See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/229551550

Rural Tourism in Spain

ARTICLE in INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH MAY 2004

Impact Factor: 1.02 DOI: 10.1002/jtr.480

CITATIONS READS

49 43

1 AUTHOR:

Michael Barke
Northumbria University
70 PUBLICATIONS 205 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Available from: Michael Barke

Retrieved on: 20 October 2015
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/jtr.480
Rural Tourism in Spain
Michael Barke*
Division of Geography, Lipman Building, University of Northumbria, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK
ABSTRACT
The paper describes the rapid recent growth
in rural tourism facilities in Spain and
attempts to account for the regional
variations that exist. The range of activities
involved in rural tourism is described and a
significant trend towards the development
of active leisure pursuits in rural areas is
identified. This clearly implies a major
change in the use of the countryside, albeit
in specific locations, but therefore calls into
question the assertion of some scholars that
rural restructuring is not a feature of
contemporary Spain. In assessing the wider
impact of rural tourism policies as part of
overall rural development, however, it is
clear that the main beneficiaries are not
necessarily local residents. Copyright 2004
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Keywords: Rural tourism; Spain;
accommodation growth; leisure pursuits;
rural development; policy impact.
Received 23 September 2003; Revised 27 November 2003;
Accepted 1 December 2003
INTRODUCTION: DEFINING RURAL
TOURISM AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE
T
he apparently simple task of defining
rural tourism is, in fact, fraught with
difficulties. This relates partly to the
problem of defining rural in the context of
developed countries in the twenty-first
*Correspondence to: M. Barke, Division of Geography,
Lipman Building, University of Northumbria, Newcastle
upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK.
E-mail: michael.barke@unn.ac.uk
century, but in the specific case of rural envi-
ronments there also may be problems in recog-
nising tourism activity. The diversity of
activities encompassed by rural tourism also
poses problems for definition (Douglas et al.,
2001). Spains definition of rural is deter-
mined by the threshold population for an
urban settlement that is set at 10 000 (Hoggart
et al., 1995). However, population size itself
is not a satisfactory criterion of rurality.
For example, many very large settlements in
Andaluca, large enough in terms of popula-
tion size to be considered urban, are essentially
rural in their functions and characteristics
(Gilmore, 1980).
A temporally consistent definition of rural
tourism in the case of Spain is handicapped by
the fact that, for many years, official definitions
adopted a limited view of the nature of the
activity, focusing particularly on farm tourism
(Garcia-Olaya, 1991; Garcia-Ramon et al.,
1995), thus underemphasising the tremendous
range of activities incorporated within the
ambit of rural tourism. This situation persisted
until the 1980s when a variety of specially pro-
tected rural areas began to be declared (Bangs,
1985). Rural tourism is also difficult to define
with precision because rural areas are visited
for recreational purposes for much shorter
periods than the conventional holiday and at
more varied times of year, thus weekend and
multiseasonal tourism affect rural areas also.
Furthermore, if we consider the provision of
accommodation for the pursuit of rural
tourism, as Canoves and Villarino Prez (2002)
have observed, Spanish legislation does not
have regulations establishing the different cat-
egories of rural lodgings at a national level.
This lack of uniform standards . . . makes an
adequate national definition of rural tourism
impossible . . . (p. 102). This is a particular
problem when attempting to assess the growth
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
138 M. Barke

and spatial pattern of Spanish rural tourism in Table 1. Growth in accommodation in rural houses,
recent years. Autonomous Regions, 19962003. (sources: Gua de
In considering the significance of rural Alojamiento en Casas Rurales de Espaa, 1996,
tourism in contemporary Spain, one of the key 2003)
issues concerns its role in bringing about fun- Bedspaces in
damental change in rural economies and soci- rural houses Percentage
change,
eties. There is considerable debate about the
1996 2003 19962003
role of rural tourism in restructuring rural
areas. Amongst the key diagnostic manifesta- Andaluca 1520 4318 +184.1
tions of rural restructuring would be the devel- Aragn 2526 4541 +79.8
opment of a more diverse range of rural Asturias 528 4994 +845.8
economic activities (i.e., more diverse than tra- Baleares 409 1192 +191.4
ditional agriculture) and the participation in Canarias 372 1499 +303.0
Cantabria 714 3593 +403.2
these activities of different members of the
Catalua 2993 6221 +107.9
same household. We may expect a consider- Castilla-Len 315 8261 +522.5
ably greater role for service activities (one of Castilla-La Mancha 335 3405 +916.4
which, of course, is tourism), the equating of C. Valenciana 293 2026 +591.5
the significance of environmental considera- Extremadura 204 1851 +807.3
