Agrotourism in Crete: lost in a labyrinth. A critical analysis

Agrotourism in Crete: lost in a labyrinth?

Dissertation submitted to the University of Leicester in partial fulfilment of the

Masters in Business Administration

School of Management


A critical analysis

Stylianos Alexakis

129042043

February 2014

Dissertation submitted to the University of Leicester in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Masters in Business Administration

School of Management


Dissertation submitted to the University of Leicester requirements for the degree of

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................. 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 5

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 6

1.1. Statement of the research aims and objectives .......................................... 6

1.2. The Greek island of Crete ........................................................................... 7

1.3. Structure of the dissertation....................................................................... 9

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORY .......................................................... 10

2.1. Rural tourism............................................................................................ 10

2.2. Defining agrotourism................................................................................ 11

2.2.1. The definition of agrotourism in the international literature ...... 11

2.2.2. The definition of agrotourism in the Greek literature................. 13

2.3. The product of agrotourism...................................................................... 14

2.4. The benefits of agrotourism ..................................................................... 18

2.5. The profile and expectations of agrotourists............................................. 19

2.6. Examination of agrotourism in various countries ...................................... 20

2.6.1. Agrotourism in England and Wales............................................. 20

2.6.2. Agrotourism in Denmark ............................................................ 21

2.6.3. Spain .......................................................................................... 21

2.6.4. Cyprus........................................................................................ 22

2.7. Agrotourism in Greece.............................................................................. 23

2.7.1. Overview of the agrotourism development in Greece ................ 23

2.7.2. Agrotourism in the Greek island of Lesvos.................................. 26

2.8. Theoretical framework ............................................................................. 28

CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH DATA AND METHODOLOGY.................................................... 30

3.1. Methodology............................................................................................ 30

2

3.2. Data collection.......................................................................................... 32

3.3. Data analysis ............................................................................................ 35

CHAPTER 4. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS........................................................................... 37

4.1. Overview of the agrotourism entrepreneurs ............................................ 37

4.2. The participants’ perception of agrotourism and its key features ............. 37

4.3. The participants’ perception of the benefits of agrotourism ..................... 39

4.4. The profile of agrotourists in Crete ........................................................... 40

4.5. The nature of the agrotourism product offered by local entrepreneurs.... 42

4.6. The participants’ perception of the application of agrotourism in Crete ... 44

4.7. The promotion of agrotourism services .................................................... 45

4.8. The level of synergies among agrotourism entrepreneurs ........................ 47

4.9. Support from public authorities................................................................ 48

4.10. Occupancy and seasonality..................................................................... 50

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................. 52

5.1. Summary .................................................................................................. 52

5.2. Theoretical implications............................................................................ 56

5.3. Practical implications................................................................................ 57

5.4. Limitations................................................................................................ 59

5.5. Directions for future research................................................................... 60

5.6. Reflections................................................................................................ 60

5.6.1. Fulfilment of objectives.............................................................. 60

5.6.2. Evaluation of the research process............................................. 61

5.6.3. Self-assessment and personal development gain ....................... 62

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 63

APPENDIX A: FRAMEWORK OF INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ............................................. 69

APPENDIX B: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS A, B, C ...................................... 70

APPENDIX C: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS D, E, F....................................... 75

3

APPENDIX D: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS G, H ......................................... 79

APPENDIX E: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS I, J............................................. 83

APPENDIX F: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS K, L ........................................... 86

APPENDIX G: SELECTIVE INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT ....................................................... 89

APPENDIX H: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET....................................................... 98

APPENDIX I: PARTICIPANT INFORMED CONSENT FORM ............................................ 100

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Overview of definitions used in the literature of agrotourism

and related labels ....................................................................................................... 12

Table 2: Agrotourism elements according to Clarke (1996) ......................................... 15

Table 3: Stakeholders of agrotourism industry in Crete............................................... 33

Table 4: Coding of the participants and their profile ................................................... 36

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Map of Greece and Crete ............................................................................... 8

Figure 2: Typology of agrotourism............................................................................... 16

Figure 3: Revised typology of agrotourism .................................................................. 17

Figure 4: Map of Greece and Lesvos............................................................................ 27

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to take this opportunity to express my deepest gratitude to the following

people:

My supervisor, Dr Olga Suhomlinova, for her valuable assistance and guidance during

the writing of this dissertation.

My personal tutor and MBA Programme Leader, Dr Martin Corbett, for his support and

understanding throughout the MBA course.

The lecturers of the University of Leicester, Dr Andrea Moro and Dr Georgios

Patsiaouras, as well as the doctoral student Ms Yue Fei, for their consultation and

concern.

My friends Kyoko Yumigeta, Sherrill Channer, Pavlos Tatsis, Charilaos Chouliaras and

Marianna Chartzoulaki for their companionship and emotional support.

Brendan Keegan and Aasia Bora for proofreading this paper as well as previous work of

mine.

The staff of the library of the University of Crete, in Rethymno, for their friendly and

encouraging attitude.

All the participants of this study for their valuable contribution to my research.

Last but not least, my parents Nikos and Mary, as well as my brother Alkis, for their

love and constant support.

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Agrotourism (also referred to as agritourism, farm-based tourism or farm tourism) has

been greatly promoted in Europe as a sustainable form of rural tourism. In Greece, it

was introduced in the early 1980s, mainly through EU and national subsidies and

gained considerable growth. Yet, results were not as anticipated, and agrotourism

entrepreneurs seem to be lost in a labyrinth of constraints.

This exploratory study examines the case of agrotourism in the Greek island of Crete.

Using face-to-face, semi-structured interviews conducted with a sample of twelve local

agrotourism entrepreneurs, the author attempts to shed light upon the main issues

governing agrotourism in the island, and to reveal the key problems encountered in its

implementation.

Findings reveal that agrotourism in Crete involves mainly the provision of

accommodation, and seldomely the participation in staged farm tasks. Moreover, the

study confirms the importance of agrotourism for the preservation and the promotion

of the traditions and cultural heritage of Crete. Yet, contrary to initial expectations,

there is no evidence that agrotourism contributes to the preservation of the

architectural heritage of Crete. What is more, the study reveals a series of problems

encountered by local agrotourism entrepreneurs, such as the absence of a legislative

framework, limited support from national and public authorities, lack of synergies,

dependency on tour operators and seasonality.

Based on the findings, the author attempts to show the way out of the dead-end by

offering some recommendations. In this context, the paper stresses the need for the

formulation of a legislative framework, the development of a coherent agrotourism

strategy, the backing of agrotourism entrepreneurs, unification of all the

representative bodies, adoption of strict building regulations and the extension of the

tourism period.

6

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Statement of the research aims and objectives

Before stating the aims and objectives of this research, it would be useful to offer an

introductory definition of agrotourism:

The concept of agrotourism, as used in Greece, embraces tourism

activities carried out in non-urban regions by individuals mainly

employed in the primary or secondary sector of the economy. Such

activities typically involve small tourism units of family or cooperative

type, which offer accommodations, goods, and/or other services and

provide a supplementary income for rural families and/or an

independent income for women living in rural areas.

(Iakovidou & Turner, 1995: 481)

The aim of this study is to shed light upon the case of agrotourism in the Greek island

of Crete, in a thorough and critical way. In particular, my research will examine

agrotourism in Crete from the supply-side, seeking to identify the main issues

governing its application and to reveal the key problems encountered by local

agrotourism entrepreneurs. Moreover, this paper will attempt to offer some potential

solutions and recommendations, grounded upon the findings of my research.

An in-depth analysis of agrotourism in Crete can be of paramount academic

importance. Admittedly, agrotourism and its applications have been extensively

studied and a plethora of literature is available, examining agrotourism practices in

various countries in Europe and around the globe. In addition, a number of scholars

have investigated agrotourism cases in various Greek regions. Yet no study to date has

examined the case of agrotourism in Crete, despite the popularity of the island as a

holiday destination and its distinct characteristics. In this context, this research comes

to extend the existing body of knowledge and bridge a gap in the literature of

agrotourism as a whole.

7

In addition, this study has great practical implications. An in-depth analysis of the case

of agrotourism in Crete can offer a useful managerial tool, not only in the hands of

agrotourism entrepreneurs but also for national and regional public authorities,

assisting this way in the evaluation of the existing agrotourism policies and facilitate

the development of a more efficient strategy. Such a policy review, I believe, is

essential in order for public authorities to support effectively the application of

agrotourism as a sustainable alternative to mass-tourism. As is well known, the latter

incurs a plethora of negative effects that need to be addressed, such as seasonality,

high dependency on big tour operators, shrinkage of profit margins for local actors,

unbalanced concentration of tourism activities and destruction of the local

environment and natural beauty.

Beyond its academic and managerial significance, the present study has also a

dimension of personal interest. I was born and raised in the island of Crete and I have

strong links with its rural environment. Furthermore, I have considered pursuing, in the

near future, business activities in the agrotourism industry. In this context, the

extensive study of agrotourism in Crete for the needs of this dissertation can also serve

as a vehicle for my professional development.

1.2. The Greek island of Crete

Crete is the largest Greek island and the fifth largest island of the Mediterranean Sea.

With a population exceeding 600,000 inhabitants, Crete is also the most populous

island of Greece and as such, it forms the Region of Crete – one of the 13

administrative regions of Greece. Geographically, the island is located 160 km south of

the Greek mainland (see Figure 1) and comprises a spatial autonomous system beyond

the primary development axes of Greece (Archi-Med, 2001, cited in Andriotis, 2006:

632). Crete is predominately mountainous and has a long coastline of 1300km, with

numerous sandy beaches. Moreover, Crete is renowned for the diversity of its

landscape, its natural beauty and its culture, and for having a plethora of

archaeological sites and historical monuments.

Blessed with all these environmental and cultural resources, the island has inevitably

attracted the attention of tourists. Since the early 1970’s, Cret

tourism development, becoming the most popular holiday destination in Greece. As a

result, tourism has now become the leading economic sector of the island (

2003) and almost 40 percent of the local population is someway engaged in tourism

activities (Andriotis, 2006)

Crete has been problematic, since the island attra

3S’s (i.e. sea, sand, sun). With the advent of mass

of problems such as seasonality, dependence on tour operators, oversupply of

services, concentration of tourist activities on the

degradation, and lack of coordination and strategic planning.

Figure 1: Map of Greece and Crete

Source: (adapted from Wikipedia, 2008)

Seeking to address some of the aforementioned pr

application of tourism, its alternative form of Agrotourism was gradually introduced.

After the 1990’s, a plethora of promotional funds and subsidies by the European Union

and the Greek state was offered to Cretan farmers, in an

to engage into tourism activities. However, despite the successful application of

agrotourism in other European countries, the case of Crete

Greece – has not met expectations, and practice does not seem to m

8


attracted the attention of tourists. Since the early 1970’s, Crete has experienced rapid


result, tourism has now become the leading economic sector of the island (

t 40 percent of the local population is someway engaged in tourism

(Andriotis, 2006). Nonetheless, despite its benefits, tourism development in

Crete has been problematic, since the island attracts package tourists seeking for the

3S’s (i.e. sea, sand, sun). With the advent of mass-tourism, the island faced a plethora


services, concentration of tourist activities on the northern coast, environmental

degradation, and lack of coordination and strategic planning.

Map of Greece and Crete

Wikipedia, 2008)

Seeking to address some of the aforementioned problems caused by the mass



and the Greek state was offered to Cretan farmers, in an attempt to encourage them


agrotourism in other European countries, the case of Crete – and other regions in

has not met expectations, and practice does not seem to match theory.


e has experienced rapid


result, tourism has now become the leading economic sector of the island (Briassoulis,

t 40 percent of the local population is someway engaged in tourism

. Nonetheless, despite its benefits, tourism development in

cts package tourists seeking for the

tourism, the island faced a plethora


northern coast, environmental

oblems caused by the mass



attempt to encourage them


and other regions in

atch theory.

9

Contrariwise, Cretan agrotourism entrepreneurs, who have greatly invested in their

business, now seem trapped in a labyrinth of legislative, bureaucratic and managerial

constraints.

At this point, I should highlight that the metaphoric use of the word “labyrinth” for

agrotourism in Crete and the illustration of its image on the title page, is well-chosen.

According to the Greek mythology, the Labyrinth was an elaborate maze-like

construction in Knosos, under the palace of King Minos of Crete. It was cunningly built

by architect Daedalus to keep confined the Minotaur, a mythical creature with a

human body and a bull's head. The monster was eventually killed by the Athenian hero

Theseus, with the help of Minos' daughter Ariadne, who provided him with a skein of

thread, literally the "clew", so he could retrace his path. Hopefully, this dissertation will

assist Cretan agrotourism entrepreneurs exit the contemporary entrepreneurial

labyrinth.

1.3. Structure of the dissertation

Following the Introduction, Chapter 2 offers a literature review. This begins by

examining the definitions of agrotourism in the international and Greek literature, the

product and the benefits of agrotourism, as well as the profile of agrotourists. To

conclude this chapter, I briefly examine the application of agrotourism in selected

European countries, including Greece and a Greek island in particular. Chapter 3

presents the research methodology, the data collection and data analysis process.

Thus it explains why a qualitative research method, comprising semi-structured

interviews, was chosen, what limitations exists, how the research sample was selected

and how the interviews were conducted. In addition, this chapter offers a description

of the data analysis process. In Chapter 4 my findings are analysed and evaluated in

view of my research questions and the previous studies of agrotourism. This is

followed by Chapter 5, where the key findings are summarised and interpreted,

providing answers to my research questions. The chapter continues on to present the

theoretical and practical implications of my research, its limitations, directions for

future research, as well as a reflective evaluation of the research process.

10

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORY

My literature review on agrotourism begins by offering a brief discussion of a broader

concept, namely rural tourism. This is followed by an attempt to define agrotourism

through the plethora of existing definitions both in international and Greek literature.

To gain a better understanding of agrotourism, the paper goes on to examine the

features composing agrotourism as a product, the benefits stemming from its

implementation, as well as the profile and expectations of agrotourists. In what

follows, the paper attempts to offer an insight into the practical issues governing the

application of agrotourism. Hence, an overview of the application of agrotourism in

selected European countries will be presented. This will result in a synoptic

examination of agrotourism developments in Greece and in a selected Greek island. In

conclusion, a theoretical framework is developed, grounded in observations based on

the prior literature. This leads to the narrowing of my research questions and the

identification of the perspectives from which the case of agrotourism in Crete will be

examined.

2.1. Rural tourism

It is worth noting that the concept of agrotourism has been extensively discussed in

the international literature of tourism, and rural tourism in particular. Hence,

agrotourism should be first examined as part of a greater concept, namely of rural

tourism (Gousiou et al., 2001: 7). The latter is generally defined as tourism activities

undertaken in the countryside (Iakovidou, 1997) and encompasses various forms of

tourism such as trekking tourism, ecological, cultural, recreational, culinary, sports and

outdoor activities, agrotourism and the like (Gousiou et al., 2001:7). Because of its

nature, rural tourism is localised in regions that have been left unexploited by the

expansion of mass tourism (Parra and Calero, 2006). Thus, it allows tourists to enjoy

the tranquillity of nature and familiarise themselves with local people and their

customs. Admittedly, the economic benefits of rural tourism, such as revenues and

employment rates, cannot be compared with those deriving from mass tourism (Parra

and Calero, 2006). Yet, rural tourism has contributed to the diversification of rural

11

economies, the provision of an extra sources of income, the creation of new jobs and

the preservation of rural culture and the natural environment (Parra and Calero, 2006).

2.2. Defining agrotourism

2.2.1. The definition of agrotourism in the international literature

As it has been already mentioned, agrotourism is a specific subset of rural tourism

(Nilsson, 2002) and as a term, it also denotes a plurality of other terms which are used

inextricably in literature. Namely, agrotourism is usually also referred to as

agritourism, farm tourism and farm-based tourism or arbitrarily even as rural tourism

(Clarke, 1999; Iakovidou, 1997; Nilsson, 2002; Phillip et al., 2010). Such an application

of diverse definitions and labels often results in a complex, chaotic and problematic

picture, particularly when scholars choose arbitrarily to use one of the

abovementioned terms (Phillip et al., 2010). For the purposes of this paper, the author

will adopt the term agrotourism to signify also the related labels of agritourism, farm

tourism and farm-based tourism. The adoption of the term agrotourism against the

others is deemed necessary, taking into account that agrotourism is the term used

predominately in the existing Greek literature. In addition, it is worth emphasising that

the term “agrotourism” is translated into Greek as “αγροτουρισμός” (pronounced:

agrotourismós) literally meaning, tourism (τουρισμός) in the countryside (αγρός).

Taking into account that despite its constant growth, there is no consensus among the

scholars of what exactly agrotourism is, a plethora of definitions exists in literature.

Looking more broadly at an international dimension, Phillip et al. (2010), examined a

variety of definitions of agrotourism and of the terms labelled as agritourism, farm

tourism and farm-based tourism which have been also used across the literature. As

displayed in Table 1, it is widely perceived by academicians that the notion of

agrotourism – under any label – encompasses terms such as working farm, agricultural

estate, agricultural holding, agrarian stay and the like. Moreover, it appears that

scholars perceive the practitioners of agrotourism as agricultural entrepreneurs,

farmers, or professionals employed in the primary or secondary sector. In turn, the

12

question raised is how the practitioners of agrotourism themselves perceive the notion

of agrotourism. This is another issue I will investigate in my research.

Table 1: Overview of definitions used in the literature of agrotourism and related

labels

Term used Definition Reference

Agritourism “any practice developed on a working farmwith the purpose of attracting visitors”

Barbieri & Mshenga (2008: 168)

“a specific type of rural tourism in which the hosting house must be integrated into an agricultural estate, inhabited by the proprietor, allowing visitors to take part in agricultural or complementary activities on the property”

Marques (2006: 151)

“rural enterprises which incorporate both a working farm environment and a commercial tourism component”

McGehee (2007: 111); McGehee et al. (2007: 280)

“tourism products which are directly connected with the agrarian environment, agrarian products or agrarian stays”

Sharpley & Sharpley (1997: 9)

“activities of hospitality performed by agricultural entrepreneurs and their family members that must remain connected and complementary to farming activities”

Sonnino (2004: 286)

Agrotourism “tourism activities which are undertaken in non-urban regions by individuals whose main employment is in the primary or secondary sector of the economy”

Iakovidou (1997: 44)

“tourist activities of small-scale, family or co-operative in origin, being developed in rural areas by people employed in agriculture”

Kizos & Iosifides (2007: 63)

“provision of touristic opportunities on working farms”

Wall (2000: 14)

Farm Tourism

‘”rural tourism conducted on working farmswhere the working environment forms part of the product from the perspective of the consumer”

Clarke (1999: 27)

“tourist activity is closely intertwined with farm activities and often with the viability of the household economy”

Gladstone & Morris (2000: 93)

“to take tourists in and put them up on farms, involving them actively in farming lifeand production activities”

Iakovidou (1997: 44)

13

“commercial tourism enterprises on working farms. This excludes bed and breakfast establishments, nature-based tourism and staged entertainment”

Ollenburg & Buckley (2007: 445)

“activities and services offered to commercial clients in a working farm environment for participation, observation or education”

Ollenburg (2006: 52)

“a part of rural tourism, the location of the accommodation on a part-time or full-time farm being the distinguishing criterion”

Oppermann (1996: 88)

“increasingly used to describe a range of activities.[which] may have little in common with the farm other than the farmer managesthe land on which they take place”

Roberts & Hall (2001: 150)

Farm-basedtourism

“phenomenon of attracting people onto agricultural holdings”

Evans & Ilbery (1989: 257)

“an alternative farm enterprise” Ilbery et al.(1998: 355)

Source: (Phillip et al., 2010: 755)

With regard to the absence of a theoretical framework in the literature of agrotourism,

Oppermann (1995) suggests that it stems from the problematic situation in regard to

its definition. Busby and Rendle (2000), identify various causes for this. Firstly, the

multitude of activities undertaken in agrotourism hampers the adoption of an accurate

descriptive definition (Busby & Rendle, 2000). Secondly, the majority of agrotourism

enterprises are small-sized and often unwilling to take part in official researches or to

share information. Hence, researchers of the concept of agrotourism often face

insufficient data sources, which lack consistency and are not representative of the

whole population (Busby & Rendle, 2000). Thus, as Busby and Rendle (2000) explain,

most attempts to quantify the size of the agrotourism sector and identify its

development are challenging and troublesome.

2.2.2. The definition of agrotourism in the Greek literature

As Flanigan et al. (2014) maintain, despite the popularity of agrotourism as a term, an

ambiguity still remains in regard to its key features and a common definition is far from

being adopted. In tandem with the international literature, no consensus definition of

14

agrotourism has been adopted in the Greek literature. In one of the well-used

definitions of agrotourism by Greek scholars, agrotourism is defined as “tourism

activities undertaken in non-urban regions by individuals whose main employment is in

the primary or secondary sector of the economy” (Iakovidou, 1997: 44). In another

definition provided by Kizos and Iosifides (2007: 63), agrotourism is defined as ‘‘tourist

activities of small-scale, family or co-operative in origin, being developed in rural areas

by people employed in agriculture”. It is worth noting that the Hellenic Organization

for Standardisation (ELOT), despite using the Greek term “αγροτουρισμός”

(pronounced: agrotourismós), translates the term wrongly in English as “rural

tourism”, thus, causing further confusion. However, the Greek Ministry of Rural

Development and Food correctly defines agrotourism as “a special form of rural

tourism encompassing activities related with agricultural production, the cultural

environment of rural areas, farming activities, local products, traditional cuisine and

local gastronomy”(Greek Ministry of Rural Development and Food, 2013).

