Wine tourism as a developmentinitiative in rural Canary Island

communitiesLynnaire Sheridan and Abel Duarte Alonso

School of Marketing Tourism and Leisure, Edith Cowan University,Joondalup, Australia, and

Pascal ScherrerSchool of Natural Sciences, Centre for Ecosystem Management,

Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia

Abstract

Purpose – Many studies underline the critical relationship between local communities and rural-basedindustries. However, the dynamics of the relationship between wineries and local communities israrely considered in research despite the importance of these links for rural communities. This paperinvestigates this dimension from the perspective of Canary Islands’ small wine growers.

Design/methodology/approach – A total of 23 winery operations located on the islands ofTenerife and La Palma accept the invitation to participate in the form of face-to-face interviews.

Findings – The level of participation and contribution to the community varies between operations,with some small family operations in particular limiting their external involvement, while others see itas a necessary and/or beneficial relationship. Most wineries in the study are active in theircommunities, participating in local events and employing local residents. However, generationalchanges that threaten both the wine business and tradition, or mass tourism leading to land valueincreases are critical challenges to the winery-community relationship.

Research limitations/implications – With over 200 largely small-family wineries in the CanaryIslands, it is acknowledged that the sample of wineries in this paper may not be representative of theregion’s wine industry.

Practical implications – The strengthening relationships between wineries and local communitiesfor cultural events can build nostalgia for local wine production. This, in turn, appears to be vital forpreserving the local wine culture and tradition by making winery ownership and work well-regardedby the local community.

Originality/value – To date limited research has been conducted on the redeveloping CanaryIslands’ wine industry, particularly from winery operators’ points of view.

Keywords Wines, Winemaking, Rural regions, Spain, Tourism

Paper type Research paper

Introduction and literature reviewWine tourism and rural communitiesIn recent years, there has been a trend of businesses becoming more involved with localcommunities, particularly strengthening partnerships (Boehm, 2005), wherebycommunities often reciprocate by actively supporting business development (Besserand Miller, 2004). Within a rural context, the relationship between rural industries andtheir communities is an important focus of rural development research. In fact, despitethe argument that “Tourism provides challenges for communities all around theworld” (Simpson, 2008, p. 5), many studies identify the potential links between tourism

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1750-6204.htm

Wine tourismas a development

initiative

291

Journal of Enterprising Communities:People and Places in the Global

EconomyVol. 3 No. 3, 2009

pp. 291-305q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

1750-6204DOI 10.1108/17506200910982037

and rural communities, as well as tourism’s supporting role in such process(Wilson et al., 2001; Williams, 2001; Choi and Sirakaya, 2006; Petrzelka et al., 2006;Ballesteros and Ramırez, 2007). In particular, festivals and events based around ruralproducts are growing in popularity (Higham and Ritchie, 2001), as is “agritourism”,which, according to Langworthy et al. (2006, p. 2):

[. . .] is an excellent tool to educate the [national] community about the value of agriculture tothe economy and quality of life especially when a country’s residents are increasinglyremoved from the land.

The benefit of tourism has primarily been the generation of employment and thediversification of marginalised rural economies (Di Gregorio and Licari, 2006). Asglobalisation progressively threatens traditional agriculture, tourism may become anecessity to support the continuation of traditional production in rural areas (Eversoleand Martin, 2006).

VanAusdle (2005) has identified wine tourism as a particularly appropriate ruraltourism product. Wine production can help rural areas redesign their economiesthrough job creation for both wine production and the hospitality associated with finedining. Many examples of newly developing wine regions exist (Sharples, 2002; Read,2004; Getz and Brown, 2006; Wargenau and Che, 2006). The availability anddevelopment of wine routes (Gatti and Incerti, 1997), or wine tourism (Hall et al., 2000c;Hall and Mitchell, 2000; O’Neill et al., 2001, 2002) generally plays a pivotal role inattracting visitors to rural areas which, in turn, benefit local economies and communities(Hall et al., 2000a).

Events such as wine and food festivals, in turn, provide opportunities for localcommunities to establish a destination identity as they can “promote the importance oflocal tourism resources to the outside world” (Inbakaran and Jackson, 2005, p. 324).In some Mediterranean rural areas, for example, wine cellars can be additionalattractions, connecting the wine product with underground architecture (Fuentes Pardoand Canas Guerrero, 2005). Furthermore, wine and tourism can reinforce localidentity and contribute to social wellbeing (Gibson and Weinberg, 1980; Telfer andWall, 1996, in Telfer, 2001; Arfini et al., 2002).

While more wine regions and trails are being developed worldwide (Bigongiari, 2003;Fensterseifer, 2007; Hall et al., 2000a; Jaffe and Pasternak, 2004; Rabellotti and Morrison,2006; Sharples, 2002), traditional wine regions in decay are being revitalised (GarcıaFernandez, 1999) – not to compete in the global wine market but, instead in an attemptto boost the local economy via small scale wine production and potentially wine tourism.

