Learning Objectives
Knowledge
The student will be able to identify agrotourism’s main characteristics, context, and evolution and differentiate it from other tourism market niches.
Skills
The student will be able to deepen the knowledge provided and adapt it to his/her specific context, thus identifying the practices that are most compatible with agrotourism.
Competences
The student will be able to engage in agrotourism or to reconduct an existing tourism business so that it is better adapted to the principles of agrotourism.
Contents
Basics of Tourism and Agrotourism
Definition of agrotourism
Agrotourism, agritourism, agri-tourism, agroecotourism, farm tourism, vacation farm, tourism on farms, etc. Different words to define the same concept, with sometimes minor differences among them. When we add terms such as food tourism, wine tourism, olive oil tourism, ecotourism, green tourism, or rural tourism, which frequently overlap, we can easily understand the confusion on this tourism market niche both in the specialised academic literature and the tourism marketing.
The conceptual work in the field of agrotourism started in the 1980s. After about forty years, the concept of rural tourism acts as an umbrella for tourist modalities which have a common setting (the rural environment, as opposed to the city), but show different characteristics both in terms of tourist supply and demand, which leads to the existence of several tourism segments or market niches, such as ecotourism, agrotourism (and all the similar terms listed in the beginning), food tourism, wine tourism, ornithological tourism, adventure sports, camping and glamping, etc., which often overlap in the same place; boundaries among them are sometimes blurred.
Since there is not a worldwide official definition for agrotourism, this module will start setting the main principles on the topic to reach a practical definition for the STAY project purposes. We will consider agrotourism as that modality (or niche market) of rural tourism which is developed as an income complement to agrarian production and in which the main motivation for tourists is the practice of activities linked to farming professions and the agrarian lifestyle (this is the distinguishing element), together with the owners of the farm.
As said before, the key element in agrotourism is the farming activity and the rural way of life itself. Thus, agrotourism tourists want to immerse themselves in the rural world, meet the farmers and their families, get to know first-hand, and even participate, in some of the farm’s tasks, such as milking a cow or a goat, feeding the cattle, picking fruits or vegetables from the orchard, participating in tilling the land, harvesting the crops, baking bread or cakes, making cheese or jam, cooking traditional recipes, etc., and taste and buy the farm (and the neighbours’) products. They can, of course, visit the surroundings and even join other activities (cultural visits, trekking, horse riding, adventure sports, wellness, birdwatching, etc.), but those serve as a complement, not as the main purpose of the holidays. Otherwise, it would be classified as rural tourism rather than agrotourism. Accommodation is a fundamental requirement for an experience to be considered tourism; without it, we would refer to recreation instead, in line with the definition of tourism from the World Tourism Organisation).
In short, agrotourism is a way of enjoying a different kind of holiday, helping to keep traditional trades and the rural economy alive. However, at the same time, it includes a clear educational component (it is based on the knowledge of the work and life in the countryside) and a social one (tourists share knowledge and experiences with the local people and take part in the culture and traditions of the territory they are visiting). Thus, this kind of tourism is usually practised by people who grew up in the cities and are not very familiar with farm work but are quite attracted by it, even as leisure time.
In conclusion, agrotourism is more than just rural tourism; it is a form of tourism where the farm itself serves as the main attraction. Blurred boundaries and overlapping with other tourism modalities are common and the meaning of the concept shows some differences among territories. Hence, what is legally defined as agrotourism in some places may not be considered as such in a different territory (even in the same country!). And finally, we come to marketing: an accommodation located in the countryside with just a small petting zoo for kids and a modest orchard is far from the agrotourism model that STAY aims to boost in the European countryside.
- Time for discussion: is this “real” agrotourism?.
What is agrotourism according to STAY?
STAY aims to go back to basics
S is for “still”, “slow”, “sustainable”, because this is the way we want the activity to be developed, the way in which tourists enjoy their time on the rural territory. We do not aim to foster any kind of tourism, even if it takes place in rural areas, but that one which has the farm, the rural world, and the rural heritage as its main factor of attraction for users.
T is for “tourism”, a key topic of the project. Strictly speaking, there is no tourism without accommodation: tourists are not just visitors.
A is for “around”, because we are talking about proximity tourism, enjoying life on the farm and visiting nearby places. And for “agriculture”, because the farm is the other key topic: our tourists want to immerse themselves in the rural world, get to know first-hand, and participate, in some of the farm’s tasks. They can visit the surroundings and even join other activities, but those serve as a complement rather than as the main purpose of the holidays.
