The evolution of profile and motivations of agro‑tourists in Rio Grande do Sul/Brasil

              © PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. ISSN 1695-7121
Vol. 12 N.o 3. Special Issue. Págs. 597-609. 2014
www .pasosonline.org
Abstract: This article aims to assess the profile of agro­‑tourists
and their motivations for agro­‑
and rural
tourism, from the point of view of the owners of agro­‑tourism
establishments in the Southern Half of the
state Rio Grande do Sul, in Brazil. Data was collected in a census approach of the rural tourism properties
in four distinct moments in time, between 1997 and 2011. Results show that most tourists are domestic,
come for short breaks, even though overcoming distances of several hundreds of kilometers, with many
showing loyalty to the unit. Although relaxation and escape from urban life is a main motive visible, there
is an apparent trend towards more diversified tourism motivations, and activities sought, yielding relaxing,
recreational, healthy, culturally enriching and emotional tourist experiences, associated to the specificities
of the visited territory and rural tourism property.
Key Words: Rio Grande do Sul/ Brasil, rural tourist market, tourist motivations, agro‑tourism, Market
evolution.
La evolución del perfil y las motivaciones de los agro-turismo en Rio Grande do Sul / Brasil
Resumen: El presente trabajo visa conocer al perfil de los agro­‑turistas
y a sus motivaciones para el
agro­‑turismo
y turismo rural, del punto de vista de los proprietarios de las unidades de agro­‑turismo
en la
mitad Sul del Estado de Rio Grande do Sul, en Brazil. Datos recogiran­‑se
por un proceso de censo referente
a todas las propriedades de turismo rural en quatro momentos distintos en el tiempo, entre 1997 y 2011.
Los resultados muestran que los turistas son maioritariamente domesticos, hacen una visita de curta
duración, mismo llegando de distancias de varias centenas de kilómetros, sendo relevante el nível de leal-dad
a la unidad de agro­‑turismo
observado en gran parte del mercado. Aparte de los motivos principales
de relajamiento y fuga de la vida urbana, visibles en los datos, hay una tendencia aparente en dirección
a motivaciones turisticas mas diversificadas, visando experiencias relajantes, recreativas, sanas, cultur-almente
enriquecedores y emocionantes, associadas a las specificidades del território e de la unidad de
agro­‑turismo
visitados.
Palabras Clave: Rio Grande do Sul/ Brasil, Mercado turístico rural, motivaciones turísticas, agroturismo,
la evolución del mercado.
The evolution of profile and motivations of agro­‑tourists
in Rio Grande do Sul/Brasil
Elisabeth Kastenholz*
Universidade de Aveiro (Portugal)
Eurico de Oliveira Santos**
Universidade Luterana do Brasil (Brasil)
* Phd in Tourism by the Universidade de Aveiro, MBA by ISEE/ Universidade do Porto, graduate in Tourism Management
and Planning by the Universidade de Aveiro, Associate Professor at DEGEI, University of Aveiro, researcher at GOVCOPP;
E­‑mail:
elisabethk@ua.pt.
** Phd in Agroscience and Natural Resources by the Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México – UAEMEX.
Agro­‑Engineeer
by Universidade Luterana do Brasil – ULBRA. Professor Adjunto at Universidade de Caxias do Sul – UCS;
E­‑mail:
eurico58@terra.com.br.
Elisabeth Kastenholz, Eurico de Oliveira Santos
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
598 The evolution of profile and motivations of agro­‑tourists
in Rio Grande do Sul/Brasil
1. Introduction
Rural tourism has led many rural areas to the,
sometimes exaggerated, hope of solving all kind of
problems, being perceived as a miraculous develo-pment
tool (Ribeiro & Marques, 2002; Sharpley &
Roberts, 2004). Some stress the potential of tourism
diversifying the local rural economy and thereby
overcoming agricultural crisis through alternati-ve
economic activities (OCDE, 1994; Sharpley &
Roberts, 2004), inclusively helping maintain the
agricultural activity, being a welcome additional
source of income for farmers (Sharpley & Vass,
2006). As a matter of fact, authors like Cavaco
(1995) and Almeida & Souza (2006) highlight the
role of agricultural activity as a main ingredient and
attractor of rural tourism. However, this does not
necessarily imply that rural tourism is a miraculous
catalyst of development in any rural context, with
some authors calling for a more realistic view to eva-luate
the real potential of a rural area for successful
and sustainable tourism development (Kastenholz,
2004; Ribeiro & Marques, 2002; Saxena, Clark,
Oliver, & Ilbery, 2007; Sharpley, 2005). Appealing
tourist attractions, basic services and facilities
are needed, but may not be sufficient (Kastenholz,
2006). A good understanding of the market, its
profile, behavior and motivations is also necessary
to develop successful and competitive rural tourism
products, which should help manage not only supply
but also demand, yielding sustainable destination
development (Kastenholz, 2004; Lane, 2009).
Several studies have already analyzed the
rural tourist market in diverse countries (eg.
Molera & Albaladecho, 2007 in Spain; Frochot,
2005 in Scotland; Kastenholz, 2004 and Eusébio
& Kastenholz, 2011 in Portugal), however little is
known about the Brazilian rural tourist market.
It is in this context that the present study tries to
contribute to an improved understanding of this
market, more specifically agro­‑tourism,
relying
on the experience of all owners of agro­‑tourism
accommodation units interviewed in the Southern
half of Rio Grande do Sul, in a census approach,
specifically in four different moments in time, from
1997 to 2011. This approach also permits analyzing
the market’s evolution. Results reveal common and
distinct features of this market and may contribute
to improved service, experience and destination
marketing in rural areas in Southern Brazil.
2. Agrotourism and rural tourism
2.1. Definitions
Agro­‑tourism
may be understood as a specific
type of rural tourism or tourism taking place in
rural areas. Calatrava and Avilés (1993) suggest
that rural tourism should include rural culture as a
core component, with personalized contact as rele-vant
as integration into the rural environment and
community life. Lane (1994) in his seminal article
“What is rural tourism?” suggests that it should
ideally be: located in rural areas; functionally rural
(based on specific features and resources of the rural
territory), rural (small) in scale and traditional
in character, organically and slowly growing and
controlled by local people. Some call for the presence
of agriculture as a core element (e.g. Cavaco, 1995;
Almeida & Souza, 2006), while others stress the
contrast to stressful, noisy and unhealthy urban
life and the corresponding idealization of rural life
(Figueiredo, 2008; Sims, 2009). However, a variety
of motives have been identified when analysing the
rural tourist market (Kastenholz, 2004; Frochot
2005; Molera & Albaladecho, 2007), where the
search of nature stands out (Eusébio & Kaste-nholz,
2011; Figueiredo, 2008; Kastenholz Duane,
& Paul, 1999; Park & Yoon, 2009; Frochot 2005),
a personalized host­‑guest
contact (Kastenholz &
Sparrer, 2009), an interest in exploring culture and
history (Eusébio & Kastenholz, 2011), with diverse
motivational segments identifiable (Kastenholz et
al., 1999; Frochot, 2005).
