jcea82_13

8/8/2019 jcea82_13

1/6

ORIGINAL PAPER

223Volume 8 (2007) No. 2 (223-228)

ROLE OF RURAL TOURISM FOR DEVELOPMENT OF RURAL AREAS

Andrej Udov, Anton Perpar

Correspondence: tel: +38614231161, fax: +38614231088, email: [email protected] Biotechnical Faculty, University ofLjubljana, Jamnikarjeva 101, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Manuscript received: July 22, 2006; Reviewed: September 1, 2006; Accepted for publication: March 5, 2007

ABSTRACT

The paper analyse the role of rural tourism for the development of rural areas, on the comparison of two regions withdifferent types of rural tourism. One area is of highly diversified rural tourism with wide range of tourist products(rafting, hiking, cycling, farm tourism, skiing ). The tourism offer in the second area is much more uniform (mainlyarm tour sm an some spa . T e stu y ana yse ow t e two erent types o tour st pro uct vers cat onsn uence t e eve opment poss t es o stu e rura areas. We ana yse ow erent systems are a e to ma nta n

its functions in the context of identified perturbations (socio-economic and geophysical). We analysed the influence

of different factors on systems stability, its resilience, robustness and integrity. The gained results show that onlythe higher level of diversification is not a guarantee for systems higher stability, resilience, robustness and integrity,ut t ere a so ot er actor w c n uence t e outcome as: s ze o t e area, vers ty o actors nvo ve , type o

governance

Keywords: Rural tourism, socio-economic system, system stability, system resilience, system robustness, system

integrity

8/8/2019 jcea82_13

2/6

24 ournal of Central European Agriculture Vol 8 (2007) No 2


INTRODUCTION

he study explores two protected areas in Slovenia with aocus on rura tour sm. T e ma n purpose o t e researcs to ana yse a rura tour sm s tuat on n two areas ano exp ore t e n uence o tour sm n rura areas on

esilience of the region. The analysis focused on social,economic and environmental aspect of protected areas.

e stu y areas were se ecte upon two most mportantcr ter a presente e ow:Protected area established at least 15 years ago (selectedwere: Triglav National Park (TNP) and KozjanskiRegional Park (KRP) as they were the only parks inS oven a t at were esta s e more t an 15 years ago ;Extent of tourism diversification TNP is characterized

by highly diversified forms of tourism activities andnfrastructure, while in the KPR the activities offeredo tour sts an tour sm n rastructure are not yet so

vers e .he analysis focused on the key dimensions of a

functioning system over time, namely: integrity,obustness, stability and resilience [3, 4]. Functioning of

soc a -eco og ca systems s a so con t one y nternaan externa actors av ng an n uence on t e system.

ese actors er rom eac ot er not on y y t e rcharacter (biophysical vs. socio-economic), but also bympetuosity (shocks vs. shifts). As part of the research,n eac case t ere were our var ants o actors o c ange

ent e , w c ave an n uence on t e system ta e1 . A aptat on processes to t e ent e s oc s an s ts

were analyzed with particular focus on two processes:nstitutional change and social learning.

Researc quest ons stu e were: Does t e type oour sm act v t es n uence w et er sta ty, res ence,o ustness an ntegr ty are promote or re uce yourism over time? What were the main outcomes of

specific disturbances in each of the study regions? Arehere some institutions in Slovenia (measures or funds),

w c a m to u er s oc s or pertur at ons?Research hypothesesMore diverse tourism leads to higher stability, resilience,o ustness an ntegr ty o soc a -eco og ca systems.

vers ty o actors an soc a ro es are essent a assources of stability, resilience, robustness and integrity inhe social dimension of natural resource management.

e ma n soc a sources o res ence are nst tut onae un ancy, ex e soc a networ s, soc a memory an

organ sat ons t at r ge eve s n systems o mu t - eve

governance.