However, all is not well in the relationship between community and wine producingoperations. For example, Friedland (2000) explains the dramatic developments in NapaValley, California, where the expansion of vineyards had significant negative impactson the local population, including increased land development, heavy traffic duringperiods of harvesting, increased water usage or environmental damage due to extensivevineyard planting (Tesconi, 1999, in Friedland, 2000). Another argument is that as aresult of the growth and prosperity of their local wine industries some wine regionshave experienced the negative effects of a rapid increase in tourism, as Griffith (2007)found in a study conducted in Walla Walla, Washington, USA. An example of the wineindustry in New Zealand, where significant growth has been experienced in recent

JEC3,3

292

years, further demonstrates potential downsides of this sector with regards to thecommunity:

[. . .] increasing numbers of outsiders have created new community impacts and new tensions[. . .] and potential contradictions between the development of Marlborough as a wine touristdestination and site of a large-scale industrial production (Beer and Lewis, 2006, p. 96).

The downside of the success of the wine sector is further illustrated in the rise of landprices in some New Zealand rural communities (Winestate Magazine, 2005; Law, 2007).Although this situation is already concerning, pressures on land, water and labour areset to continue as the wine industry is poised for a continued phenomenal growth inyears to come (Nikiel, 2007). Thus, while wine tourism has the potential to createconsiderable economic and social benefits for local development, it can also be the rootof many issues and problems for rural communities.

The Canary Islands contextTraditionally a mass tourism destination, with close to ten million visitors per year(Canary Institute of Statistics, 2007), the Canary Islands are striving for a morefulfilling type of tourism-driven economic development. In fact, because of its largevolume of visitors, a phenomenon that reflects the importance of tourism in Spain(Garın-Munoz, 2007) there is a view that tourism is a key determinant of economicdevelopment for the archipelago (Garın-Munoz, 2006, p. 282). However, after so manydecades of presence, mass tourism has failed to create the local opportunities andbenefits that smaller-scale quality tourism products could achieve. Recently, theadvent of rural and agrotourism in the islands (Parra Lopez and Calero Garcıa, 2006)offer some visitor segments an alternative to the “typical” sun and beach elements ofnumerous mass tourism destinations. Within this dimension, the ability of operators ofrural tourism and related concepts in offering unique and enjoyable experiences isfundamental in building a sustainable tourism industry within a region (Keen, 2004).In addition, the Canary Islands provide an example of a traditional wine region that isbeing revived, in part, to capture the potentially higher yield wine tourist.

Wine has been a component of the islands’ culture and agricultural heritage for manycenturies (Garcıa Fernandez, 1999; El Dıa, 2001). However, harsh production conditions,changes in external trade and vine diseases meant that for generations the local wineindustry fell into oblivion. More recently, the establishment of systems of protectionand valorisation of quality foods (Sainz, 2002) has been a turning point for the localwine industry. Moreover, fundamental to this rebirth of wine production has been theintroduction of “Designations of Origin” (DO) (Sainz, 2002; Martınez-Carrasco et al.,2005) for Canary Islands’ wines. Regulatory councils oversee more efficient productionmethods, and the quality of the wine product while protecting and promoting local wines(Godenau and Suarez Sosa, 2002; Godenau et al., 2000). This event has drasticallychanged what, until recently, had been an informal wine industry.

Today ten regions with DO have been created in the archipelago, of which five aloneare based on the island of Tenerife, and one on the island of La Palma (La Reserva,2006). Added to these events are the will and interest of local winery operators toimprove techniques and production methods to obtain a product of increased quality(Garcıa Fernandez, 1999). This quality product, added to the large number of visitors tothe islands, provides an opportunity for wine tourism.

Wine tourismas a development

initiative

293

Arguably a certain degree of nostalgia to keep a tradition alive has also helped inthe re-development of the local wine industry. While providing jobs to local inhabitantswhere the wineries are located, and helping maintain the community fabric, the “new”wine industry in the Canaries also offers tourists an alternative leisure activity beyondthe package tours for which the region is renowned (McLane, 2000).

In order for wine tourism to emerge as a contributor to the economic development ofthe Canary Islands, it is imperative that the wine industry itself engages with both thetourism industry and the broader community. This exploratory study focussed on thecrucial perspective of the wineries on tourism and the local community to understandthe perceived potential role, impacts or benefits for their businesses and the broadercommunity.

MethodologyThe investigation of an industry experiencing development in the sense of a revival,with emphasis on quality (DO), and new developments in the form of the establishmentof wine trails suggests the potential for synergies between wineries and localcommunities. In this regard, a first step into the exploration of Canary Islands’ wineindustry and the extent of its relationship with local communities was to examinewinery operators’ views on their involvement with their local community.

In May 2007, 61 wineries in the Canary Islands archipelago, 45 on Tenerife and 16on La Palma were identified through database searches. The early establishment of DOin Tenerife, namely, in the Tacoronte-Acentejo region, and the large number ofwineries within its geographical boundaries were compelling reasons for choosing thisregion as a starting point in the study. The knowledge of one of the researchers ofLa Palma Island, its wineries, coupled with current efforts among winery operations todevelop wine tourism were reasons for studying this island’s wine industry.