Y is for “yard”, which enforces both the ideas of nearness and garden (thus, agriculture). And it is also about “you”, that is, finding experiences that let tourists connect with themselves.
History of agrotourism
That was before the global boom of the so-called mass tourism, mostly sun-and-beach, in the 1960s. Then, from the 1960s onwards, farm/rural tourism (the concept of agrotourism was still not sealed) expanded to several countries, such as Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, Spain and Italy. Later, in the 1980s, many governments adopted this model as a solution to the crisis in family farming, especially using European funding for agriculture and rural development. Consequently, lots of farmhouses, estates, wine presses, village houses, mills, etc., were set up as rural accommodations, seeking economic diversification, income complementarity and a formula for revaluing the rural family heritage. Many of the oldest regional or national regulations on agrotourism or rural tourism date to the 1970s and 1980s, such as in Italy, Portugal, or the Spanish regions of Catalonia and the Basque Country.
The 1957 Treaty of Rome establishing the European Economic Community set out several economic and social measures, including the establishment of a common agricultural policy (CAP) with two main objectives: to guarantee a fair standard of living for the agricultural community and ensure consumer supplies at low prices, and to increase agricultural production and stabilise markets. From 1992 onwards, the CAP evolved from a traditional productivity approach (providing food to citizens at affordable prices and ensuring a decent and reasonable income for farmers) to a ruralist and multifunctional approach (particularly after the Agenda 2000). Farming production underwent a revolution: not only was it necessary to produce food, but it had to be done in an environmentally friendly way, with the CAP being the guarantor. Therefore, multifunctional agriculture produces both private goods (food, raw materials of agricultural origin or agrotourism) and public goods, which are divided into social (contribution to the viability of disadvantaged rural areas, protection of cultural and heritage values associated with the rural environment or protection against rural depopulation) and environmental (protection of landscape values, promotion of biodiversity and reduction of soil erosion processes).
Many millions of euros from EU funding have been dedicated to boosting rural tourism initiatives in the countryside, many of which were developed in active farms and rural estates (agrotourism). Many examples can be identified, such as investments to restore old buildings as accommodations (farmhouses, stables, etc.), to build or renovate cellars and cheese factories to welcome visitors, etc.
All this funding has been provided only from the EU agriculture (and rural development) sector, but more funding has been devoted to boosting agrotourism both directly and indirectly in the EU through other means, such as the EQUAL, Erasmus+ or Next Generation funds. From a global point of view, the efforts made by national, regional and local governments using their own budgets must be highlighted, as well as those from non-EU territories.
Public and private investments in agrotourism through the years have motivated a bloom in the sector, even when figures compared to sun-and-beach tourism are way below.
Agrotourism today is not what it once was, as our society is very different from that at the beginning of the 20 century. Somehow, after half a century in which tourism has evolved from being a residual practice available only to a privileged few to a global mass phenomenon, an economic driving force for many territories, while the traditional rural way of life is at stack, and our society is digitising at a dizzying pace, we face an agrotourism 4.0 that maintains many of the motivations and practices of the pioneering tourists, updated with current needs and trends. Moreover, the most recent trends in rural tourism are fully compatible with the most authentic agrotourism.
General Overview of the Agrotourism Market
Data on agrotourism is collected in only a few destinations, since this market niche is commonly overlapped by others such as rural tourism or ecotourism (see 1.1.1 for further information) and there is not generally a specific interest from tourism, agriculture, or rural development authorities to collect the agrotourism data separately.
Since STAY is an Erasmus+-funded project, this training module will focus on European examples despite including some references to other countries.
The best by far, at least at national level, is the Italian Agrotourism Observatory. The Italian National Law on Agrotourism (Legge 20 febbraio 2006, n. 96, disciplina dell’agriturismo) provides for its establishment. The observatory aims to facilitate the exchange of experiences at the national level regarding the state of agrotourism and to complement this with data on the sector’s size in order to produce a report on its current status. Each year, a study is produced tracking trends in the sector and presenting a snapshot of the situation in figures and data.
The Agrotourism and Multifunctionality Report –now in its seventh edition (2024)–, produced by the Institute of Services for the Agricultural Food Market (ISMEA) as part of the National Rural Network’s activities, is intended as a tool for guidance, knowledge and analysis of the sector to support the decisions of institutions, stakeholders and private actors. The main indicators and evidence of the Italian agritourism market are analysed (both the supply and demand, using data sorted by regions or type of activity).