For those tourists seeking mostly to get to know
and participate in the “rural way of life”, agro­‑tourism
should be the ideal form of rural tourism,
but it actually only represents one segment or even
“niche” amongst several “market niches”, the rural
tourism market is composed of (Clemenson & Lane,
1997). It may, in fact, constitute a particularly re-levant
tourism format when considering its impact
on rural development, since it may help maintain
agriculture and associated activities pursued by
farmers, through “pluri­‑activity”
(Sharpley & Vass,
2006; Williams & Shaw, 1998).
Beni (2000, p. 9) defines agro­‑tourism
as “a
movement of people to rural areas, in programmed
or spontaneous routes, with or without overnight
stay, for enjoying sceneries and observing, living
and participating in farming activities”. The author
further explains that agro­‑tourism
differs from
rural tourism in so far as farming should represent
the primary source of income, with tourism being
complementary, while these farming activities
represent simultaneously a distinct tourism at-traction,
permitting an experience of “authentic
farm life” and even an active participation in it,
if desired.
There is no official definition or classification
of rural or agro­‑tourism
in Brazil, but much of the
existing supply is associated to a diversification of
agriculture, taking place in working farms, with
distinct dimensions and specializations, also shaped
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Elisabeth Kastenholz, Eurico de Oliveira Santos 599
by the particularities of distinct Brazilian states
(Almeida & Souza, 2006).
Rural tourism is mainly based on urban demand,
both in Brazil and in Europe (Cawley & Gilmore,
2008; EMBRATUR, 1994; Figueiredo, 2008; Lane,
2009), very much motivated by the wish to escape
form the stress of city life, return to nature and a
relaxing, healthy life, leading to a potentially mu-tually
beneficial encounter and exchange between
the urban and the rural populations.
2.2. Insights into the rural tourism market
The rural tourist market has been growing
in number and diversity in several, particularly
European countries (European Commission, 1999;
Lane, 2009; OCDE, 1994), being in some countries
a predominantly domestic phenomenon (e.g. UK,
Germany), in others also attracting the interna-tional
tourist market (e.g. Italy, Austria, some
regions of Spain and Portugal). Several studies
carried out in Europe about this market reveal that
rural tourists tend to belong to the mid­‑high
class,
possess higher levels of education, may be from
all age ranges, with an increasingly experienced
and demanding market looking for diversified
experiences in both weekend short­‑break
and long
holiday contexts (European Commission, 1999;
Lane, 2009; OCDE, 1994). Lane (2009) underlines
the increasing relevance of the highly mobile,
independent traveler, exploring diverse facets
of rural territories. This traveler, searching new
destinations and experiences, represents, according
to recent data (Eurobarometer, 2010), a segment
of about 28% of the European population.
Zimmermann (1996), Saxena et al. (2007) and
Kastenholz, Carneiro, & Marques (2012) stress
that several elements integrate the overall tourism
product in rural territories permitting diverse and
complex experiences that respond to a wide set
of motivations (Lane, 2009). Already mentioned
important motivating factors may be summarized
as follows, with motivations naturally overlapping:
•• Search for proximity to nature (Eusébio & Kas-tenholz,
2011; Figueiredo, 2008; Kastenholz
et al., 1999; Park & Yoon, 2009; Frochot 2005;
Molera & Albaladecho, 2007; Park & Yoon, 2009;
Rodrigues et al, 2010; Zimmermann, 1996) and
activities in nature (rather sportive, recreatio-nal
or observational), also just for its aesthetic
pleasure (also the human­‑shaped
landscapes are
highly appreciated) and even spiritual fruition
(Rodrigues & Kastenholz, 2010).
•• Looking for peace and quiet, as a main leitmotiv,
seeking to escape the city, its stress, conges-tion,
noise and pollution and slowing down,
frequently associated with seeking health and
wellness (Sidali & Schulze, 2010; Lane 2009;
Marques, 2006; Molera & Albaladecho, 2007;
Silva, 2009; Rodrigues et al 2010). This motive
is close to the wish to just relax, get away from
it all (Kastenholz et al, 2012b).
•• On the other hand, there is a wish to be active,
get involved, both in nature (e.g. more or less
adventurous or physically demanding outdoors
activities), and in a cultural/ educational sense
(e.g. learning the preparation of a traditional
dish, a handicraft, participating in harvests).
Recreational opportunities (e.g. games, a swim-ming
pool or tennis court) may be provided in
the rural tourism context to address this wish
of activity.
•• Living a cultural experience, with traces from
history also spread over rural territories (Eusé-bio
& Kastenholz, 2011; Ribeiro, Souto & Santos,
2012), e.g. exploring monuments, castles and
manor houses belonging to the rural aristocracy,
but particularly through a broad interest in eth-nography
revealing specificities of rural living
contexts (Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009; Pereiro &
Conde, 2005; Silva, 2009; Zimmermann 1996),
for example through the contact with an artisan
showing how to produce handicraft, through the
participation in a local festivity with traditional
folk music and dances or through the simple
sharing of typical food;
•• Interest in rural way of life, traditions, agricul-ture,
local food, close social contacts (Cavaco,
1995; Sidali et al, 2013; Sims, 2009; Lane, 2009;
Zimmermann 1996), sometimes associated to
family origins or nostalgia of a “happy chil-dhood”,
leading individuals with a migration
background to return to their land of (family)
origin (Rodrigues, Kastenholz & Morais, 2012).