According to the Greek literature, the activities of agrotourism may include the supply

by the farmers of accommodation to tourists, the running of catering and recreational

activities for their needs, the organisation of cultural events or outdoor activities,

production and sale to tourists of handicrafts or local agricultural products and so forth

(Iakovidou, 1997; Kizos & Iosifides, 2007; Vafiadis, et al., 1992). On closer examination,

all of the aforementioned definitions accentuate that the practitioners of agrotourism

are predominately – but not exclusively – professionals employed in the primary sector

of economy and farmers in particular. Thus, in this regard, the practice of agrotourism

– at least in the Greek literature – is presented as an activity supplementary to the

main agricultural profession, rather than a profession per se.

2.3. The product of agrotourism

According to Shaw and Williams (1994), there are two principal forms of agrotourism

activities undertaken by farmers, namely, accommodation and non-accommodation

activities. Farmers usually offer just one of the two forms and seldom provide both of

them (Shaw & Williams, 1994). In the same vein, Dartington Amenity Research Trust

(1974) and Davies and Gilbert (1992) identify three different forms of agrotourism,

15

comprising accommodation-based, activity-based and day-visitor-based (cited in Busby

& Rendle, 2000). Whereas from another perspective, Ilbery et al. (1998), differentiate

agrotourism enterprises according to whether accommodation or recreation activities

are provided. In a more elaborate way, Clarke (1996) identify a set of agrotourism

elements (see Table 2) and note that some of them are solely utilised for the needs of

tourism activities. Likewise, Parra and Calero (2006) examine the features of

agrotourism and highlight its key characteristics. They note that:

[Agrotourism] includes shared or independent accommodation at the

owner’s home. It involves the whole family whose customs and traditions

are preserved [and] it allows customers to have a peaceful stay, away

from crowds, assisted by friendly people and a direct touch with nature.

(Parra & Calero, 2006: 86)

Table 2: Agrotourism elements according to Clarke (1996)

Source: (adapted from Busby & Rendle, 2000)

Attractions – permanent Attractions – events

Farm visitor centresSelf-guided farm trailsFarm museumsFarm centresConservation areasCountry parks

Farm open daysGuided walksEducational visitsDemonstrations

Access (rural) Activities

Stile/gate maintenanceFootpaths/bridleways/tracks

Horse-riding/trekkingFishingShooting/clayBoating

Accommodation Amenities

Bed and breakfastSelf-cateringCamping and caravanningBunkhouse barns

RestaurantsCafes/cream teasFarm shops/roadside stallsPick your ownPicnic sites

16

In a similar vein, Phillip et al. (2010) examine agrotourism by considering its products

and activities according to three discriminative features of various types of

agrotourism products. Namely:

The existence or not of a working farm,

The type of tourists’ contact with agricultural activity (passive, indirect or

direct)

The authenticity of agricultural activity which tourist experience (staged or

authentic)

Based on their findings, they offer a typology which categorises agrotourism into five

different types (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: Typology of agrotourism

Source: (Phillip et al., 2010)

At this point, it is important to note that the same authors (Flanigan – nee Philip, et al.

2014) have recently offered a revised and modified typology of agrotourism types

Is the tourist activity based on a working

farm?

What is the nature of tourists contact with agricultural activity?

Does the tourist experience authentic agricultural activity?

1) Non-working farm agrotourism – e.g. accommodation in ex-farmhouse property

2) Working farm, passive contact agrotourism – e.g. accommodation in farmhouse

3) Working farm, indirect contact agrotourism – e.g. farm produce served in tourist meals

4) Working farm, direct contact, staged agrotourism – e.g. farming demonstrations

5) Working farm, direct contact, authentic agrotourism – e.g.participation in farm tasks

YES

YES

NO

NO

DIRECT

PASSIVE

INDIRECT

17

which integrates the perspectives of all the stakeholders of the agrotourism industry.

Importantly, this considers both the viewpoints of providers and visitors (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Revised typology of agrotourism

Source: (Flanigan – nee Philip, et al. 2014)

From my point of view, the contribution of Flanigan et al. (2014) to the identification

and classification of agrotourism products is of paramount importance for a number of

reasons. Firstly, because of the nature of their research which is the only study so far

that takes into consideration both aspects of the supply and demand-side. Thus, it

addresses a gap in the existing literature which focuses predominantly on the supply-

side of agrotourism. Secondly, because as a number of scholars highlight (Cooper &

Hall, 2008; Smith, 1994; Swarbrooke, 2002) in the tourism industry, production is

inextricably linked with consumption “which means visitors co-produce tourism

products at the time of consumption” (Flanigan et al., 2014: 395). Finally, and most

strikingly, their study encompasses the notion of tourism products which are not

What is the nature of interaction between visitors and agriculture?

Non-working farm, indirect interaction agrotourism –e.g. accommodation in ex-farmhouse

Non-working farm, direct interaction agrotourism – e.g. agricultural shows, farming museums

Does the visitor experience authentic working agriculture?

Working farm, indirect interaction agrotourism – e.g. farmhouse accommodation

Working farm, direct staged interaction agrotourism – e.g. model farms, farm tours

Working farm, direct authentic interaction agrotourism – e.g. participation in farm tasks

Is the product based on a working farm?

NO YES

NONO YES YES

INDIRECT DIRECT

18

physically based on working farms, as long as they have “some degree of interaction

with agriculture or agricultural heritage (e.g. historical associations, educational

opportunities)” (Flanigan et al., 2014: 398).

This off-farm interaction can be either indirect, aiming at attracting visitors and

promoting traditional lifestyle (e.g. local farms’ produce sold in the farmers’ market or

farm shops/restaurants); or direct (e.g. sheep shearing shows, farming

demonstrations, model farms visits, farm museums). Frequently, non-working farm

indirect-interaction activities are not undertaken by farmers, thus, they can be

considered as other forms of rural tourism and not agrotourism per se. Although their

inclusion to the notion of agrotourism may be controversial and questioned by some

scholars, researches reveal “that a working farm is not required from the visitors’

perspective” (Flanigan et al., 2014; Fleischer & Tchetchik, 2005). Hence, my standpoint

is in tandem with the reasoning of Flanigan et al. (2005), which is the only approach in

the body of literature that takes into consideration both providers’ and visitors’ points

of view of what agrotourism comprises.

2.4. The benefits of agrotourism

The product of agrotourism does not solely signify the provision of services in rural

areas; therefore, it is not just one type of tourist product per se (Busby & Randle,

2000). According to the Commission of the European Communities (CEC, 1999), the

targets of agrotourism are manifold: namely, agrotourism aims at “maintaining

farming activities, promoting diversification of economic practices in the countryside

and rural entrepreneurship, assisting in the preservation of cultural landscapes and

contributing to the new European model of farming” (cited in Kizos & Iosifides, 2007:

71). Consequently, agrotourism is widely associated with the encouragement of

activities of local character, which include the provision of quality goods and services

by farmers and the preservation of rural culture and environment (Gousiou et al.,

2001). In this respect, apart from economic benefits, agrotourism implies social

benefits as well.

19

Seen from another perspective, agrotourism can also be considered as a form of social

tourism since it also puts emphasis on:

… the host/guest relation, the interaction between the host’s private life

and the guest’s experiences. Such interaction is the basic concept of

social tourism, which became popular during the 20s and 30s [and] was

launched as the “true” and non-commercial form of tourism… and aims

to make people feel friendship with each other.

(Nilsson, 2002: 10)

Hence, the notion of agrotourism is also closely interrelated with the notion of the

“contact hypothesis” offered by Reisinger (1994) which suggests “that contact

between different cultures will pave the way for understanding and thereby diminish

the risk of prejudices, conflicts, and tensions” (Nilsson, 2002: 10).

2.5. The profile and expectations of agrotourists

There is a general consensus that agrotourists differ greatly in their attitude from

customers of mass-tourism. They demonstrate a different approach towards travelling

in other worlds, towards local people, their culture and the environment (Parra &

Calero, 2006: 86). Agrotourist are usually educated, travel with their families, and

mainly come from urban areas (Hall & Jenkins, 1998). They prepare their travel by

collecting information in advance about the place they plan to visit, its history, its

culture and the environment (Parra and Calero, 2006: 86). Seeking to experience

authenticity, agrotourists attempt to build relationships with locals, discover their

culture, and participate in local activities and sports (Marsden et al., 2001;

Papakonstandinidis, 1993; Parra & Calero, 2006). Clearly, agrotourists have higher

environment awareness than mass-tourists. Thus, they desire to maximise contact

with nature, by experiencing natural local products and healthy food (Parra & Calero,

2006: 86). In addition, agrotourists tend to avoid the presence of mass-tourists (Parra

& Calero, 2006: 86). Rather, they prefer quality accommodation in peaceful and

tranquil places (Halfacree, 1993).

20

2.6. Examination of agrotourism in various countries

In order to gain a better understanding of agrotourism it is essential to examine its

application in different countries (Nilsson, 2002: 13). Taking into consideration that

Greece in general, and the island of Crete in particular, are located in the

Mediterranean basin, it is also deemed necessary to make selective reference to the

case of agrotourism in other Mediterranean countries. Significantly, contrary to

Northern Europe, agrotourism in European Mediterranean countries is a more recent

phenomenon which evolved after the 1950s and rather than being associated with

agriculture or rural tourism, it is mostly associated with conventional and mass tourism

(Kizos & Iosifides, 2007: 71). Because of its recent emergence, the literature of

agrotourism in European Mediterranean countries is poor and inadequate. A special

case is agrotourism in Tuscany (Italy) which is massively developed and well-studied;

thus, a rich relevant literature exists (Kizos and Iosifidis, 2007: 74).

2.6.1. Agrotourism in England and Wales

As Talbot (2013) points outs, the majority of Welsh farms are small-sized, family-

owned and located in Less Favoured Areas (LFA). As a result, their yields are usually

small and their dependency on subsidies is high (Talbot, 2013). In an attempt to

address the difficulties faced by local farmers and diversify their income, the UK

government adopted the farm diversification policy in the late 1980s (Talbot, 2013).

Subsequent schemes were also introduced, providing both guidance and financial help

in order to diversify and tackle the decline of the rural economy (Walford, 2001).

Within this context of multiple income strategies, agrotourism activities were also

undertaken by Welsh farmers and experienced a steady growth, despite some

occasional trends of stagnation (Nilsson, 2002). Its growth is also attributed to the

contribution of the Wales Tourist Board (WTB) – now named as Visit Wales – which

actively supports rural tourism and agrotourism in particular (Nilsson, 2002). According

to a survey conducted by the Welsh Rural Observatory (2010), besides farming, 10 per

cent of Welsh farmers offer tourist accommodation, 7 per cent offer horse riding

21

activities, 4 per cent offer other leisure activities (including attractions) and 4 per cent

are engaged in retail (cited in Talbot, 2013). Their agrotourism clients are mostly

British – and English in particular – who visit Wales on leisure daytrips or longer

holidays, in order to experience its high quality natural environment (Talbot, 2013).

Such an opportunity for reconnection with the countryside is greatly appealing, taking

into consideration that industrialisation took place early in the UK and thus almost 80

per cent of the English population is urban (Talbot, 2013). Yet, despite its growth, the

sector of agrotourism in Wales and rural tourism in general, is characterised by

fragmentation, limited synergy and the absence of a unifying strategy (Talbot, 2013).

2.6.2. Agrotourism in Denmark

Evidences from Denmark show that approximately 10 per cent of Danish farms have

also engaged in some form of agrotourism activities, after receiving both national and

EU subsidies. The farmers’ contribution to the projects was around 56 percent, with

funds invested in establishing or renovating accommodation facilities. Hjalager (1996)

evaluated the outcome of the projects and examined their economic implications.

Interestingly, his findings indicated that the financial returns were insignificant and

much lower than the initial expectations of the politicians or the farmers themselves

(Hjalager, 1996). Another point worth mentioning is that farmers found it difficult to

combine industrialised agriculture production with agrotourism. They realised that

modern farming activities were completely incompatible with the “hands-on”

experiences demanded by tourists and they often had to be commodified in order to

be offered to tourists as an experiential product (Hjalager, 1996). Notably, the financial

returns of agrotourism were greater in areas where intermediates or consultants were

used (Hjalager, 1996).

2.6.3. Spain

Starting from the mid-1960s and until the 1980s, Spain experienced a period of

depopulation of rural areas and mass migration to urban areas, especially to Madrid

and Barcelona. Seeking to address the ramifications of rural depopulation and the

adverse implications of mass tourism, rural tourism was introduced in Spain after the

22

1980s – much later than the other parts of Europe – and gained rapid growth

(Cánoves, 2004: 760). Its implementation was successful from the very beginning and a

significant contribution to the diversification of the rural economy, the regeneration of

rural life and the maintenance of the levels of rural population (Paniagua, 2002; Yagüe

Perales, 2002). As Cánoves (2004: 762) maintains, agrotourism in Spain evolved in two

stages. During the first stage, in the early 1980s, small family farms seeking to survive

and diversify their activities began offering accommodation to tourists. Interestingly,

during this early phase of agrotourism activities farm women contributed massively by

running the holdings and promoting the local values and hospitality (Cánoves, 2004:

762). A decade later, agrotourism entered into a second stage and a variety of

activities was offered to agrotourists, including visits to places of architectural interest,

sightseeing, visits to vineyards and wine cellars, purchasing of local products and the

like (Cánoves, 2004: 762).

Examining closer the implementation of agrotourism in Spain, Cánoves (2004) has

identified several problems and weaknesses stemming from the recent arrival of

agrotourism in the country. Firstly, the agrotourism product offered by farmers is

limited to board and accommodation. That is why – contrary to their British or French

counterparts who have been trained in offering outdoor activities such as hiking,

trekking, horse-riding, mountain-cycling, or cross-country skiing – Spanish farmers lack

relevant training and experience (Cánoves, 2004). As a consequence, the provision of

supplementary activities is still in an embryonic stage and is undertaken by other

professionals and not by farmers themselves. In addition, as Cánoves (2004)

emphasises, the Spanish autonomous governments which are responsible for

agrotourism legislation show no consensus and lack uniformity in their policy. Hence,

striking discrepancies occur in regard to agrotourism legislation, marketing and

taxation.

2.6.4. Cyprus

The promotion of agrotourism in Cyprus began as early as in the mid-1980s, in an

attempt to address some of the problems caused by the rapid growth of mass tourism

in the island and the popularity of Cyprus as a 3S (Sea-Sun-Sand) destination (Sharpley,

23

2002). In this context, the central policies introduced and the marketing strategies

designed, attempted to improve and diversify the existing tourism product of inclusive-

tours (packages). More specifically, the Cypriot Tourism Organization (CTO) expected

that agrotourism as an alternative would reduce the ramifications of seasonality and

the dependency on major tour operators; attract higher-spending tourists; regenerate

the rural area and spread evenly the social-economic benefits of tourism around the

island (Sharpley, 2002). Nonetheless, the practice of agrotourism in Cyprus was

troublesome. In his elaborate research, Sharpley (2002) revealed multiple problems

encountered by the Cypriot agrotourism entrepreneurs, namely:

Lack of support from the national authorities, including insufficient financing

and guidance

Lack of professional training or education offered to entrants to the projects

Lack of attractions in the villages or local facilities where agrotourists can

experience local culture and tradition

Low occupancy levels, resulting from the high prices of agrotourism

accommodation, the market seasonality and the price consciousness of the

majority of agrotourists – British/Germans

Ineffective marketing efforts and poor back-up by CTO

Lack of collective actions, coordination or common spirit on behalf of

agrotourism entrepreneurs

2.7. Agrotourism in Greece

2.7.1. Overview of the agrotourism development in Greece

In tandem with other European Mediterranean countries, agrotourism in Greece has

been recently introduced. It first appeared as a form of rural tourism during the 1960s

and 1970s, when city residents “escaped” to the countryside, at weekends and during

the national or religious holidays. After the 1980s, this form of rural tourism intensified

and was renamed as agrotourism (Kizos & Iosifides, 2007: 71). The primary reason for

such an evolution was the accession of Greece to the European Economic Community

24

in 1981 which brought about a multitude of orchestrated programmes and initiatives

aimed at the development of the local and rural economies (Kizos & Iosifides, 2007:

71). An additional reason for the encouragement of agrotourism in Greece was the

case for mountainous and less favoured areas (LFA) being brought to the forefront,

especially in terms of living standards and issues such as gender equality (Gidarakou,

1999; Tsartas & Thanopoulou, 1994).

As it is generally acknowledged, agrotourism as a concept is closely interwoven with

gender equality. The establishment and running by women of cooperatives in rural

areas, can serve as a paradigm of this interrelation (Anthopoulou, 2000; Kazakopoulos

& Gidarakou, 2002; Kizos & Iosifides, 2007). Those women’s cooperatives, either

provide accommodation in rural areas or produce local products – sweets, pies, pasta,

jams – or local handicrafts (Kazakopoulos & Gidarakou, 2002; Kizos & Iosifides, 2007).

Their development and financing were greatly assisted both by the European Union

(EU) and national programmes, as well as by the Greek Tourism Organisation and other

public and private organizations (Tsartas & Thanopoulou, 1994). At this point, it should

be stressed that notwithstanding the correlation between women cooperatives and

agrotourism, these kinds of entrepreneurial activities are far from the definitional

context of agrotourism. Therefore, a close examination of women cooperatives is

beyond the purpose of this paper.

In the mid-1980s, agrotourism was introduced in Greece as the primary form of

tourism in mountainous and less favoured areas (LFA) through the programme

“Farmers and Agrotourism” (Kizos & Iosifides, 2007). The areas of application were

particularly those peripherally located with no mass-tourism development (Kizos &

Iosifides, 2007) and those threatened by depopulation and economic decline (Gousiou

et al., 2001). Initially, the agrotourism development plan for Greece as a whole was

composed by the Greek Ministry of Agriculture, and the financing was undertaken by

EU through the Regulation No 797/85 – on improving the efficiency of agricultural

structures – and the LEADER initiative (Kizos & Iosifides, 2007). At the following stages

the financing continued under the Regulations No 2328/86, No 2328/91, No 950/97,

and No 1257/99 and the agrotourism programmes were under the umbrella of LEADER

II and LEADER PLUS initiatives (Kizos & Iosifides, 2007).

25

In order to be subsidised, farmers had to meet certain standards (Kizos & Iosifides,

2007). They had to live permanently in rural areas and practise agriculture as their

primary profession, namely earn more than half of their family income from

agriculture (Kizos & Iosifides, 2007). In terms of establishing agrotourism holdings,

those should comprise a maximum of five rooms or ten beds (Kizos & Iosifides, 2007).

Moreover, all participants in the programmes were committed to run their

agrotourism enterprise for a minimum of five years once the project was complete

(Kizos & Iosifides, 2007). That period was extended to ten years for participants in the

Young Farmers scheme of the EU (Kizos & Iosifides, 2007). Young farmers in Less-

Favoured-Areas received a subsidy that covered the total investment cost by 68 per

cent, while others were funded for 40 per cent of the investment.

According to the Greek Ministry of Rural Development and Food, the targets of

agrotourism programmes were multiple, namely:

The improvement and diversification of rural income

The improvement of the living and working conditions of the rural

population

The sustainment of the rural population and the prevention of

depopulation

The improvement and promotion of local agricultural products and

handicrafts

The protection of the rural environment

The preservation, promotion and utilization of the architectural and

cultural heritage

The enhancement of the attractiveness of rural areas

The support of entrepreneurship

(Greek Ministry of Rural Development and Food, 2013)

As Gousiou et al. (2001) emphasise, the Greek authorities failed in integrating

agrotourism policy as part of a greater tourism policy or as a constituent of a national

26

strategy for rural development. The Greek Ministry of Agriculture undertook the initial

agrotourism planning, yet no national or regional authority was established for its

implementation (Anthopoulou, 2000; Gousiou et al., 2001; Iakovidou et al., 2001).

Consequently, all the programmes were realised by private enterprises owned by

farmers or small-size local cooperatives (Anthopoulou, 2000; Gousiou et al., 2001;

Iakovidou et al., 2001). The outcome was that the majority of the projects only

involved the construction of holdings in rural areas, plus the establishment of some

restaurants. It is striking that beyond that, farmers as a rule did not show any interest

in providing any other form of tourism services or activities (Anthopoulou, 2000;

Gousiou et al., 2001; Iakovidou et al., 2001). Additionally, once the investments were

completed, no national or local monitoring body provided any guidance, control,

training or consultation; and any management assistance was merely offered by

private small-size organizations and various development agencies operating at a local-

level (Iakovidou et al., 1999). In the aggregate, no synergies were established between

Greek agrotourism enterprises and no conjoint marketing or promotional activities

were undertaken (Iakovidou et al., 1999).