tions with production interests in the rural Galicia 993 3997 +302.5
economy with, at the same time, a much La Rioja 209 469 +124.4
broader range of uses of the countryside by Madrid 59 665 +1027.1
different groups. Rural restructuring would Murcia 202 1316 +551.5
also involve the emergence of a rural service Navarra 1629 2545 +56.2
class with a high degree of trained profession- Pas Vasco 1412 1955 +38.4
Total 14,913 52,848 +254.4
alism, and the development of patterns of con-
sumption that are not dissimilar from those
found in large urban centres. Although rural
tourism does not necessarily always impinge
directly on each of these elements it clearly has
the potential to do so. Some authors are in no ences in the pattern of growth. This type of
doubt that rural tourism is indeed a major rural accommodation was already well estab-
force for rural restructuring (e.g. Jenkins et al., lished in the mid-1990s in regions such as
1998), and others, specifically in the context of Navarra, Pais Vasco, Aragn, Catalua and
Spain, have expressed considerable scepticism Asturias. Growth has continued in the latter
over how fundamental recent change in rural two but has been more modest in the first three
areas really is (Hoggart and Paniagua, 2001). of these regions. Overall, the rate of growth has
been most significant in Madrid, Castilla-La
THE GROWTH AND SPATIAL PATTERN OF Mancha, Extremadura and, especially, Castilla-
SPANISH RURAL TOURISM Len. The latter three have been, of course,
regions of considerable rural depopulation for
Given the problems of defining rural tourism many years. Table 2 shows the relative signifi-
noted above, it is virtually impossible to cance of this one measure of rural tourism
provide a precise assessment of the size of across Spain by calculating the amount of
rural tourism activity in contemporary Spain. accommodation relative to locally resident
However, Table 1 shows the growth in the population in each province. There is clearly a
number of bed spaces in one approved form of relationship between areas of population
rural tourism accommodation rural houses. decline and the relative importance of rural
There appears to have been a consistent tourism, suggesting that policies for rural
pattern of growth since the mid-1990s 83% tourism as part of overall rural development
between 1996 and 1999 (Canoves and Villarino may, at least, have been targeted accurately.
Prez, 2002) and 93% between 1999 and 2003. However, the relationship is not absolutely
However, there are marked regional differ- clear with, for example, some provinces of
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
Rural Tourism in Spain 139

Table 2. Ratio of accommodation in rural houses to strong population growth, Guadalajara,

resident population, Spanish provinces 2003 Navarra and Girona, also showing a relatively
Bed spaces in Percentage high ratio of rural tourism accommodation per
rural houses per population 1000 inhabitants.
1000 resident change, Tables 1 and 2, however, are far from tell-
Province population 19812001 ing the whole story of accommodation for
Almera 0.592 +31.0 rural tourism. They include only officially
Cdiz 0.476 +13.0 approved accommodation, mainly in rural
Crdoba 0.595 +5.7 houses and farms. The extent to which this
Granada 0.964 +8.3 may underestimate the amount of rural
Huelva 1.200 +10.5 tourism accommodation may be illustrated
Jan 0.938 +0.6 by the case of lora municipality (Mlaga
Malaga 0.569 +25.5 province). The 1996 Guia de Alojamiento en
Sevilla 0.192 +16.9 Casas Rurales advertised eight properties in
Huesca 13.230 -3.9
the municipality, whereas the 2003 edition
Teruel 10.724 -11.5
Zaragoza 0.408 +4.0 included only three. The competing Guia de
Asturias 4.698 -5.9 Alojamientos de Turismo Rural for 2003 adver-
Baleares 1.416 +28.3 tised six properties. However, a search of web
Las Palmas 0.609 +25.2 sites in June 2003 revealed a total of 36 rural
Tenerife 1.187 +22.4 properties advertised for rent within lora
Cantabria 6.714 +4.3 municipality. It seems probable, therefore, that
Albacete 2.472 +7.5 some previous studies (e.g. Hoggart and Pani-
Ciudad Real 1.002 +0.8 agua, 2001) have seriously underestimated this
Cuenca 4.323 -6.7
Guadalajara 4.714 +22.0
form of rural tourism accommodation.
Toledo 0.613 +14.1 Tables 1 and 2 also do not provide informa-
vila 9.178 -11.0 tion on the additional forms of rural accom-
Burgos 3.316 -3.8 modation. One of the most important of these
Len 3.169 -6.5 (although not exclusively rural) is camping.
Palencia 3.141 -7.6 Barke and France (1986) showed that total
Salamanca 3.414 -5.0 campsite capacity increased by 37% between
Segovia 5.640 -1.1 1971 and 1981 mainly in coastal areas, espe-
Soria 6.934 -9.9
cially near to the French and Portuguese
Valladolid 0.644 +3.4
Zamora 2.737 -12.4 borders. Of the interior areas, only Toledo and
Barcelona 0.254 +3.9 provinces bordering with Portugal had much
Gerona 3.764 +21.1 campsite accommodation. Although these pat-
Lrida 5.210 +2.6 terns remained, with half the total camping
Tarragona 1.619 +18.8 bednights being recorded by Girona, Barcelona
Alicante 0.363 +27.2 and Tarragona, by the 1990s camping had
Castelln 1.738 +12.4 become very much a domestic activity. Even
Valencia 0.295 +7.3 by 1991 almost three-quarters of all camping
Badajoz 0.362 +1.8
Cceres 4.000 -4.2
bed nights were generated by the Spanish.