•• Seeking a personalized host­‑guest
contact,
helping enter a distinct cultural context
through “cultural brokerage” (Kastenholz &
Sparrer, 2009; Kastenholz, Eusébio, Carneiro,
& Figueiredo, 2013; Zimmermann 1996) and
enhancing a unique type of experience and
trustful, on­‑going
relationships (Sidali et al,
2013; Loureiro & Kastenholz, 2011). This
personalized contact does not only occur in
the tourism service, but also in a broader host
community­‑
visitor context and may be valued
as a unique dimension of the overall rural
tourist experience, by residents and visitors
alike (Kastenholz, et al, 2012b).
•• The wish to be together with friends and family
in a distinct context, especially interesting for
families with small children, for educational
reasons (learn about rurality, traditions and
nature) and due to the freedom of movement in
natural spaces (Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009),
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
600 The evolution of profile and motivations of agro­‑tourists
in Rio Grande do Sul/Brasil
revealing another important social dimension
of the rural tourism experience (Molera &
Albaladecho, 2007).
•• Living an experience rich in emotions and sen‑sations,
reaching from the aesthetic pleasures
of beautiful landscapes, over the relaxing expe-rience
of sounds of nature and silence (absence
of sounds!), the delighting, distinct flavors of
local food and wine, the smells of food and nature
and the tactile experiences regarding rough
and varied material of nature and traditional
craft (Agapito, et al., 2013; Kastenholz et al.,
2012a; Loureiro & Kastenholz, 2011; Marques,
2011; Pires, 2001).
•• As a matter of fact, the food experience stands
out as a sensorial, but also as a cultural one,
representing food traditions of the visited place
­‑
in contrast to the frequently standardized
urban food, people eat quickly for convenience
­‑
typically home­‑made
dishes, with ingredients
from the local agriculture, produced in traditio-nal
ways and consumed in particular, sometimes
ritualistic contexts and being, by itself, a symbol
of cultural identity of the territory/ community
visited (Pereiro & Conde, 2005; Sims 2009;
Sidali et al, 2013).
Swarbrooke and Horner (2002) distinguish
physical, cultural, emotional, personal, status
and self­‑development
motives, which apparently
may all be satisfied in rural tourism contexts,
as mirrored in the specific motivations identified
above, which may, indeed, overlap or simulta-neously
condition one rural holiday experience. In
this line of argument, Pires (2001, p. 57) suggests
that a tourist staying at a rural property “[...]
shows diffuse motivations, which are someti‑mes
difficult to categorize, since motivations are
many, all of them intertwined and nearly all
of similar importance to the tourist.” Indeed,
different motives are frequently present in one
tourist experience, while also a person’s living
context, for example shaped by one’s family life
cycle (particularly presence of young children,
but also marital status), professional or health
situation, determines motivational changes over
time (Decrop, 2006). In any case, rural tourism
motivations have been shown to be diverse, as is
its tourist market, with distinct groups of people
showing different (combinations of) motivations,
undertaking distinct activities and consequently
living distinct experiences when visiting rural
areas (Clemenson & Lane, 1997; Frochot, 2005;
Kastenholz et al., 1999; Kastenholz et al, 2012a;
Lane, 2009; Molera & Albaladecho, 2007; Sidali
& Schulze, 2010).
In Brazil, rural tourism is much associated to
the diversification of agriculture, beginning with
initiatives in 1986 in Lages/ Santa Catarina, while
today numerous rural properties offer tourism
activities (Ministério do Turismo, 2010). These are,
however, neither legally classified, nor registered
and no official statistics on the phenomenon exist,
making its analysis a difficult task (Almeida &
Souza, 2006). The Brazilian Ministério do Turismo
(2010, p. 16) recognizes that “the growth of rural
tourism in Brazil has happened, mostly, in an
‘empirical’ way, with distinct features all over the
country and even distinct designations”.
According to a survey about 19.2% of the
Brazilian population appreciates the countryside
for holidays (MTur/Vox Populi, 2009, cited by
Ministério do Turismo, 2010, p. 27). The segment
is characterized as between 20 and 55 years old,
including couples with children, with mid/high
level education, typically travelling by car in a
range of up to 150 km from the urban residence
for week­‑end
or short­‑breaks.
They make travel
arrangements via internet, appreciate typical food
and handicraft and are mainly attracted by the
rural landscape and way of life (Ministério do
Turismo, 2010).
3. The study of agro­‑tourism
in Rio Grande
do Sul
3.1. Methodology
The present study tries to assess agro­‑tourists’
profiles and motivations, from the point of view of
owners of rural tourism properties in the state of
Rio Grande do Sul, approaching in a larger phd
research project the rural tourism phenomenon
looking at the evolution of rural tourism in this
state, from the perspective of the owners of these
establishments, their motivations to engage in
the activity, their views regarding its impacts
and also reasons for their eventual closing of the
tourism business (…ref tese Eurico). The pheno-menon
was thus analyzed from the supply side
perspective, concretely with in­‑depth
interviews
undertaken with the owners of all properties
identified in 4 different moments in time, in a
census approach, over 15 years: 9 rural tourism
properties existing in 1997/1998; 43 properties
in 2002/2003; 52 properties in 2005/2006; and 70
properties identified in 2011, all located in the
Southern Half of Rio Grande do Sul. That is, the
present study is singular in addressing all rural
tourism units in a particular region (census) in
a longitudinal approach over a 15 years period,
resulting in a total of 174 responses in total
(distributed over the four periods of time as
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Elisabeth Kastenholz, Eurico de Oliveira Santos 601
indicated above). For identifying these units the
homepage of the Secretary of State of Rio Grande
do Sul was used and all properties previously
contacted. Some of the properties contacted had
been permanently or temporarily closed down
(namely 23% in 2002/ 2003; 27% in 2005/ 2006
and 43% in 2011, in respect to the previous period
of study), while others had initiated the business,
so that responses are not necessarily from the
same owners over time. However, we consider
that they should reflect a pattern of responses
revealing indices of an evolution of the market,
its features, motivations and dynamics.
The motivation of most farmers investing in
agri­‑tourism
was the search of additional income
for economically stimulating the property and
sometimes for being able to keep it and maintain
the family together on the farm, with also an
interest in socializing of farmers with visitors
observable, an awareness of the scenic beauty
and cultural values of the properties, while parti-cularly
in recent years increased tourist demand
is referred to as a motivation to open an agri­‑tourism
business. These businesses are typically
of small scale (although the percentage of those
offering between 1 and 5 rooms has decreased
from 62.5% in 1997/98 to 37.8% in 2011, with the
second most relevant category being between 6 and
10 beds and a very small number offering more
than this). However, it must be noted that also a
relevant number of agri­‑tourism
units have closed
down in this period, mainly due to unsatisfactory
results (too few tourists, too little income given
the investment) or due to difficulties in matching
tourism with other activities, agriculture and
family life and in having sufficiently skilled human
resources available.