Seeking to elaborate further upon the implementation of agrotourism in Greece, an

examination of agrotourism cases in a Greek island will follow:

2.7.2. Agrotourism in the Greek island of Lesvos

Lesvos is a forested and mountainous island located in the north-eastern Aegean Sea

(see Figure 4). It is one of the biggest Aegean islands and the third largest island of

Greece behind Crete and Evia. Its economy is mostly based in agriculture, and in

particular the production of olive oil – which is the main source of income – and

cheese. Tourism in Lesvos is a complimentary economic activity which contributes

significantly to the local economy, but its practice is rather undeveloped vis-à-vis other

Greek islands. Most of the island comprises mountain areas where agriculture is the

only form of economic activity; hence, tourism is unevenly expanded and is developed

only in coastal areas, predominately in the West and North part of the island (Gousiou

et al., 2001).

Figure 4: Map of Greece and Lesvos

Source: (adapted from Wikipedia, 2008)

Lesvos is a Less-Favoured

as such, it was one of the first Greek regions where agrotourism programmes were

launched as early as the mid

agrotourism in the island of Lesvos,

and interviewed a representative sample comprising owners of

Their findings were interesting

functional principals of agrotourism:

The investments’ nature, to start with, mainly involved the establishment

of accommodation and restaurants

More than 96 per cent of the investment funds were received by areas

where tourism had been already developed

Investments concerned only the construction of new buildings and

seldom the reconstruction of

Agrotourism operations were signif

the exception of restaurants which operated on

majority of agrotourism holdings operated only during the summer

months and mainly during July and August

27

Map of Greece and Lesvos

Wikipedia, 2008)

Favoured –Area, under the EU definition of Regulation No 75/268) and


launched as early as the mid-1980s (Gousiou et al., 2001). In an attempt to examine

agrotourism in the island of Lesvos, Gousiou et al. (2001), examined secondary data

and interviewed a representative sample comprising owners of agrotourism holdings.

interesting and insightful and revealed many facts that oppose the

functional principals of agrotourism:


of accommodation and restaurants


where tourism had been already developed


seldom the reconstruction of the existing ones

Agrotourism operations were significantly affected by seasonality. With

the exception of restaurants which operated on a yearly basis, the


months and mainly during July and August

Area, under the EU definition of Regulation No 75/268) and


). In an attempt to examine

), examined secondary data

agrotourism holdings.

and revealed many facts that oppose the




icantly affected by seasonality. With

yearly basis, the


28

Agrotourism operations did not generate new jobs. Rather, it enhanced

employment of family members and in particular of women who were

primary in charge of managing the agrotourism business

Provision of extra agrotourism activities beyond catering and

accommodation, is rare. Even when additional activities are offered, they

are remarkably limited and irregular and comprise hiking, horse riding

and exhibition of animals’ care

Only 20 per cent of agrotourism entrepreneurs promote their products.

Surprisingly, no public or private agrotourism agencies operate in the

island

Despite the shortcomings, the majority of the owners expressed their

satisfaction with agrotourism activities and stated that agrotourism

improved considerably their household income

(Gousiou et al., 2001)

2.8. Theoretical framework

Taking into account the findings of earlier studies which examine the application of

agrotourism in various countries, it is interesting to note both the existence of some

contradictions as well as the emergence of common patterns. In an attempt to better

formulate the research questions of this study and derive specific predictions, the

aforementioned findings will be scrutinised and will be utilised for the formulation of a

theoretical framework.

With regard to the definition of agrotourism and its key features, observations from

the prior literature indicate that there is a general lack of consensus among the

academics of what exactly agrotourism is. I argue that this “complex and confusing

picture” (Phillip et al., 2010) expands further to the cohorts of the agrotourism

entrepreneurs. Therefore, what I will initially examine is:

Q1: How do agrotourism entrepreneurs perceive the notion of agrotourism and

its key features?

29

Building on earlier studies about the application of agrotourism in the Greek island of

Lesvos, which reveal that the majority of investments concerned only the construction

of new buildings and seldom the reconstruction of existing ones, doubts are raised

about the contribution of agrotourism to the preservation, promotion and utilization

of the architectural and cultural heritage. My concern is further enhanced by my

existing knowledge that due to lack of controls and regulations, farmers in Crete – like

in the rest of the country – perceived agrotourism subsidies as an opportunity to build

new luxurious accommodation at low cost without actually pursuing agrotourism

operations. Therefore, I will elaborate further by examining:

Q2: To what extent did agrotourism contribute to the protection of the

environment, as well as to the preservation and promotion of the architectural

and cultural heritage of Crete?

Q3: What other activities beyond accommodation, do agrotourism

entrepreneurs offer to their clients?

Drawing on both the international and Greek literature of agrotourism, it emerges that

farmers face significant difficulties in promoting their agrotourism operations, in

coordinating their activities and in establishing synergies. Furthermore, they receive

insufficient training, consultation and guidance by local or national authorities. The

latter often fail in providing an integrated and coherent agrotourism policy. Hence, my

last questions are:

Q4: What problems do agrotourism entrepreneurs face in promoting their

business and what is the degree of dependency on tour operators?

Q5: Which is the level of synergies among agrotourism entrepreneurs?

Q6: To what extent do agrotourism entrepreneurs in Crete receive consultation

and guidance from the local or national authorities?

30

CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH DATA AND METHODOLOGY

3.1. Methodology

As I have already mentioned, despite the plurality of studies about the tourism

industry in Crete, no research has examined so far the concept of agrotourism in the

island. In this sense, my study of agrotourism in Crete comes to bridge a gap in the

existing literature of agrotourism in Greece as a whole. Furthermore, contrary to

previous studies which base their findings on a single category of actors, my research

will examine agrotourism by indentifying and considering some of the major

stakeholders involved in its application from the supply side. Namely, my investigation

will examine the perspective of owners of agrotourism holdings, rural tourism and

agrotourism agents, as well as the viewpoint of the agrotourism union of Crete. Since

the main topic of my study has not been already examined by other researchers, my

research is exploratory in nature. Thus, a qualitative research method is considered to

be more appropriate. As it is commonly acknowledged, the elaborate qualitative

research methods allow the researcher to gain an insight into the individual’s

perspective, develop an understanding from multiple perspectives and reach the

deeper truth (Abawi, 2008; Patton, 2002). What is more, qualitative research is more

suitable when the researcher seeks to build a complex and holistic picture of his

subject of study (Abawi, 2008; Patton, 2002). Therefore, it suits the objective of this

research, which seeks to offer an in-depth critical analysis of agrotourism in Crete.

For the purpose of my research, in-depth data were collected by conduction of semi-

structured face-to-face interviews. I have chosen the interview method as the most

proper for my study for a number of reasons. Notably, in-depth interviewing “uses

individuals as the point of departure for the research process, assumes that individuals

have unique and important knowledge about the social world that is ascertainable,

which can be shared through verbal communication” (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011: 94,

cited in McGehee, 2012: 365). Moreover, interviewing is a flexible technique

particularly effective for researchers seeking to capture the informant’s thoughts,

experiences and perceptions in an in-depth and specific way (McGehee, 2012). Thus, it

is a valuable tool for extracting exploratory data. Consequently, interviewing is a

31

qualitative research method that has been widely used in the study of tourism during

the last 30 years (Goodson & Phillimore, 2004). Admittedly, my point of view is in

tandem with McGehee (2012) which highlights that:

On the supply-side, tourism industry stakeholders are often very busy

people, but they also tend to be immersed and involved in their work,

and as such are eager to share their thoughts. From a practical

perspective, the relative youth of the industry, along with a lack of clean,

systematic, quantitative data measuring the tourism industry also

contributes to the usefulness of the interview technique in tourism…

[What is more,] this is an era where researchers are finding average

survey response rates to be plunging (Sheehan, 2001), often due to

survey fatigue. The interview technique may incite a more welcome

response from potential tourism study subjects of all types.

(McGehee, 2012: 366)

Accordingly, numerous researchers have used interview methods in order to examine

the concept of agrotourism from the supply-side. The studies undertaken by Flanigan

et al. (2014), Gousiou et al. (2001), Kizos and Iosifides (2007), Sidali (2009), Sharpley

2002) and Talbot (2013) are just but a few examples.

I have opted for the face-to-face interview technique due to its advantages compared

with other interview methods. As Opdenakker (2006) points out, face-to-face

interviews are characterised by synchronous communication in time and place, and

they can take advantage of social cues – such as voice, intonation, body language – of

the interviewee. Thus, the interviewer may build rapport and extra information can be

added to the verbal answer of a question. This effect is particularly beneficial when the

interviewee is seen as a subject and as an irreplaceable person whose attitude towards

an issue is investigated (Opdenakker, 2006). In addition, face-to-face interviews

provide more spontaneous answers as there is no time delay between question and

answer, allowing the interviewer to concentrate more on the answers given. The

former advantage is particularly useful when structured or semi-structured questions

are posed. Notably, as face-to-face interviews can be tape-recorded, they provide a

32

more accurate report. Since, the nature of my interviews has been semi-structured, I

was provided with more freedom to divert from the prepared question-list when

necessary and bring new ideas during the interview process.

Admittedly, the face-to-face interview technique I have chosen is not without

limitations. The process is time consuming and entails more effort and cost when

travelling is required. Thus, in order to mitigate the effect of the former limitation, I

was bound to limit the number of interviewees to a representative sample of each

group of stakeholders. Besides, because of the nature of the face-to-face interview

technique, there were a number of ethical issues that I had to consider. As Opdenakker

(2006) highlights, the visibility of a face-to-face interview may result in unwanted

effects, when the interviewer consciously or unconsciously gives cues that drive the

interviewee to a specific direction. The risk of bias is also high, both during the

interview process and the data analysis and interpretation (Opdenakker, 2006).

Another ethical consideration, results from the scale of this research. Because of the

small sample of the participants in this study and the personal nature of the

interviews, the findings may be also biased and lack validity or may be difficult to

generalise.

3.2. Data collection

For the needs of my study, a sample comprising 12 actors in the agrotourism industry

in Crete was selected and interviewed. My attempt was to achieve a representative

examination of the key groups of stakeholders involved in the implementation and the

development of agrotourism from the supply side (see Table 3). Due to time, financing

and networking limitations, I was obliged to exclude any kind of public authorities from

my research. Furthermore, I also opted to exclude members of the local communities,

since I judged that – although they have a stake – they scarcely contribute to the

implementation or the development of agrotourism.

33

Table 3: Stakeholders of agrotourism industry in Crete

As a starting point, I interviewed a senior member of the Association of Travel

Agencies of the city of Rethymno, in Crete. This was a pilot interview that helped me

significantly fine-tune the framework of my questions. Strikingly, it also served as a

vehicle for outlining the map of the local agrotourism industry, identify its key

stakeholders and select the first participants of my study. At this point, it should be

noted that participants were recruited by a combination of purposive and snowball

sampling. Due to the relative small size of the agrotourism industry in Crete, people

involved in it are aware of a multiple of other actors. In this way, it gradually became

possible to evaluate the potential contribution of persons suggested to participate in

my research by more than one source and shortlist them effectively. Hence, I

conducted face-to-face interviews with the following participants:

Six (6) owners of agrotourism holdings in the areas of Rethymno and Chania

(Crete) varying in business size and turnover

One (1) operations manager of a agrotourism model farm, part of a hotel chain

One (1) senior member of the Agrotourism Union of Crete – also senior

member of the Federation of Agrotourism Unions of Greece (SEAGE) and

owner of agrotourism holdings

One (1) senior member of the local union of travel agencies

One (1) owner of rural tourism travel agency

Two (2) owners of agrotourism travel agencies

Supply side Demand side

EU authorities Agro-tourists

National authorities

Regional and local authorities

Tour operators

Travel and Agrotourism agencies

Agrotourism holdings ownersAgrotourism unions/associations

Local communities

34

As far as the interview questions are concerned, an interview guide was used (see

Appendix B), comprising questions specially adapted to each participant according to

which group of stakeholders they belonged. Not surprisingly, some of the participants

expressed the desire to be informed in advance of the context of the interview

questions. Since I was bound to do so in order to secure their contribution, I

communicated the interview guide to them. Yet, I did not omit to highlight that

interviews would be semi-structured and that questions would be adjusted to the flow

of the discussion.

Participants were directly contacted either by phone or by a personal visit. I considered

that establishing a preliminary contact in such a direct way, rather than by email, was

the most appropriate way to build rapport, taking into account the local temperament.

Notably, Cretan people – including businessmen – prefer a direct face-to-face

approach and seek social contact. Interviews were conducted either at the office of the

participants or at their place of residence according to what they desired. I believed

that participants would feel more relaxed and at ease in a place of their selection and

thus the development of rapport would be facilitated. In the same context, I

attempted to adjust my dress and attitude, to the social class and role of each

interviewee. To give but one example, I opted for casual dressing when interviewing a

farmer in my father’s village, politely asked for a cup of traditional Greek coffee and

carefully avoided any use of academic jargon during our conversation. It is relevant at

this point to highlight that after conducting a few interviews, I realised that most of the

participants felt rather uncomfortable when hearing the word “interview” which they

possibly associate with the concept of “press and journalists”. Remarkably, their

awkwardness was also enforced by the view of my tape-recorder and the request of

their consent to record the interview. In order to avoid this implication, I simply

replaced the phrase “may I please have your permission to record the interview” with

the phrase “would you mind if I use my mobile to record our discussion” – assuming

that the word “mobile” also sounds more familiar to them. Overall, I carefully sought

to keep eye contact and “hear behind the words” by interpreting the body language of

the participants. In an attempt to “break the ice” and enhance familiarity, a bottle of

local wine produced by my father was offered as a present to every participant, a

35

gesture highly admirable in Crete. Thus, in all but one interview, familiarity was

progressively developed and rapport was built.

Remarkably, all the participants that were contacted agreed immediately to participate

in my research and demonstrated enthusiasm for my study and a solid willingness to

contribute to it. This fact is of great importance, taking into consideration their busy

schedule and that the conduction of the interviews also coincided with the festive

period of Christmas when most Greeks dedicate their free time to their families. It is

my belief that participants were encouraged by the potential contribution of my

research to the local agrotourism industry and their willingness to exhibit solidarity

during the era of financial recession that Greece is currently undergoing. In addition,

most of the participants were hardworking people who have spent a life-time

developing their family business. Thus, they felt both proud and eager to talk about

their endeavours.

A striking example is the case of a participant who is a farmer and the owner of

agrotourism holdings. I met him at his family house, and before the interview he

insisted that we first have dinner together with all his family. After a couple of hours of

chatting, eating and drinking, we finally commenced the interview process. To my

surprise, soon the whole family was involved in the discussion and the face-to-face

interview evolved to a focus group interview. As the whole family had a degree of

involvement in the development and running of their family business, every one of

them had something useful to add. I have to note, that beyond its academic

significance, that was also a very touching and sentimental experience.

3.3. Data analysis

To facilitate the analysis of all the provided data, participants were coded according to

their profile (see Table 4) and notes were kept during the conduction of the interviews.

Notes included key words, concepts and patterns emerging from the discussion, issues

and dimensions stressed by the interviewees as well as issues understated or

overlooked. Subsequently, I used both the interview notes and the audio files

(contained in the attached CD) to create tables comprising the main questions or

36

issues, and the respective perceptions of the participants according to which group of

stakeholders they belonged (see Appendices C, D, E, F, G). Clearly, this was a time-

consuming process, considering the great volume of information which emerged from

the interviews and their length which usually exceeded one hour and reached two

hours in certain cases.

Table 4: Coding of the participants and their profile

Participant Description Abbreviation

A Owner of Agrotourism Holdings OAH

B Owner of Agrotourism Holdings OAH

C Owner of Agrotourism Holdings OAH

D Owner of Agrotourism Holdings OAH

E Owner of Agrotourism Holdings OAH

F Owner of Agrotourism Holdings OAH

G Operations manager of Model Farm OMF

H Senior Member of the Agrotourism Union of Crete

& Owner of Agrotourism Holdings

AUC & OAH

I Senior Member of the Union of Travel Agents of Rethymno UTA

J Owner of Rural tourism Travel Agency ORTA

K Owner of Agrotourism Travel Agency OATA

L Owner of Agrotourism Travel Agency OATA

37

CHAPTER 4. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

4.1. Overview of the agrotourism entrepreneurs

As it has been already mentioned, participants were selected by snowball and

purposive sampling. Interestingly, this method easily led me to agrotourism

entrepreneurs who were locally well-known for their high professionalism and the

quality of the agrotourism holdings they were running. Their operations varied in size

and features, starting from the running of a couple of luxurious villas (Participants C

and D) to the running of a small traditional village with reconstructed houses for rent

(Participants A and B) or to a built-from-scratch iconic model farm (participant G).

Clearly, as it became evident from the interviews, these were greatly competent

individuals with a high degree of expertise and involvement in the agrotourism

profession. In order to limit the bias of my study and gain a spherical understanding, I

attempted to reach the antipodes by identifying participants who practised

agrotourism in a less professional but rather opportunistic way. Thus, I extended my

research sample by finding and approaching participants E and F, who are both

farmers and owners of small size agrotourism holdings comprising 5 to 6 rooms.

Interestingly, participant F (OAH) – who preferred to refrain from any theoretical

discussion – received subsidies as a farmer back in 1995, in order to build agrotourism

holdings in a coastal area. Subsequently, following the end of the mandatory operating

period, participant F ceased activities and used the premises as a family house.

4.2. The participants’ perception of agrotourism and its key features

Much to my surprise, interviews revealed that the majority of the participants have a

good conceptual understanding of agrotourism. Inevitably, their breadth of

knowledge varied significantly according to their degree of involvement in the

agrotourism profession. As a starting point, all the interviewees stressed that

agrotourism as a special type of tourism, should be developed in the countryside far

from the areas of mass tourism. Yet, they went further by commenting that far from

the provision of accommodation in the countryside, agrotourism should also include

38

the undertaking of activities which bring agrotourists in contact with the local lifestyle,

culture, tradition and landscape.

…to me agrotourism is not merely a rent room, or a fully equipped hotel

in a village. Agrotourism should be connected with activities relevant to

nature, the environment, the local societies and farming. The key word is

activities…

(Participant A – OAH)

Agrotourism is not merely the reconstruction of an old house or the

construction of a house with a swimming pool in order to rent it to

tourists. I should include activities too…

(Participant J – ORTA)

When interviewees were asked to elaborate further and describe what kind of

activities agrotourism should include, they named the participation in farming and

husbandry activities – picking fruits, vegetables, olives, grapes, sheep-shearing,

milking, cheese-making – participating in the preparation of local food, in cultural and

local social events, having excursions in the countryside and so forth. In this context, it

was argued that agrotourism operations can be extended further to include the

running of restaurants in the countryside, leisure centres for the promotion of local

cultural and heritage, small shops and showrooms selling local products, farms; as well

as agencies and providers or organisers of outdoor programmes and ecotourism

activities (Participant H) . Moreover, participants agreed that agrotourism cannot be

practiced in mass tourism areas.

Interestingly, when asked whether agrotourism should be performed by farmers

exclusively, respondents stated that this not a prerequisite. Rather, they commented

that any person who has the competence and a genuine desire could pursue

agrotourism activities. Yet, there were voices which noted that agrotourism

entrepreneurs should be associated with the countryside:

39

We think that the agrotourism entrepreneurs should have direct contact

with each one of their guests

(Participant H – AUC & OAH)

…the concept of agrotourism should not be exclusively associated with

the farmer who provides accommodation… there should be included

even farmers who strive to promote their produce to tourists. Those

farmers who produce products of good quality which they seek to

promote and sell to tourist…

(Participant L – OATA)

It is worth noting the existence of a disagreement around the acceptable size of

agrotourism enterprises and the maximum number of rooms they may include. The

controversy expands further to the level and nature of the activities offered by the

agrotourism entrepreneurs. Unfortunately, this disagreement results in – and possibly

also stems from –the formulation of at least two distinct organisational bodies which

seek to orchestrate the operations of the Cretan agrotourism enterprises.

4.3. The participants’ perception of the benefits of agrotourism

What was resoundingly echoed by the interviewees’ responses was that they were

well aware of the benefits of agrotourism, both for the suppliers, the agrotourists, the

environment and the cultural heritage. Owners of agrotourism holdings generally

stressed the importance of agrotourism for the diversification of the farmers’ income,

the promotion of local produce, the employment of young people and family members

in particular. In addition they acknowledged that agrotourism can be also beneficial for

the agrotourists who come in contact with nature and the local culture, interact with

local people and experience temporarily a healthy and relaxing life-style. Participant G

summed up by commenting that agrotourism contributes to the establishment of a

link between the primary economic sector and tourism. Notably, owners of rural

tourism and agrotourism travel agencies demonstrated a deeper knowledge of the

benefits of agrotourism. This is aptly captured by the following participants who

stressed:

40

Agrotourism will bring some additional income. It will also incur

educational benefit, because the locals will meet new people. It will

widen their horizon. Locals will begin to appreciate the local

environment.

