experience and sustainable development of local communities”. She is the coordinator of three books, co-author of more than fifty articles published in peer-reviewed international scientific journals, more than forty book chapters, and over 130 papers in Conference Proceedings. She serves as a member of the editorial board of Anatolia and the Journal of Sustainable Tourism, of the scientific boards of Pasos, ROTUR Tourism & Management Studies, RT&D (Tourism and Development Journal) and of several international tourism and marketing conferences. Her current research interests lie in sustainable tourism destination marketing, the “overall destination

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

469

experience”, sustainable tourism, accessible tourism, rural tourism, food and wine tourism, and nature-based tourism. For more information on her publications see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Elisabeth_Kastenholz?ev=hdr_xprf Whitney Knollenberg ([email protected]) is a PhD student and instructor in the Hospitality and Tourism Management Department at Virginia Tech. She holds an MS in Sustainable Tourism from East Carolina University and a BS in Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Resources from Michigan State University. Her research interests focus on leadership, planning, power, policy, and partnerships in sustainable tourism development. She is also interested in exploring the connections between sustainable food systems and tourism as well as the role of volunteer tourism in transformative learning outcomes. Amy Komorowski ([email protected]) holds an MS in Hospitality and Tourism Management from Virginia Tech and Roosevelt University as well as a BS in Recreation, Sport, and Tourism Management from the University of Illinois. She has extensive field experience in volunteer tourism, primarily in Central and South America. Her research interests include volunteer tourism and social entrepreneurship with a focus on microcredit programs in Central America. Shinichi Kurihara ([email protected]) is Professor at the Department of Food and Resource Economics, Chiba University, Japan, where he teaches Econometrics on the basis of Statistics and Marketing Research. He holds a PhD in Agricultural Economics. His main research interests lie in rural planning and policy evaluation; he also researches food safety, social security systems, and community functions. For further information on his activities and publications see http://www.h.chiba-u.jp/prof/graduate/keizai/kurie.html Bernard Lane ([email protected]) is an Associate of Red Kite Environment, a consultancy specialising in heritage, rural and natural area tourism, heritage interpretation, protected area management, and sustainable tourism. He has edited the Journal of Sustainable Tourism for 24 years. He is a visiting professor at Leeds Beckett University, and a Visiting Fellow at Bristol University and Lincoln University, New Zealand. He has been a consultant on rural and sustainable tourism in 15 countries and for the OECD, the European Commission, the European Parliament, and the World Bank. He has worked on railway related

470

Contributors

projects in the UK, Poland, Romania, Japan and Australia, and chaired the steering group that formed and operated the Heart of Wessex Rail Partnership. He is co-editor of the Journal of Sustainable Tourism. Joana Lima ([email protected]) is an Assistant Professor at Portucalense University, Lecturer at the University of Aveiro and Researcher at the GOVCOPP Research Unit. She holds a PhD in Tourism, from the University of Aveiro, a Master’s degree in Tourism Management and Development, from the same University, and a Degree in Economics, from the University of Coimbra. Her main research areas of interests are impacts of tourism on tourists, family tourism, social tourism and the tourist experience. For more information on her publications, see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joana_Lima2 Nancy Gard McGehee ([email protected]) is Professor and Head of the Hospitality and Tourism Management Department at Virginia Tech. She holds a PhD in Sociology, an MS in Sociology, an MS in Tourism Management, and a BA in Sports Marketing and Management. She has conducted research in the area of sustainable tourism development for two decades, working with communities and organizations both in the US and abroad, in such varied locations as Portugal, Australia, and Haiti. She serves on the editorial board of several top tier journals and is the 2014 recipient of Virginia Tech’s Award for Excellence in International Research. Yasuo Ohe ([email protected]) is Professor in rural economics at the Department of Food and Resource Economics and Vice Dean of the Graduate School of Horticulture, Chiba University in Japan, from where he also gained his PhD in agricultural economics. His main research concern is to conduct economic analyses on rural tourism and farm diversification. He has published three books, is the author of more than forty book chapters and of over eighty academic papers. He is an editorial board member of Tourism Economics and also involved in editorial boards of four international journals. He received a Commended Paper Award from Tourism Review, The Sohn Hai-Sik Award from the Asia Pacific Tourism Association, Book Author Award from the Japan Academic Society of Tourism, and Distinguished Service Award for Agricultural Technology from the Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Research Council, Japan. He serves as Chair of the Appraisal Committee of Rural Tourism Program in the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan. For further information, please see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Yasuo_Ohe