2 METHODS AND DATA

For con uct ng t e researc n quest on we use a case

study approach as a particular method of qualitativeresearch to be able to capture the complexity of social-ecological systems and to identify (not to omit) non-

near ty o processes 1 . Pr mary ata were co ecten June an Ju y 2006. Because o t e m te t me an

resources we asked representatives of the local authoritywho know the situation and stakeholders involved inrural tourism in protected areas well to prepare a list ofmost mportant actors or nterv ews or ot casesTNP an KRP.In TNP interviews were conducted with the following

sta e o ers1 t e representat ves o Tr g av Nat ona

Park Board, the employees from Information Centre ofTNP in Trenta, the owners of Tourist Farms in Trenta,the representatives of Tourist Association of Trenta, therepresentat ves o Loca Commun ty Log po Mangartoman t e owners o guest ouses n Log po Mangartom. InKRP interviewees were: the representatives of KozjanskiRegional Park Board, the major of Municipality ofKozje (as a central local community in the park), therepresentat ve o Loca Commun ty o Koz e w o s att e same t me owner o tour st arm, t e representat ve oLoca Commun ty o B ze s o, w o s a so at t e sametime owner of tourist farm and the representatives ofTourist Association Piece.Sources o secon ary ata co ecte were: egaocuments, o c a stat st cs, reports, art c es, sc ent c

and other publications and other documents, internetresources,reports of self-government bodies andorganisations websites.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

T e sta ty o t e system we tr e to assess y ana ys ngthe reaction on the closure of the Rabelj mine in TNPand establishment of the border to Croatia for KRP. Inconnection to the establishment of border and loss of

mar ets, we can say t at t s event was rea y a s oc ort e reg on an t too some t me to a opt to t, an t sadoption took a kind of evolutive path from what to donow over smuggling to redirecting to new more distantmarkets and change of structure of the products (fromvegeta e to more ru ts an w ne an rura tour sm . T e

As TNP area s g, we concentrate our nterv ews on y n Poso e reg on v ages Trenta an Log po Mangartom.he reason is that we used examples of shocks and shifts from there.

8/8/2019 jcea82_13

3/6


225J. Cent. Eur. Agric. (2007) 8:2, 223-228

same kind of adoption happened in tourist industry (localSPA), so that on the long run the area dont feel that the

or er presents a eve opment pro em.In case of TNP and Log pod Mangartom the closure ofthe mine had both: positive and negative effects. The

positive is that water pollution from the mine stopped, but

on t e ot er an a ot o oca n a tants ost t e r o sw t tt e poss ty to n a new one. T e v age tse

never rea y try to compensate t s oss w t someother activity, but over time the activities of surroundingarea and the park (development of tourism in Soa valleyand development programs such as organic farming in

Nat ona par ave pro uce new opportun t es. Butst a num er o peop e e t t e v age.In the case of system resilience in regard to the change of

political system and accession to the EU, it is hard to tellw c area a apte etter. At t e eg nn ng t e area oTNP a etter c ances to use t e nstruments ava a e

ecause o t e access on process EU nance pro ectsand also the private initiative could start to develop sooner(experience from neighbouring countries and national

parks as well as more financial sources from people whowere wor ng over or er , ut a so t e KRP area uset e ava a e poss t es we an s ncreas ng t usenowadays (structural funds, international cooperation on

projects etc.).Regarding the system robustness we could notice that

ot areas tr e to use t e ava a e opportun t es tour sm

development, introducing new products, engaging inrural development programs and projects etc.), where thee ect o t s seems to e etter n t e KRP t an n t eTNP. T e reason or t s m g t e n t e act, t at ot

protected areas are of different size. The KRP is smallerand more homogeneous, so also the coordination among

actions and projects is easier. On the other side the TNP isgenera y v e on t ree a most not connecte va eys

ecause o natura arr ers-mounta ns w t erentnee s an v s ons o uture eve opment.With reference to the integrity of the regions, if we tryto assess it over the problem of out migration than wecannot rea y not ce t e erence, ecause n otreg ons t e pro em pers st an or t e t me e ng a sothe development of tourism cannot reduce it. But on theother hand in both regions was also mentioned, that thedevelopment of tourism is inducing the inflow of people,espec a y t ose w o want to u t ere t e r secon

ouses, w at r ngs a new pro em: so ca e acu ng - u ng o secon ouses w t out spat aplan and permissions.