(Participant K – OATA)

It will be a great benefit for Greece if the agricultural sector, interrelates

with the tourism sector… Agrotourism is a means to bring to the

foreground the local societies. Because of agrotourism, local people come

in contact with people from other cultures and interact with them.


Agrotourism, as well as every form of alternative tourism, is the only way

for Greece to approach new markets and to expand the tourism period.

(Participant J – ORTA)

Importantly however, some of the respondents indicated a set of downsides when it

comes to the application of agrotourism. For instance, participant G (OMF) highlighted

that agrotourism is a very demanding business activity, which requires a wide range of

skills on behalf of the entrepreneurs. In another dimension, participant E (OAH)

emphasised that agrotourism entails no drawbacks if developed in a mild form, but it

could pose a threat if developed in an industrial way. In the same vein, participant B

discussed the risk of disturbing the local life-style due to the running of facilities

supplementary to agrotourism (e.g. bars) and changes in the village's culture.

4.4. The profile of agrotourists in Crete

From the interviews it became evident that agrotourists in Crete mainly come from

France, the UK, Germany and the Netherlands. French tourists in particular are

perceived by many of the participants as being very enthusiastic about the Cretan

culture and history, the local gastronomy and the countryside. German tourists, whose

number has recently declined, are described as being fascinated by the countryside

41

and as having a keen interest in trekking. Norway, Finland, Belgium, Israel, Austria and

the US, are identified as secondary countries of agrotourists’ origin. Interestingly

though, respondents stressed that although Russia has lately turned into a strong

market for Cretan tourism, Russian tourists so far, perceive Crete as a sea-sun

destination and show no interest in agrotourism. At this point, it is worth mentioning

that according to participant G (OMF), Russian and other East-European tourists are

showing increasing interest in visiting the model farm he is managing. This fact can be

a sign that a segment from the aforementioned market may soon enter a stage of

maturity and also seek agrotourism services.

Regarding the main features of the agrotourists who visit Crete, it was revealed

through the interviews that they are predominately middle-aged couples (between 30

to 50yo) who travel with their children or along with other couples of friends.

Agrotourists appear to be well-off clients and willing to pay a premium. In return they

demand quality services of high standards. They usually book their holidays online

through specialised agrotourism travel agencies or popular websites such as

“Homeaway.com” or “Booking.com”. Additionally, they make direct booking via the

websites of the agrotourism holdings. In any case, they are experienced travellers who

plan their holidays carefully and lay emphasis on internet reviews by former visitors.

Many of them are returning clients who have visited Crete many times in the past. In

the same context, agrotourists are well informed about the places they intend to visit,

and exhibit a strong interest in the local culture, the natural beauty, and the local

customs and traditions. Although agrotourists seek privacy and tranquillity, and avoid

areas of mass tourism, they enjoy social interaction with the local people and

especially with the members of the hosting family.

Findings were very interesting when it comes to the nature of the activities

agrotourists seek. As a starting point, participant D (OAH) gave a useful insight by

identifying three different categories of expectations. According to this respondent,

one type of clients wants to experience tranquillity and seclusion, and uses the

holdings as a retreat. This kind of clients avoids any kind of contact with other people

including agrotourists and the hosting family. Another kind – which is more price-

sensitive – uses the holdings as a base, requires the existence of a swimming pool, and

42

rents a car to explore the hinterland. This segment comprises mostly French, English

and German clients. There is also a third, smaller category which exhibits a strong

interest in local culture, history and civilisation. This type of visitor seldom asks for a

swimming pool. They are well educated and visit Crete seeking to experience an

authentic life-style.

More specifically, respondents noted that agrotourists enjoy having excursions in the

countryside, sightseeing, hiking, trekking, mountain-biking and horse riding. In

addition, they are attracted by the authentic Cretan life-style, local produce and

handicrafts. In this context, they enjoy taking lessons in traditional cooking, looming

and pottery. Notably, respondents agreed that agrotourists are keen on staged farm

tasks such as picking fruits and vegetables, collecting wild herbs, participating in staged

vine harvesting, sheep shearing, milking or cheese-making. However, it should be

highlighted that the interviewees’ responses made clear that agrotourists show no

interest at all in experiencing authentic working agriculture. That said, agrotourist are

described as totally unwilling to actively engage in real farm tasks. Contrariwise, their

interest is limited to joining staged farm activities which are part of a programme

organised for the benefits of tourism. This fact is also reflected in the following

response:

What was suggested in the past, that a piece of land should be available

to the clients so that they will engage in farming activities is wrong.

Nobody likes that!

(Participant C – OAH)

4.5. The nature of the agrotourism product offered by local entrepreneurs

From the interviews, it soon became evident that the features of the agrotourism

services offered greatly depend upon the size of the agrotourism enterprise and the

degree of expertise of its owner. In this regard, agrotourism in the island of Crete

predominately takes the form of providing accommodation in the countryside.

Holdings are usually either rent rooms or villas constructed for the needs of the

tourists. Clearly, agrotourism entrepreneurs avoid reconstruction or renovation of

43

existing old residences as this proves to be technically more complicated and thereby

more costly. Hence, entrepreneurs with limited financing and experience tend to start

venturing by building one or two villas which they finance partly with EU or national

subsidies and partly with personal borrowing. On the other hand, those entrepreneurs

having a higher degree of expertise and abundant financing usually prefer to take a

higher risk and either construct a complex of villas or reconstruct a cluster of old

house, usually located in an abandoned village. In any case, regardless of the project,

the architectural nature of the constructions solely depends on the owner’s decision

since there are no official regulations governing the adoption of a traditional

architectural style and the use of materials like stone or wood. Hence, in the Cretan

countryside there is a plethora of diverse constructions which are all named as

agrotourism holdings. Consequently, an agrotourist is called to select among a

multitude of kitschy rent rooms, luxurious modern villas, “traditional style” newly-built

villas and authentically restored houses dating from the Venetian era.

Based on the interviews, it appears that beyond the offer of accommodation, the

provision of complementary activities requires a great degree of involvement on

behalf of the agrotourism entrepreneur. Offering an array of recreational activities,

beyond skills and competence, predicates the utilization of additional resources which

incur a considerable cost to the agrotourism enterprise. What is more, most of the

participants stressed that due to the lack of a legislative framework governing

agrotourism issues, agrotourism entrepreneurs providing accommodation, are

prohibited from offering extra activities. The possession of a catering licence is

required for providing board, a packing licence for using their own produce in the

meals offered and a trading licence for selling local products to clients. Moreover, a

travel agency’s licence is required for organising excursions and sightseeing, a guide’s

licence for the guided tours, and a mountain-guide licence for the trekking or hiking.

Consequently, the great majority of the Cretan agrotourism entrepreneurs merely

offer self-catered accommodation, while few offer breakfast, and even fewer offer

board. Furthermore, to a great extent owners of agrotourism holdings offer no

activities on a regular and organised basis. Conversely, they solely inform clients about

local places worth-visiting or suggest routes and activities.

44

An exemption to the aforementioned pattern, is the case of large-size agrotourism

enterprises (participants A and H), the case of the agrotourism model farm

(participants G) and undoubtedly the case of rural tourism and agrotourism agencies

(participants I, J, K). In those instances, the entrepreneurs invested amply in acquiring

qualified personnel and the relevant licensing for undertaking recreational activities

which comprise:

Hiking, trekking, horse riding

Picking of fruits, vegetables, collection of wild herbs

Presentation of the Cretan fauna and flora

Participation in staged vine harvesting, visits to local wineries, traditional olive

presses

Visits to tsikoudia (i.g. Cretan alcoholic beverage) distilleries

Participation in staged sheep shearing, sheep milking, cheese-making

Lessons of traditional cooking, visits to local bakeries

Lessons of traditional painting, pottery and looming

Visits to archaeological sites, places of historic interest and of natural beauty

Participation in concerts of Cretan music, local feasts, and traditional weddings

As it has been mentioned, it was revealed by the interviews that agrotourists are

totally uninterested in engaging actively in genuine farm tasks. This fact provides an

explanation why none of the agrotourism entrepreneurs interviewed offers any form

of authentic agricultural or husbandry activities.

4.6. The participants’ perception of the application of agrotourism in Crete

Admittedly, the vast majority of the participants expressed their dissatisfaction with

the application of agrotourism in Crete. An example in this regard is participant D

(OAH) who in a burst of anger commented:

...but there is no such thing as Agrotourism. In Greece, the word

agrotourism is a sham! It exists only in papers…

45

In the same vein, many more participants criticised strongly the poor implementation

of agrotourism in the island – and in Greece as a whole. Over and above, they referred

to numerous cases where farmers and other investors received European and national

subsidies for establishing agrotourism enterprises which were never actually run.

Contrariwise, the funds were often misused either for the farmers’ housing or for the

construction of luxurious private villas.

All the people I knew who made agrotourism holdings simply constructed

them for family housing. Nobody ever really engaged in agrotourism…

The whole programme lacked organisation and control. Some

agrotourism holdings were even constructed by the sea!

(Participant E – OAH)

I imagine that many agrotourism holding have been established not for

agrotourism per se but to offer cheap housing to the owners...

(Participant G – OMF)

Such practices were commonly encountered particularly during the early stages of the

agrotourism application in Greece where controls were poor and financing was

abundant. A striking example is the case of participant F (OAH) who received EU

subsidies in 1995, in order to build agrotourism holdings in a coastal area. When I

asked him if it was worth pursuing agrotourism, the interviewee disclosed:

Yes, because that was the only way to build a family house…

(Participant F – OAH)

4.7. The promotion of agrotourism services

The interviews illustrated the fact that the promotion of agrotourism in Crete is

achieved in diverse ways according to the nature of the services offered. Owners of

small-size agrotourism holdings who practise farming as their main profession hardly

promote their agrotourism operations. For instance, participants E and F admitted that

46

they have never advertised their business in any way, neither had any partnership with

a travel agency or tour operator. Instead, they merely relied on the word of mouth.

This is also aptly captured by the following comment:

I have never made any kind of advertisement. I did not care!


On the contrary, participants C and D, who run agrotourism holdings comprising one

and three villas respectively, stated that they rely on the power of the internet. In the

past, they had both attempted to cooperate with local travel agencies or with

international big tour operators. Yet, they expressed their dissatisfaction about the

high commission rate – reaching 30 per cent – and about the allotment contract they

were asked to sign which bonded their operations. Hence, both of the participants

turned to online booking; they developed their own websites and placed

advertisements in popular specialised websites like “Homeaway.com” and

“Booking.com” (The first website charges a commission of 17% and the second an

annual promotional charge of approximately €700). Both of those two participants

stated that their clients avoid travel agencies and tour operators and instead they book

their holidays on their own by the aforementioned websites. Quite interestingly, they

stressed the importance of gaining good online reviews by previous visitors.

Owners of bigger size agrotourism holdings, such a participant A (owner of 12

traditional houses), participant B (owner of 10 traditional houses) and participant H

(owner of 7 traditional houses and a tavern) prefer a different approach. They revealed

that despite the development of a website, they mainly rely on partnership with

international tour operations and agrotourism travel agencies abroad. When asked

whether the high commission required is a hindrance, they made clear that

cooperation is nevertheless profitable. In regard to the nature of the contracts,

participant H (AUC & OAH) revealed that the majority of the agrotourism holdings

work with allotment contracts; few still work with commitment contracts. The same

respondent pointed out that using allotment contacts on the one hand decreases

uncertainty about finding clients. On the other hand, it increases dependency on the

tour operators and can be destructive for regaining clientele when the partnership

47

terminates. Finally, from the interviews it also became evident that the local

agrotourism agencies follow a similar promotion policy, primarily based on B2B

partnerships with tour operators and travel agencies abroad.

In closing, it is it important to note that participant D (OAH) expressed severe criticism

of the unlawful practises of some travel agents which promote villas that operate

illegally without having permission from the Greek Tourism Organisation. As the same

participant revealed, an illegal villa can make a contract with certain travel agencies or

tour operators if the owner pays a premium. This statement lends support to the

voices stating that one of the greatest problems of agrotourism in Crete – and the

tourism industry in general – is the existence of a multitude of holdings which operate

illegally. Many of them have been bought by foreign citizens who in turn rent them

illegally to tourists from their country of origin. In order for the tax to be evaded, those

clients are introduced as friends of the hosting family.

4.8. The level of synergies among agrotourism entrepreneurs

As all the interviews illustrated, the level of synergies among agrotourism

entrepreneurs is disappointing. Owners of agrotourism holdings who solely provide

accommodation were found to create no synergies at all. On the contrary, they stated

that previous attempts to pool their resources with other agrotourism entrepreneurs

or with local producers or farmers, ended up unsuccessfully. The statement of

participant E (OAH) captures the general responses well:

The notion of cooperation is a great one. If cooperation exists then a

future also exists. There is no cooperation though! You cannot find

people to work with. The future is a personal matter…


On the other hand, some agrotourism entrepreneurs who operate in a more integral

way and seek to combine the provision of accommodation with the undertaking of

activities appear to maintain an elementary degree of synergies with local

professionals. This includes the cooperation with a small number of local farmers,

48

shepherds, winery and distillery owners, traditional handicraftsmen and musicians.

These professional undertake the organising of certain activities, comprising visits to

their sites, either on a commission basis or mainly in exchange for promoting their own

products. Likewise, owners of local agrotourism agencies appear to follow a similar

practice when it comes to organising agrotourism activities for their clients.

Interestingly though, agrotourism entrepreneurs, as well as agrotourism agents,

expressed complaints about the difficulties they encounter in finding reliable and

suitable professionals to cooperate with. Above all, the main challenge lies in

identifying a partner who can match reliability, quality and high hygiene standards with

authenticity and tradition.

At the aggregate level, as I have already mentioned, there are currently two different

pools of agrotourism enterprises in Crete. Namely, the Agrotourism Union of Crete –

also a member of the Hellenic Federation of Agrotourism Unions – and one called the

Cretan Association of Alternative Tourism or Cretan Agrotourism Cooperative. Those

two bodies fall short in coexisting harmoniously and barely pool their resources or

coordinate their efforts. The negligible number of their members cannot be but an

indication of that deficiency. For instance, a tourist searching the official website

(www.agroxenia.net/en/page/crete) of the Hellenic Federation of Agrotourism Unions

– which is also a member of EuroGites, the European Agrotourism Federation – can

view that the Agrotourism Union of Crete is merely represented by 4 agrotourism

holdings and 2 wineries. Conversely, the website of the Cretan Association of

Alternative Tourism (http://www.tourcrete.gr/Default.aspx?tabid=146) lists 100

holdings of various style and size, comprising even holdings of mass tourism.

Surprisingly, the only language available is Greek.

4.9. Support from public authorities

Tragically, all the participants demonstrated their strong dissatisfaction with the lack of

managerial and marketing support from the public authorities. Owners of agrotourism

holdings argued that any public help they received involved the dispensation of EU and

national subsidies at the construction stage. In addition participants D, E (OAH) and K

(OATA) added that they had participated in state-run seminars about agrotourism and

49

alternative tourism. When asked to evaluate the usefulness of the seminars,

participant D and K expressed criticism of their quality, stating that they had been

badly organised and provided limited practical guidance. On this note, participant D –

who has had tourism experience prior to engaging in agrotourism – stressed:

R: Were the seminars useful?

D: I was useful to the seminars!

All of the participants complained that once the construction phase ended they

received no sort of consultation, guidance or marketing assistance on behalf of the

local, regional or national authorities. Participants could list their holdings in the

website of the local tourism authorities or in relevant promotional brochures. Beyond

that, no other promotional assistance was ever offered.

On the other hand, owners of agrotourism agencies appeared to be more positive

towards the contribution of the local and regional authorities. The following

statements capture the general responses well:

The regional authorities make efforts but these are not constant or

coordinated. I feel that there is no strategy and that their efforts are

opportunistic and lack consistency…Regional and local authorities are

willing to help, but their efforts are sporadic.


J: I am not asking whether the state is friendly or slow. But I certainly

don't want to have a hostile state.

R: Do we have a hostile state at the moment?

J: I would say that we have an ignorant state. I don't want to believe that

our state is hostile, just that it lacks competence… Young public servants,

though, have the desire and the skills… There are active people, I don't

know if they have the freedom to make decisions.

(Participant J – OATA)

50

The participants’ complains extended further by noting that so far there is no

legislative framework in regard to agrotourism. Clearly, there is great confusion about

what agrotourism is, what the agrotourism product includes, and the rights and the

obligations of agrotourism entrepreneurs. Admittedly, the Greek legislation so far does

not approve one business activity to be designated as an agrotourism enterprise.

Consequently, the Greek tax authorities equate agrotourism entrepreneurs providing

accommodation with hoteliers. Likewise, organisers of agrotourism activities are

identified as travel agents and they are required to poses the relevant license. At this

point, it is interesting to quote the words of participant H (AUC & OAH):

Big hotel owners react strongly to the formation of a legal framework

regarding agrotourism. Moreover, travel agents feel threatened by the

idea that agrotourism entrepreneurs may be allowed to organise small

scale excursion for their clients…

In this state of ambiguity and complexity, some agrotourism entrepreneurs are driven

to offer part of their services illegally and concealed. Overall, the lack of a coherent

strategy and the inexistence of a relevant legislation results in the prevalence of a

chaotic situation where agrotourism in Crete often imitates and competes with mass

tourism.

4.10. Occupancy and seasonality

The participants’ response revealed that agrotourism in Crete is greatly affected by

seasonality. All the agrotourism holdings operate exclusively during the summer

season and remain closed for the rest of the year, due to lack of demand and high

operational costs. Not surprisingly, the occupancy rate during the summer season

varies according to the owner’s degree of engagement in agrotourism. Owners of

agrotourism holdings who practise farming as their primary profession – such as

participants E and F – complained about the low occupancy rate. Clearly, this is the

outcome of many factors, such as the lack of management expertise, low-quality

services, poor marketing, lack of promotion and the like. Conversely, other

agrotourism holdings owners, those involved exclusively with agrotourism, expressed

51

their satisfaction and revealed an occupancy ranging from 100 to 150 days. Bearing in

mind that the providers of agrotourism accommodation operate only during the

summer months, the respondents did not omit to stress that such coverage is

considered to be satisfactory.

In continuity with the aforementioned, most of the participants resoundingly brought

to the forefront the issue of seasonality. In this regard, they highlighted that in Crete

there is also potential for the practising of agrotourism during some of the winter

months. However, since the island has been established as a summer destination, both

charter airlines and tour operators cease their activities at the end of October.

Subsequently, transportation cost soars dramatically making Crete an expensive

destination for the winter traveller. In this regard, I need to quote the words of

participant H (AUC & OAH) who gave a particular useful insight by suggesting:

The tourism season could be extended for two months – November,

December... There are facilities that could support winter agrotourism

and a variety of activities which agrotourists could undertake, such as the

harvesting of olives… Winter tourism is feasible but there is a need for all

stakeholders to coordinate their efforts… Low-cost air carriers have

already started using airports of the island as a base. This provides an

opportunity for the existence of a couple of [international] flights

throughout the week which could serve tourists during the winter

months. Part of the cost could be subsidised by key actors of the Cretan

tourism. [On the other hand] mass-tourism actors do not find appealing

the prospect of winter tourism, since it will be agrotourism entrepreneurs

who will benefit and not them.

(Participant H – AUC & OAH)

52

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1. Summary

Taken as a whole, the research findings have offered a multidimensional insight into

the application of agrotourism in the island of Crete, from the supply-side point of

view. In particular, this study has provided the following valuable answers to the

research questions:

Q1: How do agrotourism entrepreneurs perceive the notion of agrotourism and its

key features?

The findings indicate that the Cretan agrotourism entrepreneurs have a coherent

understanding of the concept of agrotourism. To them, apart from accommodation in

the countryside, agrotourism encompasses the undertaking of activities which will

bring the agrotourists in contact with nature and the local culture, in order to interact

with local people and experience temporarily a healthy and relaxing life-style. Notably,

none of the respondents correlated the notion of agrotourism with the provision of

accommodation in a working farm; nor did they perceive that agrotourism

entrepreneurs should be primarily involved in agriculture. Instead, they merely

acknowledged that agrotourism holdings should be located in the countryside and that

any person having the competence and a genuine desire could pursue agrotourism

activities. In simple terms, agrotourism entrepreneurs are not necessarily farmers.

Clearly, this approach comes in contrast with the majority of the existing theories of

agrotourism, which as I stressed in the literature review, regard as a prerequisite either

the existence of a working farm, or the involvement of professionals from the primary

or secondary sector of the economy.

In terms of the nature of the activities undertaken by agrotourists in Crete, it clearly

became evident from my study that they comprise no real farm tasks at all. As was

generally revealed by the respondents, agrotourists are disinterested in participating

actively in authentic farming. Hence the agrotourism product in Crete merely

comprises staged farm activities.

53

Q2: To what extent did agrotourism contribute to the protection of the environment,

as well as to the preservation and promotion of the architectural and cultural

heritage of Crete?