La Corua 0.935 +0.3 Girona was the province with by far the most
Lugo 3.157 -11.8 foreign campers (Pearce and Priestley, 1998). In
Orense 1.900 -21.3 addition to camping, a considerable amount
Pontevedra 1.328 +2.3 of accommodation is also provided in rural
Madrid 0.123 +15.7 hotels. To take eight provinces at random,
Murcia 1.099 +25.3 Table 3 shows the pattern of change from 1970
Navarra 4.579 +9.2 in settlements of less than 5000 population.
lava 1.226 +11.1
This form of accommodation has clearly
Guipzcoa 1.431 -3.0
Vizcaya 0.570 -5.6 become much more widespread in most areas
La Rioja 1.695 +8.8 but especially so in Asturias. Overall, there has
been significant growth in rural hotel accom-
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
140 M. Barke

Table 3. Accommodation in rural hotelsa in selected provinces, 19702003. Number of localities with rural
hotels shown in parentheses
Percentage Percentage
Number of Number of change in rooms, Number of change in rooms,
Province rooms, 1970 rooms, 1994 19701994 rooms, 2003 19702003
Huesca 1972 (32) 4359 (57) +121.0 4670 (72) +7.1
Asturias 555 (22) 2389 (79) +330.4 3778 (129) +58.1
Caceres 278 (7) 1077 (33) +287.4 1910 (61) +77.3
Jan 93 (5) 331 (10) +255.9 701 (25) +111.8
Granada 1113 (7) 2137 (24) +92.0 2868 (42) +34.2
Zamora 154 (5) 732 (24) +375.3 610 (20) -16.7
Guadalajara 300 (9) 606 (25) +102.0 705 (31) +16.3
Lleida 2895 (44) 4851 (66) +67.6 4803 (73) -1.0

a
In settlements of less than 5000 resident population.

modation over the past 30 years but with some
evidence of recent slower growth in some
areas. Interestingly, this is less evident in some
of the remoter provinces such as Caceres,
Asturias and Jan. Nevertheless, there is some
indication that this spectacular growth in all
forms of accommodation has produced an
oversupply (Barke and Newton, 1995, 1997a).
Further indication of the fluidity that may
underlie the overall pattern of growth is given
by the fact that, comparing the 1996 and 2003
listings of rural houses for nine popular rural
tourism locations in Andaluca, where 49 prop-
erties were advertised in 1996 and 48 in 2003,
only 13 appear to have survived from the
former to the latter date.
A variety of processes help to explain the
pattern of growth and location revealed in
Tables 1, 2 and 3. The development of rural
tourism in Spain obtained its impetus from
two quite different forces. One stems from the
decline of traditional rural activities, princi-
pally agriculture and the consequent demo-
graphic changes, especially depopulation
(Table 2) and an increasingly elderly popula-
tion (Ribeiro and Marques, 2002). The second
force is the perceived need to diversify the
Spanish tourism product away from tradi-
tional mass beach tourism characteristic of the
1960s and 1970s (Valenzuela, 1998). The extent
to which these forces are operating obviously
varies in the different regions of Spain. For
example, a number of provinces have looked
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
to tourism (mainly domestic) as a major instru-
ment of economic restructuring and employ-
ment creation. Some northern regions, outside
the main mass tourism destinations, for
example Cantabria and Asturias, provide illus-
tration of this. Culture, landscape, gastronomy
and industrial heritage (e.g. the Museo de la
Minera at El Entrego, Asturias) are being used
in an attempt to establish a distinctive market
position. In regions such as Valencia and
Andaluca, however, the diversification of an
already existing tourism industry has been
more important.
However, it would be wrong to suggest that
rural tourism in Spain is solely a development
of the last two decades. Even when the mass
tourism industry in Spain was growing
rapidly, some developments in rural tourism
were initiated, most notably in the area of farm
tourism or Casas de Labranza (Garcia-Olaya,
1991). This programme began in 1967, sup-
ported by the Agrarian Extension Service,
which offered advice, training and promo-
tional services. In 1977 the number of beds had
risen to 32 038 in 8132 farms scattered across
486 localities. The market for this form of rural
tourism was overwhelmingly Spanish. In the
Sierra de Segura (Jan and Albacete provinces)
there were originally 71 participants but a
survey in 1983 showed that most of these had
dropped out of the scheme as few tourists had
used the accommodation owing to poor pub-
licity. Only 13% of visitors to the Sierra de
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
Rural Tourism in Spain
Segura knew of this form of accommodation
(Eden, 1996). Relatively slow growth contin-
ued until the 1990s, although, with regional
autonomy, some regions, for example Catalo-
nia, were active in the 1980s. Others, such as
Galicia, did not start to develop schemes until
the early 1990s. A natural extension of farm-
based tourism was the provision of accommo-
dation for rural tourists in other country
properties, converted agricultural buildings or
former agricultural workers cottages. The
success of such schemes then led rapidly to
an increasing amount of purpose-built rural
holiday accommodation. Although a national
system is lacking, higher standards have been
encouraged by the adoption of a system of
quality control amongst the 26 rural house
associations who created the Association for
Quality in Rural Tourism in 1996 (Gmez
Gmez, 1999).