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

471

Mi Hyeon Park ([email protected]) is a researcher at the Department of Urban Society Research at the Seoul Institute, Republic of Korea, where she conducts research related to urban culture and policies. She holds an MBA (Tourism Administration) from Kangwon National University, Chuncheon City, Republic of Korea, and completed undergraduate studies in Tourism Management and Korean Language and Literature. She is the co-author of five articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals including SSCI journals, and conducted a Master’s thesis on the “Spatio-temporal movement behaviour of walking tourists in urban area”. Her current research interests lie in walking tourism in urban areas and their behaviour pattern. Lúcia Jesús Pato ([email protected]) holds a PhD in Tourism from the University of Aveiro and a Master’s in Rural Development, from the University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Portugal. She is Assistant Professor at the Agrarian School of the Polytechnic Institute of Viseu (IPV), Portugal, and also a member of the Research Unit CI&DETS (Centre for the Study of Education, Technologies and Health) at IPV and GOVCOPP (Governance, Competitiveness and Pubic Policies), University of Aveiro. Her research is mainly focused on rural tourism, rural development, rural entrepreneurship and marketing of rural destinations. She is the author of several papers and has participated in several international conferences about tourism. Recently she participated in the Research Project “The overall rural tourism experience (ORTE) and sustainable local community development from the University of Aveiro”. David Ross ([email protected]) is currently undertaking a PhD at the Hull University Business School (UK), researching on cultural and creative tourism development in rural areas affected by large dams. He has a BA in Anthropology Applied to Development from the University of Trás-os-Montes & Alto Douro (Portugal) and has worked as a research fellow at the Lusíada University of Famalicão (Portugal) and at the Lisbon School of Economics and Management (Portugal). His main research interests are related to cultural and creative tourism, heritage studies, and rural and regional development. Mª Isabel Sánchez-Hernández ([email protected]) is Lecturer and researcher in the Department of Business Management and Sociology at the School of Economics and Business Administration at the University of Extremadura, in Spain. She is an Economist specializing in Regional Economics and Corporate Social Responsibility, has an MSc in

472

Contributors

Agricultural Economics, an MBA in Organization and Human Resources Management, and a PhD in Applied Economics and Business Organization. Her research interests range across several key areas within corporate social responsibility. She has published in various peer-reviewed journals, books, international conference proceedings and monographs. She has also held lectureships in various academic institutions. She used to work in international and multidisciplinary contexts, with extensive academic and professional experience in management and international relations. She has contributed to the training of social entrepreneurs and is involved in various research projects aiming to foster CSR in SMEs. Norberto Santos ([email protected]) is a Geographer, Associate Professor with Aggregation at the Department of Geography at the University of Coimbra, where he teaches Tourism and Human Geography subjects. He is also a member of the Research Unit CEGOT (Centre of Geography and Spatial Planning) and serves as Director of the Department of Geography, Coordinator of CEGOT’s Investigation Group on Cultural Landscapes, Tourism and Development and Coordinator of the Master’s in Tourism, Leisure and Heritage. He holds a PhD in Geography and completed undergraduate studies in Human Geography (University of Coimbra). He has published 42 articles in specialised journals and 25 papers in conference proceedings, 32 book chapters and seven books (as author and co-coordinator). He has supervised three doctoral theses and directed 37 Master’s theses in the fields of Economic and Social Geography, Tourism, Leisure and Sociology. He participated in nine research projects and coordinated one of these. His current research interests lie in cultural and urban tourism, sustainable tourism, urban geography, leisure studies, rural studies, gastronomy and wine tourism. For more information on his publications see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Norberto_Santos/contributions and http://www.degois.pt/visualizador/curriculum.jsp?key=0682596581714576 Richard Sharpley ([email protected]) is Professor of Tourism and Development at the University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK. He has previously held positions at some of other institutions, including the University of Northumbria (Reader in Tourism) and the University of Lincoln, where he was professor of Tourism and Head of Department, Tourism and Recreation Management. His principal research interests are in the fields of tourism and development, island tourism, rural tourism and the sociology of tourism, and his books include Tourism and Development: Concepts and Issues (2002, 2015 with David Telfer),