This study has confirmed the importance of agrotourism for the preservation and the

promotion of traditions and cultural heritage of Crete. Findings were in line with

existing theories (Marsden et al., 2001; Papakonstandinidis, 1993; Parra & Calero,

2006) and confirmed that agrotourists seek to experience authenticity and exhibit a

strong interest in the local culture, the local customs and traditions. Hence, it can be

argued that agrotourism contributes to the promotion and preservation of the cultural

heritage of Crete.

What is more, my study also went some way to supporting the theory of Parra and

Calero (2006) that agrotourists tend to avoid the presence of mass-tourists and seek to

maximise contact with nature and experience natural local products and healthy food.

Notwithstanding this finding, I am very sceptical about the contribution of agrotourism

to the protection of the Cretan environment and the countryside. Taking into account,

that most of agrotourism holdings comprise new constructions, that building

restorations are scarce, and that there are no regulations imposing the adoption of a

traditional architectural style, such an advance of agrotourism can pose a threat both

for the environment and the architectural heritage. In this regard, my viewpoint

supports the theory of Gousiou et al. (2001) who expressed similar concerns when

studied the case of agrotourism in the Greek island of Lesvos.

Q3: What other activities beyond accommodation, do agrotourism entrepreneurs

offer to their clients?

Based on the interviews, this study confirmed that the degree of activities provided,

correlates with the size of agrotourism holdings and the degree of the owner’s

involvement with agrotourism. Big-size agrotourism enterprises, model farms and rural

tourism and agrotourism agencies have amply invested in acquiring qualified

personnel and the relevant licensing for undertaking recreational activities related to

54

the local life-style, natural beauties, culture and heritage. On the other hand, the great

majority of agrotourism holdings which are small-sized offer no activities at all to their

customers.

These outcomes go some way to supporting previous research by Kizos and Iosifides

(2007), who studied agrotourism in the Greek regions of Lesvos, Magnesia and Lefkada

and found that only 12 per cent of agrotourism holdings offer other activities or

services. It also resonates with the findings of Cánoves (2004) about agrotourism in

Spain. Quite interestingly, my research also revealed that the agrotourism product in

Crete merely comprises staged farm activities. Hence, agrotourism in Crete does not

predicate accommodating in a working farm. The lack of authentic farming activities

may well stem from another finding of this study: the lack of interest on behalf of

agrotourists in experiencing authentic farming. Surprisingly, the aforementioned facts

contradict the very nature of agrotourism per se; at least in the way the latter is

perceived by many scholars (see section 2.2.1.).

Q4: What problems do agrotourism entrepreneurs face in promoting their business

and what is the degree of dependency on tour operators?

In addressing the current research question, my study examined the promotional

policy each agrotourism entrepreneurs follows. The interviews illustrate the fact that

their promotion policies vary significantly according to the size of the enterprise and

the expertise of the owner. Small-size agrotourism holdings which operate in a rather

opportunistic way – usually run by a farmer – have virtually developed no promotion

policy and they are merely listed in advertising brochures which are published by the

local authorities. On the other hand, small-size agrotourism holdings which are run by

more dynamic and competent entrepreneurs resort to online promotion tools. Thus

they develop their own websites and place advertisements in popular specialised

websites like “Homeaway.com” and “Booking.com”. Finally, owners of larger size

agrotourism holdings and local agrotourism agencies adopt a more complete

promotional policy. Far from creating commercial websites, they establish partnerships

with international tour operators and agrotourism travel agencies abroad.

55

Notwithstanding the conventional wisdom saying that agrotourists book their holidays

on their own, dependency on tour operators and travel agencies seems to be an

ordeal, not only for mass-tourism in Crete but for agrotourism as well. Small-size

agrotourism holdings which merely offer accommodation find it difficult to

differentiate their product and attract customers simply through their websites. Taking

into account the inexistence of cheap transportation once the tourist season ends, the

island becomes an unappealing winter destination in the eyes of agrotourists. Hence,

agrotourism is also affected by seasonality. In view of the aforementioned reasons,

competition among agrotourism entrepreneurs is fierce and inevitably results in price

wars. My study revealed that larger holdings with higher operational standards,

partnership with a tour operator or a travel agency abroad seems to be the only way

out of stagnation, despite the high commissions. However, small players in particular,

fail in achieving economies of scale and bear a high operational cost. Thus, they find it

difficult to promote their business via tour operators due to the very nature of the

allotment contracts and the high commission required. Not surprisingly, previous

studies of agrotourism in other regions of Greece have produced similar outcomes

(Gousiou et al., 2001; Iakovidou et al., 2001; Kizos & Iosifides, 2007).

Q5: Which is the level of synergies among agrotourism entrepreneurs?

This study has identified the low level of synergies and cooperation between

agrotourism entrepreneurs in Crete. For owners of small-size holdings, agrotourism is

merely a family matter; they operate on their own and no kind of cooperation or

pooling of resources exists. In addition, owners of larger size holdings which provide

some sort of agrotourism activities besides accommodation, as well as owners of

agrotourism agencies, appear to establish an elementary form of networking. This

network comprises local farmers, shepherds, winery and distillery owners, traditional

handicraftsmen and the like, whose sites tourists may visit. However, the interaction

between all sides seems to be fragmented and lacks consistency. Quite interestingly,

my findings are once more in harmony with evidence from other studies of

agrotourism in Greece (Gousiou et al., 2001; Iakovidou et al., 2001; Kizos & Iosifides,

2007). What is more,the absence of synergies extends beyond the case of

56

agrotourism. Having said that, Labrianidis (2004), and Safiliou and Papadopoulos

(2004), have observed a similar lack of synergies in Greece, in the cases of rural

enterprises and farms (cited in Kizos & Iosifides, 2007: 74).

On a broader scale, my study identified the existence of two distinct clusters of

agrotourism enterprises in Crete: the Agrotourism Union of Crete and the Cretan

Agrotourism Cooperative. Instead of coexisting harmoniously and coordinating their

efforts, these two bodies refrain from pooling their resources. On the contrary, they

seek to serve conflicting interests and consolidate different kinds of enterprises – some

of which are not even related to agrotourism. This phenomenon hampers any attempt

to promote agrotourism in Crete in a coherent manner.

Q6: To what extent do agrotourism entrepreneurs in Crete receive consultation and

guidance from the local or national authorities?

My research has produced some significant outcomes with regard to the contribution

of the public authorities. In particular, my study presented, through the statements of

the respondents, the same findings as the research of Cánoves (2004); Sharpley

(2002); Talbot (2013), – about Spain, Cyprus and England respectively – as well as of

Anthopoulou (2000); Gousiou et al. (2001); Iakovidou et al. (2001); Kizos and Iosifides

(2007), – about Greece. In particular, my study revealed the lack of consultation and

guidance from the local or national authorities, as well as the absence of a coherent

strategy. Moreover, my research brought to the forefront the barriers imposed by the

absence of a legislative framework in regard to agrotourism. Thus, it highlighted the

public authorities’ deficiency defining legislatively what agrotourism is, what the

agrotourism product includes, as well as the rights and the obligations of agrotourism

entrepreneurs.

5.2. Theoretical implications

This study came to bridge a gap in the existing literature of agrotourism. As has been

already noted, the literature of agrotourism abounds and a plethora of researchers

have examined the application of agrotourism in a multitude of countries, both in

57

Europe and around the globe. In the same context, several researchers have studied

the application of agrotourism in various Greek regions. Importantly however, no

study has investigated so far the case of agrotourism in the Greek island of Crete.

Clearly, this is a striking fact, taking into consideration the paramount importance of

Crete as a tourist destination and the plurality of the studies available which examine

the mass-tourism industry of the island. Under this perspective, my research sheds

light upon an overlooked subject, and hence extends the existing body of knowledge

on the application of agrotourism in Greece as a whole.

5.3. Practical implications

Beyond its theoretical implications, the empirical findings of this study can be a useful

vehicle for guiding managerial decision-making. My research approached the concept

of agrotourism in Crete from the supply-side’s point of view, and examined it in a

spherical and critical way. Such an approach identified, categorised and analysed a

great number of key problems encountered by the Cretan agrotourism entrepreneurs.

Beyond any doubt, this multi-dimensional analysis of agrotourism in Crete can be a

useful managerial tool in the hands of regional and central Greek authorities. In this

sense, my study can be used as a means towards evaluating the current agrotourism

policy and facilitating the design and development of a more efficient policy. Such a

policy review, I believe, is imperative in order for public authorities to address a series

of ramifications of mass-tourism in Crete: namely, high dependency on major tour

operators, shrinkage of profit margins for the local actors, unbalanced concentration

of activities and destruction of the local environment and natural beauty.

Stemming from my research’s findings, the following recommendations for practice

are presented:

Merging of the all the separate bodies which represent the Cretan

agrotourism enterprises into one union

The Agrotourism Union of Crete and the Cretan Agrotourism Cooperative

should pool their resources and consolidate. Achieving consensus is admittedly

58

difficult, considering the conflicting interests they serve and the different kinds

of enterprises they represent. Yet, identifying points of convergence and

developing a coherent strategy is the only way to create a win-win situation

and secure their survival.

Formulation of a legislative framework in regard to agrotourism and rural

tourism

A legislative framework governing agrotourism and rural tourism should be

developed by the Greek Ministry of Tourism with the consensus of the

Federation of Agrotourism Unions of Greece (SEAGE). Such a framework should

define exactly what agrotourism and agrotourism enterprises are, as well as the

rights and obligations of agrotourism entrepreneurs. Legislation must be

adapted to the Greek standards and should not be a mere replication of the

legislation of another European country. Moreover, it should differentiate

agrotourism holdings from other types of tourism holdings. Following the

legislation process, all agrotourism entrepreneurs should be registered.

Adoption of strict architectural regulations with regard to agrotourism

holdings

Bearing in mind that the current legislation imposes no architectural limitations

ensuring the preservation of the traditional architectural style, it is imperative

that the provision of new licensing for agrotourism holdings should strictly be

given only for the renovation of traditional houses or for the construction of

new holdings in a traditional style.

Lobbying for promoting the operation of low-cost airlines during winter

months

The seasonality of agrotourism in Crete could be partly tackled if cheap

transportation continues during winter months. In this direction, local

authorities and agrotourism entrepreneurs should jointly lobby for the

59

subsidising of low-cost flights by the Greek Ministry of Tourism, at least for the

months of November and April. Extending the tourism season by two months

can be beneficial for mass tourism as well.

Provision of consultation and guidance to agrotourism entrepreneurs

Most agrotourism entrepreneurs lack the competence and expertise to

successfully manage their operations. In view of this shortfall, both agrotourism

unions and the Greek Ministry of Tourism should provide managerial help to

agrotourism entrepreneurs. These could take the form of educational courses

and seminars.

Development of a coherent strategy tailored to the needs of agrotourism in

Crete

Crete is an area with distinct characteristics. Since the island is remote and far

from the major Greek urban centres, – Athens, Thessaloniki – agrotourists are

predominately foreigners. What is more, the island is long and narrow, having

the mass tourism industry highly developed along its northern coast. The

implication of this is that in Crete, the product of agrotourism coincides to

some extent with the product of mass tourism. Consequently, an agrotourism

strategy should be developed particularly for the needs of the island, by taking

into account its distinct features. Above all, a successful agrotourism policy

should put emphasis on the promotion of Crete as an agrotourism destination

and should encourage the establishment of synergies and the creation of

agrotourism networks.

5.4. Limitations

Although this research has produced significant findings, several limitations exist. As I

have already noted my study is exploratory in nature, thus a qualitative research

method has been applied, involving face-to-face interviews with a representative

sample of agrotourism actors in Crete. Part of my study’s limitations originates from

60

the very nature of the research method I have applied. In this regard, my findings

reflect the personal viewpoints of the participants; hence, they cannot be free from

bias. Another limitation of this study concerns the analysis and interpretation of the

responses, which undoubtedly are subject to my personal judgement. In addition my

research sample is small and despite my efforts to be representative, the responses

may not resonate with the standpoint of other agrotourism entrepreneurs.

Consequently, any attempt to generalise my results should be made with discretion

and prudence.

5.5. Directions for future research

Undoubtedly, this study is limited in terms of its scope. A thorough examination of

agrotourism in Crete would require a much bigger sample of agrotourism

entrepreneurs. Such research could examine in detail the range of issues my research

has identified, by addressing the majority – in not all – of the Cretan agrotourism

entrepreneurs through a survey using online questionnaires. Future research would

also benefit from exploring the viewpoint of other categories of stakeholders, namely,

EU authorities, national authorities (local, regional, central), local communities, as well

as tour operators. Most importantly, future researchers should examine the demand-

side of agrotourism. Above all they should explore fully the profile of agrotourists in

Crete, since in-depth comprehension of their features will provide policy-makers with a

valuable tool for the development of a well-targeted strategy.

5.6. Reflections

5.6.1. Fulfilment of objectives

It is my view that my research objectives were clearly defined and that my study

fulfilled its objectives and offered a critical insight into the main issues governing the

Cretan agrotourism industry. Taking into account that the case of agrotourism in Crete

had never been examined before, my work was indeed exploratory in nature and thus

it resembled a venture into uncharted waters. In this sense, beyond offering a

61

multidimensional analysis of agrotourism in Crete, my study has also paved the way for

future researchers and policy makers.

5.6.2. Evaluation of the research process

Admittedly, the research process has been demanding and stimulating. The first

challenge I encountered was the selection of the dissertation’s topic itself. In this

regard, an article suggested by my supervisor titled “Publishing in the Academy of

Management Journal (AMJ) – Part 1: Topic Choice” proved to be a useful guide. After

careful consideration, I chose the topic of Agrotourism in Crete, for matching the five

distinct criteria of an effective topic; namely, significance, novelty, curiosity, scope, and

actionability (Colquitt & George, 2011: 432). From my point of view, this specific topic

allowed me to “tackle a grand challenge in a literature, pursue a novel direction that

arouses and maintains curiosity, build a study with ambitious scope, and uncover

actionable insights” (Colquitt & George, 2011: 434). In a similar manner, the overall

research process was greatly facilitated by the useful guidelines provided by the other

articles of the series “Publishing in the AMJ”.

One of the greatest difficulties that I encountered during the research process was

approaching the agrotourism entrepreneurs I had identified, and arranging an

interview with them. This required numerous phone calls, multiple emails and

travelling to three different provinces of Crete. What is more, most of the participants

had a busy programme and many of the scheduled interviews had to be postponed

and rearranged due to the Christmas holidays. As a result, I was compelled to collect

data and concurrently work on various chapters of the dissertation.

At this point, I should stress that my initial planning included interviewing senior

members of the regional and local authorities involved with the implementation of

tourism policy in Crete. Although two high-rank officials were indeed interviewed, –

and provided a great volume of information – I realised that gaining an unbiased

insight into the perspectives of the public authorities would require a much bigger

sample. Therefore, I deemed it necessary to exclude the examination of public

authorities from the scope of my research.

62

Last but not least, once all the interviews were conducted, I had to overcome the

hurdle of listening to all the audio files which had a total duration of almost 14 hours.

This was a very laborious and time consuming stage, taking into consideration that all

interviews were in Greek, and that responses thus had to be translated before entering

the key findings in a table for analysis.

5.6.3. Self-assessment and personal development gain

In closing, it would be useful to make a self-assessment and identify how I would

improve my study in the light of my experiences. In this context, I believe, it would

have been advisable to start by conducting the pilot interview with the senior member

of the Agrotourism Union of Crete, rather than with the senior member of the Union of

Travel Agents. Doing so would have saved me valuable time in identifying new

respondents and formulating my research questions. What is more, I now deem that

an additional pilot interview should have been informally conducted – in the form of a

private conversation – prior to the submission of my dissertation proposal. The

experience acquired would offer a useful insight that would bridge the gap between

the preliminary literature review and the commencing of the actual research process.

On a personal level, working on my dissertation has helped me develop my individual

research and management competencies. By conducting this research, I have

expanded my horizons and utilised the knowledge and skills I had acquired during the

MBA course. Furthermore, during the research process I improved my competence in

planning, interviewing, networking, time-management, and data analysis. In addition, I

gained a valuable insight into the agrotourism industry and established valuable

contacts with local agrotourism entrepreneurs. In this sense, I can use my dissertation

as a vehicle for my professional development.

63

REFERENCES

Abawi, K. (2008) 'Qualitative and quantitative research', paper presented to the

Reproductive health.

Andriotis, K. (2006) 'Researching the Development Gap between the Hinterland and

the coast—evidence from the Island of Crete', Tourism Management, 27 (4):

629-639.

Anthopoulou, T. (2000) 'Agrotourism and the Rural Environment: Constraints and

Opportunities in the Mediterranean Less-Favoured Areas' in H. Briassoulis and

J. Van der Straaten. (eds) Tourism and the Environment: Regional, Economic,

Cultural and Policy Issues, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic

Publishers. pp. 357-373.

Archi-Med (2001) Pilot Action Archi-Med — Sub-Action 2.2: The Enhancement of the

Environment as a Factor of Development of the Mediterranean Space, Athens,

Greece: European Union and the Hellenic Ministry of Environment, Spatial

Planning and Public Works.

Briassoulis, H. (2003) 'Crete: Endowed by Nature, Privileged by Geography, Threatened

by Tourism?', Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11 (2-3): 97-115.

Busby, G. and Rendle, S. (2000) 'The Transition from Tourism on Farms to Farm

Tourism', Tourism Management, 21 (6): 635-642.

Cánoves, G., Villarino, M., Priestley, G.K. and Blanco, A. (2004) 'Rural Tourism in Spain:

An Analysis of Recent Evolution', Geoforum, 35 (6): 755-769.

Clarke, J. (1999) 'Marketing Structures for Farm Tourism: Beyond the Individual

Provider of Rural Tourism', Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7 (1): 26-47.

Clarke, J. (1996) 'Farm Tourism', Insights, January (D): 19-24.

Colquitt, J. and George, G.G. (2011) 'Publishing in AMJ—part 1: Topic choice

', Academy of Management Journal, 54 (3): 432-435.

64

Commission of the European Communities (1999) Agriculture, Environment, Rural

Development: Facts and Figures, Luxembourg: CEC.

Cooper, C. and Hall, C.M. (2008) Contemporary Tourism, Oxford: Butterworth -

Heinemann.

Dartington Amenity Research Trust (1974) Farm Recreation and Tourism in England

and Wales, London: Countryside Commission Publications 83.

Davies, E.T. and Gilbert, D.C. (1992) 'A Case Study of the Development of Farm Tourism

in Wales', Tourism Management, 13 (1): 56-63.

Flanigan, S., Blackstock, K. and Hunter, C. (2014) 'Agritourism from the Perspective of

Providers and Visitors: A typology-Based Study', Tourism Management, 40 (0):

394-405.

Fleischer, A. and Tchetchik, A. (2005) 'Does Rural Tourism Benefit from Agriculture?',

Tourism Management, 26493-501.

Gidarakou, I. (1999) 'Young women’s Attitudes Towards Agriculture and women’s New

Roles in the Greek Countryside: A First Approach', Journal of Rural Studies, 15

(2): 147-158.

Goodson, L. and Phillimore, J. (2004) 'The Inquiry Paradigm in Qualitative Tourism

Research' in L. Goodson and J. Phillimore. (eds) Qualitative Research in

Tourism: Ontologies, Epistemologies, and Methodologies, London: Routledge.

pp. 30-46.

Gousiou, A., Spilanis, I. and Kizos, T. (2001) 'Is Agrotourism ‘Agro’ Or ‘Tourism’?

Evidence from Agrotourist Holdings in Lesvos, Greece', Anatolia, 12 (1): 6-22.

Greek Ministry of Rural Development and Food (2013), 'Agrotourism'. Online. Available

at: http://www.minagric.gr/index.php/el/for-farmer-2/agrotourism (accessed

December, 2013).

65

Halfacree, K. (1993) 'Locality and Social Representation: Space, Discourse and

Alternative Definitions of Rural', Journal of Rural Studies, 9 (1): 23-37.

Hall, C.M. and Jenkins, J. (1998) 'The Policy Dimensions of Rural Tourism and

Recreation' in R. Butler, C. M. Hall and J. Jenkins. (eds) Tourism and Recreation

in Rural areas, Chichester: John Wiley and sons. pp. 19-42.

Hesse-Biber, S.N. and Leavy, P. (2011) The Practice of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn,

Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Hjalager, A. (1996) 'Agricultural Diversification into Tourism: Evidence of a European

Community Development Programme', Tourism Management, 17 (2): 103-111.

Iakovidou, O., Anthopoulou, T. and Triantafyllou, K. (1999) 'Innovative action of rural

women in a mountain region. The case of the women’s agrotourism co-

operative of Agios Germanos (Hellas)', paper presented to the paper presented

at Gender and Rural Transformation in Europe: Past, Present and Future

Prospects, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 14 – 17 October.

Iakovidou, O. (1997) ' Agro-Tourism in Greece: The Case of Women Agro-Tourism Co-

Operatives of Ambelakia.', MEDIT, 144-47.

Iakovidou, O., Emmanouilidou, M., Stavrakas, T., Simeonidou, P. and Chrisostomidis, G.

(2001) 'Trends of Tourism Market for Agro-Tourism', Anatolia, 12 (2): 165-179.