A letter explaining the study’s objectives was sent to each winery, formallyrequesting interviews with owners or managers and winemakers. All the chosenwineries had gained DO status and had at least one wine label. In late May and earlyJune 2007, one of the researchers travelled to Tenerife and La Palma and establisheddirect contact with each winery. This timing avoided any major events or busy periodsfor wineries, such as harvesting or pruning. A total of 23 wineries, 15 on Tenerife andeight on La Palma Island agreed to face-to-face interviews, a 37.7 per cent responserate. All operations are small in size, that is, fewer than 20 employees andpredominantly family owned. It is acknowledged that the number of participatingwineries may not allow for making generalisations about the archipelago’s wineindustry, or its wineries’ relationship with local communities or wine tourism.However, this effort was intended to be a first approach to examine the local wineindustry, which in turn would set the scene for building networks between theresearchers and local grape growers and industry officials with the final goal to studythis industry and wine tourism using a longitudinal approach.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted at the wineries, and on interviewees’terms, that is, allowing them to choose a convenient day and time to be interviewed.While the central theme in this study was the relationship between wineries and theirlocal community, additional interview questions were designed to explore wineries’background, their relationship to tourism, whether they were open to the public, and ifso in what form, as well as business and other challenges wineries faced. Interviews

JEC3,3

294

ranged between 15 minutes and an hour and allowed interviewees to comment onaspects affecting the local wine industry and their businesses. Interviews wererecorded, transcribed and translated from Spanish into English by the researchers.The qualitative data software NVivo 7 was used to assist data managementand analysis.

Findings and discussionEmployment of the local communityOverall, the wine tourism literature (Hall et al., 2000b) suggests that, in an idealscenario, the development of wine tourism should generate employment for the localcommunity, increase profits to local wine producers, encourage institutional supportfor wine production, enhance the social aspects of community development andreinforce the very wine culture upon which the wine tourism industry depends. Theseideals will now be considered with reference to the Canary Islands scenario.

Employment generation for the local communityCurrently, wineries in need of external labour employed staff from the local region ordrew on help from family members during harvesting time as in the case of small,family-owned wineries that are otherwise largely self-reliant in terms of labour. In all,13 wineries currently provide employment to locals. Comments such as “all ouremployees live within 20 kilometres of the winery” or “during harvesting season weuse labour from the village” and “we employ all local people” reflect the closeconnection to the local community and labour market. Nevertheless, one operator alsoindicated that the need for external staff was minimised as much as possible due tohigh labour costs. “We want to curtail fixed costs and therefore we only employ whatwe essentially need, not more”. At the other end, another business owner indicated thatit was at times difficult to find staff and that employment agencies were lookingoutside the region for workers.

Indeed, Canary Island wineries appear to be beginning to take employment mattersinto their own hands by making significant contributions to building the capacity ofthe locals so that they would develop the expertise required to play a more significantrole in wine production. Two wineries were doing this by investing in education andtraining, and three of the 13 wineries employing locals were providing youthemployment, addressing a critical issue in their rural community. One respondentstated that “We support local professional schools; we hire young viticulture students.Sometimes, girls are not welcome at wineries, but we give them an opportunity to workat the winery”. Therefore, not only were the wineries employing locals but they werealso assisting particularly vulnerable groups within the local community, in this casethe young and women, in a traditionally male-dominated industry.

Youth employment was common with another winery manager explaining “Wecollaborate with both local schools and teach the young kids; it is a way for them tolearn something new and have a perspective of the future. At the same time, it is anopportunity for them to make some money”. Another operator provided an educationalcomponent by opening the winery to school visits: “We also have group visits fromschools and we try to have children positively engaged in wine culture, includingemphasising on drinking with moderation”. Such an initiative could have positiveimpacts among future wine consumers, namely, in the form of gained knowledge about

Wine tourismas a development

initiative

295

the importance of preserving the islands’ wine heritage, as well as awareness ofenjoying the local wine product in a healthy, controlled manner.

Overall, the current economic benefit of wine-based employment in the CanaryIslands appears to be less than some other developing wine regions. In Walla Walla inthe USA, for example, wine has not only diversified the local agricultural economy butalso increased employment opportunities for locals in the tourism and hospitalitysectors (VanAusdle, 2005). A key point of difference may be that Walla Walla hasindustry-relevant training programs well underway with groups of over 70 students.According to Poitras and Getz (2006), training is vital as it ensures that locals candevelop services and generate employment rather than rely on skilled employeesrelocating to the area.

The potential for wineries to make a positive impact on their community is alsoreflected in developing wine regions of South Africa. In this context, Johnson et al. (2007,p. 139) illustrate the involvement of several wineries in the establishment of communityprojects, including the promotion of services in the areas of health, education andrecreation. In terms of education, facilitating or promoting scholarship awards foryoung individuals in the community to study at agricultural colleges ( Johnson et al.,2007) is yet another aspect that underlines the extent to which wineries can “connect”with local communities in an effort to secure the future continuation of a local industry.

The fact that Canary Island wineries are only just recognising the importance ofeducation and training may explain the current lack of employment benefits but if thetraining initiatives are further consolidated, this bodes well for the future.

Tourism-derived wine salesThe wine market of the Canary Islands is very localised, as one respondent indicated:“90 per cent of the wines are sold locally”. Another operator commented:

Practically our harvest is sold on the island, in restaurants, supermarkets, with around40 per cent of our wine being sold at the restaurant. We collaborate with local associationsthat contact us to ask for wine.

Thus, there is a very close geographical connection between the wine product and itsconsumers, first with the local community but potentially tourists, including masstourists visiting the islands who, with hospitality industry support for local products,could be consuming local wine rather than cheaper imports.

