Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
of geographers has largely been in relation to the study of farm tourism. But as Butler and
Clark (1992) rightly acknowledge, tourism in rural areas is not necessarily the magical
solution to rural development, given its
income leakages, volatility, declining multipliers, low pay, imported
labour and the conservatism of investors. The least favoured circumstance
in which to promote tourism is when the rural economy is already weak,
since tourism will create highly unbalanced income and employment
distributions. It is a better supplement for a thriving and diverse economy
than as a mainstay of rural development.
(Butler and Clark 1992:175)
In a longitudinal study of the Spey Valley, Scotland, Getz (1981, 1986b, 1993c, 1994a,
1994b) documents a rural area in which tourism has remained the economic mainstay. In
this respect, Butler and Clark's (1992) research is useful in that it identifies the principal
concerns in rural economic research and the role of tourism in development in relation to
• income leakage
• multipliers
• labour issues (local versus imported and low pay)
• the limited number of entrepreneurs in rural areas
• the proposition that tourism should be a supplement rather than the mainstay of rural
economies.
The principal research in this area has been undertaken by economists such as Archer
(1973, 1982) whose pioneering studies of multipliers have been used to establish the
economic benefits of tourist expenditure in rural areas. While these studies have
remained the baseline for subsequent research on rural tourism, few studies embrace a
broad economic analysis to encompass the wide range of issues raised by Butler and
Clark (1992). One possible explanation for this paucity of detailed economic studies of
rural tourism may be related to the persistence of a 'farm tourism' focus.
Farm tourism
Farm tourism may offer one way of facilitating agricultural diversification. According to
N.J.Evans (1992a), research on farm tourism can be divided into two categories. The first
is an expanding literature concerned with 'differing types of farm diversification as a
major option adapted by farm families to aid business restructuring, necessitated by
falling farm incomes' (Evans 1992a:140). The second is 'one devoted specifically to farm
tourism and though these studies remain the most detailed, they are becoming
increasingly dated' (Evans 1992a:140). Evans (1992a) cited those by Davies (1971),
C.Jacobs (1973), DART (1974), Bull and Wibberley (1976), Denman (1978) and Frater
(1982) which all use 1970s data.
Evans (1992a) is critical of the second group of studies for their lack of definitional
clarity, since they fail to distinguish between the accommodation and recreational
components of farm tourism (Evans and Ilbery 1989). Evans (1992a:140) rightly
considers the analytical components of the studies to be too simplistic, focusing on
