Agrotourism, sustainable tourism and Ultraperipheral areas: The Case of Canary Islands

              Vol. 4 Nº 1 págs. 85-97. 2006
www.pasosonline.org
© PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. ISSN 1695-7121
Agrotourism, sustainable tourism and Ultraperipheral areas: The Case
of Canary Islands
Eduardo Parra López †
Francisco Javier Calero García ‡
Universidad de La Laguna (Islas Canarias, España)
Resumen: La ultraperiferia añade a los problemas inherentes a la insularidad los derivados de la lejanía respecto a
los principales centros de aprovisionamiento, la considerable escasez de recursos, la fragmentación del territorio, y
por tanto, de los mercados. En las últimas décadas se ha ido tomando conciencia del impacto de la ultraperiferia
sobre el desarrollo de las regiones y estados insulares. La ultraperiferia es un atributo geográfico que condiciona las
opciones de desarrollo y el tipo de especialización de las economías, afecta a la competitividad y a las estrategias
empresariales. El agroturismo es una de las actividades que está adquiriendo mayor relevancia en el marco de la
diversificación de las explotaciones agrarias, agropecuarias y del turismo. Por ello, la necesidad de activar económi-camente
las zonas rurales de territorios insulares ultraperiféricos, así como la valorización de las producciones agra-rias
y agropecuarias vinculadas a la actividad turística, se presentan como elementos vitales para estrategias de
diversificación, transformación y mejora de la competitividad y calidad de las mismas. El presente trabajo tiene
como objetivo analizar los cambios y el posible impacto que supone la incorporación del agroturismo como una
alternativa al turismo de sol y playa, de incremento de rentas de las familias, del desarrollo rural y de nuevas formas
de turismo. Se pretende establecer un análisis estratégico del agroturismo, analizar el lado de la oferta y demanda,
para sentar la base de las razones de fomentar esta actividad.
Palabras clave: Ultraperiferia; Agroturismo; Turismo sostenible; Islas Canarias.
Abstract: Ultraperipheral regions share certain common characteristics, such as their remoteness from the major
supplying centres, their scanty resources, their island status or isolated location and consequent fragmentation of
markets. Over the past decades, there has been an increasing awareness of the impact of ultraperiphericity on the
development of a number of regions and islands. The concept of “ultraperiphericity” includes specific geographic
circumstances that influence the development and specialisation of economies, competitiveness and business strate-gies.
Agrotourism is playing an ever increasingly important role in the diversification of the agriculture, farming and
tourism sectors into the Ultraperipheral Regions. Therefore, particular attention should be paid to the economic
development of rural areas in Ultraperipheral Areas and to the reappraisal of agriculture, which is closely connected
with tourism. Agrotourism is essential to diversify, transform and improve the competitiveness and quality of farms.
This paper examines the impact of Agrotourism as an alternative to sun and sand tourism, resulting in the growth of
family income, in rural development and, in short, in new approaches to the tourism industry. A further goal of the
paper is to develop a strategic analysis of Agrotourism, studying both supply and demand in the Canary Islands.
Keywords: Ultraperiphericity; Agrotourism; Sustainable Tourism; Canary Islands.
† Eduardo Parra López, is Senior Lecture in the Department of Economics and Business Management, Univer-sity
of La Laguna (Spain), has a PhD in Economic and Business Science (University of La Laguna, 2002), is
Superior Technician in External Trade (School of Industrial Organization, Madrid, Spain). E-mail: epar-ra@
ull.es
‡ Francisco Calero García, is Reader in the Department of Financial Economy and Account, University of La
Laguna (Spain), has a PhD in Economic and Business Science (University of La Laguna, 1998). E-mail: fcale-ro@
ull.es
86 Agrotourism, sustainable tourism and Ultraperipheral areas ...
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
Introduction
One of the main attributes of rural tour-ism
is its localisation in regions and terri-tories
which so far have not been exploited
by mass tourism. Tranquillity, nature and
familiarisation with local customs all play a
prominent role in rural tourism (Reguero
1994).
The importance of rural tourism on the
Canary Islands cannot be compared with
that of sun and sand tourism in absolute
economic terms, such as revenues and em-ployment.
However, this type of tourism
has performed an essential function in the
sense of giving prestige to rural life, creat-ing
jobs and diversifying the economy.
Moreover, rural tourism has contributed
decisively to preserve both the cultural and
natural heritage in rural settings, with
special attention to typical agricultural
produce.
Even though rural tourism and
Agrotourism are commonly confused terms,
a distinction can be drawn between them.
While rural tourism is a more generic term,
Agrotourism refers to specific sets of leisure
activities organised by farmers to cater for
visitors (Spanish Ministry of Agriculture
1992). These tourist services are regarded
as a complement to the main source of in-come,
so the infrastructures, which are
commonly associated in regional networks,
clearly belong to the primary sector (Ca-nary
Islands Government 1989).