Iakovidou, O. and Turner, C. (1995) 'The Female Gender in Greek Agrotourism', Annals

of Tourism Research, 22 (2): 481-484.

Ilbery, B., Bowler, I., Clark, G., lCrockett, A. and Shaw, A. (1998) 'Farm-Based Tourism

as an Alternative Farm Enterprise: A Case Study from the Northern Pennines,

England', Regional Studies, 32 (4): 355-364.

Kazakopoulos, I. and Gidarakou, I. (2002) 'Women’s cooperatives in Greece and the

niche market challenge', paper presented to the paper presented at ICA

International Conference, Naoussa, Greece, May.

66

Kizos, T. and Iosifides, T. (2007) 'The Contradictions of Agrotourism Development in

Greece: Evidence from Three Case Studies', South European Society and

Politics, 12 (1): 59-77.

Marsden, T., Banks, J., Renting, H. and Van der Ploeg, J.D. (2001) 'The Road Towards

Sustainable Rural Development: Issues of Theory, Policy and Research

Practice', Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 2 (2): 75-83.

McGehee, N.G. (2012) 'Interview Techniques' in Larry Dwyer, Alison Gill and Neelu

Seetaram. (eds) Handbook of research methods in tourism: quantitative and

qualitative approaches, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. pp. 365-376. (accessed

2012).

Nilsson, P.A. (2002) 'Staying on Farms: An Ideological Background', Annals of Tourism

Research, 29 (1): 7-24.

Opdenakker, R. (2006) 'Advantages and Disadvantages of Four Interview Techniques in

Qualitative Research', Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative

Social Research, 7 (4): .

Oppermann, M. (1995) 'Holidays on the Farm: A Case Study of German Hosts and

Guests', Journal of Travel Research, 34 (1): 63-67.

Paniagua, A. (2002) 'Urban–rural Migration, Tourism Entrepreneurs and Rural

Restructuring in Spain', Tourism Geographies, 4 (4): 349-371.

Papakonstandinidis, A.L. (1993) Αγροτουρισμός, Σταθμός στο δρόμο για την Τοπική

Ανάπτυξη (Agrotourism, Landmark on the Road to Local Development), Athens:

Dorikos.

Parra López, E. and Calero García, F.J. (2006) 'Agrotourism, Sustainable Tourism and

Ultraperipheral Areas: The Case of Canary Islands', PASOS: Revista De Turismo

y Patrimonio Cultural, 4 (1): 85-97.

Patton, M. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods

, 3rd edn, Thousand Oaks, Calif, London: SAGE.

67

Phillip, S., Hunter, C. and Blackstock, K. (2010) 'A Typology for Defining Agritourism',

Tourism Management, 31 (6): 754-758.

Reisinger, Y. (1994) ' Social Contact between Tourists and Hosts of Different Cultural

Backgrounds ' in A. V. Seaton and C. L. Jenkin. (eds) Tourism: The State of Art,

Chichester, England.: John Wiley and Sons. pp. 743-754.

Safiliou, K. and Papadopoulos, A.,G. (2004) Μικροί Αγρότες στην Ελλάδα: Ποιοί θα

Επιβιώσουν και Πως (Small Farmers in Greece: Who Will Survive and how),

Athens: Gutenberg.

Sharpley, R. (2002) 'Rural Tourism and the Challenge of Tourism Diversification: The

Case of Cyprus', Tourism Management, 23 (3): 233-244.

Shaw, G. and Williams, A.M. (1994) Critical Issues in Tourism: A Geo-Graphical

Perspective., Oxford: Blackwell.

Sheehan, K. (2001) 'E- Mail Survey Response Rates: A Review', Journal of Computer-

Mediated Communication, 6 (2): .

Sidali, K.L. (2009) Farm tourism: a cross-country empirical study in Germany and Italy,

unpublished Dissertation, University of Bologna and University of Göttingen.

Smith, S.L.J. (1994) 'The Tourism Product', Annals of Tourism Research, 21 (3): 582-595.

Swarbrooke, J. (2002) Development and Management of Visitor Attractions, 2nd edn,

Oxford: Butterworth - Heinemann.

Talbot, M. (2013) 'Farm Tourism in Wales. Products and Markets, Resources and

Capabilities: The Experience of Six Farm Tourism Operators', European

Countryside, 5 (4): 275-294.

Tsartas, P. and Thanopoulou, M. (1994) Γυναικείοι Αγροτουριστικοί Συνετερισμοί στην

Ελλάδα (Women’s Agrototourism Cooperatives in Greece), Athens:

Mediterranean Women’s Studies Institute,.

68

Vafiadis, G., Xristos, K. and Leonidas, P. (1992) Agrotourism and Equal Development,

Athens: Agricultural Bank of Greece (in Greek).

Walford, N. (2001) 'Patterns of Development in Tourist Accommodation Enterprises on

Farms in England and Wales', Applied Geography, 21 (4): 331-345.

Welsh Rural Observatory (2010) Survey of Farming Households in WalesCardiff &

Aberystwyth Universities.

Wikipedia (2014), 'Labyrinth'. Online. Available at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labyrinth (accessed February, 2014).

Wikipedia (2008b), 'Locator Map of Crete Periphery, Greece'. Online. Available at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Periferia_Kritis.png (accessed February,

2014).

Yagüe Perales, R.M. (2002) 'Rural Tourism in Spain', Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (4):

1101-1110.

69

APPENDIX A: FRAMEWORK OF INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

1. How do you define agrotourism and what does agrotourism mean to you?

2. What is the benefit of agrotourism, for its practitioners, local communities, the

environment and agrotourists as well?

3. What are the downsides of agrotourism, for its practitioners, local communities,

the environment and agrotourists as well?

4. What kind of activities do agrotourists seek for?

5. What are the main agrotourism services you offer to your clients?

6. Where does the majority of agrotourists come from?

7. What is the profile of your clients?

8. What are the main difficulties you have encountered in your operations?

9. How do you promote your business?

10. What is the degree of establishment of synergies among agrotourism

entrepreneurs?

11. How do you assess the policy of public authorities with regard to agrotourism?

12. Have you received any training, consultation, control, supervision?

13. How do your forecast the future of agrotourism?

14. What are your recommendations?

70

APPENDIX B: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS A, B, C

Participant A (OAH) Participant B (OAH) Participant C (OAH)

Owner of Agrotourism Holding



Definition of Agrotourism

[01:30] The notion of agrotourism is a unclear due to the lack of relevant legislation. Participant is very well informed about the theoretical framework of agrotourism and its history. He makes reference to the application of agrotourism in Italy and France. [05:05]Notes the lack of training, and coherent policy. [07:40] "to me agrotourism is not merely a rent room, or a fully equipped hotel in a village. Agrotourism should be connected with activities relevant to nature, the environment, the local societies and farming". [08:15] "The key word is:activities" . [09:45] The professionals of agrotourism are not necessarily farmers. [11:15] Merely provision of accommodation is not agrotourism. [14:00] Agrotourism enterprises should not be of big size.

[00:35] Agrotourism means the accommodation of a visitor in a lodging which provides the same facilities as a proper hotel where the visitor participates in the life of the place they visit. Staying in a village, coming in contact with locals, participating in activities of the local society. E.g. the preparation of local food, cultural events, agricultural task.

What are the benefits of agrotourism?

[02:00] Additional income for the professionals of agrotourism. Apart from the economic benefits of the providers of accommodation, local producers may promote their sales. [02:28] Agrotourist come in contact will local culture, and become a part of the local society.

What are the downsides of agrotourism?

[03:25] Noise [04:13] Disturbance of the local life style due to the running of facilities supplementary to agrotourism (e.g. bars). [04:45] Changes in the village's lifestyle.

71

What kind of activities do agrotourists seek for?

[06:50] Agrotourists show an interest for the local culture. [09:50] They like to engage in activities of the countryside.

[1:02:00] Clients enjoy hiking, mountain cycling. They are not interested at all in participating in farming activities. Yet, they enjoy local products. Clients are fascinated by local social events such as weddings and fiestas. [1:07:45] "What was suggested in the past, that a piece of land should be available to clients so that they will engage in farming activities is wrong. Nobody likes that".

What are the main services you offer to your clients?

Accommodation, restaurant, plus activities. Activities include hiking tours, collection of herbs, cookinglessons, staged farming tasks.

[05:55] "Your business can be named as an agrotourism business, can't it.... I'm not interested in labels, what I want to offer is an alternative to mass tourism where visitor never interact with local societies. [06:38] Cultural events such as concerts of Greek and Cretan music. [07:00] Hiking activities, visits to places of historic interest, wineries, painting lessons. [09:10] No participation in farming activities apart from the grapes harvesting

Where does the majority of agrotourists come from?

[16:35] Foreign tourists. Greeks just come to eat.

[09:55] English exclusively, due to the cooperation with a British travel agency

[40:00] Mostly English and French. Some others from Norway, Finland, the US

What is the profile of your customers?

[14:33] Agrotourists show no interest in actively participating in farm activities, apart from the vine harvesting. [15:25] The find husbandry appealing as well as cheese making, cooking lessons where children can also participate. [16:25] No participation in olives harvesting because clients in winter are Greeks

[10:10] All age groups. Agrotourists come without their children in order to enjoy tranquillity. [10:57] The show interest in cultural events. [12:20] some of them are returning visitors who have visited Crete more than 2-3 times. [18:50] Agrotourists are very demanding clients and they pay more.

[38:44] He supports that most of his clients avoid travel agents and book holidays on their own by internet. Ages vary from 20 to 70. Most of them are couples travelling with their children. [40:50] Clients take into consideration the review of previous guests. [43:30] Most of the clients are wealthy. They have many returning customers. [56:40] Clients enjoy local people's hospitality and friendliness as well as [58:10] the landscape and the natural beauties [59:00] and the contact with the owner's family. [1:35:30] Clients want to have their privacy; they don't want to be close to other clients. They usually have holidays with other friends or couples. [1:37:00] Clients

72

like the use of stones and wood for the construction.

What are the main difficulties you have encountered in your operations?

[31:40] Lack of flexible legislation. Currently agrotourism enterprises require having a different operating licence of each category of activities. Long bureaucratic procedures for licensing

[16:25] High operational cost "but I have the moral satisfaction that I have done something distinct". [23:15] Travel agency is very demanding and this increases operational cost and shrinks profit margins. [29:00] Unfair competition by villas in the countryside which host tourists illegally.

[1:29:30] High taxation cost. Taxation rate is 26% until revenues of 50.000. 33% for revenues as high as 80.000 and 50% for revenues above 80.000

What is the degree of establishment of synergies among the agrotourism entrepreneurs?

Cooperation with a local shepherd.

[17:35] Very low, once cooperated with a local peasant. [18:00] "I have no financial benefit to spend time for additional activities, beyond those undertaking in my own lodging. Yet, if a client is interested, I can provide it without extra charge"

No synergies at all

How do you promote your services?

[27:50] Promotion is a very serious issue incurring high cost. Every professional is marketing their services on their own. [28:00] There are two different bodies for the promotion of agrotourism in Crete: Cretan Union of Alternative Tourism (only Greek website) and Agrotourism Union of Crete.

[07:55] Partnership with a travel agency

[34:45] Promotion is achieved by the company's website. Prior partnership with tour operators were with allotment contracts and ended unsuccessfully due to the very small number of bookings. [38:44] He supports that most of his clients avoid travel agents and book holidays on their own by internet. [50:55] The villa is also advertised in online booking portals, such as Booking.com and Homeaway.com. [53:33] Partnership with travel agencies is not profitable due to their high commissions.

What is the support of the public authorities in regard with agrotourism?

[21:45] Expresses dissatisfaction about the limited contribution of the Greek state to the concept of agrotourism. [24:35] The state does not engage in addressing critical issues of agrotourism. [36:25] Participant is pessimistic about the future contribution of the state.

[19:30] No support. On the contrary experienced many bureaucratic difficulties. [20:40] No help in terms of promotion or advertising. No inclusion of their business in a catalogue due to the partnership with the travel agency. [21:25] The owner does not participate in seminars, since he considers that his competency is sufficient.

[1:14:50] No kind of support or guidance just advertising of the lodgings in the website of the local prefecture. The participant expresses his dissatisfaction about the limited contribution of the local authorities.

73

How do you foresee the future of agrotourism?

[25:00] Optimistic that there will be progress with a small help from the state, at least in the promotion.

[22:25] Optimistic that agrotourism will gradually win a market segment

Suggestions? [08:31] Legislation should require the undertaking of at least 2 types of activities in order to name an enterprise as agrotourism. One of them should necessarily be associated with nutrition.[09:24] In small rural communities were agrotourism enterprises have a small size, synergies and division of services offered should be established. [17:25] If the problem of cheap transportation in winter is not resolved, agrotourism may not develop beyond the summer months. [19:30] Refers to the example of winter agrotourism in Turkey. [25:50] The Greek state should promote elements of agrotourism

[29:50] Simplification of the taxation system and the certification process

[1:43:45] Occupancy could increase if the problem of expensive transportation during winter months is resolved.

Miscellaneous [05:05]Notes the lack of training, and coherent policy. Expresses dissatisfaction about the application of agrotourism in Greece. [06:35] Participated in the establishment of a local agrotourism union 4-5 years ago.[07:00] Between 1990 and 2010, more than 500 agrotourism projects have been approved in Crete. 180 out of them are still operation agrotourism. Those which virtually perform agrotourism are less than 80.

[13:45] Started operation in 1996 without any financial aid. Later received an EU subsidy for reconstruction. Mostly used own funds. [22:05] Had no prior tourism experience. [22:50] The company has not been affected by the recession. Customers are only foreigners.

[02:45] In 2007 the participant constructed a luxurious villa with 4 rooms in the countryside after receiving funds from the ministry of agriculture. Financing received covered 55% of the approved improvement cost. Farming is not his main profession. [09:30] In order to secure the subsidy, he resorted to using personal connections with a member of the political authorities. [17:00] No constraints were imposed with regard to architectural style. [17:30] There was close monitoring during the development of the project. [1:42:34] 150 days of occupancy during 2012. 140 days in 2013.

[12:05] The owner names his business as "Ecotourism village". [14:33] Commenced operations in 2000 and runs 12 lodgings which may accommodate 2-6 persons each.

[15:00] Satisfied with occupancy rates, which varies from 60-90%. Do not operate after the end of summer season due to the high operation costs, mainly due to heating.

[32:00] One of the programmes requirements was that the owner would hire at least one employee for a period of one year.

74

[21:40] Mentioned a couple of initiatives as examples which failed due to the great transportation cost of transport during winter months.

[16:55] Local farmers do not show interest in performingagrotourism

[1:21:20] "There are hundreds of unlicensed villas for rent in Rethymno. Most of them are owned by foreigners who rent them to other tourists".

[18:30] Customers are very satisfied with the services offered, the landscape.

[1:33:25] "What I want is my clients to be happy. I don't solely see them as a source of profit"

75

APPENDIX C: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS D, E, F

Participant D (OAH) Participant E (OAH) Participant F (OAH)





[00:55] A complementary economical activity of residents of the countryside, beyond their main activities accommodate tourists as well. Tourist may also participate in farming activities, like olives harvesting, vegetables cultivation, animal breeding, and diary production. [1:04:50] "...but there is no such thing as Agrotourism [in Greece] ". [1:06:02] "In Greece the word agrotourism is a sham! It exists only in the papers"

[00:40] Agrotourism should be developed in the countryside, not in the areas of mass tourism. It should include the undertaking of activities which bring the visitor in contact with the village's lifestyle. [1:25] Any person can be engaged in agrotourism as long as they have the competence and know what they are doing. [3:05] Activities should include farming and husbandry activities.

No theoretical discussion took place


[05:25] "To me agrotourism is my life style. What I'm doing is what I love. I'm doing this out of love and I don't mind if it will be profitable or not". [12:25] Agrotourism can be an opportunity for the young people.


[10:25] No downsides perceived if agrotourism is developed in a mild form. If it is developed in an industrial way, that could pose a threat.


[12:25] It varies from person to person. Some want to experience hospitality, the Greek life style [13:25] There different kind of expectation. One type wants to experience tranquillity and use the lodging as a retreat. Another kind is price sensitive, rent a car to travel around the hinterland (mostly French, English and Germans). There is also a third small category which exhibits a strong interest for the local culture, history and civilisation. These types of visitor seldom ask for a swimming pool.

[25:05] Clients liked the landscape and the local people.

76


[04:00] Mainly provision of accommodation. Seldom participation in farming tasks, unless required. Agrotourists mainly desire leisure. [1:03:15] They also offer one free meal to their clients. Yet, the business is not licensed to do so….

[13:35] Only provision of accommodation. No breakfast or meals, no activities at all. [15:45] Owners seldom engaged in the activities of their clients. They seldom offered some sight-seeing


[19:00] England mostly, few French, few Israelis, few Germans, Belgians. Russians mostly prefer living by the sea.

Only Greeks mostly from Athens, through personal networking

[12:30] Greeks and few German tourists.


[54:35] Clients seek for social interaction with the locals and contact with the countryside.

Only Greeks holidaymakers


[37:30] Emphasised the lack of a legal framework in regard with agrotourism holdings and their licensing. [39:20] The law prohibits the owner of agrotourism accommodation to sell any of the local produce or offer local food without distinct licensing. [57:30] High taxation. [1:15:50] High investment cost, high maintenance cost, high operational cost. The owners have not regret for their investment, but they face financial constraints because of the recession.

[06:50] Difficulties in promoting the business and renting the holdings due to lack of guidance and support

[22:40] Paying for the insurance. Taxation was very low at that time.


No synergies at all. [35:50] Expressed dissatisfaction about the efforts of the Agrotourism Union.

[07:00] No synergies or partnership. [29:45] He made some attempts to establish partnership but they were all unsuccessful. [28:50] "The notion of cooperation is a great one. If cooperation exists then a future also exists. There is no cooperation though! You cannot find people to work with. The future is a personal matter".

[26:02] No synergies. Occasionally a partnership with a nearby hotel which sent clients when it was fully booked


[22:50] Predominately by the company's website and by partnerships with affiliate sites such as "booking.com" and "homeaway.com". [27:00] Avoids partnership with tour operator because they required working on an allotment base. That was a problem due to the small number of rooms. That was a

[15:35] "I never had any clients apart from Greek. I have never made any kind of advertisement. I did not care. I just did it because I like that". [20:40] He admits that he lacks the skills to promote the farm project

[08:50] Partnership with other hotels and by the word-of-mouth. Many were pensioners participating in programmes of social tourism [13:10] No advertising at all

77

problem due to the small number of rooms. [29:30] Travel agents and tour operators require a high commission reaching even 40%. [30:50] Travel agents hire even villas which lack permission. [32:30] A villa running illegally can make a contract with a travel agency if the owner pays a premium!!! Strong dissatisfaction expressed. [45:58] No synergies or cooperation with any travel agencies. They show no trust in them because of bad past experience.


[08:30] No consultation received from public authorities in terms of running or promoting the business. [37:30] Emphasised the lack of a legal framework in regard with agrotourism holdings and their licensing. [39:20] The law prohibits the owner of agrotourism accommodation to sell any of the local produce or offer local food without distinct licensing. [48:30] Dissatisfaction expressed about the work of public authorities, the lack of consistency in their strategy, the poor promotional efforts. [50:50] Greek policy in terms of tourism fluctuates.

[06:50] Lack of guidance and support. Dissatisfaction expressed about the backing of the authorities. [23:10] Participation in seminars regarding agrotourism, when he subsidy was received. [24:25] No other kind of support of guidance. However, he is satisfied by the help received by the local authority of agriculture. Yet, he never received any help in marketing.

[17:15] No guidance or support at all, apart from financing


[1:11:15] It will depend on many factors (e.g. the political and economic situation of the country).

Suggestions? [43:10] The establishment of a well-defined legal framework, describing the right and obligations of agrotourism holdings. The company is licensed as rent apartments, cannot be licensed as agrotourism holding per se. [1:24:00] "Agrotourism depends on the state's policy"

Miscellaneous [05:50] Owner has participated in educational seminars and has prior tourism experience [10:00] Expresses dissatisfaction about the quality of one

[3:25] Participant had constructed agrotourism holdings. Now has a project for establishing a model working-farm open to visits of agrotourists, including 4

[2:20] Commenced business in 1995, after receiving funds as a farmer. Constructed 5 rooms in total. [06:30] Business was profitable during the first years.

78

seminar about promotion of alternative tourism [10:40] "Was the seminar useful...I was useful to the seminar!"

cottages and a tavern. Agrotourism was a complementary activity. [10:35] Ended operations in 2007. Converted 2 of the rooms into rent rooms and used the rest of the premises as a family house.

[25:35] Commenced operations in 2001. Initially they had a partnership with a travel agency "Simply Travel". [28:55] Occupancy was approximately. 100 days. [58:05] They received no funding to establish the business.

[08:15] "All the people I knew who made agrotourism holdings, simply constructed them for family housing. Nobody ever really engaged in agrotourism. If they had customers they would operate their business". "The whole programme lacked organisation and control. Some agrotourism holdings were even constructed by the sea."