The main survey was administered directly by
the second author, in an interview format. This
very time consuming procedure (the properties
Figure 1 ­‑
The location of properties approached in the census 2011.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
602 The evolution of profile and motivations of agro­‑tourists
in Rio Grande do Sul/Brasil
where located in very disperse and not easy to
reach places in a territory of about 154.000 km2,
see figure 1) resulted in particular attention gi-ven
to each case (typically the researcher stayed
for some hours and sometimes he had to stay
overnight) and yielded a good understanding of
each case’s context, permitted field observations
(regarding the surroundings and specificities of
the unit), supported by photographic registers.
It also led to a high response rate (all those
contacted responded, however not necessarily to
all questions), permitted explanations of some
questions and the recording of also open­‑ended
questions, which frequently are left unanswered
in an indirect mailing approach.
The questions were specifically elaborated for
this research project yielding an understanding
of the owner’s profile, motivations to invest in
tourism, the rural tourism product presented,
management of the tourism activities, but also
the profile and motivations of tourists visiting the
units, from the owners’ perspective, given the close
contact between hosts and guests. Both closed­‑ended
and open­‑ended
questions were used, the
former permitting direct statistical treatment, the
latter requiring transcriptions, content analysis,
categorization of responses to also permit some
statistical analysis.
The choice of the property owner as respondent
and not of the tourist is due to the main interest of
the phd research project being an understanding of
the way tourism is implemented in a working farm,
thereby addressing the farm owners. On the other
hand, however interesting, it should be practically
impossible to obtain both a census of owners and
a representative sample of tourists visiting each
unit, given the direct administration approach
(units were geographically dispersed and tourists
not always present at the time of the researcher
visiting the unit). Still, in the present article this
indirect assessment of tourist motivations must
be recognized as a limitation, however attenuated
through the fact that most of them had close contact
and frequent talks with their (many of them loyal)
guests, making them knowledgeable about their
guests’ profile.
Considering that Porto Alegre, the capital of
Rio Grande do Sul, is the State’s main population
center, the distance of each unit from this city was
calculated, this being a relevant determining factor
for visitation. Most rural tourism properties are
located at a distance of between 301 and 500km
of the capital (61.4%), while 37.1% are located
between 100km até 300km from Porto Alegre.
According to Zimmermann (1996) and Ministério do
Turismo (2010), rural tourism is mostly demanded
by people coming from a distance of up to 150km,
suggesting a most relevant proximity market,
while the present study also reveals a market of
longer distances.
3.2. Survey results
3.2.1. The clients’ profile
The large majority of clients of agro­‑tourism
units are reported to be in the age classes between
29 and 64 years, with the age distribution appa-rently
more equilibrated in the last year of data
collection (2011), when apart from this largely
dominating group (mentioned by 90% of owners),
increasingly also children, adolescents, young
adults (up to 28 years) and senior tourists (above
65 years) were mentioned, when compared with
previous periods of analysis. Owners identified as
main professional occupations liberal, scientific
professions, medical doctors and lawyers, revea-ling
a predominantly high socio­‑economic
status
of visitors. The impression some owners retain
from their clients is expressed in the following
discourses: “they come with luxury cars, appreciate
the [transitory] change from city to the farm life
and say they will come back”. They tend to identify
most clients as “people with money”.
Table 1 shows that rural tourism properties in
Rio Grande do Sul attract predominantly families
with children, however with a slightly diminishing
trend since 2002. Properties seem particularly
attractive for families, offering packages with all
meals included, permitting a contact with animals
that city children only know from books, space for
them to run and play freely, amongst other features.
A second outstanding tourist group are friends,
this being an apparently increasingly important
client segment since 2002, which is also true for
trips with the “entire family”.
Visitors come mainly from urban areas within
the region of the establishment (44,4%) or from
larger distances within the state of Rio Grande
do Sul (66.7%), with some flows observable from
outside the federal State (38,9%) and even from
outside Brazil (19,4% mainly Uruguay and Ar-gentina),
with the same amount being observed
for the closest, the municipality level. One owner
states that “we have already welcomed visitors from
Australia, Germany, EUA and Japan.” However,
the here studied agro­‑tourism
reality seems to be
mainly a domestic phenomenon.
These numbers (with multiple responses) refer
to 2011 and show a relative increase since 2002 in
the categories “regional” and “from another federal
State”. It is interesting to note that the very close
market does, in fact, not adhere as much to the
existing rural tourism offering, while the attraction
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Elisabeth Kastenholz, Eurico de Oliveira Santos 603
over longer distances seems to be quite common.
As one agro­‑tourism
owner explains, “mostly people
do not complain about the distance from the (state)
capital (where most of his clients come from), they
come and feel at home here”. Similarly, another
owner states: “even coming from far away, they
like to come to this place.” However, one referred
to “some say they would come more often, if it was
closer (to their place of residence)”.
Table 2 reveals that the vast majority of clients
stay between one and two nights (67,6%, in 2011),
with an apparently increasing tendency towards
this short break stay. The second most relevant
visitation type is that of just one day (32,4%), the
cheapest option, while only 10.8% (in 2011) are
identified as clients staying between 3 and 4 nights.
These is related, for once, to a weekend short­‑break
pattern of rural tourism in Rio Grande do Sul,
where most do apparently not consider the rural
tourism experience interesting enough for a longer
stay. Some also only pass by, visiting farms as a
tourist attraction for the same day, as mentioned
by one owner: “Sometimes they come with a group
of elderly, in an (organized) excursion, they spend
the day here and leave again.” The units are also
sometimes used, for convenience, on the way to
another destination.
Additionally, several owners identify a particular
seasonality of tourist flows: “In summer, they go
to the beach, we have more demand in winter” or
Table 1. Clients of rural tourism properties.
2002-2003 2005-2006 2011
Freq. Perc. Freq. Perc. Freq. Perc.