Among the features of Agrotourism, we
can mention the following:
1. It includes shared or independent ac-commodation
at the owners’ home.
2. It involves the whole family of farmers,
whose customs and traditions are pre-served.
3. It allows customers to have a peaceful
stay, away from crowds, assisted by
friendly people and in direct touch with
nature.
Agrotourism is more than just another
tourist product –it goes well beyond a mere
offer of services in a rural setting (Busby
and Rendle 2000). Rather, it implies a no-vel
way of understanding travel, a new
awareness, a positive attitude towards ot-her
worlds, towards the environment and
towards local people and their culture.
Agrotourism as a leisure activity has
been extremely successful. The possibility
of enjoying the rural environment and cul-ture
at an attractive price appeals to a
large market, including families, couples
and seniors. The customers of this type of
tourism, who usually travel with their fam-ily,
tend to be educated and of predomi-nantly
urban origin (Hall and Jenkins
1998). They respect the local customs and
often gather information in advance about
the places they plan to visit. Users of
Agrotourism services want to avoid mass
tourism. Instead, they are interested in
maximum contact with nature and in warm
relationships with other people. They are
environmentally aware and demand natu-ral
products, including healthier food.
Moreover, they seek genuine local culture,
as well as novel activities and sports. And,
of course, they look for quality accommoda-tion
that ensures peace and rest (Halfacree
1993).
Agrotourism has proved a powerful tool
in the reactivation of depressed areas in
the Canaries. Besides the turnover derived
from accommodation, catering and leisure
activities, as well as from the direct selling
of local produce and crafts, Agrotourism
has brought about other beneficial effects,
such as the restoration of the architectural
and cultural heritage (see La Laguna; La
Orotava; Santa Cruz de la Palma Cities),
the appreciation of the role of women in
rural communities, the dignifying of the
role of farmers in society or the fostering of
cultural exchanges. Thus, the agrarian
sector is not only a provider of material
goods, but also of immaterial goods, espe-cially
those connected with culture, educa-tion,
gastronomy, landscape and the envi-ronment.
A whole host of innovative activi-ties
related to the service economy have
arisen, with a consequent boost to new
types of employment. However, despite the
romising results, it should be remembered
that Agrotourism poses particular training
and technical demands and would need
more incentives for its effective promotion.
An analysis of rural society and space in
the past few decades reveals the following
factors with an effect on the service sector
(Mediano Serrano 2002, Butler and Clark
1992 and Gannon 1994)
Eduardo Parra y Francisco Calero 87
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
• The new economic context, character-ised
by a general trend towards spatial
concentration and towards an increase
in the size of the facilities, with the aim
of achieving a more competitive qual-ity-
price relationship, thus endangering
disperse or small-scale services.
• The massive rural exodus from agricul-tural
mid-mountain areas towards lar-ge
cities and tourist zones, which took
place in the sixties and seventies due to
the better prospects offered by the con-struction
and service sectors.
• In the eighties and seventies, the
search for a more agreeable environ-ment
by certain sectors or urban popu-lation
has given rise to migratory flows
towards the mid-mountain areas which
are best-communicated and closest to
large urban centres.
• Qualitative changes in ways of life, in
activities and in forms of family and so-cial
organisation have generated a de-mand
for new tourist services. For to-day’s
consumers, the most important
aspects are quality and the differentia-tion
among various types of tourism.
Several new contexts have arisen:
• A new institutional context, character-ized
by the distribution of responsibili-ties
and activities among the public,
private and associative sectors.
• A new technological context, in which
the breakthroughs in information and
communication technologies make it
possible to overcome, either partially or
totally, some of the limitations typical
of mid-mountain areas regarding the
distance, the scale and the quality of
services.
• A diversity of local contexts, on the
basis of their shortcomings in services,
whose quality generally depends on the
degree of proximity to urban centres.
Thus, the regions with lowest popula-tion
density and most distant from ur-ban
centres tend to suffer from a deficit
in their service network.
Special emphasis is put on diversifica-tion,
understood as the performance of mul-tiple
activities within a farm, with the aim
of ensuring its viability and of creating and
preserving jobs. The endogenous resources
of the farm must be maximised, while syn-ergies
and complementarities among its
different activities and with external actors
should be generated. This way, it is possi-ble
to offer novel goods and services, either
agrarian or not, which may take advantage
of market niches (Bahamonde 2003, Juan
Martínez 2000 and Sanchis Silvestre and
Olcina Soler 1995).
To complete this approach to Agrotour-ism,
a SWOT analysis of this type of tour-ism
in the Canary Island Archipelago is
sketched below:
Strengths:
• Type of tourism, which has hardly
been developed in the Canaries.