Data on rural tourism at the national level is collected in some countries, like in Spain. The National Statistics Institute updates each year the Survey of Occupancy in extra-hotel tourist accommodation (Encuesta de ocupación en alojamientos turísticos extrahoteleros – EOAT); the Ministry of Agriculture elaborates an Agrarian Census, although it is not updated regularly (the last edition was in 2020); and two private rural tourism platforms (Escapada Rural and Clubrural) run their own observatory with (almost) yearly surveys. Sadly, these sources do not distinguish between agrotourism establishments and other rural accommodations (check the National Reports and the Summary Report for further details at stay-erasmus.eu/resources).
Subsequently, it is not possible to provide an overview of the global or European agrotourism market but on specific locations and sometimes even arising from tailor-made research (several papers are available in the specialised literature), since accurate data is usually missing.
Good Practises on Agrotourism
As described in previous sections of this unit, there is not a unique approach to the concept of agrotourism and the context really makes the difference (i.e., due to an uneven legal recognition of the activity). Thus, this training module will focus on those initiatives that best fit the STAY project concept of agrotourism (see section 1.1.1) and, therefore, will highlight a few good practices.
The first group refers to the case studies developed by the STAY partners in the framework of the project. As such, 18 agrotourism ventures have been identified because they show successful entrepreneurial stories across the European countryside, led by farmers. They provide a clear picture of the opportunities and challenges for entrepreneurs by outlining the knowledge, skills and capacities needed to start and manage agrotourism businesses. Check the case studies in the respective section of the STAY project website.
Beyond our project, two French initiatives should be underlined. The first one is Accueil Paysan (which means “Peasant Welcome”), a network of people who offer hospitality services in their homes, on the farm and in the countryside. It was created in 1987. The members of the network are grouped into local associations. Together they form the Fédération Nationale Accueil Paysan, based in Grenoble (France). It currently has 800 members in France and 230 members in 32 countries. Members participate in the management, animation, and construction of the network through commissions or working groups at the national and/or local level.
The Accueil Paysan network exists to build, defend and promote peasant agriculture and a diverse, supportive, ecological and living rural world. Its members open their living space to visitors and tourists and welcome them for a stay, a meal, an event or a product tasting, but also to discover their profession, their culture, and their territory. Belonging to Accueil Paysan is more than being a member of a tourist or farmers’ association: it is a whole philosophy of life. This is why Accueil Paysan encourages tourism open to all, avoiding mass tourism, and promotes the richness and quality of human relations by placing cohabitation and authenticity at the heart of its practices. It is also strongly supported by the Association of Friends of Accueil Paysan, whose aim is to encourage and promote this model of solidarity tourism. Training activities for partners, peer-to-peer exchanges and working committees enable members of the network to improve their skills.
The second example from France is Bienvenue à la ferme (which means “Welcome to the farm”). This network, born in 1988, is coordinated by the French Agriculture Chambers Service and supports 10,000 local producers through regional consultants all around the country. The members of Bienvenue à la Ferme are committed to offering high-quality agricultural products, welcoming guests with a personalised and professional approach in a warm environment, and serving as ambassadors of sustainable and responsible agriculture. They strive to uphold farming traditions deeply rooted in the land, ensuring the preservation of our shared agricultural heritage. Their farms are often part of an authentic environment, rich in history, rural traditions and knowledge in a preserved natural environment.
Finally, the effort undergone by many agrotourism establishments to turn into an eco-friendlier business must be underlined. For example, according to a survey made by the National Exhibition of Agritourism and Multifunctional Agriculture (AGRIeTOUR) Observatory in Italy during 2024 (sample of +3 000 businesses, 110 tour operators), 76.8 % of the agrotourism ventures considered very important, almost a discriminating element in the choice of tourists, that they are perceived as green companies and concerned about sustainability. Therefore, 73.6 % of the structures surveyed by the observatory claim to have implemented energy-saving technological solutions. Amongst them, 29 % of agritourism facilities are investing in home automation technologies and systems to control electronic devices within the facility, while 23.2 % of agrotourism bussiness owners are trying to enrich their environments with furnishings based on sustainable materials. And more than 50 % of the ventures participating in the survey are implementing (or willing to) artificial intelligence tools.
Regulations on Agrotourism
As there is no global definition for agrotourism, the legal framework for this topic is uneven and diverse. Not only at the national level but even at the regional level, where differences among territories can be identified according to their own regulation.
