Planning for Growth? Re-thinking the Rural Tourism Opportunity1

Mair/Canadian Society of Extension 2001
Planning for Growth? Re-thinking the Rural
Tourism Opportunity 1
Heather Mair
Dr. Donald Reid
Wanda George
Jim Taylor
Faculty of Environmental Design and Rural Development
University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
1
Rural communities are pressed to generate growth in the face of economic restructuring, the reduction of government
services and funding, and threats to their natural resources. Rural tourism is becoming increasingly attractive
as a mechanism for meeting these challenges and many planners, practitioners and academics believe that
the future of rural communities rests with the economic, social and political opportunities created through
tourism. This presentation discusses the current shift towards tourism-led growth in Southwestern Ontario and
highlights some of the environmental, economic and social implications of this move. By challenging the notion
that tourism is nearly always a viable, ‘quick fix’ for rural ills, the presentation offers an alternative vision of the
opportunities presented by rural tourism and gives direction to a new approach to community development more
generally.
Introduction
The conundrum of change in rural Canada has been the
topic of much discussion of late. Indeed, consideration of
rural change has taken the attention of many theorists, and
especially community development practitioners. The purpose
of this paper is to carve out one component of the
responses to rural change in this era of global restructuring
- tourism. Economic change, particularly changing agricultural
practices, have led to rural unemployment and have
presented grave dilemmas about the future of rural communities
in general. Rural decline has been a problem for all
modern governments. The use of tourism as a way to generate
growth is a common response. In their work on tourism
and community development, a group of researchers from
Canada and Brazil noted that tourism is looked upon as a
“possible salvation” but one that is “fraught with danger”
often resulting in minimal long term benefits for the local
community and the development of a community that is “at
the mercy of outsiders” (2001: 1). This paper is concerned
with the problems inherent in tourism-led growth in rural
communities and focuses on research in Southwestern Ontario.
The paper is divided into four parts. First, there is a brief
introduction to tourism in rural areas which sets the stage
for the rest of the analysis by considering the attractiveness
of tourism development as a mechanism for rural growth
1
Draft. Not for Citation.
in many communities. The second section will outline research
undertaken in seven rural communities in Southwestern
Ontario in an effort to highlight the problems and
issues that are erupting as tourism development continues
to intensify. Having outlined the impacts of current tourism-led
approaches to rural development and growth, this
paper then suggests that there are opportunities for tourism
planning to be undertaken in a more engaging, participatory
and potentially less damaging way. This paper concludes
by introducing some of the next stages of research in order
to give direction to an alternative planning process for tourism
in rural communities.
I. Introducing Rural Tourism
Rural tourism might seem easily defined as travel to rural
areas but research has shown that it is much more complex
(Lane, 1993b). There are a variety of examples of the ways
tourism is undertaken in rural areas, including: nature-based
activities, festivals, heritage events, aboriginal-based attractions
and events, agri-tourism, arts and crafts shows, community
theatre and others. As Lane points out, rural tourism
is a multi-faceted and complex activity which includes everything
from farm-based tourism to educational travel, health
tourism, ‘ethnic’ tourism and ecotourism (1993a). Part of the
reason for the complexity rests with the difficulty inherent in
defining rural areas themselves especially as their roles
change in an increasingly globalizing economy. While much
of the focus upon how to define what constitutes rural areas
has been concerned with its changing function in the global
economy, Panelli (2001) argues that the meanings and poli-
Issues in Rural Extension

Mair/Canadian Society of Extension 2001
2
tics of change in rural areas are as important as the economic
shifts that seem to generally characterize their function. Considerations
of tourism and travel to rural areas, then, are also
complicated.
The context within which rural tourism has developed is a
useful starting point for this discussion. Travel to rural areas
has grown for two inter-related reasons: on the ‘demand’
side, people are becoming increasingly interested in rural
areas and heritage tourism; on the ‘supply’ side, governments
have been taking initiatives to encourage its development.
