Article by Martín Araque
One of the most interesting phenomena experienced by the tourism industry in the post-pandemic years has been the need to reconnect with the natural environment. After the boom in proximity tourism, specifically related to experiences in contact with nature resulting from international mobility restrictions, the growth of tourism in rural environments has shown no signs of slowing down. Although spending on urban and coastal tourism still accounts for 88% of tourism revenues, according to CaixaBank data, the growth of spending on rural tourism exceeded its counterparts in each month of 2022 and 2023, demonstrating this change of trend in the preferences of tourists for an alternative form of tourism.
Rural tourism, unlike its counterparts, is a type of tourism with a more sustainable focus. Although there are exceptions, both urban and coastal tourism tend to be massified and over-commercialized and could benefit from applying practices that are common in rural tourism from a sustainable standpoint.
What is rural tourism?
Several authors have their own definitions of what the phenomenon of rural tourism encompasses. Perhaps one of the most complete and relevant (despite its age) is from Sharpley (2002), who says: “Rural tourism is a multifaceted concept that encompasses a wide range of activities, including stays and agricultural experiences, ecotourism, and cultural experiences aimed at promoting the local economy and preserving rural heritage.”
This form of tourism is of significant importance for rural populations, mainly due to the socio-demographic changes that have taken place in recent decades. According to Sánchez and Rodrigues (2020), this environment is facing changes due to depopulation, the decline in the active population, the aging and abandonment of agricultural activities, and rural tourism comes in as a tool for the “reconquest” of agricultural or rural societies and as a driver of economic development.
What does rural tourism teach us?
1. The complementarity of activities provides resilience and contributes to the desegmentation of tourism and economics.
Introducing ‘complementary’ activities, such as tourism within rural settings, provides the local population with the opportunity to diversify their income, offering economic resilience when one of their activities may be affected by endogenous factors, such as a decrease in tourism demand during the pandemic or a poor crop year due to climatic elements. Furthermore, this diversification allows for the development of different economic axes throughout the year, contributing to the desegmentation of income derived from mono-activity, giving visitors the opportunity to explore the region throughout the year, not just during historically higher seasons.
2. If the attraction is based on cultural heritage, it will be revalued.
Part of the essence of rural tourism is the focus on authentic experiences, usually involving contact with local products or culture. Brandth and Haugen (2011) discuss the combination of heritage in its threefold dimension: tangible elements, gastronomy, and rural landscapes, as the key element of the authenticity of rural experiences. In other words, the rural experience arises from the combination of heritage factors, meaning that, for the tourist activity to take place, heritage is an indispensable factor that must be maintained and protected. Sims (2009) also discusses the importance of gastronomic and wine heritage in rural experiences, as it integrates the farmer into the tourism value chain, transforming them from a supplier into a participant.
3. Tourist activity is a driver of cultural education and environmental protection.
As mentioned earlier, rural tourism has the potential to foster cultural education but also to promote environmental education and more sustainable lifestyles. Brandth and Haugen (2011), citing McGehee, 2007; Kuo et al., 2008; and Plaza Gutiérrez, 2016, write about how activities related to food production, usually organic and environmentally respectful, help maintain the rural landscape, and through their physical and ecological structures, they also form a “cultural landscape.”
We could consider that the attraction is not created, as in the case of a tourist product in urban settings, but rather it is ‘taken advantage of,’ and that without nature, this attraction ceases to exist or transforms into something completely different from what was originally intended.
Three lessons we can apply to other types of tourism:
1. Care for local heritage (customs, gastronomy, physical heritage).
Tourist activity has the capacity to enhance and consequently protect local heritage. By ‘taking advantage’ of local heritage without commodifying it, experiences have the potential to become more authentic and differentiated, while also acting as a protective instrument for it.
2. Apply a tourist immersion vision into the territory rather than a territory to tourist adaptation.
One thing is clear: tourism is about experiences, and these experiences have the potential to be enriching for both visitors and the local community. Related to the previous point, but emphasizing the adaptation of activity to the environment, we can apply the lesson from rural tourism by encouraging tourists to immerse themselves in the territory rather than adapting the territory to the tourist, thus preserving its authenticity and essence.
3. Sustainability as a pilar:
When we talk about sustainability, rural tourism provides us with two important lessons: environmental sustainability and economic sustainability. Environmentally, we can learn about the value of proximity products but, above all, care for the environment (as if our activity depended on it). It is also important to consider the economic aspect, where rural tourism teaches us the importance of diversification. When businesses are not solely dependent on mono-activity, they can, in a sense, replace the need to attract with the luxury of choice.
In conclusion, it could be said that rural tourism is a form of tourism that presents numerous opportunities for recovery and revaluation in the triple dimension of sustainability (environmental, social, and economic). Observing the practices of these activities teaches us that tourism has the potential to have a positively symbiotic relationship, rather than the traditional and, in some cases, accurate parasitic view.
References:
CaixaBank Research. (2023, octubre 18). The rise of rural tourism in Spain: An opportunity for rural development. CaixaBank. https://www.caixabankresearch.com/en/sector-analysis/agrifood/rise-rural-tourism-spain-opportunity-rural-development
Brandth, B. y Haugen, M. S. (2011). Farm diversification into tourism – Implications for social identity?. Journal of Rural Studies, 27(1), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jrurstud.2010.09.002
Kuo, N.-W., Chen, Y.-J., y Huang, C.-L. (2008). Linkages between organic agriculture and agro-ecotourism. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 21(04), 238-244. https:// doi.org/10.1079/raf2006148
Mcgehee, N. G. (2007). An agritourism systems model: A Weberian perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(2), 111-124. https://doi.org/10.2167/jost634.0
Plaza Gutiérrez, J. I. (2016). El valor patrimonial de los paisajes rurales. Algunos ejemplos. En Rebollo, J. F., Cantos, J. O., Hérnadez Hérnadez, M., Morales Gil, A. (Coord.), Paisage, cultura territorial y vivencia de la Geografía. Libro Homenaje al Profesor Alfredo Morales Gil (pp. 343-360). Universitat d´Alacant / Universidad de Alicante, Instituto Interuniversitario de Geografía.
Rodrigues Ferreira, D. I. y . Sánchez Martín, J. M. (2020). La agricultura como producto turís t ico en áreas rurales: Un debate abierto en la literatura. Investigaciones Turísticas (20), pp. 97-123. https://doi. org/10.14198/INTURI2020.20.05
Sharpley, R. (2002). “Rural tourism and the challenge of tourism diversification: The case of rural tourism in the UK.” Tourism Management, 23(2), 133-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00074-7.
Sims, R. (2009). Food, place and authenticity: Local food and the sustainable tourism experience. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(3), 321-336. https://doi. org/10.1080/09669580802359293