• Participation in local ways of life,
customs and tasks.
• High quality as far as appeal, tran-quillity
and security are concerned.
Weaknesses:
• Lack of business training (underde-veloped
tourist product).
• Absence of legislation on Agrotour-ism.
• Scarce complementary offer.
• High cost of house and farm resto-ration.
Opportunities:
• Promotion of the preservation of lo-cal
customs and traditions.
• Need to create new employment al-ternatives
in the rural world.
• Alternative market for local pro-duce.
Threats:
• Lack of planning and concrete aims.
• Danger of massification.
• Little political awareness.
• Cultural authenticity could be al-tered
as a result of the attempt to
imitate the level of services of con-ventional
tourism.
Once the strengths, weaknesses, oppor-tunities
and threats have been established,
it is appropriate to set a series of goals, as
well as a number of strategies in order to
achieve them. (see Table 1).
The canaries in the international tourism
framework
The Canary Islands are located about
1500 kilometres from mainland Spain and
88 Agrotourism, sustainable tourism and Ultraperipheral areas ...
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
500 kilometres from Saharan Africa. They
comprise seven main islands as well as a
number of small, inhabited islands (see
figure 1). The total population of the canar-ies
is in excess of 1.6 million.
The services sector plays an increasingly
important role in the economy of the Ca-nary
Islands and within this sector the
tourism sub-sector is prominent (see table
2). With respect to this sub-sector, the
growth in global tourism in recent decades
has made the Canaries a major world
player in “sun, sea and sand” tourism, with
mainly European originating markets
(Parra and Baum, 2004). Specifically in the
Canaries, tourist activity has acquired such
importance that it has become a configura-tional
factor for geography and demogra-phy,
the prosperity of the economy, as well
as for the socio-cultural factors of the re-gion,
and currently represents around 83%
of the GDP (see figure 2).
The tourist sector in the Canaries is at a
crucial point in its development. Significant
challenges are being faced that are marked
by the appearance of new competing tour-ism
destinations, and by transformations
arising from tourist demand and supply,
that have increased the likelihood of
changes in the tourism model which has
been the backbone of its mass tourism de-velopment,
namely that of a supply chain
through originating country travel agents,
international tour operators and local sup-pliers
at the destination (Parra, García y
Gutíerrez, 2004). These changes have ma-jor
implications for island destinations
such as the Canaries.
As a result, concentration and
restructuring strategies are being
applied to the tourist business sector
and, more specifically, to tourist
transport (tour operators, travel
agencies and airlines) and hospitality
sectors in the Canary Islands, resulting
in a loss of independence for lodging
units and a greater increase in control
and power over tourism distribution for
tourist transport, thereby resulting in a
distancing of decision-making centres
from the Canaries.
Charter and low cost European air-lines
have increased passenger numbers by
an annual average of 46% in recent years
and are expected to continue growing by
between 20% and 30% per annum over the
next few years. Therefore:
• The future could herald consolida-tion
processes between these com-panies,
which might affect the Ca-nary
Islands.
• The Island hospitality sector recog-nises
the new markets generated by
cheap flight supply as an invest-ment
risk.
GOALS
1. To promote communication between locals and
tourists, as well as the active involvement of the
latter in local life.
2. To foster the development of agriculture and
cattle-raising with new services –both basic and
complementary- as a source of employment and
wealth.
3. To develop a competitive offer.
4. To take advantage of existing commercialisation
processes for certain tourist destinations (e.g.
Tenerife).
5. To project an innovative image of tourist and
environmental quality.
STRATEGIES
1. Creation and commercialisation of our tourist
product.
2. Promotion and information about our services.
3. Planning and competitiveness.
4. Structuring of communication systems be-tween
public agents and our company
Table 1. Goals and a number of strategies in order
to achieve Agrotourism. Source: own elaboration
Figure 1. Map of the Canary Islands. Source:
Gobierno de Canarias. (http://www.gobcan.es)
Eduardo Parra y Francisco Calero 89
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
Positive Negative
Income increasing Increase of public expenditure in social
service and infrastructure
Investment attraction Prices increasing
Create employment To remove others sector
Economics
Entry of foreign currency We can lose some foreign currency in
the imported articles and the back of
the income
Services and infrastructure for the
local population
A “sudden” change in the local life
style and the traditional culture
Social modernization Life Orientation towards leisure
Cultural Exchange
Socio-Cultural
Peace encouragement Increase of the unsafe
To contribute to preserve the envi-ronment
Congestion of the traffic, noise and
contamination
Greater environmental become aware Pressure on the fragile ecosystems and
the landscape
To obtain resources to preserve the
environment
Scarcity of resources energetic and
others
Environment
To stimulate the preservation of the
environment
Increase of residues
Table 2. Some possible impact
above tourism in the Canary Is-lands.