While the question of travel to rural areas is an
interesting one (see Weiler and Hall 1992), for the purposes
of this paper, the focus is mostly upon the role of government
in its development. In Ontario, the election of the Harris
Conservative government and its ‘Common Sense Revolution’
intensified a process of scaling back the role of government
in rural community growth and development. The idea
of planning rural communities was generally to be undertaken
from the perspective of amalgamated rural municipal
governments who were in charge of much of their own funding
and development. This shift was not unique to Ontario
and was, as Healey argues, deeply influenced by the neoliberal
strategy of promoting entrepreneurial rather than regulatory
styles of governance (1997; see also Harvey 1989).
As municipal governments in rural communities are pushed
to devise their own strategies for generating funds for providing
services, tourism is given increasing credence. This
is the case in many places in the world. In a 1994 report by
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development,
it was suggested that tourism had a vital role to play in
the future of rural development:
For many years a number of rural areas have
been beset by population loss and declining
services. These problems are now exacerbated
by changes that have brought job losses and
falling income to the farm sector. In contrast
to this downturn, tourism has blossomed into
a prosperous, fast-growing activity, and has
indeed turned out to be a significant factor for
economic growth in the countries in which it
has developed. It was therefore important to
determine whether tourism’s growth potential
could be harnessed as a strategy for rural development,
in particular by drawing upon resurgent
interest in the countryside, its traditional
way of life, and landscapes and the architectural
heritage....[Tourism] has proved to
be a powerful engine for economic growth - -
transferring capital, income and employment
from industrial, urban and developed areas to
non-industrial regions. (1994: 5-7)
The relationship between tourism and economic development
is growing both in importance as a development strategy
and a focus for research (see Aronsson 2000; Blank
1989; Bouquet and Winter 1987; Britton 1991; Butler et al.
1998; Hall and Jenkins, 1998; Ilbery 1998; Keane 1992; Luloff
et al. 1993; Mitchell 1998 & 2000; Ramaswany and Kluentzel
1998). The next section narrows the discussion to the experiences
of four rural communities in Southwestern Ontario 2 .
II. Tourism Development and Problems in Rural
Communities 3
Increasing attention is being given to the impact of tourism
development on the members of rural communities (Bourke
and Luloff 1995; Perdue, Long and Allen 1987 & 1990; Pizam
1978; Smith and Krannich 1998). Research undertaken in
four rural communities in 1999 supports these findings. Interviews
were completed with over 100 respondents from
four rural communities. These four communities were selected
based upon their position along an adapted version
of Butler’s destination life-cycle model (1980). Care was taken
to identify and interview members of the business community
(tourism and non-tourism businesses), concerned residents,
service club representatives and other community
volunteers, and local politicians. Overall, when asked about
the benefits that tourism brought to their community, respondents
were most inclined to discuss economic factors.
Employment, economic growth, spin-offs such as support
services, and business development were commonly given
as evidence that tourism helps boost the rural economy.
When pressed to consider some non-economic benefits, respondents
usually identified examples of community pride,
cultural interaction and education, incentives to keep the
community neat and tidy, and the ability to maintain support
for diverse businesses and services.
The overarching purpose of this research was to have
respondents identify issues and concerns related to tourism
development in their community. Major concerns and issues
resulting from the development of tourism included traffic
congestion, noise, the lack of access to amenities, the lack of
privacy, a feeling of a loss of balance, threats to rural
tranquility, and a fear of losing control of the tourism industry.
Conflicts around tourism-related activities also appear to
occur more often in communities where tourism growth has
intensified. These conflicts and anger appear to have been
most often manifested in petitions and town hall meetings,
but they have also been played out in public, face-to-face
confrontations and in open hostility, anti-tourist signage,
and other forms of vandalism.
Analysis of the four areas suggests that tourism communities
place immediate attention on the substantive issues which
2
In the interest of space, this paper will not discuss the methodological
underpinnings of this research. For details, see Reid, D.G., J.
Taylor and H. Mair. (2000a) Rural tourism development: research
report. School of Rural Planning and Development, University of
Guelph, Guelph, Ontario.
3
A similar version of this section was presented at the 6 th Annual
World Leisure and Recreation Congress, Bilbao, Spain, July, 2000.