Spouse and children 26 89,7 29 85,3 25 78,1
Spouse/partner 8 27,6 9 26,4 7 21,9
Friends 3 10,3 4 11,8 7 21,9
Single parent with children 2 6,9 - - - -
Grandparents with grandchildren - - 2 5,9 1 3,1
Entire family - - 2 5,9 4 12,5
Honeymoon couples 1 3,4 - - - -
N° respondents 29 - 34 - 32 -
* multiple response
Source: survey of agro­‑tourism
owners in Southern Rio Grande do Sul
Note: several responses possible
Table 2. Length of stay of clients in rural properties
Length of Stay
2002-2003 2005-2006 2011
Freq. Perc. Freq. Perc. Freq. Perc.
One day visit 8 25 12 31,6 12 32,4
1 to 2 nights 19 59,4 19 50 25 67,6
3 to 4 nights 6 18,8 11 28,9 4 10,8
Total number of responses 32 - 38 - 37 -
Source: survey of agro­‑tourism
owners in Southern Rio Grande do Sul
Note: several responses possible
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
604 The evolution of profile and motivations of agro­‑tourists
in Rio Grande do Sul/Brasil
Table 3. Motives for visiting rural tourism properties in Southern Rio Grande do Sul
Tourist motivations
2002-2003 2005-2006 2011
Freq. Perc. Freq. Perc. Freq. Perc.
Nature
Proximity to nature 12 37,5 5 14,3 2 5,6
Proximity to nature/freedom for children 3 9,4
Culture
Learning about the animals 7 21,9
Learning about the farms 2 6,3 2 5,7
Learning about local/regional culture 4 11,4 16 44,4
Gastronomy 2 6,3 1 2,9 1 2,8
History 1 3,1 3 8,6
Social
Be together with children 2 6,3
Socialize with owners 2 6,3
Hospitality/Service context
Private environment 1 3,1 1 2,9
Personalized service 2 6,2 1 2,9
Recreational
Fishing 1 3,1
Differentiated program 2 6,3 2 5,7
Horse riding 3 9,4 3 8,6
Entertainment 1 3,1 1 2,9 1 2,8
Relaxing/escape from city stress
Peace and quiet 15 46,9 4 11,4 1 2,8
Rest 6 18,8 2 5,7 3 8,3
Quality of Life 1 3,1
Physical wellness/Health 3 9,4 7 20 8 22,2
Self development
Self development 1 2,9 2 5,6
Freedom 1 3,1 1 2,9
Emotional 4 11,4 10 27,8
Nostalgia
My roots 7 21,9
Convenience
Proximity to urban center 1 3,1 1 2,9
Safe roads 2 6,3
Ease of access 1 3,1 1 2,8
Safety 5 15,6 1 2,9
Other
Particular motives 3 8,6 5 13,9
Like the place 3 8,6
Source: survey of agro­‑tourism
owners in Southern Rio Grande do Sul
Note: several responses possible
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Elisabeth Kastenholz, Eurico de Oliveira Santos 605
“when there is a public holiday, particularly close
to the weekend, I am out­‑booked,
I could host more
people, if I had so many rooms, but there are also
times nobody comes.”
On the other hand, many clients are remarkably
loyal, coming back to the visited rural tourism
property (86,5%, in 2011), typically once or twice
a year, some even three to four times, but others
never return. This behavior (that has not changed
much since 2002) reflects the preference for several
short breaks along the year in the countryside over
a longer holiday stay. The following statement of
one owner exemplifies this pattern: “they come for
little time, but they like this rural environment,
and like to come back”. One owner of a farm pro-viding
horse riding says: “the kids (in the tourist
group) always want the same horse”, revealing a
particular type of loyalty, interestingly including
loyalty to certain farm animals, or a certain type
of place attachment, which is in fact close to place
dependence, referring to a set of social and physical
features that meet the individual’s specific needs
and permit desired activities and represent what
is unique in the place, differentiating it from any
other alternative one (Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000;
Silva et al, 2013).
3.3. Tourists’ motivations
Owners of rural establishments were asked
about their clients’ main specific motivations,
leading to a large number and variety of respon-ses
which are presented and categorized into the
following broad categories, as derived from the
literature review (see section 2.2.). The responses
to the open­‑end
questions are naturally varied and
make a comparison over time difficult (see Table 3).
Relaxation in a quiet and peaceful environment
as a general motivation of most rural tourists,
identified in many studies on the respective market,
is also important here, but has apparently lost its
relevance, although it may just be named differently
in the study undertaken in 2011, where people
refer to a more holistic wellness and health motive,
which should indeed be partly related to relaxation,
but can also assume more active pursuits. So it is
worth of notice that just relaxation may indeed
not be the outstanding motivation any more, being
increasingly associated to a broader view of a he-althy,
balance providing and emotionally colored
experience, which is simultaneously culturally
enriching.
So, even if some “may come just to relax and
enjoy the peace and quiet”, “they want to get away
from the city”, “eventually reading books and not
doing anything else”, others refer to visitors “liking
to participate in rural activities”, “providing their
children a contact with farm and domestic animals
they do not have in the city”, enjoying “walking
on the trails in the property”, especially through
forested nature areas, appreciating “swimming
in a pool in the middle of the countryside” , and
many being interested in “horse riding”, being also
a frequently mentioned motive for coming back
(and riding the same horse).
Agro­‑tourism
units close to the border to Uru-guay
also refer to an interest of clients in “shopping
in Uruguay”. This emphasis on diverse “particular
motives” points at new, eventually more diversified
patterns of tourist motivation, making a classifi-cation
and a homogenous description of “the rural
tourist” highly questionable.
When asked about the reasons about visitors’
loyalty to their property, owners of rural tourism
units understand that their clients tend to come
back, mostly due to the fine hospitality, the per-sonalized
way they are welcomed at the property,
generally in a family ambiance: “They like the way
we treat them here, they feel truly welcome”, as one
owner puts it. But owners also understand the
importance of the specific features of their proper-ties
and surrounding environment, making people
“attached to the place”, by providing the ideal
context for seeking close contact to nature in the
rural tourism property and the associated health
benefits (“pure air”) tourists seek, while others
refer to the attractions/ activities available at the
properties, with gastronomy and horseback riding
particularly standing out. Also a general escape
from stress is a frequently mentioned underlying
motive again in responses to this question, confir-ming
studies in other contexts (Sidali & Schulz,
2010; Kastenholz et al., 2012; Lane, 2009; Molera &
Albaladecho, 2007; Silva, 2009). Some also refer to
the particular location, the liking of the region the
property is integrated in, as a reason to come back,
while others refer even to animals, some clients (or
their kids) get affected to, as mentioned before, all
creating loyalty, place attachment and sometimes
even place dependence (Silva et al, 2013).