Although all the autonomous regions have
emphasised the promotion of rural tourism in
one form or another, the northern areas were
the pioneers in this field (Valenzuela, 1998)
Asturias, Cantabria and northern Aragon. For
example, significant legislation to regulate and
control quality in rural accommodation (farm-
houses and houses for rent) was introduced
first in Aragon in 1986, followed by Pais Vasco
and Cantabria in 1988, Asturias, Navarra and
Baleares in 1991, Galicia and La Rioja in 1992
and Catalua and Castilla y Len in 1993
(Martn Gil, 1994). Apart from Baleares and
Catalua none of these areas contain zones
of mass tourism. It was only a little later,
however, that many of the latter areas started
to give more attention to rural tourism in the
context of their overall tourism planning, for
example, Canarias in 1995 (de Souza Iglesias,
1997).
The search for alternatives to sun, sea and
sand based tourism in Spain dates from the
1980s although many of the negative impacts
of mass tourism had become obvious before
then. In the 1990s therefore, Spain is hoping
for a new wave of tourists . . ., tourists who are
motivated by the countrys culture and her-
itage (Maiztegui-Oate and Areitio Bertoln,
l996). The drive to develop a wider range of
tourism facilities and destinations was articu-
lated in 1992 in the FUTURES Plan (Frame-
work Plan for the Competitiveness of Spanish
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
141
Tourism), which pointed out that income from
European visitors dropped by 28% between
1988 and 1990. This gave considerable promi-
nence to the promotion of rural tourism as a
new form of tourism (Blanco Herranz, 1996).
Although, as we have seen, its actual newness
is very much open to debate, there is no doubt
that a considerable stimulus to active develop-
ment stemmed from this plan. Furthermore, in
1994, the Ministry of Commerce and Tourism
launched its Strategic Plan for Tourism,
which envisaged joint promotional activities
for the different regions of Spain, co-ordinated
by TURESPANA . . . with the emphasis on
the development of alternative tourism
areas, adventure and cultural tourism . . .
(Maiztegui-Oate and Areitio Bertoln, l996,
p. 270).
One example of a regional response is pro-
vided by Andaluca with its own Plan DIA
. . . seen as a means of inserting tourism for the
region as a whole within the structural aid
programmes of the European Union. (Pearce,
1996, p. 129). As a significant proportion of
structural aid relates to rural areas, clearly this
has important implications for rural tourism.
Plan DIA designated seven specific areas
for the promotion of rural tourism (PRODIN-
TUR). The Andalucan regional government
has also become an active hotel promoter
in rural areas and opened several tourism
complexes, for example, the Villas Turisticas
in Bubion (Alpujarras), Cazorla and
Grazalema.
Rural tourism is now a widespread activity
across Spain and forms part of the portfolio of
leisure and recreation activities in every
region, although its relative significance does
of course vary considerably (Tables 1 and 2).
There are now over 170 rural tourism associa-
tions in Spain performing promotional, infor-
mation and booking functions. The wide
variety of organisations represented in the
rural tourism associations is illustrated by the
17 in the case of Andaluca. These include rep-
resentation from the Junta de Andaluca itself
(the Consejera de Turismo y Deporte), the
province of Mlaga, RAAR the network of
rural accommodation providers, three private
sector groupings of rural hotels, three local
town halls (municipios), six groupings of local
authority areas working together (comarcas),
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
142
and two rutas the Via Verde (in Cadiz and
Sevilla provinces) and the Ruta de la Plata.
TYPES OF RURAL TOURISM
There are many types of rural tourism activity
present in different localities in Spain. Some of
these stem from a different (that is different
from, say, northwest European), indigenous
use of the countryside. At the end of the twen-
tieth century, many Spanish families living in
urban areas were only one generation away
from the land (Bradshaw, 1972; Lara Sanchez,
1977). For some, especially landless labourers,
this was a blessed relief but in regions of
smaller landholdings there remains a consid-
erable attachment to the countryside and to a
specific location, leading to return visits
(Garcia-Olaya, 1991). This is one reason why
Spain has a large number of second homes in
rural areas (Barke, 1991). A variant of this
theme is the annual or more frequent return of
urban residents to the village of their birth at
fiesta time or on occasions such as Easter Week
or family birthdays. At a simpler level is the
traditional drive into the countryside for a
Sunday picnic on summer weekends. Other
more formalised types of rural activity,
although still within the categories of tradi-
tional, indigenous use of the countryside,
include the many long-established hunting
and shooting clubs. In addition to these kinds
of activities there is a more recent set of devel-
opments. Some of these relate to various
aspects of countryside management, for
example, the creation of National and Natural
Parks. In 1999 Spanish National Parks received
over 9 million visitors. In 1995 more than 5
million Spaniards made at least one trip into
rural spaces from towns of over 100 000 popu-
lation (excluding weekend trips), therefore
true numbers of visitors to rural areas are obvi-
ously considerably more than this (Montfort
Mir and Ivars Baidal, 2001). Other relatively
new forms of activity include hang-gliding,
long distance walking and hiking, riding
(although see Chetwode (1965) and Boyd
(1969) for earlier versions of this activity),
caving, rafting and canoeing. As we shall see,
however, in Spain, some of these practices are
not always compatible with each other, espe-
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
M. Barke
cially as there has been a move from the
passive to more active activities.