However, one of the main current impediments for local wine producers, asmembers of the community themselves, is that the tourism industry does not activelysupport their wine product but, instead, chooses to import cheaper wine:

By and large tourists visit the islands on a package where all their consumption has been paidin advance. Many of these tourists are not wine consumers and many who are usuallyconsume cheap wines and do not look at the quality of the wines. Therefore, our currentrelationship with tourism is limited.

This comment suggests that in its current form, the mass tourism industry appears toundermine rather than support the local wine industry. Indeed, this is not dissimilarfrom findings in the Napa Valley where it was concluded that “mass tourism and winetourism are largely incompatible” due to conflicts in marketing and product delivery inaddition to the usual problems of overcrowding and traffic (Carlsen and Ali-Knight,2004, in Poitras and Getz, 2006, p. 426).

JEC3,3

296

Changes at the provider level, such as hotels and restaurants incorporating localproduce into their businesses, could provide an opportunity for wineries to tap intopotential economic benefits from existing tourism. In addition, there is considerablepotential for attracting a more discerning and higher yield tourism market segment.The development of high quality local produce with Canary Island DO, coupled withgreat scenic assets, local heritage and art, provide the basis for quality rural-basedtourism products.

Furthermore, in the Canary Islands wine trails are increasingly playing animportant role in establishing a coordinated approach to generating direct wine sales totourists, and even resident foreigners, as one respondent commented:

[. . .] we have traditionally welcomed visitors here and now that we are certified wine routemembers we have an extra reason to welcome visitors. Obviously, we believe that the tastingroom is an important vehicle to promote the winery’s sales [. . .] There is in fact an economicreason for us to be related to tourism.

Wineries have recognised the great potential of direct cellar door wine sales to tourists,as an operator whose winery has existed for over five generations stated: “Of all ourvisitors, around 95 per cent are locals and 5 per cent are tourists, which is curious. Theopposite should be the ideal scenario. We are improving our facilities to host tourists”.In fact, 19 of the participating wineries provide “formal” wine tastings in their cellardoor, and four more informal tastings (casual set up) for the occasional visitor.Wineries are also being very proactive about stimulating the direct sales mechanism,as another winery owner explained:

We are now refusing to sell our wines in large areas (supermarkets) to make people come andbuy wine from us, and we are achieving this. We are a winery where we don’t sell but peoplebuy from us.

The lack of support to buy “local” from the tourism hospitality sector is beginning toprovoke a backlash which is boosting cellar door wine tourism.

The fledgling establishment of wine tourism and cellar door experiences in theCanary Islands provides new business opportunities, and in addition, it may contributeto the community as a whole with a concerted effort to market the region.The development of the wine tourism product would both benefit from and contribute toa more holistic industry framework and regional marketing strategy, contributing to thesustainability of the local economy in the long-term. One respondent whose winery bothplanted and purchased grapes from local micro-growers explained:

We have to find a mechanism to make people understand that in a bottle of wine we areselling landscape/scenery, viticulture, tradition, and history. This is hard to transmit to theaverage citizen who has a tendency to only make comparisons in terms of wine prices.We must go beyond that dimension; hence we have the responsibility to preserve the activityof grape growing within the community because we buy our grapes from local producers.If these growers do not have a place to bring their grapes, their production probably willcease to exist.

In their study of local-global nexus of the Australian wine industry, Aylward andClements (2008) argue that long-term success in the international wine industry comesfrom clearly differentiating the product in a saturated marketplace. Embedding of thelocal wine culture in the bottle, potentially via a wine tourism experience, could create

Wine tourismas a development

initiative

297

this important point of difference. It might therefore lead to wine sales not only atthe destination but also back in the tourism generating communities. This will notoccur, however, whilst the traditional tourism industry in the Canary Islands fails tosupport local wine as a unique part of the visitor experience.

Institutional support for the wine industryAt present, wine growers are often required to pay levies that then support fundraisingand marketing. However, the distribution of the benefits (both direct economic andmarketing benefits) is not evenly distributed. Not surprisingly some wine producersare opting not to support wine tourism events. As one grower explained:

We are fighting against the political establishment [. . .] the money that is moved by somelocal administrators is sometimes important, though this does not reach us. This money doesnot reach the local wine growers, but is shared among a lot of administration officials, whosay they represent wineries but ironically had never worked with grapes before. They live offthe wine sector without being involved in it [. . .] It is unacceptable that only 20 per cent ofsuch funds reach growers, while the other 80 per cent is being wasted among friends. Wetherefore refuse to participate in acts we consider wasteful.

Despite the resistance and disappointment among some operators, four wineries oftendonate wine in order to support more tourism-related initiatives. Furthermore, 12 of theinterviewed wineries regularly participate in community events and local festivals.Participation is seen simply as a contribution of their business to the local communityand event: “We always collaborate with local festivities, particularly the AlmondsFestival, where we distribute almonds and wine for free”. However, as anotherrespondent explained, it may be a conscious marketing decision “so that people knowus more and purchase our wines”.

Overall, it seems that local initiatives are exclusive rather than inclusive, a situationthat is affecting local winery attitudes towards participating in wine tourism. Hall et al.(2000a) highlight the importance of networks to the wine tourism industry, withevidence of resource pooling and cooperation between competitors being keyindicators for their functionality (Hall et al., 1998). The challenge of wine production inthe Canary Islands landscape has encouraged cooperation and strong social networkswithin the community as one winery owner explains:

When we harvest we schedule some specific dates, especially on weekends, and we help eachother [. . .] In order to become stronger, it is very important that we are united with as manylocal wineries as possible.