3.1 Discussion

On the example of two analysed cases it is possible tonotice, that some actors are simultaneously performingdifferent roles (i.e. the same person is local representative,c a r person o oca tour st oar an owner o ggesttour st arm n t e area w at ea s to t e etter a aptat onto shocks and shifts. Such a situation is taking place in

Table 1: Overview of perturbations

PerturbationsTriglav national park - Trenta

Diverse tourism

Kozjanski Regional park

Not diverse tourism

ShockIndependence of Slovenia and accession toEU; Closing of mine Rabelj

Independence of Slovenia and newborder with Croatia;Accession to EU

External

Shift Political system change Political system change

ShockInitiatives for a new Law on TNP andinitiatives for changing the borders of park

Shock

arising

from

socio-economic

sphere

Internal

Shift Emigrations from area Emigrations from area

Shock Earthquake in Poso je in 1998 Earthquake in Kozjansko in 1974

External

ShiftGrowth of game (reed and roe deer, bear,wolf, and lynx)

Shock

Landslide in Log pod Mangartom Drought in 2003

Shock

arising

from

geophysicalsphere

Internal

Shift

Farming land overgrowing,Decreasing of Soa trout population

Farming land overgrowing

8/8/2019 jcea82_13

4/6

26 ournal of Central European Agriculture Vol 8 (2007) No 2


both cases. This facilitates to see at a lot of issue fromerent perspect ves, to un erstan erent arguments;

t ea s t e etter a aptat on, g er sta ty, res ence,o ustness an ntegr ty.

In the TNP regions the social memory and social networks

could be recognised as the important factor enhancinge a apt ve potent a o governance, as t e nat ona par

as a ong ast ng tra t on over 80 years an ecause oc ose a p ne commun t es a so process o soc a memoryransmission is still present. In the case of KRP this is not

so evident; as the region is more open and less developedhe out migration was much higher.

e appearance o t e appropr ate nnovat on s t esymptom of the effective adaptation to the changingcontext and shocks or shifts. In the case of both investigatedegions it is possible to identify the occurrence of severalnnovat ons. TNP as eve ope ts own sc ent c

esearc nst tute w c wor s as n epen ent nst tuten rame o TNP Pu c Inst tut on s nce 1998. T e ma nask of institute is to collect and to arrange the results of

scientific researches in the park, to stimulate and directndividuals and the researches of research institutions,

an to researc natura an cu tura er tage. TNP a soopene some In ormat on Centres o t e par : one n

renta (it helped a lot to Trenta development, providingalso new working places and it is a motor of development)and one in Pocarjeva domaija in Radovna. TNP wasse ecte a so as a partner n p ot pro ect Young Ranger- nnovat ve way to present rangers wor to pup s ano st mu ate t em or nature protect on an to s are t e

awareness in local communities. In TNP they are alsodeveloping a model of eco-tourism as a way of sustainableourism appropriate for protected areas.

KRP a so eve ope some rea y nnovat ve pro uctsand projects based on natural and traditional cultural

eritage of Kozjansko. They recorded rural architecture(more than 3000 units, 800 of them can have a statuso cu tura monument , an ntro uce t e Koz ans oapp e an a pro ucts eve ope rom t em w t tra e

ark SOITJE for this products. The park also organizededucation programme how to cut the tries, and how to

ake different products from them (brandy, vinegar,

juice). As a result of education a special group of treecutters were qua e an t ey go aroun an cut t e tr esan teac peop e n area ow to o t at. T ey oun a soa special way of bottle filling it enables to store a juicefor two years without preservatives. At the end apple

project finished also with now traditional internationalApp e est va pro ess ona , sem nar, cu tura an

soc a event . Renewa o g trun mea ow orc ar secame a so an nternat ona INTERREG pro ect. In

Kozjansko also joinery was traditional and apple project

brought new possibility for revival of some products fromvery co our u app e or nut tree woo . Innovat ve s a soree ng o capons un er mea ow orc ar s as rev va o

an o M e Ages C aracter st cs. In one a an onehamlet with four homes they want to develop ecological

village with apartments and with parallel tourist andeducational offer.Summ ng up t e s sue o earn ng t s wort w ement on ng t at t e e ect ve process o earn ng mustco-occur with the process involving all actors into the

process of deciding and managing protected area andits surroundings [2]. In both case such action is beingta en. Ma n n t ator o t ese act ons n ot areas s t e

par a m n strat on, w ere t e TNP s muc more act vedue to its bigger size, higher financial support fromnational budget and longer existence. The active learningis organized in forms of different workshops, seminars,

part c pat on n nat ona an nternat ona pro ects antrans ers o goo pract ces or erent n o peop e.Bot par s a m n strat ons are a so putt ng a great e orton cooperation with children, so in both areas they aretrying to involve actively local schools into the parkact v t es.T e ana ys s s ows t at rura tour sm s seen as a veryimportant, probably even the most important, factorfor economic development in both areas, and it is alsoseen as a solution for lost working places. Howevernone o t e area s ntereste n mass tour sm or every

n o tour sm. Bot areas promote susta na e way otour sm n connect on w t nature protect on an ocaarea characteristics. Endogenous potentials (natural andhuman) of each area are most important. Tourism in parkis increasing and it means also important contributionto economy o n v ua area. In TNP t ey ave v s ona out ecotour sm as an appropr ate way o tour sm or

protected areas. Ecotourism is one way of sustainabletourism; it is an instrument for natural protection andat the same time assures sustainable economic benefitsor oca peop e 5 . Ecotour sm can e un erstoo as

env ronmenta , soc o og ca an econom c category. Aseconom c category t can cruc a contr ute to susta na erural development and it is at the same time a motor of

development. As sociological category it can contributeto g er awareness o pu c a out mportance o nature

protect on, at t e same t me v s tors ave mpress on t atw t t e r appropr ate treatment contr ute to protect onand maintaining. As economic category ecotourism assure

promotion and marketing of products from protectedareas like nature, cultural heritage, clean water, fresh air,oca aut ent c pro ucts a so rom eco og ca arm ng .

But a n o tour sm act v t es an t e r eve opmentshould be adjusted with local population in protected

8/8/2019 jcea82_13

5/6


227J. Cent. Eur. Agric. (2007) 8:2, 223-228

areas.

3.2 Conclusions

Generally, on the case of two analysed protected areas,we could not find firm evidence which indicates highersta ty, res ence, ro ustness an ntegr ty o t e reg onw t more vers e tour st o er. In some cases t e essdiverse area (KRP) proved to be better off (i.e. stability).However the rural tourism proved to be one of the mostimportant factors for securing the sustainable rural

eve opment n ana yse reg ons.

4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was financed under the ECs FP5, Qualityof Life and the Management of Living Resources (QLK5-

CT-2002-02718)

REFERENCES

1 Ber es, F ret; Jo an Co ng, Car Fo e 2003Intro uct on n: Nav gat ng Soc a -Eco og ca Systems.Bulding Resilience for Complexity and Change. Fikret

Bekres; Johan Colding, Carl Folke (eds.). Cambridge:Cam r ge Un vers ty Press

2] Kofinas, Gary (2003) Resilience of Human-Rangifer Systems, IHDP Update No. 2, pp. 6-7

3 Stag , S gr 2006 Rura Tour sm an Res enceo Reg ons. Part o WP 2 Learn ng or Soc a -Eco og caResilience and Diffusion of Innovations. Working Paper

prepared within the IDARI Project WP 2

4 St r ng, An y 2005 Open ng Up EnergyTrans t ons: precaut on, res ence an vers ty nsocial appraisal. Paper presented to SPRU / EindhovenWorkshop on Energy Transitions, University of Sussex,27th October 2005

5] olar, Martin: Model ekoturizma v Triglavskemnarodnem parku. V: Turizem v zavarovanih obmojih.Gradivo s posveta, Turistina zveza Slovenije, Goriko,

december 2005.

8/8/2019 jcea82_13

6/6

jcea82_13

Documents