A recent development has been the revival
of traditional cultural features, for example
the promotion of a range of rutas, which,
although often linking up historic cities also
have, by definition, a significant component of
experiencing the rural, in terms of culture and
landscape. The most obvious is the promotion
of the Route of Santiago, the eastwest axis
across northern Spain (Murray and Graham,
1997), given special impetus in 1993 with the
celebration of Ao Jacobeo (the 1000th
anniversary of St James, patron saint of Spain,
allegedly buried at Santiago). The number of
pilgrims increased from a few thousand to
nearly 100 000 in 1993 (Hunter-Jones and
Morpeth, 1996). Although the compatibility of
religious pilgrimage and tourism remains
open to debate (Graham and Murray, 1997),
investment in facilities along the route was
complemented by the promotion of events
such as medieval markets in several small
towns. Another example was the restoration of
the Roman Silver Route, running from north to
south in the west of the peninsula. In addition
to these, several other rutas have been devel-
oped in the 1990s, following in the footsteps of
real or imaginary literary figures such as Don
Quixote and Washington Irving but also
Camilo Jos Cela in the Alcarria region of
Guadalajara province and Alarcn in the
Alpujarras, Granada (Barke, 2002). Andalucas
Plan DIA designated themed rutas based on
architectural heritage or particular activities
such as bull rearing or wine production.
Clearly, rural tourists, and the facilities they
require, vary immensely, ranging from tradi-
tionalists who want authenticity, traditional
culture, and peace and quiet to those who
appreciate various aspects of the countryside
but actually also want it to replicate (in terms
of social facilities and entertainment) those
offered by urban areas (Kastenholz et al., 1999).
Martn Gil (1994) provided a comprehensive
account of the range of activities in Spanish
rural tourism in the mid-1990s. For example,
he noted that between 1992 and 1994 at the
annual Feria Internacional de Turismo (FITUR)
event in Madrid there was a 100% increase in
the number of businesses involved in adven-
ture tourism (canoeing, rafting, climbing,
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
Rural Tourism in Spain
caving, hang gliding, mountain bicycling, ski-
ing and pony trekking) in rural areas (from 71
to 141). The majority of these businesses were
located in mountainous areas, especially the
Cantabrian mountains and the Pyrenees. In the
10 years since then, this number has almost
certainly increased and become more spatially
widespread (Guillermo, 2003). For example, in
Aragon alone, 36 turismo deportivo busi-
nesses were active in 2003 offering a wide
range of activities and 24 of them also pro-
vided accommodation. This greatly expanded
provision relates to some quite fundamental
social and cultural changes in Spain over the
past three decades and the support received,
both financially and technically, from a variety
of public sector agencies. A range of organisa-
tions have also encouraged more effective
marketing, quality control and development.
A good example of this concerns the ski-ing
industry, which is effectively organized under
the Asociacin Turstica de Estaciones de Esqu
de Montaa (ATUDEM), established in 1974
and representing the 28 recognised ski sta-
tions in Spain (16 of these are in the Pyrenees).
Within the ski stations themselves there are
20 000 approved accommodation spaces with a
further 102 000 in close proximity. In 20022003
over 6 million visits were recorded, an increase
of 11.8% over the previous year. The growth
and popularity of the sport has allowed
ATUDEM to oversee the investment of 32
million euros in 20022003 alone (Balance Tem-
porada, 2002/2003). A characteristic of adven-
ture tourism in rural areas is that many of the
businesses are started by relatively young indi-
viduals who themselves are keen participants
in the activities concerned. It is also the case
that many of them tend to set up their business
in their municipalities of origin. In this sense,
many aspects of adventure tourism can be
viewed in more sustainable terms, although
we should recognise that some activities may
well have deleterious environmental implica-
tions and for most aspects of adventure
tourism careful attention needs to be given to
the carrying capacity of local areas.
The same observation applies to tourism
concerned with the interpretation and appreci-
ation of flora and fauna, the physical form of
the landscape, and traditional economic and
cultural activities. Martn Gil (1994) identified
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
143
an increase in the number of businesses in this
category from 35 to 62 between 1992 and 1994
(77.1%). In this brief period, the location of
these businesses became much more wide-
spread as only 16 provinces had representation
in 1992 but this increased to 29 by 1994.