Nevertheless, evidence from this study indicates that the function of more formalstructures for horizontal cooperation (between wineries), such as wine cooperatives orregional councils could be improved. Further, mutually beneficial development of theapparently weak or imbalanced vertical dimension (between the wine and tourismindustry) will be essential not only to the two industries, but also to providing extendedcommunity benefits through wine tourism. The strengthening of representativeindustry bodies which can directly engage with governments at all levels couldfacilitate that process.

JEC3,3

298

Enhanced social benefits and community developmentIn this study, there was little evidence of wine tourism directly contributing back to thecommunity at this initial stage of development, which may reflect the lack of orimbalance in the vertical integration of the tourism and wine industries. However,some winery operators were providing free advice or presentations to the widercommunity as one interviewee indicated: “I sometimes go and speak about agriculturein the local community”. In another example, a winery owner was approached by anorganisation supporting physically challenged people and offered to help by:

[. . .] hosting these individuals and having the oenologist teach them about wine tasting, winevarieties, and I will also teach them about the history of Canary wine, about the sector, aboutrestructuring, etc.

Certainly, this last scenario implies that wineries clearly understand their potential rolein community development and the skills implied here. Developing experiences forgroups, including the physically challenged may have similarities to developingtourism products, particularly niche wine tourism products for other groups of visitors,including the sophisticated wine consumer. Moreover, the importance for operators toprovide unique experiences, as highlighted in previous studies (Keen, 2004) can helptowards tourism sustainability within a region. Comments from 14 winery operatorssuggest that more and more wine tourists in the Canary Islands are looking forpersonalised, in-depth, experiences unique to the archipelago.

Revitalised and reinforced wine culturePromoting and protecting the more intangible aspects of the livelihood and well beingof the community is an important aim of tourism-driven community development.In this study, several very positive factors that could lead to a fruitful alliance betweenthe Canary Islands’ wine industry and tourism development were identified. Inparticular, the renaissance of the wine industry and the growing association with winetourism was fostering the maintenance of local heritage. The traditional use of thelandscape was perceived as having value, as it could reinforce local sense of place andpride, while at the same time contribute to the local identity of the tourism industry.Being unique is critical in an increasingly repetitive and highly competitive globaltourism industry.

Wine production on the islands of Tenerife and La Palma has a strong historicalconnection. Statements such as “our winery is tradition in our family; my grandfatherwas a wine producer”; “this winery has existed for 5 generations” or “the sweat andwork of our grandfather was such that we did not want to give this up” reflect thesentiment and attachment of some of the current owners. Interviewees also expressedtheir connection with the traditional landscape, and the role of wineries in contributingto their preservation. This aspect also contributes to the lifestyle element of these ruralcommunities, which are particularly attractive because of their scenic landscapes: “Wehave made many improvements to the property and this enriches the local landscape”.Another operator commented that:

[. . .] much of the relationship of the winery and tourism is that the vineyard createsa landscape or scenery. Having vineyards we are preserving areas that without vineyardswould be at the mercy of urbanisation pressures.

Wine tourismas a development

initiative

299

Another participant expressed how the winery business was playing an active role in thelocal economy and value creation through income generation and landscape conservation:

Apart from looking for a business benefit we are also interested in preserving the insularviticulture-gastronomic patrimony, tradition and a wine with tradition, anthropology andculture, advertise the local food, the scenery and incorporate the local population.

This comment is particularly important as the landscapes are changing, withincreasing pressure of urbanisation and development, as a winery manager stated:

[. . .] this industry competes with construction and although in some regions construction isregulated because of the protection of the landscape [. . .] the children of old growers mayhave their own professions or are not prepared to spend money on an investment that in theend may not provide profits.

Some wineries are, however, struggling against the urbanisation and trying to preservetheir traditions:

The family winery has existed since 1600 [. . .] The family’s great-grand children inheritedwhat used to be traditional vineyards in the early 1990s. Instead of selling the land orurbanising what they had inherited, they decided to stick to family tradition and exploit theirvineyards jointly.

Though the tradition is rich and the personal attachment strong, there are elements ofchange with questions over the viability of the industry because of high productioncosts and generational transition. Statements such as “Every day we have less skilledlabour, and farmers are becoming older” or “the majority [of grape growers] arebecoming old, over 60 years old, while the younger generations are ‘fleeing’ fromagriculture” reflect the challenges particularly the smaller growers are facing: “Thereare many people abandoning their vines and I am going to do it too. It is just not worthit with the high labour costs. It worked as we worked as a family but now I am gettingtoo old”.

In this scenario, could wine tourism provide the impetus for the long-term survivalof the culture of wine production in the Canary Islands? Certainly the strong localculture would suggest that there is a potentially very interesting, culture-driven, winetourism product. This niche tourism product would also appear to click into theestablished social networks that are already facilitating local benefits, ranging fromtraining and education to experiences for local physically challenged people. Couldemployment in the service aspect of the winery encourage the local youth to stayinvolved in wine production?