Source: Hernández Martín,
2004a; 2004b
Figure 2. Development of hotel and others types
of lodging in the Canaries. Source: Regional
Ministry of Tourism and Transport. Govern-ment
of Canaries, 2001. Note: Hotels are in red
and other lodging in blue
• Cheap flights have changed the
pattern of holiday demand to Is-land
destinations such as the Ca-nary
Islands.
• Low cost airlines have acted as
catalysts for the rise in real estate
markets of “second homes” or
timeshare.
• 90% of travel bookings
with new model carri-ers
are made through
the Internet.
All these factors affect the
seasonality of Island holiday
hospitality supply, by offering to open up
much wider markets that are more sensi-tive
to pricing (e.g. Eastern European
markets). Currently, a need for a change
of direction is perceived by local industry
players, a change that will strengthen
tourist business and administrative poli-cies
aimed at increasing environmental
and entrepreneurial quality (see table 3).
Consequently, there is a call for in-depth
analysis and understanding of these mat-ters,
resulting in adequate planning and
response to these changes and to new
demands.
Development of Lodging in the Canaries
213.608
230.737
117.006
123.698
100.000
120.000
140.000
160.000
180.000
200.000
220.000
240.000
1.994 1.995 1.996 1.997 1.998 1.999 2.000
90 Agrotourism, sustainable tourism and Ultraperipheral areas ...
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
PREVIOUS MODEL NEW MODEL
Growth, spontaneous development and lack of
strategic planning
Growth planning and management, along with
strategic agreements with tourist transport firms
Market forces and business profitability Competitiveness and sustainability
“Natural” competitive advantages “Created” and managed advantages
Selling beds Selling experiences
Mono-product (Sun and beach) Diversification
Price-Quality Value added / price
Quantitative Qualitative
Rivalry between islands Coordination / Cooperation
Generic and disorganised promotion Segmented promotion combined with destination
brand management
Table 3. Tourism Planning in the Canaries. General principles for a new model. Source: Gobierno de
Canarias, Consejería de Turismo, 2002. (http://www.gobcan.es/turismo/gpren/nprensa2004.html)
Sustainability in the Canary Islands
The arrival of tourism brought a num-ber
of improvements in infrastructure
and way of life, such as the ones men-tioned
below, to many rural areas that so
far had remained neglected (Berry and
Ladkin 1997).
􀂃􈌠 Advancements in communications,
which provided access to population
centres that were practically isolated.
􀂃􈌠 Caring of rural areas, which began to
be considered an asset in themselves.
􀂃􈌠 An incipient revalorisation of rural
heritage, so far undervalued.
Nevertheless, we should also take into
account a series of circumstances that
have caused negative impacts, such as
(Weaver 2001):
􀂃􈌠 Irreversible alteration of landscape,
due to the proliferation of infrastruc-tures
and constructions.
􀂃􈌠 Disappearance of plant species and
forced escape of fauna.
􀂃􈌠 Increase in waste levels, without an
adequate infrastructure that could
minimise the environmental impacts.
􀂃􈌠 Land speculation, which has brought
about the excessive urbanisation of
certain rural areas, without any
proper planning and without allowing
for adequate hygienic-sanitary infra-structures.
However, it should be pointed out that
most tourists visiting the Canary Islands
come in search of sun and sand, so the
inland areas have been less damaged.
Today there is a clear demand for the
so-called environmental goods, which are
mostly located in rural settings (Villar
2003). However, such goods will only be
useful if they are managed following sus-tainability
criteria, since rural develop-ment
and sustainable development are
inseparable concepts. Economic develop-ment
in rural areas cannot be properly
planned if environmental criteria are left
aside. The main objective, therefore, is to
improve the resources, infrastructure and
equipment of expanding tourist centres,
thus establishing the foundations for sus-tainable
growth and development in the
mid-mountain areas of the different is-lands
(Butler 1980).
The growth of the tourist sector has
given rise to great concern about the pos-sible
depletion of the islands’ resources.
These worries have prompted a number
of political initiatives that have changed
the political and legal context (Oreja
1999; Oreja et al, 2004). The declared aim
is to slow down the expansion of tourism
and to channel its development along
sustainable guidelines, in an attempt to
strike a balance between the economic
development derived from tourism and a
Eduardo Parra y Francisco Calero 91
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
rational consumption of resources. There-fore,
the key aspect in future strategic
decisions affecting ultraperipheral re-gions
will be the setting of sustainability
objectives, within the framework of what
Hunter (1997) calls “Sustainable Devel-opment
through Product-Led Tourism”.
Many of the measures that have been
enforced through a series of legal norms
relate to “MORATORIA” imposed on the
building (or on licence–obtaining proce-dures)
of tourist constructions. The only
exceptions would be buildings used for
rural tourism, urban hotels and the resto-ration
or refurbishment of tourist facili-ties
–as long as they constitute classified
buildings or their accommodation capac-ity
is not increased (Villar 2003).
