Innsbruck, Oct 17th, 2016

1. Tourism development as a determinant of
quality of life in rural areas
prof. Magdalena Kachniewska
Warsaw School of Economics
www.kachniewska.net
Innsbruck, Oct 17th 2016

2. rural tourism as panacea for all the problems?
• growing unemployment in rural areas
• depopulation of rural areas
• decline in local governments' and farmers' income
• lowering living standards
• infrastructure shortcomings
It was believed that tourism would allow for
the establishment of additional sales channels
(food, services) and would attract tourists
to less popular regions.
2

3. rural tourism in Poland in 90s.
• relatively spontaneous and uncontrolled tourism development
• serious spatial and social consequences
• the transformation of settlement networks and the quality of rural
building resources
• waning rural culture
• rising social pathologies
The main challenge is
the social condition
of local communities!
3

4. stakeholders concept – much more than ecology
The ecology-related threats had been introduced to the discussion much
earlier than social ones.
However, the pace and direction of rural economic development
are increasingly dependent upon the quantitative
and qualitative parameters of social resources.
4

5. cost-benefit analysis of rural tourism development
• the research 2014-16 (Tourism Dep. Warsaw School of Economics)
• to verify a common belief that rural tourism development has had a
beneficial effect on the residents of these areas
• 515 residents of 36 villages (with a tourism industry at least twenty
years old)
• 1/2 of all the respondents were people who were not direct economic
beneficiaries of tourism development (i.e. farmers or people employed
in different types of businesses)
• in-depth interviews with the DMO leaders
• round table discussions with rural tourism managers and residents
5

6. 4 fields of observations
• economic activation
• quality of life
• buildings and infrastructure
• agriculture
6

7. Economic activation (P):
• depopulated rural areas in Poland were revitalised by tourism
• tourism attracts new residents
• servicing tourism had notably decreased young peoples’ desire to move to
cities (60% of respondents)
• employment in sea coast vs mountain areas (longer peak season)
• tourism better than farming (73%) – but only in small and medium-sized
farms
• the scale of tourism flow depends on the level of development of tourism
facilities (e.g., small hotels, guesthouses, private rooms, etc.) - 82%
• the professional activation of women, who are motivated to remain in
rural areas if the attractiveness of life is above average (new cultural
facilities, events) and eliminated feeling of isolation
7

8. Economic activation (N):
• high-quality agricultural land is sold off for building development
(attractiveness of the landscape) – 65%
• notable increase in land prices – 70%
• the soil quality and attempts at its preservation for agricultural purposes
are disregarded – 68% (irritation!)
• female rural residents encounter the same barriers as urban females:
overburdening housework; and drastical lack of institutional support
(daycare centers, preschools)
8

9. Quality of life (P 1/2):
• more active approach to traditions, cultural heritage, folklore and
characteristic rituals of a given region (78%)
• tourists introduce new models of leisure, recreation, entertainment and
sports, adopted by local residents (62%)
• investments in sporting, cultural and recreational facilities (tennis courts,
yacht harbours, pedestrian zones, waterfront developments, quays,
bowling facilities, summer theatre stages, spas, bathing sites, sports and
tourist equipment rentals, etc.) – 78%
• numerous services (medical facilities, cosmetic and hairdressing centres
etc.) were launched for tourism purposes, but they improved the
attractiveness of living in these villages – 85%
9

10. Quality of life (P 2/2):
• improved safety (i.e., police patrols, monitoring, lifeguards at bathing
sites, walking and bicycle routes, pedestrian crossings, etc.) – 74%
• improved aesthetics of villages (revitalization of green spaces and
parks, greater care for cleanness, removal of illegal landfills,
construction of playgrounds, purchase of park benches, greater care
of green areas and the general
appearance of a given locality,
including planting of flowers,
renovation of public-utility buildings,
better road and roadside surface)
10

11. Quality of life (N):
• sport and culture facilities are available only seasonally (32%) – however
67% indicated that such facilities also operate off-season at lower prices
• villages overburdened with tourist traffic – 36%
• damage caused by visitors: shopping difficulties (insufficient supply in
season); overcrowding; dirt and pollution; inappropriate (arrogant,
unkind) visitor behavior towards local residents
• the risk of cultural and social conflicts and pathology (i.e., theft, mutual
battery, alcoholism, etc.)
• 26% of the respondents “would not like to have anything to do with
tourists”
• 32% could not imagine putting tourists up in their own home (they do not
exclude the possibility of taking up other forms of tourism-related activity)
11

12. Buildings and infrastructure (P):
• infrastructural investments (e.g., pavements, roadsides, road surface
renovation, demarcation and construction of bicycle lanes, marking
walking and bicycle routes, construction of sewage systems and
connections to residential buildings, delineating parking spaces, etc.) –
76%
• significant improvement in the quality and quantity of residential
buildings, as well as in the quality of farm buildings (83%)
• a “contagion effect” - inhabitants who do not provide tourism services tend to
pay more attention to the aesthetics of their houses and surroundings (56%)
• restoration and modernization of old residential buildings (55%)
• regular inhabitants also benefited from tourism development (proper
sanitary and housing conditions) – 64%
12

13. Buildings and infrastructure (N):
• increased building activity and greater than average volumes of
residential buildings
• growing density of rural settlements (78%)
• the expansion of buildings outside the historically traced boundaries of
settlements (92%)
• new buildings do conflict with the architectonic order and spatial layout
of the village – 34%
• reduced private space (increasing the number of rooms for rent lowering
family members’ standard of living)
• 52% of respondents estimated housing resources of the villages to be
insufficient in relation to demand
• low technical standard of the new buildings - lack of precise
standardization of agrotourism lodgings in Poland (65%)
13

14. Agriculture and natural environment (P) :
• double employment: demand created for agricultural products
influences the intensity, structure and level of agricultural
activity (65%)
• decreasing waste surface (45%)
• increasing surface covered by forests
and farmland (23%)
• increased intensity of agriculture
14

15. Agriculture and natural environment (N) :
• the small scale of production and low profitability are the main
factors limiting the productivity of private farms in Poland
• tourism influences the prices of land and limits the possibilities of
extending farming areas (speculation) – 72%
• fencing plots with access to lakes and rivers limits possibilities of
efficient farming (86%)
• farming high season = tourism peak (draining the workforce from
agriculture)
• new structure of agriculture products (preferred by tourists) - improper
soil exploitation
15

16. Is rural tourism sustainable?
• Notions such as ecotourism, agrotourism, tourism in rural areas,
and sustainable tourism are often merged into one mental
stereotype – which is not right
• Sustainable tourism should enable contact with nature and the
local community, the interests of which should be attributed
higher priority than those of newcomers (minimize social
and ecological losses, ensure intensified contact with nature)
• rural tourism tends to increasingly resemble mass tourism in its
scale and uncontrollable pace of growth
16

17. 3xP (profit, people, planet)
• rational management of natural/social resources supporting
tourism requires transforming the spatial structure of tourism by
inhibiting and precisely controlling its development
• DMOs should undertake action in the domains of zoning,
economic planning, vocational training and tourism marketing
• rational use of a village’s natural resources, traditions and
customs for preserving its individual character is a crucial
recommendation
• the qualities that make tourism most attractive are also
factors determining quality of life in rural areas
17

18. Thank you for your attention 
www.kachniewska.net