Ensuring that businesses can be transferred into willing and capable hands isanother reason that education and training initiatives should be supported by theCanary Island’s wine industry. Although a different situation, the political scenarioin South Africa (Johnson et al., 2007) required a similar transfer of lands andwine production from older, experienced, wine producers to younger, often unskilled,labourers. The key to success was education and, in particular scholarships,scholarships for young people to study at agricultural colleges, coupled with transfersof parcels of land back to groups of people who demonstrated improving experience andtraining (Johnson et al., 2007). A sense of ownership by a new generation may be what isrequired to continue to revitalise the island’s wineries.

JEC3,3

300

However, it must be recognised that the mass tourism industry, growing demand forhousing and resulting continuous urbanisation exert massive pressure for relentlessdevelopment of rural lands, making it more economically viable for wine propertyowners to cease production and sell up. Likewise, locals might prefer to work in morestable sectors, including the local mass tourism industry rather than in the vineyards,especially as wine production is still a difficult process. In fact, not even new machineryand technologies have overcome the fundamental impediments of high productioncosts. As Poitras and Getz (2006) state, the overall viability of the wine productionshould be considered including the real potential of overcoming external forces.

ConclusionIn terms of tangible benefits, Canary Island wine tourism potentially could generateemployment with better education and training, as well as with potential land transferto enthusiastic young workers. Local profits to wine makers could be increased withgreater mass tourism industry support of local wine in traditional package tourproducts plus through increasing development of the niche wine tourism product viacellar door wine trails. Institutional support for wine could be improved by bettercollaborative procedures and a greater transparency in the distribution of marketingand other benefits. Social aspects of community development could become a greaterfocus as there are currently few clear outcomes and this element could be linked toreinforcing the wine culture by involving new generations of the community in wineproduction and culture. Overall, if wine and wine tourism is to play a role in regionaleconomic development then, as some studies suggest (Hall et al., 2000a) there needs tobe a continued close relationship between the wine producers and their community tomaximise potential and minimise any negative impacts.

This said, there are many challenges facing the Canary Islands wine industry andits interaction with the local community and tourism. These challenges, however, alsoprovide several opportunities for future research on the archipelago’s wine industryand its relationship with the local community. One challenge, for instance, is thenatural competitiveness of business that interferes with the collaboration required formost destination-based tourism initiatives to be successful; for example, wine trailsonly work when there is cooperation. Another challenge is in the form of generationchanges that threaten both the wine business and tradition, as business succession isunlikely to occur when the young are not interested in wine production or winetourism. Furthermore, the threat of mass tourism could lead to land value increases,which in turn could outprice traditional rural products and therefore rule out anypotential for the wine tourism niche product upon which it depends. In this complexscenario, it is clear that even closer relationships need to be established between wineproducers, the local community and the tourism industry to ensure that the winetourism product can contribute to strengthening the rural development and identity ofthe Canary Islands.

References

Arfini, F., Bertoli, E. and Donati, M. (2002), “The wine routes: analysis of a rural developmenttool”, Atti del Convegno SYAL, Systeme Agroalimentaire Localises, Montpellier, availableat: www.gis-syal.agropolis.fr/Syal2002/FR/Atelier%204/DONATI%20ARFINI.pdf(accessed 12 September 2007).

Wine tourismas a development

initiative

301

Aylward, D.K. and Clements, M. (2008), “Crafting a local-global nexus in the Australian wineindustry”, Journal of Enterprising Communities, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 73-87.

Ballesteros, E.R. and Ramırez, M.H. (2007), “Identity and community-reflections on thedevelopment of mining heritage tourism in Southern Spain”, Tourism Management,Vol. 28, pp. 677-87.

Beer, C. and Lewis, N. (2006), “Labouring in the vineyards of Marlborough: experiences,meanings and policy”, Journal of Wine Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 95-106.

Besser, T.L. and Miller, N.J. (2004), “The risks of enlightened self-interest: small businesses andsupport for community”, Business and Society, Vol. 43, pp. 398-425.

Bigongiari, D. (2003), South American Vineyards, Wineries and Wines, Austral Spectator,Buenos Aires.

Boehm, A. (2005), “The participation of businesses in community decision making”, Business andSociety, Vol. 44, pp. 144-77.

Canary Institute of Statistics (2007), “Turismo”, available at: www.gobiernodecanaias.org/istac/estadisticas/php/saltarA.php?mid¼istac/estadisticas/turismo/area_11a_frame.html(accessed 10 May 2007).

Carlsen, J. and Ali-Knight, J. (2004), “Managing wine tourism through demarketing: the case ofNapa Valley, California”, International Wine Tourism Research, 2004. Proceedings of theInternational Wine Tourism Conference, Margaret River.

Choi, H.C. and Sirakaya, E. (2006), “Sustainability indicators for managing community tourism”,Tourism Management, Vol. 27, pp. 1274-89.

Di Gregorio, D. and Licari, E. (2006), “Rural development and wine tourism in Southern Italy”,European Regional Science Association in its Series, available at: www.ersa.org/ersaconfs/ersa06/papers/626.pdf (accessed 10 September 2007).

El Dıa (2001), “Gente: historia del vino”, El Dıa, available at: www.eldia.es/2001-12-01/gente/gente1.htm (accessed 16 March 2007).

Eversole, R. and Martin, J. (2006), “Jobs in the bush: global industries and inclusive ruraldevelopment”, Social Policy & Administration, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 692-704.

Fensterseifer, J.E. (2007), “The emerging Brazilian wine industry: challenges and prospects forthe Serra Gaucha wine cluster”, International Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol. 19No. 3, pp. 187-206.