One may think that the reason for the lack of legal recognition and regulation for agrotourism in any territory is related to the low development of this activity, but Austria, France, or Germany are among the pioneer countries in farm tourism (agrotourism) development and welcome hundreds of thousands of agrotourists altogether each year and did not pass regulations on the topic. Subsequently, there are multiple and diverse factors involved in each territory. The context is crucial.
Legal Framework on Agrotourism in Some Countries
| No National Regulation | National Regulation | Regulation at Regional Level |
|---|---|---|
|
Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands. |
Italy, Panama, Portugal, Slovenia. |
Argentina, Spain, United States of America. |
When a regulation on agrotourism exists, it usually depends on the agriculture authorities, either at the national or regional level, but sometimes the legal competencies lie with the tourism authorities or even in both, such as in the Balearic Islands (a Spanish region, where agrotourism is regulated both with an agrarian law and a tourism decree).
Actually, the Spanish case is striking. Agrotourism was first regulated in two regions: Catalonia (1983) and the Basque Country (1988). Both regulated agrotourism by decree and identified it as a rural accommodation service provided by farmers, as an income supplement, and integrated into a farm. At that time, only agrotourism was considered. However, from the 1990s onwards, the concept evolved into more generic rural tourism in which the link between agricultural productive activity and the hosting of guests became blurred, and agrotourism lost its legal relevance. Nowadays, there is no regulation at the national level, and all the Spanish regions have regulations regarding rural tourism, but only ten explicitly reference agrotourism. The approach to agrotourism varies by region. In some autonomous communities, it is defined as a specific type of rural accommodation, while in others, it is seen as a broad category that applies to all rural tourism establishments. Additionally, two regions even recognise agrotourism without requiring an overnight stay. All the regions but one identify agrotourism as a complement to farming income, but only one region passed a specific regulation on agrotourism, while the others regulated only rural tourism, and even two of them changed the scope from agrotourism to rural tourism some years ago (see the Spanish National Report on agrotourism for further information).
Current Trends and Future Prospects in Agrotourism
Digitisation
Tourism is one of the sectors that is most intensively incorporating technology. Rural tourism stakeholders must use technologies to innovate and offer new products, services and business models to their customers, as well as reinvent themselves, improving their processes and the quality of their products.
It is also partly a legacy of the pandemic. Most industries are experiencing the results of technological advances and the growing predominance of the digital world, and we are increasingly dependent on the internet and social media in the personal sphere. For this reason, the tourism sector is increasingly incorporating digital and telematic tools and processes: big data, artificial intelligence, internet of things (IoT) and sensors, digital marketing, social media, online services, process automation, domotics, etc. Technology adoption in tourism is mostly related to marketing and distribution, and is less oriented towards productivity improvement, while more advanced technologies (big data, customer relationship marketing, etc.) are still under-represented. And the agrotourism sector, despite the sometimes-great digital break on technologies experienced in the countryside, is no stranger to this trend.
We can mention just two examples.
The main topic for the 22nd National Exhibition of Agritourism and Rural Tourism (AGRIeTOUR 2024), the main fair on multifunctional farming and agrotourism held in Italy, was artificial intelligence in the agriculture and rural tourism world. Consequently, the fair addressed the artificial intelligence challenge in the sector (AGRI@INTELLIGENCE), trying to best know how to improve the traveller’s experience, customise the services provided, and enhance the hospitalities management.
The Digital Federation on Tourism (FEDITUR), a national alliance of rural and inland Spanish tourism associations whose objective is to advance the digitisation of the sector, was presented at the beginning of 2023. FEDITUR was created to help the sector implement new technologies to manage its establishments to maximise profitability and operational efficiency and provide advanced management technology services. Digitisation, therefore, provides an opportunity for collaborative, networked work.
Experiences and Personalisation
Over the last 30 years, the same motto has been repeated over and over again: “The global tourism demand is changing, new trends are arising”. Tourists are more experienced and demanding and therefore they are willing for new locations, new activities, new challenge and new experiences. The boundaries of tourism are expanding. Rural tourism has been called worldwide a new trend in tourism for decades, showing increasing figures year after year, but still very far from sun-and-beach tourism. The global pandemic generated by COVID-19 motivated fast changes in tourism demand: a collapse in international arrivals, acceleration of the sector’s digitisation process (big data, artificial intelligence, IoT and sensors, telematic processes), changes in tourists’ priorities (more concerned about safety and health, demanding open spaces for social distance, tranquillity and freedom), etc. Thus, less crowded, sustainable and closer experiences guaranteeing confidence and a sense of control were desired in that first stage: family national tourism, travelling by car and to local destinations ─which benefits villages and rural areas–, back to nature, etc.