Issues in Rural Extension

Mair/Canadian Society of Extension 2001
3
are causing tensions and community conflict. Most of the
participants in this study suggested that if they could
address the substantive issues including traffic, parking,
consistent business hours and the nature of the tourism
product (i.e., mass tourism or high-end), then they would
have dealt sufficiently with the major irritants. Respondents
in each of the study communities expressed that the creation
of a tourism plan would be a major step toward solving their
problems. Through our analysis of the decision-making
processes in each of the communities, however, it became
clear that there was no identifiable and widely trusted process
for making the decisions necessary to begin to create this
tourism plan.
Tourism development in each of the study communities has
moved forward incrementally, and in a direction that has
generally been unplanned and unsupported by residents in
any meaningful way. Tourism development that occurs at
the whim of local businesses has the potential to sow the
seeds of its own destruction (Mitchell, 1998). Tensions will
develop within the community as some members benefit
from tourism and others are left out; poorly planned traffic
routes will exacerbate congestion and frustration; there will
be a drop in the provision of local services (or an increase in
their cost); and the invasiveness that unchecked tourism
growth can bring to a small community will be increasingly
resented. These community tensions can begin to affect
the health (and appeal) of the community.
Regardless of whether respondents saw tourism development
as good for the community, a necessary evil, or an approach
to development that must be avoided, nearly all respondents
suggested that planning for tourism development was an
essential and often neglected activity. Responses indicated
that undertaking a planning or visioning exercise was
believed to be necessary for addressing tourism
development problems and may bridge the divides between
those who were in support of unfettered tourism
development, those who accepted limited development and
those who wanted none. Even business owners and those
who stood to gain most directly from intense tourism
development suggested that there should be controls or
guidelines put in place both to ensure consistency and quality
in the development of tourism, but also to prevent overdevelopment
which could taint the community’s appeal.
Indeed, when asked about potential mechanisms for
addressing concerns, conflicts and considerations of future
directions, respondents overwhelmingly suggested the need
to create a plan. Not working from a community-based
approach, however, can lead to dissatisfied residents whose
attitudes will affect the image and tone of community life
and thus risk reducing the appeal of the area. It is clear that
what is needed in the first instance is a process which will
allow the various groups in the community to confront
collectively the irritants which arise as a result of tourism
development. The next section introduces on-going research
in three other rural communities which is attempting to
develop such a process.
III. Alternative Approaches to Rural Tourism Planning
Given the issues uncovered in the first stage of the research,
many questions arise both for planners and researchers of
rural tourism. If the community is an integral part of the
tourism product, how might planners create a more integrative
and holistic approach to tourism planning? Some researchers
might consider this to be the foundation for sustainable
tourism (Hunter, 1997; see also Bramwell and
Sharman 1999). Can there be sustainable rural tourism? How
can it be planned for, monitored and controlled? An especially
useful approach to answering these questions is influenced
by the work of Hunter (1997). He argues that sustainable
tourism is most effectively used as an “adaptive paradigm”
insofar as it can take different forms in different places,
depending on how one arrives at a balance between the
perceived needs of the community in question, and the demands
of the tourists visiting them. Hunter sees sustainable
tourism as a continuum (1997: 859-863) wherein a community
could have a ‘tourism imperative’ in that they would
decide which resources would need to be sacrificed in order
to generate income. The other end of the continuum,
‘neotenuous tourism’ or an ecology first perspective, would
actively discourage tourism in an effort to protect those natural
areas that the community wants to protect. This
neotenuous position could be extended beyond ecology
concerns to include the preservation of rural community life
and culture.
It is important to note that each step along this continuum
involves a degree of control and preservation, but the mix is
decided by the community in question and may change over
time. A community that decides to attract an initially large
number of tourists to generate income, for instance, may
move along the continuum provided that controls (as
determined by the community) are in place to safeguard total
destruction until there could be an increased level of
protection or control. Changes in the nature of tourism indicate
that tourists may well be accepting of the need for these
protective measures, and may be willing to take an active
role in encouraging these measures (Hunter, 1997; Aramberri,
2001).
The question remains, of course, of how this might take place.