[21:00] Profits never managed to pay off all the investment cost. [21:50] "Did it worth doing it"…Yes, because that was the only way to build a family house"

[56:50] They express they satisfaction of having social contact with their customers. [57:04] " this is what we like, this what gives life to us"

[17:20] "What mostly satisfies me is that I'm friends with my guests, just like a family. They come here, we go out together, and their children play together with my children. I love those people. This is my satisfaction. I mean, I don't want them to pay me".

[20:05] "To me the word Crete and tradition means everything".

79

APPENDIX D: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS G, H

Participant G (OMF) Participant H (AUC & OAH)

Operations manager of Model Farm Senior Member of Agrotourism Union of Crete + Owner of Agrotourism Holding


[00:25] A form of alternative tourism where a segment of tourists lives and interacts with the countryside. It also includes the undertaking of activities related to the location where agrotourists are based or the broader area. [42:50] agrotourism is not merely the provision of accommodation and meals.

[06:30] Agrotourism as an activity can be undertaken by any resident of a village regardless of being a farmer or not. [09:15] Maximum number of rooms should be 40. [11:45] Agrotourism may include the provision of accommodation, the running of restaurants, farms, small shops. [12:35] Agrotourism entrepreneurs should be associated with the countryside. [17:30] "We regard that the agrotourism entrepreneurs should have direct contact with each one of their guests. [06:30] Agrotourism as an activity can be undertaken by any resident of a village regardless of being a farmer or not as long as he/she of family members work in the business. [09:15] Maximum number of rooms should be 40. [09:25] Such a model has not been developed in Greece. What has been developed are agrotourism businesses in the countryside and not in running farms, contrary to Italy. [10:02] Agrotourism should not be developed in mass tourism areas, with the exception of very small islands.


[02:30] Creation of experiences in another dimension, positive feelings, strengthening of personal bonds. Establishment of a link between the primary economic sector and tourism


[03:15] Agrotourism is a very demanding business activity which requires a wide range of skills on behalf of the entrepreneurs.


[06:00] Activities related to the environment, the tasting of local organic products. [39:20] Preferences depends on the customers’ age, country of origin, personality. They are all given chance to choose from a variety of available options

[19:00] Agrotourists show limited interest in participating in farming activities. Yet, they are fascinated by Cretan cuisine. [21:42] agrotourists are not primarily concerned about cultivating ways. They want to be partly informed about farming tasks but not to spend their time participating in it. [23:20] "Even in countries abroad, agrotourists no more show interest in hands-on experiences". Rather, they prefer farm activities which are joyful, - like vine harvest - and those associated with food. [1:05:45] "The agrotourism lodging is a tool. It is not a determinant that will bring the visitors here. Visitors do not come because they can find hear the best lodging. They mainly come for the experience of the activities".

80


[10:40] Experiential activities both for the adults and the children: "Be a farmer for a day" a programme for the adults who prepare on their own the products for their meals. "Junior farmers": a programme where children knead dough to make a healthy organic pizza, collect the eggs and vegetables they are going to use, view the animals in their sheds etc. [17:10] Thematic activities comprising sheep shearing, sheep milking, cheese making, wheat harvesting by hand, threshing, vine harvesting, raki distillation. [19:20] The model farm also includes an old style church, a traditional bakery, a traditional oil press, a wine press, a distillery

[19:25] Hiking in the countryside involving collection of wild herbs, followed by cooking lessons. [20:00] All of the organised activities end up at the kitchen were cooking lessons take place. [21:00] Visits to archaeological sites. [1:38:15] Small excursions like visits to towns nearby.


[28:30] country of origin depends on the partnership of the hotels an the season. North and central European countries, east European countries.

[1:21:50] Dutch, Germans, English. [1:24:20] English, Dutch, French, less Israelis, few Austrians. The number of Germans has declined. Russians show no interest in agrotourism. They seek for mass tourism instead. However, they visit the village to experience local food.


[33:35] Tourists show interest in the countryside, the local culture, the local cuisine. They prefer healthy nutrition

[37:17] Agrotourists hold an intense interest in local produce. [1:21:15] Most of agrotourists rent a car to travel around the island. They spend 14 day in Crete. Every 3 days they change accommodation and move to another area. They hike around the countryside of each area the stay.


[13:30] Clients come from various countries which make communication a challenge. Inevitably groups have to be of a small number and be accompanied by a translator. Heat is another issue especially during the noon. [21:50] Promotion of the business and informing the clients about the historic and cultural value of the activities they are experiencing. [24:00] Recruiting the proper people who can run and coordinate the activities in order to add value and feeling to the experience offered.

[14:00] Defining what an agrotourism enterprise is and the necessary features. [16:45] Total lack of legal frameworks. [42:55] Lack of financing was a great barrier. [51:40] During the first years networking was a prerequisite for the approval of funding. [57:05] Nowadays the things slightly improved due to more strict EU rules. [1:01:10] Due to the problematic legislation the enterprise need a multitude of difference licences: for the providing accommodation, catering, running the shop, running the tavern.


[08:40] Cooperation with local farmers who cultivate organic products for the needs of the hotel.

[1:25:50] There are synergies to a certain extent. It includes visits to wineries, visits to "mitato" (i.g. traditional shepherd's hut)


[29:00] Through the company's website, travel agents, participation in cultural events, mass media, and publishing.

[39:06] When they commenced operation in 1996, they had a contract with a big tour operator. [1:20:15] Promotion by cooperation with other travel agencies based abroad.


[41:00] The model farm was established as part of a hotel chain which has the required resources and capabilities to carry out the endeavour. Yet, the participant acknowledges the bureaucratic difficulties a small player would face.

[03:30] Dissatisfaction expressed about the public authorities and about the problems they cause. [1:31:45] Local authorities have not contributed to the development of agrotourism to the extent of their abilities. They make small steps. [1:37: 45] Big hotel

81

owners react strongly to the formation of a legal framework regarding agrotourism. Moreover, travel agents feel threatened by the idea that agrotourism entrepreneur may be allowed to organise small scale excursion for their clients


[1:36:35] Very promising. There is a trend for maturity. Italy a period of almost 35 years was required for agrotourism to reach at a good level.

Suggestions [47:00] The creation of a network of agrotourism enterprises is essential.

[32:30] New people with fresh ideas should enter the agrotourism sector. [35:15]"I want to interlink the local produce with agrotourism. It is unacceptable when an agrotourism holding buys products from a supermarket instead of using the local ones."[57:50] The increase of the obligatory period of running the projects, from 5 years to 8 years. [58:28] The formation of a legal framework.

Miscellaneous [42:50] The key is the offer of authentic experiences (e.g. offering of warm bread which just out of the wood oven)

[10:30] "What is difficult to us is that in Greece there was lack of a legal framework, hence, everyone did whatever they wanted". [10:45] Enterprises with a big number of rooms (i.g. 120, like the business of participant A and G cannot be considered as agrotourism business. Rather, these are merely tourism businesses in the countryside.

[08:25] The model farm was set up in 1996 as part of a hotel chain where organic products were cultivated for the clients' meals. It soon evolved to a model farm open to tourists.

[11:35] "Big entrepreneurs at one moment realised that the agrotourism has a dynamic and they tried to enter the sector. Nonetheless, this does not mean that they perform agrotourism.

[09:30] the model farm is open to the public. A big part of the visitors are clients of the hotel chain. Among others it comprises an award-winning organic restaurant.

[29:25] Mass tourism incorporates a segment of tourists which have a great interest in agrotourism. Those combine the low cost services of mass tourism with some of the experiences of agrotourism.

[46:40] "I imagine that many agrotourism holding have been established not for agrotourism per se but to offer cheap housing to the owners".

[40:50] The participant runs a tavern in the village, an agency of experiential tourism, and 7 guest houses

[49:15] "Usually a person who is good in producing something is not good in the management of the operations. In addition a third person is required for the management of the recreational activities. Those are the 3 major categories of tasks that should be combined together".

[59:00] EU has yet to adopt a legal framework about agrotourism.

82

[1:13:00] Winter tourism is feasible but there is a need for all stakeholders to coordinate their efforts. [1:15:25] Low cost air carriers have already started using airports on the island as a base. This provides an opportunity for the existence of a couple of flights throughout the week which could serve tourist during the winter months. Part of the cost could be subsidised by the Cretan tourism actors. There are facilities that could support winter agrotourism and a variety of activities -such as the harvesting of olives -which agrotourists could undertake. [1:17:05] Mass tourism actors do not find appealing the prospect of winter tourism, since it will be agrotourism entrepreneurs who will benefit and not them. [1:17:45] the tourism season could be extended for two months - November, December.

[1:19:50] An occupancy rate of 70% - 140 days per year -is considered satisfactory for agrotourism.

[1:22:00] Most of agrotourism holdings work with allotment contracts. Few still work with commitment contracts. Using allotment contacts decreases uncertainty about finding clients. Yet, it increases dependency on the tour operators and can be destructive for regaining clientele when the partnership terminates. [1:24:10] A combined system is the best.

[1:28:40] The participant was public servant prior to engaging in agrotourism. [1:29:38] Expressed his satisfaction "I like a lot what I'm doing; this is what I want to do and what I enjoy. If you think that what you are doing is primarily a profession, you'd better not o it all. You have to give all of your energy.

[1:46:10] "This endeavour was an economic destruction to me but it gave me great resources of strength and experience".

[1:49:15] Company was founded in 1995 by 10 partners. Most of them reconstructed old houses they owned.

[40:50] The participant runs a tavern in the village, an agency of experiential tourism, and 7 guest houses.

83

APPENDIX E: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS I, J

Participant I (UTA) Participant J (ORTA)

Senior Member of Union of Travel Agents Owner of Rural tourism Travel Agency


[03:45] A combination of tourism and agricultural activities or education or learning. Agrotourism in not accommodation in the countryside per se.

[02:20] When habitants of the countryside come up with offers of tourism nature which require the active participation in the agricultural life. Visitors select a tourist program where they participate in farmer’s life; they live with the family and work with them. It includes both activities and participation. [13:35] "Agrotourism is not merely the reconstruction of an old house or the construction of a house with a swimming pool in order to rent it to tourists. I should include activities too".


Agrotourism, as well as every form of alternative tourism, is the only way for Greece to approach new markets and to expand the tourism period. [05:51] The development of authentic human relationship and the contact of visitor with the nature, culture and people in particular. [10:30] Agrotourism is a form of tourism not harmful for the environment. On the contrary it promotes the protection of the environment.


[13:30] Downsides, if any, are outweighed by advantages. Perhaps, agrotourism cannot be sustainable in some certain areas.

What is the extent of provision of agrotourism activities in Crete?

[04:17] Very limited. Most of the agrotourism entrepreneurs have interpreted agrotourism as merely the provision of accommodation. [21:15] There are no working farms where agrotourist can combine accommodation with participation in farm tasks.


[20:04] Collection of wild herbs and cooking lessons. No interest for participation in farming activities apart from vine harvesting.

[25:30] Visits to various areas are sought to be combined with experiencing of agricultural activities in the villages, such as vine harvesting, or sheep milking. Yet this is not the agency's main product, just a complementary one.


[15:30] Trekking excursions but there is also the will to create tourist packs which will be a synthesis of people, areas and concepts. [16:28] Agrotourism cannot be the main topic of their business but it can be a complementary product and they working on this direction. Thus, they select agricultural areas in order to make new products.

84


Tourist from France and Switzerland show an interest in agrotourism and tradition. Belgium tourists are interested in gastronomy. Germans prefer hiking. Italians show limited interest and English show no interest at all. Russian tourists are a new market. At present they just show interest for mass tourism, in high quality resorts or luxurious villas by the sea. As small segment of Russian tourist is interested in religious tourism. They are not interested in agrotourism at all. Regarding the Greek tourists, they show no interest at all in agrotourism.

[15:40] The pool of their clients is France, Germany, Austria; countries that have already developed this king of tourism. Russia, Scandinavian and Asian countries are new markets of great size. Their contribution would be significant even if a small segment of clients would show demand for agrotourism.


[15:25] Clients seek for authenticity in the human contacts. [21:29] Their main criteria is authenticity, quality and the value of agricultural sites they visit. [22:35] Clients accommodate in the countryside and seek to experience local products. [37:45] Clients are willing to pay a premium but they expect provision of quality services.


Promotion is difficult because of the dominance of the major European tour operators. [09:03] "until now I have not managed to find a cheese-making site suitable to be visited by tourists. One that combines high hygiene standards with traditional elements". [11:47] Traditional producers find it difficult to comply with quality standards and they perceive tourism activities in a more opportunistic way. [12:35] During the traditional sheep-shearing, animals may feel distress or suffer. This may cause the reaction of agrotourist who are particularly sensitive. In a model farm, sheep-shearing is staged in a more careful and delicate way. [14:40] "Agrotourism is not a tourism type economically feasible in its own".

[34:10] "Promotion is one of the problems. Another problem is accessibility. All major tour operators brings visitor only from April to October. Thus, Greece has been established merely as a summer destination"


[07:35] Limited existence of synergies. Mostly in form of co-operations when groups of tourists visit farms, cheese-makers, bakeries. Also mentioned the existence of a model farm where tourism can experience staged agrotourism. [33:50] Small players should establish partnerships [09:03] "until now I have not managed to find a cheese-making site suitable to be visited by tourists. One that combines high hygiene standards with traditional elements". [11:47] Traditional producers find it difficult to comply with quality standards and they perceive tourism activities in a more opportunistic way. [12:35] During the traditional sheep-shearing, animals may feel distress or suffer. This may cause the reaction of agrotourist who are particularly sensitive. In a model farm, sheep-shearing is staged in a more careful and delicate way.

[27:02] The agency wishes to cooperate with local farmers. Yet, synergies are not on a regular basis and it depends on the specific needs of their clients.

85


[18:25] By the company's website, by partnership with foreign travel agents, by participation in fairs abroad). [19:00] "Yet we don't pay particular attention to agrotourism because it is a very small part of tourism" [19:30] "Profits per client is smaller than other forms of tourism because the cost is high due to the small numbers of agrotourist lodgings" .

[41:40] By B2B partnerships with big specialised tour operators in the country of clients' origin. This way proves to be an effective one for the survival and development of the business. The company's website is another channel of promotion.


The public authorities have undertaken limited activities to support agrotourism.Apart from the publishing of some brochures listing agrotourism accommodation there are no other initiatives. "I think that agrotourism is a necessary form of tourism. Yet, there is need for higher specialisation of the parts involved in order to achieve a better result"

[30:00] Still much has to be done. However, there is progress over the last years. Steps have been made, but at slow pace. [30:44] Legislation is complicated and lacks flexibility. [31:13] "I am not asking whether the state is friendly or slow. But I certainly don't want to have a hostile state. Do we have a hostile state at the moment? I would stay that we have an ignorant state. I don't want to believe that out state is hostile, just that it lacks competency". [32:37] The public authorities make efforts, either through the production of videos. [33:07] Young public servants, though, have the desire and the skills.


Not very promising, because of the lack of professionals with competency and desire to get involved with agrotourism. Any steps are few and slow. Demand is limited due to the limited promotional actions.

It is foreseen that special form of tourism will develop in Greece. [53:30] "I see it in an optimistic way. But I have been optimistic over the last 25 years because I believe in it". In Crete there is need both for mass tourism and agrotourism. [54:40] "Both forms need to co-exist in the future".

Suggestions? [14:40] "Agrotourism is not a tourism type economically feasible in its own"

[07:24] "We are a 3S destination, where vacations mean staying in a hotel or at the beach for the whole day and having only one excursion. Our target should be to make tourists come out of the hotels and experience the local lifestyle". [46:02] "I would suggest that we all sit around a table and discuss and the then promptly make action what we decide. For example we cannot still argue in 2013 of what agrotourism is". [47:50] "We need speed and flexibility. Regional authorities should establish a team to deal exclusively with agrotourism. I want this team to be formed and I want to see this team". [49:17] " I prefer a team which takes 100 actions and makes 3 mistakes rather than a team that does nothing”. [50:22] "There are active people, I don't know if they have the freedom to take decisions". [56:28] " To me the ideal would be if a team exists which engages exclusively in agrotourism issues. I definitely believe that this can be our best image abroad."

Miscellaneous [16:48] Most of the farmers perceived agrotourism as an opportunity to build cheap accommodation for themselves. Only few perceived it in a professional way even fewer offer activities that are in demand by tourists.

[06:13] "Greece had 17mn tourists during 2013. Crete had 3 million tourists. Statistics show that during a typical stay of one week, tourists participate in just one or rarely two excursions".

86

APPENDIX F: DATA ANALYSIS TABLE – PARTICIPANTS K, L

Participant K (OATA) Participant L (OATA)

Owner of Agrotourism Travel Agency Owner of Agrotourism Travel Agency


Bringing tourists in contact with local wine-making, cheese-making, local handicrafts, local culture, walking in the local environment. Also giving them the opportunity to pick olives, grapes, oranges, make a stay on a farm.

[06:25] Any form of mild tourism, where visitors accommodate in a farm house, and participates in farm activities. The logic was that agrotourism is performed by farmers. [8:18] "By agrotourism we mean the countryside, the countryside lodgings of small size (e.g. farm house) which can host the visitors who at the same time perform some farm activities." [09:55] "According to my experience, the concept of agrotourism should not be exclusively associated with the farmer who provides accommodation. Besides, there should be included even farmers who strive to promote their produce to tourists". [13:47] "Those farmers who cultivate the land and produce products of good quality which they seek to promote and sell to tourist" [1:11:30] "We should say as a conclusion that the notion of agrotourism mostly fits to the farmer, the habitant of the countryside, who will utilise agriculture as a tool to attract tourists" .


[53:45] "Agrotourism will bring some additional income. It will also incur educational benefit, because the locals will meet new people. It will widen their horizon. Locals will begin to appreciate the local environment"

[15:25] It will be a great benefit for Greece if the agricultural sector, interrelates with the tourism sector. [20:35] The primary benefit is its contribution to the farmers' income. Moreover, agrotourism is a means to bring to the foreground the local societies. Because of agrotourism, local people come in contact with people from other cultures and interact with them.

What are the downsides of agrotourism?What is the extent of provision of agrotourism activities in Crete?

It is a small niche area at the moment. Not publicised well yet in Crete. It is not greatly supported by the state as much as mass tourism is supported. [10:15] "Agrotourism in Crete is more about sampling the wine or the cheese. In England is about going to a farm and helping with the farm tasks".


To see the beautiful environment of the island by having beautiful one-day walks and know a little bit about the area

[1:03:00] Agrotourists show desire just for staged farm tasks. Not for participating in authentic ones. [1:04:00] "I reach to the conclusion that the tourist who will actively engage in farming activities, needs to have time. Therefore, they should visit Crete for those activities exclusively". Active participation is only possible when tourist stay in an agrotourism holding. [1:13:12] When agrotourists arrive at Crete they have

87

a general desire to learn about the place, about nature. They don't like whatever is industrialised or messy.


Walking tourism, a selection of walks varying from easy to difficult. Relaxed tours to tourists who want to get an idea of the Cretan countryside. Valleys and culture tours looking at the fauna and flora. Just passing through some villages and archaeological sites. No visit to farms. Offering visits to cheese-makers.

[37:00] Excursions in the countryside, contact with local people and their culture. [39:36] Visits to traditional olive presses or wineries, traditional bakeries. [41:43] "What I try to convey to my clients is the experience, the feeling of being Crete. People that we visit are the peasants who have the authentic Cretan attitude, the stand of the proud person who sees tourists not as customers but as guest. Those people will open their fridge -if they have one- and treat tourists with whatever they have available. This is what we try to convey to our clients".


German, English, Norwegians and Dutch. Only few Russians and Ukrainians

[24:00] Mainly from central Europe: France, Germany, and Netherlands. Only few British and even less Italians. [22:45]Notably, there also agrotourists coming from the US and Canada. The reason for their small numbers is that Greece is a remote destination, thus, to them the transport cost is high. [26:25] Russian tourists are not experienced travellers. They seek for sun-sea and show no interest for any form of alternative tourism.


More educated, interested in doing something different than visiting the beach, normally well-off. Belief that their clients in the future will be the elder generation. Many have visited Crete many times in the past (at least 50% of them).

[22:25] Agrotourists are usually middle-aged people, travelling without children. [24:35] Usually they are repeated clients, who have visited Greece and Crete in particular in the past. Agrotourists are experienced travellers.


[12:36] One of the main difficulty is that the local hotels are being controlled and dominated by the big international tour agencies and they control nearly everything that their guest do thought the tor reps that they have in their hotels. Reps have first access to the clients, they have preferred excursion and trip which they get commission for. Big tours agencies only allow hotels to advertise those trips. As were not part of these organisations even our leaflets are not allowed in hotels and no one in hotel is allowed to advertise us. This is illegal and a big barrier and people have been complaining for years"

[29:00] Operational cost is one of the biggest impediment, it is very high due to the nature of work. Agrotourism involves small groups of tourist (20-30 persons). Undertaking of activities or farm visiting is not possible for bigger groups, hence, economies of scale are difficult to be achieved. [32:54] Another problem is that agrotourists, who possibly desire to visit Crete on their own, cannot do so beyond the summer months. Once the charter flights stop at the end of tourism season, the transportation cost soars. [38:45] Establishing partnership with tour operators. [43:25] Commission rate rendered to tour operators is high (20-30%), which also increases operational cost.