When asked about activities sought by clients,
owners refer to horse riding as the most outstanding
activity (however slightly declining since 2002), and
to swimming in swimming pools (slightly increasing
in relevance). Other most sought activity opportu-nities
are hiking on ecological trails (showing an
increasing trend) and observing/ participating in
agricultural activities (e.g. milking cows, observing
animal vaccination, harvesting, etc., another incre-asing
trend). Also rustic playgrounds, football and
volleyball grounds and river beaches/ waterfalls are
highly appreciated. Owners are able to number a
large variety of different specific activities revealing
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
606 The evolution of profile and motivations of agro­‑tourists
in Rio Grande do Sul/Brasil
a vast range of recreational, cultural/ educational
and sportive activities/ facilities, confirming the
idea of rural tourists being increasingly active and
motivated by distinct interests, eventually also
due to the fact that they often come with family
and friends, i.e. in groups composed of individuals
with distinct interests. Frequently, families visiting
rural properties are quite heterogeneous, with
parents sometimes nostalgically returning to their
rural origins, while their children only know city
life. The wish to show their children life in a rural
area, presenting them with their original family
background is oftentimes an important motif for
the visit, but owners have understood that for the
children, so used to urban life, they need to present
other kinds of attractions to make them also enjoy
their stay in the rural property.
The variety of opportunities presented reveals
the owners’ capacity of developing new products/
attractions, based on existing natural and cultural
resources, as well as on their own investment in
facilities they understand to be attractive to tou-rists,
i.e. revealing some level of entrepreneurship,
capacity to adapt to market needs, which may
be one important reason for the high levels of
loyalty obtained from their clients. As a matter of
fact, the recreational activities suggested are not
exclusive neither necessarily related to agriculture
or the countryside, like swimming pools, sports
facilities or even saunas, which are mostly signs
of an adaptation to the urban visitors’ tastes.
4. Conclusions
In the Southern Half of Rio Grande do Sul there
is an intense debate about the role and future of
agro­‑
and rural tourism, which should be based on
a sound knowledge of the phenomenon. The main
goal of the here presented study is to shed light
on rural tourism in this region, considering its
evolution overtime and looking here, particularly,
at the property owners’ perception of this market,
in terms of profile, motivation and travel behavior.
Many owners seem to be successful in attracting
and creating a loyal client base by matching the
needs and desires of a generally well educated,
professionally active, urban couples and families,
coming for short breaks of typically 1 or 2 nights,
frequently several times a year. Hospitality and
the special, familiar welcoming of clients seems to
be relevant for coming back, confirming Avena’s
(2001) emphasis on the warm, personalized service
context as a particularly sought dimension of rural
tourism, probably in contrast to the anonymous
city life and standardized hotel comfort provided
in other tourism contexts (Kastenholz & Sparrer,
2009). This, plus perceived unique features of the
property, where even the attachment to animals
plays a role, but also way the property provides
the opportunity to relax from stressful city life
in a natural, healthy environment, on the one
hand, and to engage in certain activities (including
agricultural) and experiences (including learning
experiences), create loyalty to the unit, but also
place attachment and even place dependence
(Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000; Silva et al, 2013).
The here identified relevance of a health/ well-ness
motive associated to nature corroborates
results of a study undertaken by Hanai in Minas
Gerais about the rural tourist market: “ The
majority of tourists visits these nature areas [...]
motivated by the contact with preserved nature,
seeking tranquility, peace and quiet, relaxation
and an escape from the daily routine and stress”
(2009, p.110). It further confirms an apparently
global trend of urban populations seeking to escape
the city transitorily, as found in other contexts
(Kastenholz et al., 2012; Lane, 2009; Molera &
Albaladecho, 2007; Sidali & Schulze, 2010; Silva,
2009). However, one important finding of the
present study is the fact that most owners do not
refer as frequently as before the single motivation
“relaxation”, a typical escape motive, but inste-ad
suggest increasingly a more holistic health/
wellness motive, which would naturally include
relaxation from stress, while also implying more
active pursuits, as also observable in the trend
towards more activities mentioned and towards
the increasingly emotion­‑rich
experience sought.
This may confirm a general trend within tourism
demand, the post­‑modern
tourist being frequently
suggested to be more open to new and different
experiences, interested in getting involved and
valuing the emotional outcome of the holidays,
which may, indeed apply perfectly to rural tourism
experiences (Kastenholz et al, 2012; Walmsley, 2003).
Additionally, specific attractions/ activities
available at the properties, particularly related
to gastronomy and horseback riding are other
important motives for rural tourism in Rio Gran-de
do Sul, but also opportunities to get to know
and get involved in agricultural and traditional
activities, and sometimes learning about local/
regional history and culture, confirming results
of Ribeiro et al’s (2012) study. There seems to be a
need to present a balanced offer, based on highly
valued endogenous natural and cultural resources,
but also including more urban­‑like
recreational
facilities, permitting diverse opportunities for
multi­‑motivated
tourists seeking emotionally
involving experiences, in a safe, relaxing, he-althy
and welcoming environment. This multi­‑motivational
rural tourism demand should also
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Elisabeth Kastenholz, Eurico de Oliveira Santos 607
be due to the fact that many hosts come in groups
with diverse family members, sometimes with
friends, individuals with distinct interests and
preferences, a varied offer would best adapt to.
Owners interviewed in this survey, particu-larly
those who maintained their unit open and
eventually also increased their (still small­‑scale)
offer of accommodation, show this capacity of
providing satisfactory rural tourist experiences
making clients come back several times a year.
However, not all have succeeded and even deci-ded
to close down their business, due to lack of
profitability and difficulty of adaptation to this
type of market and activity (quite different from
agriculture), while those who keep the business,
apparently have not succeeded yet in changing
the pattern of the weekend short­‑break
to a longer
holiday stay, eventually requiring additional
management and marketing efforts, since longer
stays should help contribute to more sustainable
rural tourism development, as well as to more
involving and significantly recalled experiences
and richer host­‑guest
relationships, for both
visitors and visited alike (Kastenholz et al, 2013).