Inevitably, the greatest increase was in
National and Natural Parks. Whereas adven-
ture tourism tends to be concentrated in the
north, the largest number of enterprises
involved in environmental tourism are located
in the south, in Andaluca. Nearly 17% of the
territory of Andaluca is protected in some
way. Recent years have therefore seen a huge
expansion in nature tourism. Vacas Guerrero
(2001) has identified 56 activities related to this
type of rural tourism, with over 1500 new busi-
nesses created in the past decade. Information
about them is diffused much more widely
through the media, including over 50 new
periodicals specifically dedicated to such activ-
ities. Not surprisingly, therefore, the number of
visitors to espacios naturales increased from
4.2 million in 1973 to 20 million in 1982 and
25.5 million in 1995, figures that are strongly
indicative of important changes in the use of
the Spanish countryside. The 1990s saw the
declaration of many such protected spaces, in
fact 85% have been declared since 1987. These
designations also have been accompanied by
increased investment in facilities for visitors.
One specific area of tourism that has a strong
rural component is concerned with health spas
(balnearios). As with many parts of rural
Europe, Spanish spas have a long and distin-
guished history. Indeed, the Secretaria General
de Turismo have published a booklet detailing
the mineral composition of the waters, the
treatments available, the accommodation and,
in trying to change the image of this activity,
the local attractions of over 80 approved spas
throughout Spain, providing accommodation
for over 10 500 guests (Ministerio de Comercio
y Turismo, 1994). These spas vary enormously
in size and in terms of the facilities they
offer. For example, at Baos de Ledesma
(Salamanca) 680 guests can be accommodated,
at Panticosa (Huesca) 440 and at Archena
(Murcia) 490. On the other hand, Camarena de
la Sierra in Teruel province, although founded
in 1890 and its waters winning gold medals in
1921, offers no accommodation. Similarly, the
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
144
famous spa at Lanjaron in Granada province,
whose mineral/medicinal waters were offi-
cially recognised in 1774, has no on site
accommodation, although the village has 15
hotels offering over 520 rooms. Some indica-
tion of the fluctuations in this particular area
of rural tourism, however, is given by the fact
that in 1970 there were 27 hotels offering 750
rooms.
Overall, this range of tourism activity and its
recent growth implies a much more varied use
of the countryside in Spain. Although this, in
itself, does not amount to a complete restruc-
turing of rural areas and such activities are
concentrated into particular areas, they cer-
tainly indicate significant change for the local-
ities concerned.
THE CHANGING CONTEXT
OF RURAL TOURISM
It has been claimed that in the period since the
Second World War, the relationships between
rural areas and the leisure activities associated
with them, changed from . . . being primarily
passive and minor elements in the landscape
to become highly active and dominant agents
of change and control . . . (Butler et al., 1998,
p. 3). Although this may be true for the more
crowded parts of the developed world, espe-
cially northern Europe, it is less true for areas
of lower population density, such as many
parts of Spain. Nevertheless, it is clear from the
account given above, in some areas of rural
Spain, active leisure pursuits now dominate. It
also has been claimed that, increasingly, people
see rural areas in different ways, with the
corollary that they use rural areas differently.
Again, this is probably only partly true of
Spain and some (Hoggart and Paniagua, 2001,
p. 76) would argue that There has been no
fundamental transformation of rural society.
A sample survey of domestic rural tourists
to the inland regions of Spain in 1994, looking
at some of the motivations for these visits,
provides some interesting information on the
changing context in Spain (Fuentes Garcia,
1995). The principal motive for visiting rural
areas was to seek tranquility (17.1%), fol-
lowed by family reasons (either to visit the
family home or to visit relatives and friends fully researched but we may hypothesise that,
(16.5%). Third in importance was to examine
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
M. Barke
nature (16.4%) and then curiosity (11.8%)
and specific tourist attractions (10.8%). These
results are of interest in that they suggest
something of a dichotomy in the Spanish rural
tourism market. On the one hand, there are
those who appear to be making periodic visits
back to their roots, and on the other hand, rural
tourism does appear to be something new
with motives of curiosity, specific tourist
attractions and experiencing nature being
prominent. In the latter case, the rural holiday
is not a return to the familiar but a new
experience, something more associated with
northwest Europe. The significance of this
dichotomy is, of course, that it indicates a
highly differentiated rural tourism market in
terms of the type of accommodation
demanded and the type of activities engaged
in. This broad dichotomy was also indicated by
age differences, with younger visitors to rural
areas being there for sport, curiosity, etc.,
whereas the older visitors cited tranquillity
and visiting the family home or family and
friends more frequently. The potential for con-
flict that lies within this dichotomy should be
noted, especially when considered alongside
the spectacularly rapid recent growth and
diversification of rural tourism activities.
The wider significance of the family home
in rural areas has been noted by Aranda
Palmero (2002), who observes a close relation-
ship between return visits to the place of birth
and second home ownership. The number of
second homes increased from 1 899 759 to
2 923 615 between 1981 and 1991 and to 3 323 127
or 16% of the total by 2001. However, this
almost certainly underestimates the true
number of second homes as, in addition, the
2001 census recorded 2 894 986 (13.9% of the
total) homes standing empty. Although many
reasons could account for this high number of
empty properties, it seems likely that the diffi-
culty in establishing whether or not a dwelling
was a second (or even third) home would be
one of them. The areas of strong out-migration
of the mid-twentieth century Andaluca,
Castilla y Len, Castilla La Mancha and
Extremadura all show a strong flow of
tourists back to the place of family origin.