88


Establishing a partnership with the big tour operators is difficult because of the high commission they request (approx. 30%) which destroys profitability. Local communities are supportive. And they want to promote the local culture and environment. But their efforts are still in the beginning stage.


By forming direct contact with foreign companies in German, Holland, UK. The number of tourist that can be attracted from Rethymno is limited. This is done mainly through leaflets distributed in the town. Limited advertising in hotels. Marketing both in Greece and abroad is the biggest challenge.

[32:24] Clients are mainly identified via the tour operators. In this way, agrotourism can utilise mass tourism as a reservoir to draw some of the agrotourists [26:50] Direct approach of big tour operators. [51:38] By-passing tour operators by changing the price policy may cause friction. The agents must be careful, because they are in need of the tour operators.


No great support so far. Took part in a course run by the regional authorities which in practice was not well organised."[41:43] The tourism organisation kiosk is very poor. It gives some maps to tourists but it has mainly nothing. The main work they do is give tickets to tourists.

[18:42] "The regional authorities make efforts but they are not constant and coordinated. I feel that there is no strategy and that their efforts are opportunistic and lack consistency". [54:55] No guidance was needed from the public authorities, since know-how was already available. Yet, assistance was required in term of developing the business. [1:00:05] Public authorities are unaware of the number of agrotourism holdings. In addition, they give no instructions when it comes to their architectural design. [1:02:28] Regional and local authorities are willing to help, but their efforts are sporadic.

Suggestions? "They have to create the demand. There is a small demand but I think there will be a lot more profit if they make the demand". "[56:41] I think the crisis will bring a change to the people's attitude. The people are going to have to look for new ways of making an income. The farmers are losing a lot of their grants, the way they get paid is changing the taxation is changing so it this forces people of making a living. People are seeing that the future is bleak. They can't continue they way they were. That can be helpful if organisations - national organisations and local organisations - get together and help develop agrotourism in a coherent manner. But if it is just left the willy-nilly, if it is piecemeal, if small groups do whatever they want, it will be chaos. It needs an overall control which in Greece never happens ".

[1:16:35] "Regional authorities should take action to promote not only agrotourism holdings but local products too".

89

APPENDIX G: SELECTIVE INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

Researcher (R): I would like to ask you, to give me your own definition of agrotourism. What does agrotourism mean to you?

Participant B – Owner of Agrotourism Holding (B): One can give various interpretations. I regard that agrotourism is the staying of a visitor in a holding, which should offer the same quality of services as a proper hotel. Beyond that, the guest should participate in local life. By saying that, I mean that the guest should stay in the village, should come in contact with the locals and participate in some activities which characterise the local society, depending on the area where the guest accommodates. For instance the tourist could participate in the preparation of local food, or in some farming activities, or in local cultural events.

R: So, the key is participation and contact?

B: Contact with the local society…

R: What do you think are the benefits of agrotourism compared to other forms of tourism? Both for the visitors and the agrotourism entrepreneurs…

B: Agrotourism entrepreneurs have an extra income from providing accommodation. Beyond that, other people will sell their produce, so local producers will have a financial benefit.

R: And what about agrotourists?

B: Agrotourists come in contact with local culture in a broader sense and become a part of the local society.

R: Are there some downsides?

B: There will be always downsides. When you develop an agrotourism holding in a village, there can be always problems. For example, noise coming from some activities. And for this reason the state should take some measures. What I want to say is this: one may start the construction next to you during the tourist term. This is disastrous because you do not have a secluded hotel. This can be a problem.

R: Can there be innervations which disfeature the local character? For example, by some professionals, who have a different understanding of agrotourism?

B: Yes, this can happen too. For instance a bar’s owner may not show consideration of his neighbours who are affected by noise. This is a negative element.

R: According to your experience, have you seen some kind of downsides with regard to agrotourism? For example, did the village’s life change?

B: Yes, to a certain extent. In the beginning local people were sceptical but on the other hand there are some local stores which make good business during the tourist term. That is, because tourists will go shopping at the village, will go out to eat, or to buy a local product. For example, I offer fresh juice every day and once I realised that there were no local oranges available anymore. Instead they imported from South

90

America. This is unacceptable. The state could create some sort of incentives to address this phenomenon.

R: Your business could be named as an agrotourism enterprise…

B: I am not interested in labels. I have never been interested in saying that I run an agrotourism holding. What I have been interested in, is making something different than what is done at the coast areas where everything is preformed and where visitors have limited options and no contact with the local society. I have a different philosophy. For this reason, this year I have started a sort of cultural activity, where the visitor is given the chance to listen to live Greek music in concerts at my own premises. Tourists like that a lot, and starting from next year, this will be conducted regularly, on a weekly basis. This shows that the visit is interested in the local culture. I forgot to tell you that the local tourist agency is also organising some excursion, where tourists visit monasteries, they go hiking, visit the local winery of Dourakis. In addition, sometime we organise painting lessons.

R: In Vamos? [The village’s name]

B: At my own premises but in Vamos too.

R: Did you ever think of doing something like this on your own, without the tourist agency?

B: Yes, I had thought about it from the very beginning. The travel agency I’m cooperating with is a way to promote my product, nothing else. The travel agency is interested in this form of tourism.

R: In terms of the agricultural production, do the tourists visit some farms?

B: The tourist period of my business comes to an end in October. So the only activity coming between is the grape harvesting. My own clients occasionally visit it, because the local travel agency in Vamos sometimes organises participating in the grapes harvesting and their pressing.

R: Where does it take place?

B: In various places. There is no standard place. In Vamos or in another village.

R: Do they also actively participate in it?

B: Yes, yes, they participate…

R: Are your clients willing to participate in farming tasks? Do they like participating?

B: Yes, they like it. Not everyone does, but there is a segment who does like it.

R: What is the origin of your clients?

B: My clients are English.

R: Exclusively?

B: Yes, exclusively.

91

R: Is it because of the travel agency?

B: Yes, the travel agency is English.

R: What about their age group?

B: We cannot say that they are old. Young people come, as well as middle aged and elderly people. All kinds of age groups…

R: You mentioned before that children do not come anymore….

B: Children don’t come anymore because this is a particular product and children want to play around and someone should supervise them. So my clients wanted to have their peace of mind. So they stopped bring children with them. Couples with children go to other places.

R: Do clients have some common characteristics? I mean, could you say that for example they have a certain profession?

B: Clients coming here have totally different characteristics than clients visiting the beach. I have come to this conclusion when the travel agency I cooperate with, advertised the music nights I have organised, at a hotel in Kalyves [another village] by the beach. They showed no interest at all. Nobody came. On the contrary all my own clients came.

R: Have you ever talked with them to learn what they are interested in?

B: Yes, for example, there was a couple who liked a lot those music nights. In Vamos there was a concert of Cretan music where some local young people played music. The couple liked that a lot and when they returned to their country, they sent me a CD with local music of other places they had visited.

R: Shall I suppose that some of them are returning back to Crete?

B: Yes, I have clients who have visited Crete two, three or even four times.

R: Why do they prefer the area of Vamos?

B: Vamos is not by the sea, but has the following advantages: Vamos is near the sea –Kalyves is 10 minutes by car – there are some facilities here, for example some store, clients can do their shopping from, as well as a health centre. In addition, the village is near Chania and Rethymno, so it is near urban centres. Thus it is easy for someone to visit alternative places. Vamos is approachable, is not far from Southern Crete, which is another pro. I think that all these counts.

R: And the natural environment?

B: And the natural environment, which is very beautiful. And one more thing, that the village is keeping its “colour”. Very few villages in Crete have kept their “colour” because as you know most of them have been destroyed. At least here there are some places which have kept their “colour” a lot and this is a plus.

R: Eh, you started 15 years ago?

92

B: In 1996…

R: Did you join a programme then, such as a Leader or something else?

B: No, no. I did not join any programme. The only programme I had joined was one for renovation. After I had completed the construction…

R: Was it a European programme?

B: Yes, but now I don’t remember to tell you its name.

R: So, most of the capital invested was yours?

B: It was my own capital. Coming out of my own savings and loans...

R: So, financing had never been part of a programme?

B: No, no…

R: No, eh… Why didn’t you consider joining a programme?

B: Eh, when I started, Leader programmes had already finished. There weren’t available and I didn’t want to wait for them.

R: Is there something available now?

B: There was something but I don’t think it is active now. And it also requires my own funding. But I don’t have any money to invest and I don’t have any intention to make any other expansion. There are financial difficulties.

R: As far as the occupancy is concerned? Are you satisfied?

B: Yes, it is good.

R: How many days approximately per year?

B: There are some months where occupancy is 90 per cent. Some other months it is may be 60 per cent. It depends.

R: Including months beyond the tourist term?

B: No, in winter the business is closed.

R: Do you close after October?

B: Yes, I close at the end of October until the beginning of April. In the past, when I first started the business, I operated even during the winter. At that time I had 2-3 houses and I worked with clients from Heraklion [the biggest city of Crete] and Athens. But the operational cost is very high in winter. If you consider the electricity cost and the amount of wood required for the fireplace…Then you have no profit left at all. So it is better to keep it closed.

R: What about the return on your investment?

93

B: I don’t know if I will ever break even. It might happen if things don’t go wrong. But we have many expenses. But I have the moral satisfaction that I have done something distinctive.

R: Have you regretted about something? I mean, would you do something different with regard to the investment?

B: I guess not.

R: Are there similar operations in the area of Vamos, on behalf of other entrepreneurs, or farmers?

B: Yes, but it was not farmers. Everyone was like me.

R: You mean people who owned the property and returned to their homeland. It was not farmers.

B: No, not farmers. Farmers have a different mentality. A different mentality and a different perception...

R: Do you cooperate with a farmer? I mean, maybe someone is providing you his products. Or maybe you have another form of partnership. For examples making visits to his farm.

B: I don’t have any particular cooperation. For example one day they [the clients] wanted to go and view sheep. Ok, we went to a farmer. We went there for them to see how sheep are milked and things like these.

R: And why didn’t this continue?

B: This is a matter of demand. You cannot make different things every day because it is also very tiring.

R: And very expensive, eh?

B: I have no financial benefit from spending my time in this. Because I also have other issues to take care of… But if someone asks me, I provide it to them without asking for money. But the customers’ comments are very positive. You could view them in the website, where they are written. Ok, they mostly write about the amenities I provide, the cleanliness, the landscape and all these…

R: Customers are demanding, eh?

B: Yes, a lot. They pay a lot and the travel agency has also very high requirements.

R: And I believe that they are researching a lot, they have the knowledge. They make a market research before travelling somewhere.

B: Yes, yes.

R: Did you have some sort of support from the local or central authorities?

B: Local authorities? What do you mean?

R: For example at regional level…

94

B: Not really. What sorts of support could I have had? Even getting some licences was suffering. For example because the houses were old and there were no building licences, I was asked to find aero photos to prove that they're old indeed. That was a difficult thing to do.

R: Aero photos?

B: Yes, the first years I took a certificate for the major. Latter the building authority came to inspect and they were not happy with that document. I told them “can’t you see for yourself that the house is so old indeed?” And they replied: “No you must…”. Various stupid things... Bureaucratic obstacles...

R: Any assistance in the promotion?

B: You mean the Region [of Crete] to advertise?

R: Yes.

B: The only thing done is that some films have been shot here. In the past BBC shot a documentary about Cretan cuisine. There was also some shooting for movies.

R: Were you included in any promotional brochure?

B: No, because I work through the travel agency.

R: Any seminars even run by private companies?

B: There are seminars but I don’t participate, because I don’t have time. Besides, I regard that I have a certain culture… that there is no need to go and listen to something more. This might sound egoistic but I have no interest.

R: Were you informed of rural tourism when you first engaged in agrotourism? Do you keep informed, reading any websites?

B: I am studying various things. But I think that what I wanted to do, I have already done it.

R: You didn’t have any experience in tourism before you start?

B: No, no experience at all in tourism. But I gained experience gradually. I also met many people.

R: Learning by doing…

B: Yes, this is how it is.

R: How do you forecast the future of agrotourism?

B: I think that gradually some things will start changing and it will gain a market share. At least a small one…

R: And what about the crisis now?

B: Crisis is a problem with regard to the local market.

95

R: The local market… What about the international market?

B: The international market, I think is not a particular problem.

R: You don’t work with the international market…

B: No.

R: Has the crisis affected your operations?

B: Not really…

R: Did the prices drop?

B: The prices did not drop but the operational cost has increase, in the sense that the travel agency has many demands. And when demands rise and multiply your expenses, you profit shrinks.

R: Which category of expenses increases the most?

B: For example, this year we renewed all the linens, fridges, TV sets... The travel agency required it… We employed extra staff, so that we would provide services of higher quality, better cleanliness. All these were and extra cost without an increase of the revenues.

R: You have not increased the prices?

B: The agency has increased the [final] prices. I have not increased them.

R: What do you mean?

B: I have a fixed amount which I get paid by the agency. I don’t know what the agency will do after that. [Guarantee contract]

R: So you have agreed a fixed price for yourself. And beyond that the agency can increase the [final] price?

B: Yes.

R: Good. I believe we have covered….

B: … A wide range….

R: Yes. Do you know what impresses me? When the agrotourism programmes started, supposedly they were run by famers…

B: Almost nobody was farmer. And to tell you one more thing, many received the money to construct their own house. For example I know a case of a person who entered the programme, took a load of money and constructed his own house...

R: He overprized the project…

B: Yes, yes and for him it had been almost for free. And now it appears that he is running an agrotourism holding with no revenues at all.

96

R: Yes, exactly. And my question is why nobody has checked them. Since they [the authorities] are aware of what is going on?

B: Of course they know…

R: Why nobody checks them? And no standards were imposed of what you can make and what you should offer…

B: Nothing, all the fiddlers received money and they served their own interests without making really anything. This is what happened.

R: Yes…

B: Like what happens everywhere in Greece. This is why we have reached at this state of disrepair. Others [countries] had a crisis too, but slowly they come out of it. I think that we continue our way down.

R: There was no control at all…

B: Nothing, nothing… I will give you another example. Because there is an issue regarding villas for rent. Where the money is black... Few years ago there was a laws saying. Ok, you have this tourist holding… You want to rent it... You are going to pay this tax, which is fixed at the state, and you don’t need to issue receipt or anything.

R: A fixed amount, yes.

B: Everyone used to go and pay for it. They would say, why not paying €200, 300, 400 or 500 to have my peace of mind. Now they have ceased this [law] and they have obliged you to have books for revenues and costs, to be insured in TEVE [professionals’ insurance body] and a load of other bureaucratic stuff… One now says: “I own a house… Am I going to enter this welter of problems? For what benefit?” So they were running the holdings illegally. The state used to earn a considerable amount. Because one would think: “why not paying €500”. I think it depended on what category the holding belonged to…. You had to pay two, three hundred Euros. Depending… And everyone used to pay willingly.

R: Now they give nothing…

B: They give nothing. And you cannot imagine the bureaucratic process it takes to go and get an operating license. It’s incredible…

R: How much does one need to pay for the license?

B: They pay some deposit. But it is not only this. It is the bureaucracy to acquire the licence and then the process of operating. That is, you need to keep books, the door book, to register the clients, to issue receipts. The SDOE [financial control authority] came to me this summer. I had registered the clients in the book. It was after the 15 August [Greek festive period]. And I was making a fiesta where I have the chapel, with live music and there was also a concert under the full-moon. I had not issued the last two receipts. The clients were registered but I hadn’t issued the receipts because I didn’t have the time. And they gave me a fine. I told them “they are registered in the book, how is it possible that I will not issue the receipt?” What they replied was that they don’t cared. They gave me a fine…

97

R: What about the villas working illegally? Don’t they get caught? There are so many…

B: The place is full of them. But look what happens. When one lives abroad and has constructed a house, they can send people from abroad, get paid by them and then pretend that they are friends of them. I cannot knock their door and check who lives inside.

B: Yes, this is what happens many times.

R: They cannot get caught. And I don’t think that it is allowed to enter their house and check who lives inside. So, how can you know if I rent the house or not? The state could have just asked them to pay a fixed amount every year, as tax, and let them rent it. Let them do whatever they want. The state would have earned much more than what it earns now.

B: The same thing will apply to farmers starting from this year, with the books they will have to keep…

R: Yes, this is one more issue. Nobody will keep them. This is how the situation is…

B: Good… If you think that we should discuss some more issue….

R: No, I don’t have anything else. I think you have understood my spirit. How I operate.

B: Yes. I like that you are doing it for your own personal satisfaction.

R: Yes. These things cannot be done if you are not personally satisfied.

[Some private conversation followed]

R: How are things going with the bank? Have you made any settlement?

B: No, until now I have no problem. I’m paying it properly [the debt].

R: What about your bookings? Have they declined during the last two years?

B: No, no. Luckily the travel agency I’m cooperating with is very good and we have a good contract. And now, they have asked me to make a new contact for five years. And so it gives me the peace of mind to relax a little bit….

R: Do you advertise at all? Do you have a website?

B: No, I don’t have a website?

R: Because of the travel agency?

B: Yes, there is no point in creating a website. No need for it….

98

APPENDIX H: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET

PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEETDate ..................

The study of Agrotourism in Crete

Research title:

“Agrotourism in Crete: lost in a labyrinth? A critical analysis”

You are being asked to take part in a research study on agrotourism in CreteBefore you decide, it is important for you to understand why this study is being done and what it will involve. Please take time to read the following information carefully and decide whether or not you wish to take part. Ask me if there is anything that is not clear or if you would like more information.

WHAT IS THE STUDY ABOUT?The purpose of this study is to offer a multi-dimensional critical analysis of the case of agrotourism in the Greek island of Crete

WHO IS DOING THIS STUDY AND WHY?I am a student at the University of Leicester and am doing this study for my dissertation. I am supervised by Dr Olga Suhomlinova at the University of Leicester, School of Management.

WHY HAVE I BEEN CHOSEN?I am inviting you to take part in this study as someone who I think would be able to provide some valuable opinions about agrotourism in Crete

DO I HAVE TO TAKE PART?It is up to you to decide whether or not you want to take part. You do not have to give a reason.

PARTICIPANTS’ RIGHTSIf you do decide to take part you will be given this information sheet to keep. You may decide to stop being a part of the research study at any time without explanation. You have the right to ask that any data you have supplied to that point be destroyed. You have the right to omit or refuse to answer any question that is asked of you. You have the right to have your questions about the procedures answered. If you have any questions as a result of reading this information sheet, you should ask the researcher before the study begins.

99

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT IF I AGREE TO TAKE PART IN THIS STUDY?You will need to answer some interview questions. This will take no more than one hour

WHAT KIND OF INFORMATION WILL BE COLLECTED ABOUT ME?In the interview I will ask you some information about your role as a stakeholder in the agrotourism industry and your degree of expertise in your field of knowledge

CONFIDENTIALITY/ANONYMITYAny information you supply to me will be treated confidentially in accordance with the 1998 Data Protection Act: your name and identifying affiliations will be anonymized in the analysis and any resulting publications, unless you give your explicit consent to identify you as a subject. Any information you provide will not be given to anyone else.

WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS IN TAKING PART IN THIS STUDY?There is no payment for taking part in this study. This study will offer an insight into the agrotourism industry in Crete. In particular, this study will help the researcher identify the level of success of the existing agrotourism practices, their strengths and weaknesses, and the development potential of agrotourism in Crete. Apart from enriching the existing body of knowledge, the finding of this study may assist in the evaluation and fine-tuning of agrotourism strategies and their effective implementation

ARE THERE ANY RISKS IN TAKING PART IN THIS STUDY?There are no risks in taking part in this study

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE STUDY FINISHESThe results of the study will be presented in my dissertation

FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONIf you have further questions about the study, you are welcome to contact me at the following e-mail address: [email protected] you have any questions about the ethical conduct of this research please contact the School’s Ethics Officer at the following e-mail address: [email protected]

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO READ THROUGH THIS INFORMATION

100

APPENDIX I: PARTICIPANT INFORMED CONSENT FORM

PARTICIPANT INFORMED CONSENT FORM

The study of Agrotourism in CreteResearch title:

“Agrotourism in Crete: lost in a labyrinth? A critical analysis”

CONSENT STATEMENT

Thank you for agreeing to participate in this study. Before I carry out the research, I

would like you to read the following statements and confirm your agreement to take

part in this study.

Please tick to confirm

I confirm that I have read and understand the Participant Information Sheet dated .........................

All the questions that I have about the research have been satisfactorily answered

(DELETE/AMEND IF NOT RELEVANT) I give my consent to the recording and transcription of the interviews by the researcher

I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw from the study at any time, without giving reason

I agree to participate.

Participant’s signature: ______________________________________

Participant’s name (please print): ______________________________________

Date: ______________________________________

Agrotourism in Crete: lost in a labyrinth. A critical analysis

Documents

Transcript of Agrotourism in Crete: lost in a labyrinth. A critical analysis