It is noteworthy that some of the motives
and trends reveal a real opportunity for farm
owners in Brazil diversifying into tourism and
able to provide not only a genuine welcoming
atmosphere, but also diverse experiences based on
endogenous resources, local food and its traditio-nal
preparation, on the local nature environment,
which may be additionally prepared for leisure
and sports activities (especially hiking and swim-ming),
the maintenance of animals, particularly
horses (for horse riding), to increase their income
through tourism services, while simultaneously
enhancing local farming produce, especially food
production (not only for consumption during the
stay, but also for selling directly to the hosts as
souvenirs). This type of tourism, even if to a
certain degree adapted to the taste of the urban
guests, is also likely to enhance the maintenance
of local traditions, which are valued by visitors,
as unique and different from the standardized
urban way of life. All this, plus the opportunity
of enjoying increased social contacts and thereby
overcoming the relative isolation of living in rural
areas, as highlighted by Kastenholz et al (2013)
for village populations in Portugal, the local
residents’ quality of life may indeed be enhanced,
possibly leading farmers and their families to
stay in areas, which are sometimes perceived
as less attractive for living. Consequently, all
this implies a large potential of sustainable
rural tourism development in the here studied
Brazilian farms, contributing to farm families’
economic survival, to continued agricultural
activities, which also benefit from tourism while
simultaneously benefiting it, to landscape and
heritage preservation and to their setting into
value, also enhancing local culture and sense of
identity (Bramwell & Lane 1993; Kastenholz,
2004; Saxena et al, 2007).
In any case, the here presented results are
perceptions of agro­‑tourism
promoters and should
be complemented by a survey of tourists visiting
these units, however difficult the implementation
of such a study. With a sufficiently large and
representative sample, also a cluster analysis
could be undertaken, helping identify segments
seeking distinct benefits in the Brazilian rural
areas and correspondingly improve the units’
and destination’s capacity of developing well­‑adapted
products to carefully selected markets
(Kastenholz, 2004; Frochot, 2005).
Bibliography
Agapito, D., Almeida, H., Mendes, J. and Valle, P.
2013 “A contribution to marketing sustainable
sensory­‑themed
tourist experiences in rural
destinations”. In Proceedings of the Internatio-nal
Conference on Rural Tourism: Re­‑inventing
rural tourism and the rural tourism experience
­‑
Conserving, innovating and co­‑creating
for
sustainability, 4th ­‑
7th September 2013. Aveiro:
University of Aveiro.
Almeida, J. A. and Souza, M. (org.)
2006 Turismo Rural: patrimônio, cultura e legisla-ção.
Santa Maria, RS: FACOS­‑UFSM.
Avena, B. M.
2001 “Acolhimento de Qualidade: fator diferencia-dor
para o incremento do turismo na sociedade
pós­‑industrial”.
Revista Turismo em Análise,
12(1: 20­‑29.
Beni, M. C.
2000 “Turismo ­‑
visão e ação (Glossário). Turismo
­‑
Visão e Ação”. Revista Científica do Mestrado
em Turismo e Hotelaria, 4(2): 9, 25­‑28.
Bramwell, B. and Lane, B.
1993 “Sustainable Tourism: an evolving global
approach”. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
1(1): 1­‑12.
Bricker, K. and Kerstetter, D.
2000 “Level of Specialization and Place Attach-ment:
An Exploratory Study of Whitewater
Recreacionists”. Leisure Sciences, 22: 233­‑257.
Calatrava, J. and Avilés, P. R.
1993 “O turismo, uma oportunidade para as zonas
rurais desfavorecidas?”. In Cadernos LEADER.
Comercializar um turismo rural de qualidade
(pp. 9­‑18).
Bruxelles: Célula de Animação LE-ADER
(AEIDL).
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
608 The evolution of profile and motivations of agro­‑tourists
in Rio Grande do Sul/Brasil
Cavaco, C.
1995 “Rural Tourism: The creation of new tourist
spaces”. In Montanari, A. and Williams, A. M.
(Eds.). European Tourism: Regions, Spaces and
Restructuring (pp. 127 ­‑
149). Chichester: Euro-pean
Science Foundation, John Wiley & Sons.
Cawley, M. and Gillmor, D. A.
2008 “Integrated rural tourism: Concepts and
Practice”. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2):
316­‑337.
Clemenson, H. A. and Lane, B.
1997. “Niche markets, niche marketing and rural
employment”. In Bollman, R. D. and Bryden, J.
M. (Eds.). Rural Employment: An International
Perspective (pp. 410­‑426).
Wallingford: CAB
International.
Decrop, A.
2006 Vacation Decision Making. Oxfordshire: CABI
Publishing.
Embratur
1994 Manual Operacional do Turismo Rural. Bra-sília:
Instituto Brasileiro de Turismo.
Eurobarometer ­‑
European Commission
2010 “Survey on the attitudes of Europeans towards
tourism, Analytical report: Flash”. Eurobaro-meter
Series nº. 291.
European Commission
1999 Towards quality rural tourism – integrated
quality management. Luxembourg: Office for Offi-cial
Publication of the European Communities.
Eusébio, C. and Kastenholz, E.
2011 “Quem procura o Turismo no Espaço Rural?
Especificidades do mercado da Região Centro
de Portugal”. In Figueiredo, E., Kastenholz, E.,
Eusébio, M. C., Gomes, M. C., Carneiro, M. J.,
Batista, P. and Valente, S. (Coords.). O Rural
Plural ­‑
Olhar o Presente, Imaginar o Futuro
(pp. 215­‑230).
Castro Verde: 100Luz Editora.
Figueiredo, E.
2008. “Imagine there’s no rural – the transfor-mation
of rural spaces into places of nature
conservation in Portugal”. European Urban
and Regional Studies, 15(2): 159­‑171.
Frochot, I.
2005 “A benefit segmentation of tourists in rural
areas: a Scottish perspective”. Tourism Mana-gement,
26(3): 335­‑346.
Hanai, F. Y.
2009 Sistema de indicadores de sustentabilidade:
uma aplicação ao contexto do desenvolvimento
do turismo na região de Bueno Brandão, estado
de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Tese Doutorado (Ciên-cias
da Engenharia Ambiental). São Carlos/SP.
Kastenholz, E.
2004 “Management of Demand as a Tool in Sus-tainable
Tourist Destination Development”.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5): 388­‑408.
Kastenholz, E.
2006 “O marketing de destinos turísticos ­‑
o seu
significado e potencial, ilustrado para um
destino rural”. RDT/ Journal of Tourism and
Development, 6: 31­‑44.
Kastenholz, E. and Sparrer, M.