The significance of this trend remains to be
in these circumstances, personal emotional
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
Rural Tourism in Spain
(although not necessarily sentimental) factors
may play a part in attitudes to rural areas and
their futures. There is likely to be less spend-
ing by those returning to a traditional family
location for a visit than by other rural tourists.
They are less likely to demand ancillary ser-
vices and activities and may well have a very
different attitude to what others may perceive
as the positive development of rural areas for
a range of tourism facilities.
An important issue in the changing context
of rural tourism is the question of changing
gender roles. Early research in villages affected
by tourism growth in Catalonia showed that
women had been most active in taking up
opportunities offered by the rise of tourism
(Hermans, 1983). Contrary to traditional
theory, this meant that women were often
making the most significant contribution to
modernisation. It was suggested that
womens control of business stemmed from
their traditional control of the household.
However, this relative economic success was
not without its price. For example, survey
work showed that women work harder and
more than men, whereas men work less than
they had done 20 years previously. Also, social
contact with friends and relatives declined
considerably and social isolation increased.
Yet, this new economic role of women does not
seem to have undermined their traditional
family role or led to a major challenging of the
mans position. Further studies in Catalonia
and Galicia (Garcia-Ramon et al., 1995) have
shown that, although women most commonly
initiate agrotourism enterprises, they do not
differentiate between domestic chores and the
new business, seeing the latter as an exten-
sion of the former. The role of this activity in
bringing about fundamental changes in tradi-
tional rural gender relationships may be more
limited than expected. However, one impor-
tant change was noted, consequent upon the
development of rural tourism enterprises, this
being an increased environmental awareness
on the part of women responsible for the activ-
ity. Also significant is the very positive reaction
of many rural dwellers to agrotourism activi-
ties, largely because they see an improvement
in facilities, increased value of their property,
and a rather better quality of life overall. These
positive repercussions are often felt most by
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
145
younger households and children, possibly
making it more attractive for them to stay in
the rural area (Canoves and Villarino Prez,
2002).
TOURISM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
As far back as the 1960s, it was suggested that
rural tourism could be an important catalyst
for rural development. However, the overall
impact of rural tourism on rural development
depends upon the precise nature of the activi-
ties pursued. For example, with regard to farm
tourism, important regional differences have
been noted (Garcia-Ramon et al., 1995). In
Catalonia, farmers in receipt of subsidy from
the region to carry out refurbishment for
tourist accommodation must continue his/her
agrarian activity in other words, tourism is
seen as an agent of diversification, not a
replacement. In Galicia, however, the continu-
ation of agricultural activity is not required.
After the early, small-scale initiatives in farm
tourism in the mid-1990s, a greater impetus for
more integrated forms of rural tourism devel-
oped. For example, Muoz de Escalona (1994)
suggested that a fully integrated form of rural
tourism would promote the biodiversity of
rural areas, respect their distinctive cultural
identity, help to increase the income and
overall standard of living of the rural inha-
bitants and promote the local design, owner-
ship and management of infrastructure and
resources used by the tourism industry. The
agenda therefore has moved from seeing rural
tourism as a rather limited form of diversifica-
tion to a much more ambitious form of activ-
ity that engages with many dimensions of
rural sustainability. The extent to which this
theoretical idealism is met by reality in Spain,
however, is open to question. For example, one
of the EUs principal mechanisms for rural
development the LEADER initiative has
undoubtedly encouraged the supply of facili-
ties, but the promotion of a more sustainable
form of rural development remains much
more problematic (Barke and Newton, 1997a).
In LEADER 1, investment in tourism consti-
tuted 52.5% of the total investment made, yet
much of this was directed at specific concrete
projects with a much more limited agenda than
that described by Muoz de Escalona (1994).
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
146
Although some research reports positive
features such as the beneficial involvement of
local populations and organisations (Gil de
Arriba, 1998), the precise nature of the charac-
ter of rural development brought about by
rural tourism can be questioned more closely.
A detailed comparative study of the applica-
tion of LEADER 1 in the two areas of La Loma
(Jaen province) and the Alpujarras (Granada
and Almeria provinces) demonstrated that the
characteristics of the two areas at the time of
implementation (including local political tra-
jectories) fundamentally influenced the nature
of the activities proposed (Barke and Newton,
1997a). Elsewhere, the inevitable involvement
of several levels of administrative bureaucracy
in Spain militated against the genuine
achievement of bottom up, grass roots, rural
development (Barke and Newton, 1997b).
Furthermore, the processes by which local
rural development groups emerged varied
immensely, with many being little more than
pre-existing interest groups and local elites
(Barke and Newton, 1997c). Elsewhere, for
example in several rural areas in Guadalajara
province, it has been urban to rural migrants
(mostly from Madrid), often possessing pro-
fessional qualifications, who have initiated
recent rural tourism developments (Paniagua,
2002). Overall, in relation to the first phase of
LEADER, there is some suggestion that areas
and groups that were already better off were
in a position to gain the most from such pro-
grammes (Barke and Newton, 1995).