Friedland, W.H. (2000), “Agriculture and rurality: beginning the ‘Final Separation?’”, paperpresented at the Annual Meetings of the Rural Sociological Society, Washington, DC.

Fuentes Pardo, J.M. and Canas Guerrero, I. (2005), “Subterranean wine cellars in Central-Spain(Ribera de Duero): an underground built heritage to preserve”, Tunnelling andUnderground Space Technology, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 475-84.

Garcıa Fernandez, M.J. (1999), “Estudio de la evolucion temporal de los caracteres madurativosde las cepas listan negro, listan blanco y negramoll en la denominacion de originTacoronte-Acentejo”, doctoral thesis, University of La Laguna, San Cristobal deLa Laguna.

Garın-Munoz, T. (2006), “Inbound international tourism to Canary Islands: a dynamic panel datamodel”, Tourism Management, Vol. 27, pp. 281-91.

Garın-Munoz, T. (2007), “German demand for tourism in Spain”, Tourism Management, Vol. 28,pp. 12-22.

Gatti, S. and Incerti, F. (1997), “The wine routes as an instrument for the valorisation of typicalproducts and rural areas”, Proceedings of Typical and Traditional Productions: RuralEffect and Agro-industrial Problems, 52nd EAAE Seminar, Parma, 19-21 June.

JEC3,3

302

Getz, D. and Brown, G. (2006), “Benchmarking wine tourism development: the case of OkanaganValley, British Columbia, Canada”, International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 2,pp. 78-97.

Gibson, J.A. and Weinberg, D. (1980), “In vino communitas: wine and identity in a Swiss AlpineVillage”, Anthropological Quarterly, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 111-21.

Godenau, D. and Suarez Sosa, S.S.J. (2002), “Estructuras agrarias y estrategias difusoras deinnovacion. El caso de la reconversion vitıcola en la denominacion de origenTacoronte-Acentejo”, IV Jornadas Tecnicas Vitivinıcolas Canarias 25-27 November, Casadel Vino ‘La Baranda’, El Sauzal.

Godenau, D., Suarez Sosa, S.S.J., Gil Dıaz, M.P. and Fernandez Lopez, L. (2000), “Particularidadesdel marketing vitivinıcola en zonas turısticas. El caso de la denominacion de origenTacoronte-Acentejo en Tenerife (Espana)”, Comunicacion escrita asignada a la Seccion 3(Economıa Vitivinıcola), Subtema 3.2 (Segmentacion de mercados, habitos de consumo) enel XXV CONGRESO MUNDIAL DE LA VINA Y EL VINO, organizado por la O.I.V.(Oficina Internacional de la Vina y del Vino), 19-23 June, Paris.

Griffith, A. (2007), “The grapes of wrath: mitigating the negative effects of wine tourism in WallaWalla, Washington”, Terminal Project, Department of Planning, Public Policy &Management, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, available at: http://hdl.handle.net/1794/4543 (accessed 10 October 2007).

Hall, C.M. and Mitchell, R. (2000), “Wine tourism in the Mediterranean: a tool for restructuringand development”, Thunderbird International Business Review, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 445-65.

Hall, C.M., Johnson, G. and Mitchell, R. (2000a), “Wine tourism and regional development”, inHall, C.M., Sharples, L., Cambourne, B., Macionis, N., Mitchell, R. and Johnson, G. (Eds),Wine Tourism Around the World: Development, Management and Markets, ButterworthHeinemann, Oxford.

Hall, C.M., Cambourne, B., Macionis, N. and Johnson, G. (1998), “Wine tourism and networkdevelopment in Australia and New Zealand: review, establishment and prospects”,International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 9 Nos 2/3, pp. 5-31.

Hall, C.M., Sharples, L., Cambourne, B. and Macionis, N. (2000b), Wine Tourism Around theWorld: Development, Management, and Markets, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford.

Hall, C.M., Johnson, G., Cambourne, B., Macionis, N., Mitchell, R. and Sharples, L. (2000c), “Winetourism: an introduction”, in Hall, C.M., Sharples, L., Cambourne, B., Macionis, N., Mitchell, R.and Johnson, G. (Eds), Wine Tourism Around the World: Development, Management andMarkets, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford.

Higham, J.E.S. and Ritchie, B. (2001), “The evolution of festivals and other events in ruralSouthern New Zealand”, Event Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 39-49.

Inbakaran, R. and Jackson, M. (2005), “Marketing regional tourism: how better to target andaddress community attitudes to tourism”, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 4,pp. 323-39.

Jaffe, E. and Pasternak, H. (2004), “Developing wine trails as a tourist attraction in Israel”,The International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 237-49.

Johnson, L., Koepke, L. and Wang, A. (2007), “Black economic empowerment in the South Africanwine industry”, in Dayal-Gulati, A., Finn, M.W. and Diermeier, D. (Eds), Global CorporateCitizenship, Northwestern University Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 139-50.

Keen, D. (2004), “The interaction of community and small tourism businesses in ruralNew Zealand”, in Thomas, R. (Ed.), Small Firms in Tourism: International Perspectives,Elsevier, London.

Wine tourismas a development

initiative

303

Langworthy, A., Howard, J. and Mawson, F. (2006), “Building the relationship betweenagriculture and tourism – models and benefits of co-operation”, report prepared for TheCentre for Agriculture and Business, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne.