Tourists are increasingly looking for deep and transformative experiences, personalised treatment, adapted and customised tourism micro products, etc. The 2nd International Inland Tourism Congress in Andalucía (2020) highlighted the importance of micro-segmentation: “We are witnessing a new era, in which tourism activity is based on micro niches, very small in size, but tremendously profitable. Knowing how to identify needs and satisfy them becomes one of the main challenges for companies and destinations”. Differentiation, authenticity and innovation are identified as the three keys to the development of micro-segments in inland tourism.
Given an experienced consumer and leisure time available to millions, we have moved from mass production and consumption to a personal and individual consumer desire, leading to a tourism product on demand. Individualised tourism focused on special interests: agrotourism, food tourism, ecotourism, birdwatching, astrotourism, etc. The inland tourist is looking for deep, transformative experiences and personalised treatment. One tourist, one destination, one experience.
Demand is beginning to opt for “experience” offers, where active and emotionally rich trips are evaluated, seeking a variety of activities that allow contact with history, culture, environment, and people. Therefore, the current trend is to look for opportunities for activities with which to have pleasant experiences through direct and close contact with natural and rural destinations, especially for those tourists who are more informed and have a conscious vision of the tourism impact. Tourists consider in their decision the encounter with the local population, the learning opportunities, as well as the enjoyment of the territory.
In this context, agrotourism plays a key role: “The consumer wants to get in touch with rurality and the countryside, either to find his or her roots, or simply to disconnect from the city. Many generations of today’s urban societies no longer maintain their family ties with the rural environment and, consequently, are attracted by an unfamiliar space […] The tourism products of inland destinations must reflect the identity of the territory and must focus on demand segments committed to the local culture of the places to which they travel […] Inland destinations must make an effort to transform existing resources and even tourism products into emotions that make the tourist experience memorable so that tourists are willing to spend more time in the destination and spend more money. Ultimately, if destinations cannot excite tourists during their visit, they will hardly be considered by the potential customer” (University of Jaén, 2020).
In this case, learning to milk a cow, shear a sheep, feed livestock, make cheese or bread, pick fruit or participate in tilling the land are some of the experiences that agrotourists can live to escape urban life. Or simply have a nice talk to the farmer and family. Some activities which are not so directly linked to life on the farm but are complementary and compatible can even be incorporated, such as those considered orange or creative tourism (e.g. making handicrafts), wellness (in a broad sense: forest baths, meditation, yoga, mindfulness, massages) or birdwatching. Living the experience, that is the point. Acting (for a while, for some time) as a farmer, just for fun, just to know how it feels. Agrotourism 4.0, in line with new times, but without losing the essence or the link with the agrarian, with the decisive factor in the choice of holiday destination: living the experience on the farm.
Integration and Impact on the Local Community
With the growing importance of multifunctionality and sustainability under the CAP, farmers are not only seen as responsible for food production, but also for maintaining the agricultural landscape and, by extension, the rural world. Therefore, productive (agriculture and livestock), recreational (agrotourism and rural tourism) and aesthetic (agricultural landscape) functions converge in the countryside.
Many city dwellers seek contact with agrarian and rural life, as if it were an idyllic enclave, which implies overcoming new challenges, such as the need to consume authentic and quality products and to reconnect with their roots, seeking new trends in non-overcrowded tourism. These tourists generally consume more local and organic products, frequent more typical restaurants and prefer agrotourism. Not in vain, agrotourism farming production is usually more environmentally friendly: i.e., in Italy, 26.6 % of agrotourism farms have adopted organic production (vs. 7.4 % in other farms).
Agrotourism, due to its characteristics, is deeply rooted in the territory in which it is developed and has implications that go far beyond the recreational activity itself. It is inevitably proximity tourism, km. 0 (farm to fork, in this case). Getting to know, experiencing and enjoying life on the farm, in some cases almost like a member of the family (for a few days), is the main reason for holidays. Of course, we can find from really immersive experiences to light ones, but in the end, it is life in the countryside that attracts the interest of tourists, both on the farm itself and in its immediate surroundings: the village, the town, the region.
So agrotourism not only has an impact on the agricultural activity itself (tourists demand agri-food products for their supply, both from the farm and from nearby producers), which has implications in terms of income and employment (tourists spend money on sleeping, eating, buying agricultural and livestock products, and hiring leisure activities and services), which is fundamental in low-income territories such as many agricultural areas, but also plays an important role in strengthening rural identity (there are people willing to pay to get to know the local way of life, culture, traditions, etc.; they value it and enjoy it) and even in the provision of services and infrastructure in rural communities (a not very populated area which receives tourist and recreational flows of a certain magnitude has extra needs that must be addressed by the authorities).