Meeting Challenges for Rural Tourism through Co-Creation of Sustainable Tourist Experiences

473

Tourism, Tourists and Society, 4th Edition (2008); Tourist Experience: Contemporary Perspectives (2011) and The Contemporary Tourist Experience: Concepts & Consequences (2012). Luís Silveira ([email protected]) is a Geographer and holds a Masters degree in Human Geography—Planning and Development (2009) from the University of Coimbra. He is currently a PhD student in Tourism, Leisure and Culture, at the University of Coimbra, specializing in Tourism and Development. He is a member of the Research Unit CEGOT (Centre of Geography and Spatial Planning) and SYLFF Fellow from the Tokyo Foundation. His current research interests lie in nautical tourism (yachting) and in tourism development in the Azores islands. For information on his publications see https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Luis_Silveira2/contributions Ana João Sousa ([email protected]) has a degree in Biology and a Master’s in Management and Planning in Tourism, from the University of Aveiro. She was a researcher at the University of Aveiro, between 2004 and 2006, in a scientific project about the flora of East Timor, at the University of Coimbra, in 2009 in a scientific project on invasive alien plants occurring in the center of Portugal and, again, at the University of Aveiro, between 2011 and 2012, in a scientific project entitled “The overall rural tourism experience and sustainable local community development” (ORTE). She is the author and coauthor of several articles, books, book chapters and scientific works, both in the field of tourist experience and rural tourism and in the field of botany and biology. Her research interests include the tourist experience, rural and nature tourism, sustainable development of tourist destinations, the environmental impacts of tourism, environmental behaviour, natural and cultural attractions, botany and nature conservation. Ignasi Puig-Ventosa ([email protected]) is an Industrial Engineer from the Polytechnical University of Catalonia (Spain) and holds a PhD in Environmental Sciences from the Autonomous University of Barcelona (Spain). He also obtained an MSc in Monitoring, Modelling and Management of Environmental Change from King’s College London (United Kingdom). His main research area is the use of market-based instruments for environmental policy, particularly related to municipal waste management. He has written several books on these topics, along with some technical and research papers in national and international journals. Since 2002, he has been head of projects at ENT Environment and Management (www.ent.cat). In 2007, he worked as an environmental

474

Contributors

advisor for the Spanish Parliament (Madrid) and in 2008 as external researcher at the OECD (Paris). Gabriel Weber ([email protected]) is Associate Professor in the Department of International Affairs at ESCCA, School of Management, Angers, France, where he teaches International Trade, International Business, and European Sustainability Policies. He holds a PhD in Environmental Management and Accounting (TU Dresden, Germany) an MA in Environmental Management and Environmental Policy (FU Berlin) and an MBA (HTW, Berlin). Gabriel has taught at several universities including TU Dresden and Northumbria University, Newcastle, UK. He was also involved in several research projects at ENT, Environment and Management, Vilanova i la Geltrú, Barcelona, Spain and the Institute for Ecological Economy Research (IÖW), Berlin. At ENT, he participated as a Marie Curie Post-Doc Fellow in the EU FP7 Project ENTITLE on political ecology. His research looks at mitigation of and adaptation to climate change, tourism, waste management, ecological economics and waste management. He has published in Business and Society and other peer-reviewed journals as well as several chapters in books. For further information on his activities and publications see http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gabriel_Weber3 Hee Jeong Yun ([email protected]) is Associate Professor at the Department of Tourism Administration, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon City, Republic of Korea, where she teaches Tourism Resources, Tourism Spaces, Tourism Planning and Development, and Tourism Law. She holds a PhD and a Master’s degree in Landscape Architecture and completed undergraduate studies in Tourism Management. She has coordinated and participated in more than fifty research projects, funded by the National Research Foundation of Korea, Rural Development Administration, and other Korean national bodies. She is a co-author of seven chapters in books, co-author of over fifty articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals including SSCI journal, and more than twenty papers in Conference Proceedings. She serves as a member of the editorial board of Tourism and Environmental Studies and received a Best Paper Award from the Tourism Science Society in Korea (2012) and a Best Teaching Awards from Kangwon National University (2012, 2015). Her current research interests focus on issues of sustainable tourism development and time-space analysis of tourists. For further information on her activities and publications see http://www.kangwon.ac.kr/~tourism