On-going research with members of three different rural communities
in Southwestern Ontario suggests that an essential
starting point is the creation of a community visioning session
which helps to build the trust between community members
as all take an equal role in dreaming about the future of
their community. Importantly, the focus of this session is
deliberately not on tourism per se but on the community
itself. Participants follow the model of a search conference,
as set out by Emery and Purser (1996) and spend time drawing
images of their community, discussing their drawings
and then making collective decisions about what in their
Issues in Rural Extension

Mair/Canadian Society of Extension 2001
4
community they want to protect, build upon and prevent
from continuing. While this process requires facilitation,
care is taken to ensure that those participating are in control
of all decisions through consensus. The next stages of the
community visioning exercise involves slotting tourism development
into the created vision and devising strategies
about how to reach this goal. While the research is still at
early stages, there are many exciting instances of collaboration,
enhanced understanding and mutual respect that form
over the course of this particular exercise. Participants in
two of these exercises have determined that it should be
undertaken again with as many people from the community
as possible. The challenge remains in terms of engendering
the initiative and energy to design a flexible, communitybased
tourism planning process but these first efforts reveal
a buy-in which helps to ensure the momentum is indigenous
and self-directed.
Conclusion
In their work on collaborative recreation and park services
planning, Hope and Dempsey (2000) have utilised community
decision conferences and conclude that this type of
planning:
should represent what people want, project imaginatively
what might be, and recognize realistically
what is possible. It must also actively
involve the stakeholders and seek to
build consensus around shared community
values in order to achieve genuine commitment
to implementation. (p. 63-4)
As researchers and planners investigate the role of tourism
in rural development, attention must be paid not just to the
players in the community and the importance of inclusivity,
but also on the context. As was mentioned earlier, tourism is
being introduced in small communities around the world as
the quick fix for development ills. Tourism is being asked to
generate a plethora of benefits for communities and thus
must be taken seriously. For example, as part of its rural jobs
strategy and to encourage development in rural areas, the
provincial government in Ontario earmarked $30 million dollars
for rural projects - over $7 million of which went to rural
tourism projects. That number indicates that nearly onethird
of rural development funding is steering rural tourism
growth. The appeal of tourism for rural development fits
alongside the ideals of entrepreneurial growth insofar as it
means the government can take a smaller role. As is shown
above, however, entrepreneurially driven tourism leads to
problems in rural communities and so must be steered much
more carefully than first considered. A long-term approach
to healthy tourism development demands the time, resources
and skills to ensure that it is built from consensus and support
and with as many members and perspectives in the
community as possible. The research described here is a
step in that direction.
References
Aramberri, J. 2001. “The Host Should Get Lost: Paradigms in the
Tourism Theory.” in Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 28.
No. 3. pp. 738-761.
Aronsson, L. 2000. The Development of Sustainable Tourism.
London: Continuum.
Blank, U. 1989. The Community Tourism Industry Imperative.
Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing.
Bourke, L. and A.E. Luloff. 1995. “Leaders’ Perspectives on Rural
Tourism: Case Studies in Pennsylvania.” in Journal of the
Community Development Society. Vol. 26. No. 2. 224-239.
Bouquet, M. and M. Winter. (eds). 1987. Who From Their Labours
Rest? Conflict and Practice in Rural Tourism. Aldershot,
England: Avebury.
Bramwell, Bill and Angela Sharman. 1999. “Collaboration in Local
Tourism Policymaking.” in Annals of Tourism Research.
Vol. 26. No. 2. 392-415.
Britton, S. 1991. “Tourism, Capital and Place: Towards a Critical
Geography of Tourism.” in Environment and Planning D:
Society and Space. Vol. 9. pp. 451-478.
Butler, R.W. 1980. “The Concept of a Tourism Area Cycle of
Evolution: Implications for Management of Resources.” in
Canadian Geographer. Vol. XXIV. No. 1. 5-12.
Butler, R., M.C. Hall and J.M. Jenkins (eds.). 1998. Tourism and
Recreation in Rural Areas. London: John Wiley and Sons.
Emery, M. and R.E. Purser. 1996. The Search Conference: A Powerful
Method for Planning Organizational Change and Community
Action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hall, C. M. and J.M. Jenkins. 1998. “The Policy Dimensions of Rural
Tourism and Recreation.” in R. Butler, C.M. Hall and J.M.
Jenkins (eds.). Tourism and Recreation in Rural Areas. New
York: John Wiley & Sons. pp. 19-42.
