Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
restructuring and change by supporting the development of 'soft infrastructure', such as
education and entrepreneurial skills, and by attaching greater importance to the provision
of relevant research to improve decision-making, rather than specifically supporting
programmes which encourage the production of brochures, walking trails and other
small-scale local tourism initiatives, such as visitor centres. Such an integrated approach
to rural policy is essential given the extent to which tourism and recreation and second
home development is embedded in broader processes of counter-urbanisation (Buller and
Hoggart 1994; Swaffield and Fairweather 1998; C.J.A.Mitchell 2004a, 2004b) and
amenity and lifestyle migration (Hall 2005a). According to Champion (1998):
A key theme in the debate is the extent to which those moving into rural
areas are motivated by a desire for 'rurality' in terms of rural living
environment and lifestyle—in essence making a 'new start' that represents
a 'clean break' from their past—as opposed to choosing (or even being
forced) to move because of a geographical redistribution of elements that
have always been important to their quality of life such as jobs, housing,
services and safety.
(Champion 1998:22)
Nevertheless, such movements are not new and are part of processes that have been
occurring in the developed world since the late 1960s. As Law and Warnes (1973:377)
observed in the early 1970s, 'evidence from both North America and north-west Europe
is that rural areas, preferably in either waterside or hilly areas are the preferred setting for
vacation and retirement homes'.
CONCLUSION
This chapter has emphasised the development of geographical research in rural recreation
and tourism and the major philosophical changes in emphasis from empirically derived
analyses through to more socially derived analyses. The geographer has sometimes found
it hard to distinguish between the context of recreation and tourism, as users consume the
same resources in the rural environment (Jenkins and Pigram 1994). The 1960s and
1970s saw the development of a strong recreational geography of the rural environment
emerge from the leading research of noteworthy authors such as Coppock, Duffield,
Lavery and Glyptis within the UK and in North America, followed by the influential
work of S.L.J.Smith (1983a). The disappointing feature is the lack of continuity and
theoretical development after the 1970s. One possible explanation may be derived from
Chapter 1 with the denial of mainstream geography and its reluctance to embrace such
research as critical to the conceptual and theoretical development of the discipline. This is
certainly true in tourism up until the 1990s when research by mainstream human
geographers such as Cloke began to cultivate critical social geographies of recreation and
tourism in the countryside. Even so, one would expect that research assessment exercises
in countries such as the UK would do little to foster a spirit of mainstream incorporation
of tourism and recreation into the discipline as it may be assessed under business and
management rather than as a subgroup of geography. The nearest inroad is through the