2009 “Rural Dimensions of the Commercial Home”.
In Lynch, P., MacIntosh, A. and Tucker, H.
(Eds.). Commercial Homes in Tourism: An in-ternational
perspective (pp. 138­‑149).
London:
Routledge.
Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., and Marques, C.
2012 “Marketing the rural tourism experience”.
In Tsiotsou, R. H. and Goldsmith, R. E. (Eds.).
Strategic Marketing in Tourism Services (pp.
247­‑264).
Bingley: Emerald.
Kastenholz, E., Duane, D. and 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., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M. J. and
Figueiredo, E.
2013 “Host­‑Guest
relationships in rural tourism
­‑
evidence from two Portuguese villages”. Ana-tolia:
An International Journal of Tourism and
Hospitality Research.
Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C. P.
and Lima, J.
2012 “Understanding and managing the rural
tourism experience – the case of a historical
village in Portugal”. Tourism Management
Perspectives, 4: 207­‑214.
Lane, B.
1994 “What is rural tourism?”. Journal of Sustai-nable
Tourism, 2(1): 7­‑21.
Lane, B.
2009 “Rural Tourism: An Overview”. In Jamal, T.
and Robinson, M. (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook
of Tourism Studies (pp. 354­‑370).
London: Sage
Publications.
Loureiro, S. M. C. and Kastenholz, E.
2011 “Corporate reputation, satisfaction, delight,
and loyalty towards rural lodging units in Por-tugal”.
International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 30(3): 575­‑583.
Marques, Carlos P.
2011 “Mapping affective image of destinations”.
Encontros Científicos ­‑
Tourism & Management
Studies, 2(7): 1040­‑1043.
Ministério do Turismo
2010 Turismo Rural: Orientações Básicas. 2ª Ed.
Brasília: Ministério do Turismo.
Molera, L. and Albaladejo, I. P.
2007 “Profiling segments of tourists in rural areas
of South­‑Eastern
Spain”. Tourism Management,
28(3): 757­‑767.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 12 N° 3. Special Issue. Mayo 2014 ISSN 1695-7121
Elisabeth Kastenholz, Eurico de Oliveira Santos 609
OCDE
1994 Tourism Strategies and Rural Development.
Paris: OCDE/GD. (94)49.
Park, D. B. and Yoon, Y. S.
2009. Segmentation by motivation in rural tourism:
A Korean case study. Tourism Management,
30(1): 99­‑108.
Pereiro, X. and Conde, S. P.
2005 “Turismo e oferta gastronómica na comarca
de Ulloa (Galiza): Análise de uma experiência
de desenvolvimento local. Pasos”. Revista de
Turismo and Patrimonio Cultura, 3(1): 109­‑123.
Pires, J. M.
2001 “O turismo rural e a preservação de valores
sócio­‑culturais”.
In Oliveira, Cássio G. S. (Ed.). O
Sucesso como possível fator de descaracterização
de empreendimentos de turismo rural. Anais
do 3° Congresso Brasileiro de Turismo Rural.
Piracicaba: FEALQ.
Ribeiro, M. and 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.
Ribeiro, M., Souto, C. B. and Santos, E. O.
2012 “A Valorização da Memória e do Patrimônio
Cultural Como Atrativos Turísticos em Proprie-dades
Rurais do Rio Grande do Sul”, Revista
Rosa dos Ventos, 4(II): 151­‑163.
Rodrigues, Á., Kastenholz, E., and Morais, D.
2012 “Travel constraints and nostalgia as deter-minants
of cross­‑Atlantic
legacy tourism”. In
Pechlaner, H., Lee, T. J. and Dal Bò, G. (Eds.).
New Minorities and Tourism – Proceedings of
the International Scientific Workshop on New
minorities and Tourism (pp. 75­‑92).
Bolzano:
European Academy of Bolzano/Bozen.
Rodrigues, A. and Kastenholz, E.
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(4): 331­‑343.
Rogrigues, A. and Kastenholz, E.
2010 “Sentir a Natureza – passeios pedestres como
elementos centrais de uma experiência turís-tica”.
Revista de Turismo & Desenvolvimento,
13/14(2): 719­‑728.
Saxena, G., Clark, G., Oliver, T. and Ilbery, B.
2007 “Conceptualizing Integrated Rural Tourism.
Tourism Geographies: An International”. Jour-nal
of Tourism Space, Place and Environment,
9(4): 347 ­‑
370.
Sharpley, R.
2005 “Managing the countryside for tourism: a
governance perspective”. In Pender, L. and
Sharpley, R. (Eds.). The Management of Tourism
(pp. 175­‑186).
London: Sage Publications.
Sharpley, R. and Roberts, L.
2004 “Rural tourism ­‑ 
10 years on”. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 6(3): 119­‑124.
Sharpley, R. and Vass, A.
2006 “Tourism, farming and diversification: An
attitudinal study”. Tourism Management, 27(5):
1040­‑1052.
Sidali, K. L. and Schulze, B.
2010 “Current and future trends in consumers’
preference for farm tourism in Germany”.
Leisure/Loisir, 34(2): 207­‑222.
Sidali, K., Kastenholz, E. and 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, DO
I:10.1080/09669582.2013.836210
Silva, C., Kastenholz E. and Abrantes, J. L.
2013, “Place attachment, destination image and
impacts of tourism in mountain destinations”.
Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism
and Hospitality Research, DOI:10.1080/13032
917.2012.762312
Silva, L.
2009 Casas no campo. Etnografia do Turismo Rural
em Portugal. Lisboa: Imprensa de Ciências
Sociais.
Sims, R.
2009 “Food, place and authenticity: local food and
the sustainable tourism experience”. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 17(3): 321­‑336.
Swarbrooke, J. and Horner, S.
2002 O comportamento do consumidor no turismo.
São Paulo: Aleph.
Walmsley, D. J.
2003 “Rural tourism: a case of lifestyle­‑led
oppor-tunities”.
Australian Geographer, 34: 61­‑72.
Williams, A. and Shaw, G. (Eds.).
1998 Tourism and economic development: European
experiences. 3rd ed. Chichester: Wiley.
Zimmermann, A.
1996 Turismo Rural: um modelo brasileiro. Flo-rianópolis:
Ed. do Autor.
Recibido: 04/11/2013
Reenviado: 16/12/2013
Aceptado: 11/02/2014
Sometido a evaluación por pares anónimos