Therefore, it is not only the hosts, those who run the farm, who benefit from welcoming tourists, but the whole rural community benefits indirectly in some way: restaurants, wineries, olive oil mills, craft shops, museums and collections, local businesses, etc. Agrotourism contributes to preserving and enhancing the value of agricultural and rural heritage, while transferring traditional knowledge for future generations and maintaining the built heritage, traditions and ancestral intangible heritage.
And there are still other benefits from agrotourism, this time for visitors. Environmental education and interpretation activities, such as composting, gardening, picking aromatic herbs, or traditional food or drink processing, illustrate the relationship between tourists, farmers and the environment, which is a distinctive feature of agrotourism, and contribute to raising environmental awareness among travellers. Just one example: in Italy, a leading European country in the agrotourism sector, census data show that in 2020 the share of organic utilised agricultural area for agritourism farms (32.3 %) was double that for other farms, and higher than the target (25 %) set by the Farm to Fork strategy for the EU by 2023.
Informational Guidelines for Educators and Advisors
This part of the training module is an extended version for educators and advisors on agrotourism so they can find extra information and go deeper into some content. Not all the units are considered with the same level of depth.
Definition of agrotourism
- The I National Conference on Agrotourism in Spain was held in 2005. A sort of definition was agreed, as shown in the conclusions document: “we can talk about agrotourism when the accommodation in rural areas is provided in the rural population’s habitat, which eases a closer relationship with the inhabitants and the life in the countryside. The main goal is diversifying the activities in the farm to maintain population and enable farming incomes raising”. Thus, the income from tourist activities is a complement to those coming from farming. And those activities must be linked to an active farm. The welcome provided by the farmers is the key, over the facilities themselves. That is, the communication and mutual respect between hosts (who show their place, profession, their local products, etc.) and guests.
- Agrotourism has gained popularity in the last 20 years and the volume of research literature in this field is growing continuously. Its definition varies across the world (sometimes even in the same country, like in Spain. Check the Spanish National Report for further details) based on a set of geo-cultural and regulatory delimitations. Thus, the Global Agritourism Network Definition and Standards committee is engaged in formulating a comprehensive global interpretation based on broad values. That was one of the activities included in the II World Agritourism Congress held in May
- Sourav Rauniyar et. al (2020)., Agritourism: structured literature review and bibliometric analysis. Bibliographic data of 459 research publications obtained from Web of Science and Scopus databases from the period 1980–2019 were analysed. The results show that “agritourism is broadly conceptualised as an amalgamation of agricultural resources, activities, and traditions with fun and educational purposes, which is served as a tourism product and ultimately augment farmers’ income. Such dissimilar theorization of agritourism by the researchers makes a systematic literature review of agritourism remarkably necessary and also conceptually challenging task”.
- The Global Agritourism Network reference list, lc.cx/WtcvEW
History of agrotourism
- Busby, G., & Rendle, S. (2000). The Transition from Tourism on Farms to Farm Tourism. Tourism Management , 21, pp. 635-642,
- Traditionally, the common agricultural policy was financed through a single fund, the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), which was replaced in 2007 by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). For the period 2021-2027, the CAP has been allocated EUR 387 billion: EUR 291.1 billion from the EAGF and EUR 95.5 billion from the EAFRD.
- More information on CAP
- More information on CAP funds
- Guide to EU funding
General overview of the agrotourism market
- Despite specific agrotourism data are rarely collected, we can find some reports or research on the agrotourism market, such as this one from a private company. But are they really reliable when no official data are collected and agrotourism is defined in a different way in each territory?
Good practises on agrotourism
- Fundación Ecoagroturismo (member of the Accueil Paysan network; in Spanish)
Regulations on agrotourism
Experiences and personalisation
- Jurdana, D.S. (2024). Evolution of trends affecting the tourism industry: business challenges in the future, Journal of Innovations in Business and Industry, vol 2, number 3(8), pp. 193-204,
Conclusions
Defining agrotourism is not an easy task, especially when a global definition is needed. There are several elements involved which bring many nuances to the table. The geographical, historical, legal and cultural contexts are fundamental and, in the end, differential. However, there is a clear central element: the close link between agrotourism, farms, the rural environment, and the rural heritage.
In addition, the lack of specific data and overlaps with other niche markets add confusion.