La Reserva (2006), “Vinos: Denominaciones de Origen de Canarias y sus vinos en La Reserva”,available at: www.vinotecalareserva.com/vinot/vinodecanarias.htm#grancanaria(accessed 19 January 2007).

Law, T. (2007), “Pinot-noir demand outstrips grapes”, The Press, available at: www.stuff.co.nz/northland/4245971a6668.html (accessed 25 October 2007).

McLane, D. (2000), “Frugal traveller; a Canary Island, away from the flock”, The New YorkTimes, available at: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res¼9B0DE4DD133BF930A15754C0A9669C8B63 (accessed August 2007).

Martınez-Carrasco, L., Brugarolas, M. and Martınez-Poveda, A. (2005), “Quality wines and winesprotected by a designation of origin: identifying their consumption determinants”, Journalof Wine Research, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 213-32.

Nikiel, C. (2007), “Big issues face $ 1b wine industry”, The New Zealand Herald, available at:www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id¼3&objectid¼10471306 (accessed 30October 2007).

O’Neill, M., Palmer, A. and Charters, S. (2002), “Wine production as a service experience – theeffects of service quality on wine sales”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 4,pp. 342-62.

O’Neill, M., Palmer, A., Charters, S. and Fitz, F. (2001), “Service quality and consumerbehavioural intention: an exploratory study from the Australian wine tourism sector”,Conference Proceedings. Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference,Massey University, 1-5 December.

Parra Lopez, E. and Calero Garcıa, F.J. (2006), “Agrotourism, sustainable tourism andultraperipheral areas: the case of the Canary Islands”, Pasos, Vol. 4, pp. 85-97.

Petrzelka, P., Krannich, R.S. and Brehm, J.M. (2006), “Identification with resource-basedoccupations and desire for tourism: are the two necessarily inconsistent?”, Society andNatural Resources, Vol. 19, pp. 693-707.

Poitras, L. and Getz, D. (2006), “Sustainable wine tourism: the host community perspective”,Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 425-48.

Rabellotti, R. and Morrison, A. (2006), “The role of research in wine: the emergence of a regionalresearch area in an Italian wine production system”, European Regional ScienceAssociation in its Series, available at: www.ersa.org/ersaconfs/ersa06/papers/199.pdf(accessed 10 September 2007).

Read, P. (2004), “Developing a grape and wine industry in a non-traditional region”, ActaHorticulturae, Vol. 652, pp. 493-6.

Sainz, H. (2002), “Alimentos y bebidas con denominaciones de origen y distintivos de calidad –Balances y perspectivas”, Distribucion y Consumo, July-August, pp. 58-73, available at:www.mercasa.es/es/publicaciones/Dyc/sum64/pdf/alimentos.pdf (accessed March 2007).

Sharples, L. (2002), “Wine tourism in Chile. . . a brave new step for a brave new world”,International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 43-53.

Simpson, M.C. (2008), “Community benefit tourism initiatives – a conceptual oxymoron?”,Tourism Management, Vol. 29, pp. 1-18.

Telfer, D. (2001), “Strategic alliances along the Niagara wine route”, Tourism Management,Vol. 22, pp. 21-30.

JEC3,3

304

Telfer, D. and Wall, G. (1996), “Linkages between tourism and food production”, Annals ofTourism Research, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 635-53.

Tesconi, T. (1999), “Napa county presses to rein in vines”, Santa Rosa Press Democrat,3 November, p. A7.

VanAusdle, S.L. (2005), “Changing times for rural prosperity through wine, food, and art”,Community College Journal, Vol. 75 No. 6, pp. 10-14.

Wargenau, A. and Che, D. (2006), “Wine tourism development and marketing strategies inSouthwest Michigan”, International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 45-60.

Williams, P. (2001), “Positioning wine tourism destinations: an image analysis”, InternationalJournal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 42-58.

Wilson, S., Fesenmaier, D.R., Fesenmaier, J. and van Es, J.C. (2001), “Factors for success in ruraltourism development”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 40, pp. 132-8.

Winestate Magazine (2005), “Marlborough rings in the changes but keeps the quality”, WinestateMagazine, available at: www.winestate.com.au/magazine/article.asp?articleno¼352(accessed 20 September 2007).

About the authorsLynnaire Sheridan is a Lecturer in Tourism Management, Edith Cowan University, WesternAustralia. Areas of research include pro-poor tourism via economic development, the design ofeffective tourism impact indicators, cultural tourism and migration studies.

Abel Duarte Alonso is a Lecturer in Hospitality Management, Edith Cowan University,Western Australia. Research interests include business-related areas of concern of small andmedium enterprises (SMEs), urban (e.g. hospitality) and rural (e.g. wineries), as well as wineconsumer and winery visitor behaviour. Abel Duarte Alonso is the corresponding author and canbe contacted at: a.alonso@ecu.edu.au; ada0007@auburn.edu

Pascal Scherrer is a Sustainable Tourism Research Fellow with the Centre for EcosystemManagement and the Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre at Edith CowanUniversity in Perth, Western Australia. His research interests include the sustainability oftourism activities in both urban and natural destinations. He is currently involved in a number ofprojects examining visitors’ experiences, behaviours and impacts at tourist destinations.

Wine tourismas a development

initiative

305

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints