Conclusions

The preceding contributions have revealed different “realities of farm and rural tourism” as well as multiple possibilities of its interweaving with other forms of tourism such as culinary tourism as well as other aspects of experiencing “nature” and “agrarian life” such as on educational farms. This final chapter explores the extent to which these themes can be placed in a contextual landscape to enhance further empirical research. The conceptual framework that we are going to introduce focuses on individuals’ consumption patterns and shows how these shape the nature of farm tourism. At first glance the relationship between farmers and tourists, which is the core of farm tourism, appears to be based largely on contrasts. For instance, Getz, Carlsen and Morrison (2004) stress that farming is “supply-driven”, whereas tourism is “market-led”. Furthermore, farmers travel the least, rural tourists on the contrary travel very frequently. Henceforth, market and consumer orientation is a difficult goal to reach. According to many scholars (Hill and Busby, 2002; Roberts and Hall, 2004), in order to understand this relationship, research should concentrate on the sense of Adams (2008) observes, “the more humans become removed from nature, the more they try to reconnect to it”. This “reconnection” process passes through individuals’ interpretation of nature which is, first of all, a dynamic process. Knudsen and Greer (2008) point out that, before the romantic movement of the second half of the 18th century, mainstream Western aesthetics was shaped by the classical concept of beauty. As a consequence, nature was considered “too imperfect” because it was “lacking in symmetry” (Kwa, 2005). Common tourist destinations of the 21st century, such as the seaside and wooded areas, were considered wild and somewhat frightening, and it is only since industrialization that they have become interesting (Romeiß-Stracke, 1998). Furthermore, people’s perception is influenced by the image of nature common in their country. Thus, for example, Germans are much fonder of rambling than Italians (ibid.). A number of scholars have tried to identify common interpretations of nature (see Figure 1). The mystique associated with rural areas is a recurrent topic in the literature (Hjalager, 1996; Wilson et al., 2001). Thus, nature is filtered through a feeling of nostalgia, which, according to Romeiß-Stracke (1998), is an indefinable quest for a real or imaginary place where a person feels protected. Thus, according to the literature, consuming the countryside (Roberts and Hall, 2004) should be seen as a response to the individual’s need to “immerse oneself in the emotion of nostalgia” (Hjalager, 1996). Farm tourism associations and other, related businesses are conscious that this type of tourism is attractive because it provides “what urban life cannot give” (Nilsson, 2002). As a consequence, farm tourism should fulfill a hedonistic function; after all, even on a farm holiday, tourists expect not only basic requirements but also memorable experiences (Hill and Busby, 2002). However, Hjalager (1996) stresses that the “modern agricultural community is not immediately capable of providing the facilities enabling tourists to experience or re-experience even the very near past [of agrarian life].” Hence, farm tourism associations, as well as tour operators and farmers, have the essential task of clustering a variety of products and activities in order to “reinvent tradition” (ibid.) and, in this way, engrave the farming environment on the consciousness of farm guests. The latter is particularly important because, nowadays, it is not the holiday product per se but human recollections that guests are willing to pay for. The quality labels “Erlebnis Bauernhof” (“Adventure Farm”) in Germany and “agriturismo ospitalità” (“Hospitality Farm”) in Italy are indicative of this attempt to court the favor and fulfill the emotional needs of farm guests (Hill and Busby, 2002). If, on the one hand, many people have a romantic vision of nature and want to be part of it, on the other hand, others share a more mechanistic approach and want to “utilize” nature for reasons such as its positive repercussions for physical and psychological well being. This is the case for many tourists who choose rural areas for practicing outdoor sports and other health-related activities. This perception of nature as the “fitness center of the human being” (Romeiß-Stracke, 1998) has been sensed by the farm holiday sector, where the idea of “adding healing arts (bodywork, day spas etc.) to the farm’s agritourism package has been emerging” (Adams, 2008). In practice, farms with this specialization could host health-related activities, such as yoga lessons, training in the creation of home spa and cosmetic recipes and sportthemed workshops led by members of local sporting associations. Furthermore, in such cases the farm setting plays a supporting role, as the guest is more interested in relaxing than in the agrarian features of the farming environment. Similar considerations apply to individuals who “utilize” nature for practicing “extreme sports”. In this case, people choose farm accommodation for its location and because it fits with their consumption patterns, but the farm itself is less relevant than the activity and sometimes almost irrelevant (cf. Roberts and Hall, 2004). In this context, whether alone or in collaboration with external businesses, farmers make their natural surroundings available to adventure seekers by providing a variety of services, such as camping facilities and short-term accommodation during extreme sports tours. Finally, nature can be perceived as a “mission” as in the case of individuals characterized by high environmental awareness. This, according to Romeiß-Stracke (1998), originated in the ecological movement of the 1970s and 1980s. Given the high priority such guests place on nature issues, they hope to have a close relationship with the farmer. These individuals are aware of the farm. Moreover, they are interested in being connected with agrarian life through an educational approach and not through a quest for peak experiences. On the practical level, whereas the pleasure-seeker (Schulze, 1992) can be interested in experiencing outdoor fires or participating in workshops, such as picnic preparation or gift-making on the farm (cf. Adams, 2008), the education-seeking farm guest looks for other types of activities, such as the opportunity to work on the farm, to learn organic farming techniques (adults) or to take care of the animals (children). The different interpretations of nature correspond to different needs of individuals; accordingly, farmers should try to fulfill these needs by placing their facility in a position to meet these objectives. The food component is a signifier of the agrarian culture and, at the same time, a "joyful experience" for body and soul which forms a bridge between educational (knowledge of food sources) and hedonistic (sensory experience) functions. The preceding contributions have shown manifold ways in which farmers can build up this bridge both alone or together with special interest actors such as the Slow Food movement, etc. Italian farmers, for instance, were pioneers in providing their guests with high-value oeno-gastronomical specialties which reflect deeply-rooted traditions in the rural area. In the same way, German farm operators whose farms are located in highly valuable wine regions (e.g., SaaleUnstrut) have started orienting their farms towards the regional landscape. Furthermore, the increasing success of educational farms indicates a strong desire within society to explore farm life, to improve its awareness of environmental matters (such as knowledge of food processing traditions) and to be “educated” by farmers. In conclusion the contributions of this book have advanced knowledge about the complex interfacing between agrarian life and culture, the rural and farm tourism sector as well as culinarity issues. By reviewing both the theory and practice this book has contributed to the development of a better approach to this interdisciplinary field.