RRL & RRS

RRL
FOREIGN
Agri-tourism is defined as any business conducted by a farmer for the enjoyment or education of the
public, to promote the products of the farm and to generate additional farm income (Hilchey, 1993).
Moreover, Hamzah et al. (2012) defines agri-tourism as an economic activity which inherently affects
the social, cultural, and the economics of life of a community. It is a tool that has been widely used
around the world for the purpose of intensifying
The literature affirmed that agri-tourism as a business provides benefits and opportunities to the
people. According to the theory of Lobo et al. (1999) agri-tourism can be an effective tool to educate
consumers about local agriculture, and its importance for the country’s economy and quality of life.
Moreover, McCallum (2003) and Churchchill (2004) have stated that agri-tourism is a growing segment
of the tourism industry, as a way to save the farm as well as provide customers with personalized
service; high- quality fresh food; and farm, nature and family experiences
Agritourism offers new types of satisfaction for the tourist; that is: modest accommodation, physical
activity, participation in rural activities and a closeness to nature (Gilbert 1989). The agritourist does not
usually expect high-quality accommodation (Kumbhar 2010), but needs a basic set of facilities that are
necessary for active and passive leisure as well as daily functioning connected with food preparation and
communication with others (i.e. access to the Internet) (Zawadka 2014).
The view that a positive correlation between tourist’s expectations and white collar occupations exists,
can be found in the literature. Zuzanek (1978), based on the literature, stated that participation in
relaxation is highly and positively correlated with social status and occupational prestige. According to
the author, white collar workers participate in a wider spectrum of tourist activities and at least some of
them require a relevant occupational status (Zuzanek 1978; after: Hartman & Cordel 1989).
Therefore, it may be stated that the results rather confirm the theory, known from the literature, that
the economic status of tourists does not determine their tourist behaviors and expectations (O`Leary
1982). It should also be underlined that students’ income per one family member is not the best
characteristic for tourist market segmentation.
LOCAL
According to the study of Recio, De Ada, Esguerra, Mandanas, Masangkay, Mendania, and Apritada
(2014) in the 4th district of Batangas, Philippines, agri-tourism contributes economic growth in the
locality, and also it has taught the locals and tourists to appreciate more the nature and life of the farms.
In addition, according to Otchterki (2008) as cited by Recio et al. (2014) agri-tourism provides additional
source of revenue for farmers and it increases their quality of life. In Malaysia, the study of Hamzah,
Yassin, Samah, Silva, Tiraiyaei, Shaffril and Uli (2012) revealed that agri-tourism provides several benefits
such as enhancement of social empowerment system, strengthening social ties and development of
social skills and relationships, increase in income of local community, diversification and intensification
of economic activities, job opportunities, and alleviation of poverty. Moreover, the study of Bwana et al.
(2015) in Kenya found out that agri-tourism reduces ruralurban migration of the young people since it
will provide incentives to preserve agricultural land, and it also creates employment opportunities.
REFERENCE: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1234/ijsegce.v2i1.50
RRS
FOREIGN
Research on tourists’ expectations serves as a basis for creating a touristic product and the development
of a whole branch of tourism. Fulfilment of these expectations is not only the reason for tourists’
satisfaction, but also guarantees promotion of tourist services and tourist areas (Carpio et al. 2008;
Wilson 2007; Kumbhar 2012). Recognition of consumers’ expectations regarding the touristic product
being offered, as well as the characteristics preferred in determining the choice of the product,
facilitates the product’s improvement, refinement of its parameters, and providing the most wanted
characteristics (Szymańska & Dziedzic 2005). As the cited authors claim; the consumer’s expectations are
a source of inspiration for the enterprise, and allow to it to verify its marketing decisions made during all
phases of shaping what is on offer to the tourist.
According to Larsen (2007) tourist experience should include expectations, perception and memory. A
part of tourist experience results from personality characteristics, and part from expectations toward
future travels. The cited author suggests that pleasant experiences may have a positive influence on
formulating other pleasant experiences. The negative experiences of an agritourist, on the other hand,
may end with abandoning this form of leisure or a particular farm (Morgan, Lugosi & Ritchie 2010).
The importance of gender as a relevant factor in the creation of tourist’s expectations is often
underlined in the research papers on this matter (Zuzanek 1978; Gentry & Doering 1979; Teaff & Turpin
1996; Lang et al. 1997). Study results show that women more often travel for tourist purposes (Speirs
2003) and men more often visit agritourist farms (Carpio et al. 2008). Women prefer less energy
consuming activities such as walking for pleasure, sunbathing, picnics, than men. On the other hand,
men are more interested in horseback riding, hiking, hunting, fishing (Speirs 2003). Gentry and Doering
underlined that the difference between women and men does not rely only on the kind of preferred
activity, but also on both genders attitudes toward them.
Research results were diversified where relations between income per one family member, and tourist
preferences and expectations were concerned. For example Keyser (2002) stated that tourist’s
expectations correspond to the financial situation of households as holiday expenses depend on
people’s income. O’Leary et al. (1982); however, proved that such a relation does not exist.
In the studies concerning relations between tourist expectations and the socio-demographic and
economic characteristics of respondents – characteristics such as age, gender, marital and family status
– the level of income or holiday lifestyle are usually used. Aspects regarding tourists’ interests are
passed over. It is understandable, as problems involving interests are very complex. Tourists usually
have many interests, and it is not necessarily possible to include them in a simple qualification.
Moreover, a tourist destination chosen by particular persons is usually a result of the fulfilment of their
interests. A stay on an agritourist farm is mainly connected with fulfilling the aims of resting. Fulfilment
of other interests is of secondary meaning and occurs “by the way”. Naturally, trips other than for
resting purposes, such as festival participation, during which agritourist farm only counts as an
accommodation facility, should be excluded from this type of thinking.
REFERENCE: https://journals.segce.com/index.php/IJSEGCE/article/view/50

RRL & RRS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RRL & RRS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RRL & RRS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RRL

REFERENCE: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1234/ijsegce.v2i1.50

You might also like