Sustainable tourism calls for appro-priate
instruments to measure the extent
to which the desired balance has been
achieved. The concept of carrying capacity
(Mathieson and Wall, 1982), mentioned in
Act 19/2003, approving the General Plan-ning
and Tourism Planning Guidelines
for the Canary Islands, could be a good
start. This Act aims at identifying the set
of factors that allow for the tourist use of
an area, with all the necessary general
equipment, services and infrastructure,
but without implying an unacceptable
decline in the quality of the experience
obtained by visitors, an excessive burden
on the tourist resources, an inadmissible
alteration of the ecology, territory and
landscape of the area, or disproportionate
pressure on the host community.
This carrying capacity will be estab-lished
depending on each individual is-land
and even on different zones within
each island. In fact, tourist growth may
be completely barred in areas considered
saturated because supply exceeds esti-mated
demand. The main difficulty met
by the political institutions on the Islands
lies in refining this index, since carrying
capacity is an extremely complex concept.
Among the facets of carrying capacity, as
expressed in the current legal norms of
the Canary Islands, the following factors
can be mentioned: ecological capacity,
social capacity, landscape capacity, infra-structure
capacity, market capacity,
availability of technological, professional
and labour resources, availability of tour-ist
resources, or the inventory and as-sessment
of natural resources.
The above-mentioned Act also estab-lishes
the suspension of building licences
for new tourist facilities for the period
2003-2006, with the exception of urban
hotels, hotel refurbishments which do not
bring about an increase of accommodation
capacity, and the projects whose licence
had been granted before 1st January,
2001. According to this Act, the growth
rate of new tourist beds will be reviewed
every three years.
All these restrictions aim to achieve
sustainable tourism, i.e. tourism that
does not surpass the island’s carrying
capacity.
Objectives and methodology
This paper is a definitive approach to
the relationship between the concepts
“Agrotourism”, “sustainability” and “Ul-traperipheral”
regions, specially the Ca-nary
Islands case. The model proposed
below, based on both quantitative and
qualitative methodological foundations,
has been outlined in the Canary Islands
Archipelago and it attempts to lay the
foundations for a model of economic and
tourist development in the rural regions
of its different islands.
Since this is a pilot study, two differ-ent
modes of analysis were adopted:
• The initial stage consisted in locating
the different tourist areas in the Ca-naries
and establishing the first con-tacts
with experts in the sector. As a
result, we formulated a series of ques-tions
which were included in a struc-tured
questionnaire.
• A qualitative methodology that ex-plored
the attributes related to the
above-mentioned concepts, with the
aim of identifying the issues that can
be regarded as critical variables in
the current dynamics of Agrotourism.
• Finally, a thorough review of previous
research on Agrotourism, sustainabil-ity
and ultraperipheral areas, in or-der
to raise the questions addressed
in the sections below.
The study was conducted in three dis-tinct
phases, using three different tools of
primary research, namely unstructured
92 Agrotourism, sustainable tourism and Ultraperipheral areas ...
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
interviews, questionnaires and in-depth
interviews. Qualitative interviews with a
reduced group of experts in tourism in the
Canary Islands, both academics and
members of ASHOTEL and ASOLAN1,
helped us obtain more accurate informa-tion
that helped clarify the issues under
discussion. The unstructured discussion
with researchers and students of the
Master’s in Tourist Companies Manage-ment
at the University of La Laguna,
resulted in an in-depth discussion that
helped identify the issues addressed be-low.
In addition, the information gathered
enabled us to prepare a first question-naire
with 11 items for analysis.
In order to analyse data from sources
other than suppliers and academics, we
requested information from tourists
lodged in rural hotels and houses
throughout the different islands (up to a
total of 200 questionnaires). The informa-tion
obtained about the main variables on
the demand side provided new insights on
the consumers of this type of product and
on how certain aspects of supply could be
corrected in order to match the tourists’
needs more closely. As shown in table (5),
which displays the results of the “Analy-sis
of inbound tourism”, our demand
analysis provided answers to both quali-tative
and quantitative questions.
Figure (3) below illustrates the re-search
procedures, specifying for each
stage the objective set, the methodology
followed and the expected outcome.
Figure 3. Research design. Source: Own elaboration. The model will be henceforth called MOSAZU
(Spanish for Modelo Sostenibilidad en Agroturismo para Zonas Ultraperiféricas).