Harvey, D. 1989. “From Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The
Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism.”
in Geografiska Annaler. B (Human Geography). Vol. 71.
No. 1. pp. 3-17.
Healey, P. 1997. Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in
Fragmented Societies. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Hope, D. and S. Dempsey. 2000. “Achieving Consensus in Planning
Recreation and Park Services.” in World Leisure. Vol. 42.
No. 4. pp. 56-64.
Hunter, Colin. 1997. “Sustainable Tourism as an Adaptive Paradigm.”
in Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 24. No. 4. 850-867.
Ilbery, B. (ed.). 1998. The Geography of Rural Change. Essex,
United Kingdom: Addison Wesley Longman Limited.
Keane, M. 1992. “Rural Tourism and Rural Development.” in H.
Briassoulis and Jan van der Straaten (eds.). Tourism and the
Environment: Regional, Economic and Policy Issues.
London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 43-56.
Lane, B. 1993a. “What is Rural Tourism?” in Bramwell, B. and B.
Lane (eds.). Rural Tourism and Sustainable Rural
Development. Proceedings of the Second International
School on Rural Development, 28 June - 9 July. Ireland:
University College Galway. pp. 7-21
Lane, B. 1993b. “Sustainable Rural Tourism Strategies: A Tool for
Development and Conservation.” in Bramwell, B. and B. Lane
(eds.). Rural Tourism and Sustainable Rural Development.
Proceedings of the Second International School on Rural
Development, 28 June - 9 July. Ireland: University College
Galway. pp. 102-111.
Luloff, A.E., J.C. Bridger, A.R. Graefe, M. Saylor, K. Martin, and R.
Gitelson. 1993. “Assessing Rural Tourism Efforts in the
United States.” in Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 21.
pp. 46-64.
Mitchell, C.J.A. 1998. “Entrepreneurialism, Commodification and
Creative Destruction: a Model of Post-modern Community
Development.” in Journal of Rural Studies. Vol. 14. No. 3.
273-286.
Issues in Rural Extension

Mair/Canadian Society of Extension 2001
5
Mitchell, Clare J.A. and Candy Coghill. 2000. “The Creation of a
Cultural Heritage Landscape: Elora, Ontario, Canada.” in The
Great Lakes Geographer. Vol. 7. No. 2. pp. 88-105.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. 1994.
Tourism Strategies and Rural Development. Paris: OECD.
94 pp.
Palerno F. (project director). 2000. Tourism and Community
Development Case Studies. Halifax, Canada: Faculty of
Architecture, Dalhousie University.
Panelli, R. 2001. “Narratives of Community and Change in a
Contemporary Rural Setting: The Case of Duaringa,
Queensland.” in Australian Geographical Studies. Vol. 39.
No. 2. pp. 156-166.
Perdue, R. R., P. T. Long, and L. Allen. 1987. “Rural Resident
Tourism Perceptions and Attitudes.” in Annals of Tourism
Research. Vol. 14. 420-429.
Perdue, R. R., P. T. Long, and L. Allen. 1990. “Resident Support for
Tourism Development.” in Annals of Tourism Research.
Vol. 17. 586-599.
Pizam, A. 1978. “Tourism’s Impacts: The Social Costs to the
Destination Community as Perceived by its Residents.” Journal
of Travel Research. Vol. 16. No. 4. 8-12.
Ramaswamy, V.M. and W.F. Kuentzel. 1998. “Rural Restructuring
and the Transition of a Tourism Dependent Community.” in
Tourism Analysis. Vol. 3. pp. 63-76.
Reid, D.G., J. Taylor and H. Mair. 2000a. Rural Tourism Development:
Research Report. School of Rural Planning and Development,
University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario.
Reid, D.G., H. Mair and J. Taylor. 2000b. “Community Participation
in Rural Tourism Development.” in World Leisure Journal.
Vol. 42. No. 2. pp. 20-27.
Smith, M. D. and R. S. Krannich. 1998. “Tourism Dependence and
Resident Attitudes.” in Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 25.
783-802.
Weiler, B. and C.M. Hall. 1992. Special Interest Tourism. London:
Halstead Press.
Issues in Rural Extension