Identification of subjective aspects of
agrotourism
To obtain a reliable picture of the most
relevant attributes of Agrotourism in
Ultraperipheral Areas, a review of the
literature was undertaken, including
previous work on the dimensions of the
ultraperiphery, sustainability and com-plementary
tourist products, question-naires
used by other researchers, and
specific materials on Agrotourism. This
review resulted in a long initial list of
items deserving analysis -one of the most
important sources used was the study by
Bigné (1997) on green consumers and
their patterns of behaviour. We also ex-amined
the work of Bosch et al (1998) on
the direct relationship between tourism
and the environment, which throws light
on the least tangible aspects of the rela-
OBJECTIVE METHODOLOGY OUTCOME
To assess the relative impor-tance
of the fundamental at-tributes
of agrotouirsm from
the demand perspective
Questionnaire B
( 11)
Relative ranking of
the attributes accord-ing
to demand
Unstructured interviews
questionnaires (n=11) and
in-depth interviews
To determine which attrib-utes
are the fundamental ones
to examine agrotourism from
the supply point of view
List of fundamental
attributes of agro-tourism
To identify the main at-tributes
of agrotourism
Qualitative
and literature
review
List of issues rele-vant
to agrotourism
SUSTAINABILITY MODEL FOR AGROTOURISM IN ULTRAPERIPHERAL AREAS
Eduardo Parra y Francisco Calero 93
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
tionship between tourism, sustainability
and the complementariness of tourist
products. Likewise, the work of the
Commission of the European Communi-ties
(2001) on a common cooperation
framework for the future of European
tourism revealed certain imbalances as
far as sustainable tourism, Ultrap-eripheral
Areas and complementary tour-ist
products are concerned.
As a result of this work, we drew up
an initial list with 30 subjective aspects
that could affect Agrotourism, which we
used in the preliminary stages of our re-search.
INFORMATION
• Information requested Location and access, services and activities offered,
prices.
• Who requests the information The male head of the family and, in some cases, the
female one.
• How they get the information Through travel agents, specialised travel guides,
friends and family, promotional brochures, tourist
offices and web pages.
• How they obtain the information One or two months in advance.
• When they get the information In the towns and cities where they live.
PURCHASE
• What they buy Holidays in a rural setting, tranquillity and envi-ronment.
• When they buy A few weeks before the trip.
• Where they buy Mostly through travel agents.
• When they buy Through travel agents, contacting the company by
phone, through central reservation systems and
through the Internet.
• Why they buy To enjoy nature, rest and tranquillity in places
where families can be safe.
USE
• What they use Accommodation, catering services, leisure areas,
well preserved natural areas, cultural and historic
attractions, genuine rural life.
• Who uses it The whole family
• How they get to use it Customers arrive in their own vehicle and some-times
by plane.
• Why they use it Because they want to receive friendly service, en-joying
the authenticity of rural life, with all the
necessary services and no crowds.
• When they use it Weekends and (short) holidays.
• How long they use it Two or three-day periods (weekends) o eight-day to
two-week spans (holidays).
Table 4. Result of the process to have the outline of an Agrotourist offer together with farming activities
oriented towards the family market segment. Source: Own elaboration, partly based on Bahamonde
(2003).
94 Agrotourism, sustainable tourism and Ultraperipheral areas ...
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
Determination of the fundamental attrib-utes
for the assessment of agrotourism
according to perceptions from the supply
side
In this second phase, the goal was to
detect the fundamental attributes of
Agrotourism from the perspective of the
accommodation supply.
To this end, we sent a questionnaire
which attempted to deepen communica-tion
between tourists and the host com-munity
in order to set common goals. The
questionnaire aimed to raise awareness of
the need to develop agriculture and cat-tle-
raising, as well as their relationship
with a competitive Agrotourism offer
which suits the needs of ultraperipheral
areas and projects an innovative image of
tourist and environmental quality.
The result of the process was the out-line
of an agrotourist offer that could in-clude
accommodation in rural establish-ments,
together with farming activities
oriented towards the family market seg-ment,
as summarised in the table 4.
The application of this matrix may
contribute to understand the market
segment corresponding to potential users
of agrotourist products in ultraperipheral
areas, thus sustaining the MOSAZU
model from the point of view of accommo-dation
supply.
Identification of the fundamental attrib-utes
for the assessment of agrotourist
activity from the point of view of demand
The aim of the third phase of the study
was to ascertain the ideal tourist profile
suitable for Ultraperipheral Regions,
along the lines of the above-mentioned
attributes. To that end, a questionnaire
was shown to a sample of tourists staying
at rural hotels (200 questionnaires), who
were asked to assess the importance they
attached to Agrotourism (see table 5).
A Likert scale was chosen, since the
attributes had to be evaluated along a
continuum (Oppenheim, 1992). In this
case, the continuum was the relative im-portance
of each attribute for the assess-ment
of Agrotourism in ultraperipheral
areas.
A six-point scale was chosen to avoid
the tendency to select the intermediate
value, thus forcing tourists to choose ei-ther
a more favourable or less favourable
opinion. Among the advantages of this
scale we can find its reliability, its easi-ness
of construction, the accuracy of the
data obtained and the wider range of an-swers
they allow for (Oppenheim, 1992).
The research methodology adopted has
provided us with a greater insight into
the different tourist areas analysed.
Apart from yielding information on the
latest trends and issues with an impact
on Agrotourism and Ultraperipheral Ar-eas,
our method has enabled us to re-trieve
a wealth of both qualitative and
exploratory information.
CHARACTERISTICS OF DE-MAND
German Spanish Swiss British Dutch
Tourists demanding Agrotourism 􀁄􄐠 􀁄􄐠 􀁄􄐠 􀁄􄐠 􀁄􄐠
Average stay 8 to 10 days
Age 35-60 years 35-50 years 35-50 years 38-50 years 35-50 years
Way of travelling 80% in couples and 20% in groups
Means of acquaintance with
Agrotourism
78% through tour operators and travel agencies. The rest, indepen-dently.
Table 5. Analysis of inbound tourism Source: Own elaboration on the basis of surveys answered by tour-ists.
Eduardo Parra y Francisco Calero 95
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
FIGURE 4. The link between Agrotourism and sustainability. The MOSAZU MODEL. Source: Own
elaboration.
Figure 5. Relationship network for Ultraperipheral Regions and Small Islands Destinations, based on the
MOSAZU MODEL. Source: own elaboration
The link between agrotourism and sus-tainability
Finally, the fourth stage of the study at-tempts
to achieve one of its main objec-tives,
i.e. examining the ultimate rela-tionship
between Agrotourism and sus-tainability
in ultraperipheral regions,
along the lines of the MOSAZU model
(see figure 4).
Final implications
The analysis of Ultraperipheral Re-gions
has traditionally been one of the
major neglected issues in the interna-tional
arena. We hope that the present
study can contribute to start promoting
changes in that respect.
The MOSAZU model also attempts to
provide orientations for environmental
policymaking in ultraperipheral regions
and small Island destinations, in order to
satisfy the expectations and motivations
of tourists and to guide the elaboration
and implementation of Environmental
Strategic Plans, as well as the creation of
good practice codes.
In addition, we firmly believe that the
key factor for a spectacular economic and
tourist take off in the Canary Islands
Archipelago probably lies in the joint ap-plication
of quality and environmental
management systems in the tourist sector
and, secondly, in the integration of busi-nesses
within society (see figure 5).
Bibliography
Bahamonde, E.
2003 MBA Final Project: The Agroturism
Impact in Canary Islands. MBA Pro-gramme
in Tourism of La Laguna
University.
MOSAZU
MODEL
SUSTAINABILITY: The answer to a new concept of the tourist
activity: sustainable tourism. Conquest of market segments with
markedly ecological profiles. Consolidation of a tourist model in
rural settings of the Canary Islands Archipelago
AGROTOURIST PRODUCT: Increasingly discriminating cus-tomer,
more of a connoisseur, more experimented, seeking quality
and new sensations. Escape from crowded urban centres in search
of nature, direct contact with farming and the environment. Wide
range of unconventional leisure activities. Cultural resources and
rural traditions. Local hospitality and typical food.
VALUE
BUSINESS COOP-ERATION
INTERNET PLAT-FORM
COMPETITIVE-MOSAZU
MODEL
TOURIST AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN RURAL
SETTINGS OF ULTRAPERIPHERAL REGIONS AND SMALL
ISLANDS DESTINATIONS
96 Agrotourism, sustainable tourism and Ultraperipheral areas ...
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
Berry, S. and B. Ladkin
1997 Sustainable Tourism: A regional
perspectiva, Tourism Management, 18
(7): 224-33.
Bigné, J. E.
1997 El consumidor verde: bases de un
modelo de comportamiento, ESIC-MARKET.
Nº 96.
Bosch, R. et al.
1998 Turismo y Medioambiente. Madrid:
Centro de estudios Ramón Areces.
Busby, G. and S. Rendle
2000 The transition from tourism on
farms to farm tourism, Tourism Man-agement,
21 (6): 635-42.
Butler, R.W.
1980 The concept of a tourism area cycle
of evolution: implications for the man-agement
of resources, Canadian Geog-rapher,
24: 5-12.
Butler, R. and G. Clark
1992 Tourism in rural areas: Canada and
the UK, in I. Bowler, C. Bryant and M.
Nellis (Eds.) Contemporary Rural Sys-tems
in Transition Volume 2: Economy
and Society, Wallingford: CAB Inter-national.
Canary Islands Government
1989 Conferencia Mundial sobre el desa-rrollo
del turismo y medio ambiente.
Lanzarote
European Comission
2001 Un Marco de Cooperación Para el
Futuro del Turismo Europeo. Commu-nication
to the Council of Europe, The
European Parliament, The European
Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee of the Regions. Brus-sels.
Gannon, A.
1994 Rural tourism as a factor in rural
community economic development for
economies transition, Journal of Sus-tainable
Tourism, 1 (1&2): 51-60.
Gobierno de Canarias
2002 Consejería de Turismo, from the
World Wide Web:
http://www.gobcan.es/turismo/gpren/n
prensa2004.html.
Halfacree, K.
1993 Locality and social representation:
space, discourse and alternative defi-nitions
of the rural, Journal of Rural
Studies, 9 (1): 23-37.
Hall, C.M. and J. Jenkins
1998 The policy dimensions of rural tour-ism
and recreation”, in Butler, R.,
C.M. Hall and J. Jenkins (Eds.), Tour-ism
and Recreation in Rural Areas.
Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. 19-
42.
Hernández Martín, R.
2004a El impacto del turismo en la eco-nomía
canaria. En Uriel Jiménez, E. y
Hernández Martín, R.: Análisis y Ten-dencias
del Turismo. Pirámide, Ma-drid.
Hernández Martín, R.
2004b Impacto económico del turismo. El
papel de las importaciones como fugas
del modelo, Información Comercial
Española, Revista de Economía,
Nº817.
Hunter, C.
1997 Sustainable tourism as an adapta-tive
paradigm, Annals of Tourism Re-search,
24 (4): 850-867.
Juan Martínez, F.
2000 Alojamiento turístico rural: gestión
y comercialización. Madrid: Síntesis.
Serie Gestión Turística.
Mathieson, A. and G. Wall
1982 Tourism: economic, physical and
social impacts. London: Longman.
Mediano Serrano, L.
2002 El desarrollo sostenible del turismo
rural: una cuestión de responsabilidad
compartida”, in Blanquer D. and E.
Bigné, V Congreso Turismo Universi-dad
y Empresa. La calidad integral del
turismo. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.
217-244.
Oppenheim, A.N.
1992 Questionnaire design, interviewing
and attitude measurement. 2ª Edition.
London: Pinter Publishers.
Oreja J.R. et al
1999 El impacto del entorno en las activi-dades
empresariales (El caso de la
empresa en Canarias. Colección Inves-tigación
Empresarial. Tenerife: FYDE-Cajacanarias
e IUDE.
Oreja, J.R.; Parra López, E. and Yanes
Estévez, V.
2004 The Sustainability in the Island
Coastal Destination. Proceedings of
Tourism: State of the Art II. Glasgow,
Scotland.
Eduardo Parra y Francisco Calero 97
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 4(1). 2006
ISSN 1695-7121
Parra López, E.; F.J. García and D. Gutié-rrez
2004 Importance of Environmental Re-sources
and Capabilities for Firm’s
Competitivess: The Case of the Hotel
Industry in the Canary Islands, Anato-lia:
An International Journal of Tour-ism
and Hospitality Research. Vol. 15
(2): 183-190.
Parra López, E. and Baum T.G.
2004 An analysis of supply-side relation-ships
in small island destinations: The
role of tour-operators, travel agencies
and tourism transport in the Canary
Islands, Tourism and Hospitality:
Planning and Development. Vol. 1 (3):
201-218
Pérez Pizarro, A.
1996 Agroturismo, aspectos socioeconómi-cos
y de identidad local. Chile: Univer-sidad
de Chile, Facultad de Ciencias
Agrarias y Forestales.
Reguero Oxinalde M.
1994 Ecoturismo: Nuevas formas de tu-rismo
en el espacio rural. Barcelona:
Bosch Turismo.
Sanchis Silvestre A. and A. Olcina Soler
1995 El desarrollo del turismo rural y sus
repercusiones, Papers de Turismo,
Nº17: 89-101.
Spanish Ministry of Agriculture.
1992 El turismo rural en el desarrollo
local. Madrid.
Villar, F. J.
2003 La ordenación territorial del turis-mo:
luces y sombras de la limitación
del crecimiento turístico en Canarias,
Actualidad Administrativa, 24: 579 –
616.
Weaver D.
2001 Sustainable Tourism: Is it Sustain-able?,
in Faulkner, B., G. Moscardo
and E. Laws (Eds.). Tourism in the
21st Century: lessons from Experience.
London: Continuum: 300-311.
NOTAS
1 ASHOTEL: Association of employers in
the accommodation sector of the province of
Santa Cruz de Tenerife (made up of four
islands: Tenerife, La Palma, La Gomera y El
Hierro). http://www.ashotel.es
ASOLAN: Association of employers in the
accommodation sector of Lanzarote island.
http://www.asolan.com/pub/
Recibido: 2 de noviembre de 2005
Aceptado: 15 de diciembre de 2005
Sometido a evaluación por pares anónimos