IMPACTS OF RURAL TOURISM POLICIES
As some of the examples cited above suggest,
there may be a considerable gap between the
positive rhetoric promoting rural tourism as a
panacea for the problems of modern rural
areas and the actual achievement (Ribeiro and
Marques, 2002). In many cases, where
tourism is promoted in the name of overall
rural development and preservation, it has
been the interests of the former that have been
paramount rather than the latter. When the
agenda is driven primarily by the demands of
rural tourism there is clear scope for incom-
patibility between those demands and the
much wider issues of rural development. For
example, the conflict between the construction
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
M. Barke
sector, including road building programmes
and the Majorcan Tourist Boards rhetoric con-
cerning the desirability of forms of sustainable
tourism based on existing traditional local
agricultural economies. has been pointed out
by Selwyn (2001, p. 29). Even when legislation
is introduced to try and protect excessive
growth of rural tourism, it may not necessarily
be successful. For example, in the Balearics, the
Law of Rural Land was introduced in 1997
to limit the construction of non-agricultural
villas and cottages in rural areas. Many local
municipalities, however, failed to implement
the law properly and a common practice was
to grant permission for the refurbishing of
small huts formerly used for animals or
machinery storage and their conversion into
residences (Bardolet, 2001).
In terms of the beneficiaries of rural tourism
policies, it has been shown in Portugal that, in
the provision of accommodation, it was the
older, wealthier families together with the old
and new bourgeoisie and their descendants
who have gained most (Ribeiro and Marques,
2002). This is possibly less the case in Spain but
state support for conversion and new build has
certainly benefited the poorest least. It is also
the case that possibilities for agroturismo are
related to factors such as farm size with
larger farms having greater probability of
offering the sort of accommodation and expe-
rience that tourists are likely to demand.
Smaller farms, some still often lacking in basic
facilities, are likely to be less appealing. There
is, of course, a regional dimension to the dis-
tribution of farm size and therefore to the
potential to benefit. More generally, some
research on the LEADER project has shown
that rural tourism projects may be based on the
initiatives of international residential tourists
and urban to rural migrants as well as return-
ing migrants (Leontidou and Marmaras, 2001;
Paniagua, 2002). Waldren (1998) claims that in
Mallorca many foreigners have purchased
large estates and converted them into rural
hotels. Long-established local residents there-
fore may not be significant beneficiaries from
rural tourism development. Furthermore, the
claim that rural tourism is an effective means
of income redistribution between different
areas is not easy to substantiate many
studies show that direct spending by rural
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
Rural Tourism in Spain
tourists is quite limited (Ribeiro and Marques,
2002).
There is also the supreme irony that, in the
name of developing rural tourism resources
that are presumed to be attractive to external
visitors (both foreign and urban based middle
class nationals), some of the very traditions
that are part of the rural dream have to be
destroyed. For example, in designating
National or Natural Parks, areas that were for-
merly used for everyday purposes by local
inhabitants are appropriated by the apparatus
of the state. Crain (1996) shows how the
measures taken to develop the Doana
National Park as an ecotourism site excluded
the centuries old traditions of using the area as
a hunting ground by working class residents
of nearby villages. Similarly, the designation of
the Natural Park of Cazorla, Segura y Las Vilas
in 1986 led to considerable local opposition in
fear of the additional bureaucratic restrictions
that were likely to be imposed on a traditional
upland farming area, especially the perceived
restrictions on the grazing of livestock (Araque
Jimenez, 1989). It is significant that, in 1987, the
first full year of the Parks existence, forest fires
increased eleven-fold (Eden, 1996).
Conflict between different activities within
the rural sphere is also a considerable problem.
The environmental degradation introduced by
excessive number of visitors is well docu-
mented for theoretically protected areas such
as Bosque de Irati in Navarra, the Regional
Park of Alta de Manzanares and Hayedo de
Montejo, both in Madrid province (Martn
Gil, 1994). Conflict between climbers and the
nesting areas of rare species of bird such as
vultures is a regular feature of the Parque
Natural del Can del Duratn (Segovia) and
the Parque Natural de Grazalema (Cadiz).
Finally, concerns about the overdevelopment,
siting and management of facilities such as
camp sites, particularly in mountainous rural
areas, were given massive impetus by the
Biescas (Huesca province) disaster of August
1996 when a flash flood caused the death of
over 80 individuals.
CONCLUSION
In the introduction it was suggested that
several features of the recent development of
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
147
rural tourism were distinctive to Spain. One
factor is the large-scale involvement of public
sector bodies, not always successfully, espe-
cially in the case of some smaller municipali-
ties lacking in capacity and experience, but
elsewhere the public sector has been effective
in making things happen, even if the chief
beneficiaries have not necessarily been local
residents. It is certainly the case that initia-
tives have been facilitated through a high
degree of networking between all sorts of dif-
ferent actors within many localities (Martn
Gil, 1994). Spain is also characterised in many
areas by a remarkable continuity of close links
to the countryside felt by urban dwellers.
Although most Spaniards have a less senti-
mental attitude to rural areas than is often
found, for example in the UK, it is arguably
more deeply felt.
It is clear that rural tourism has had a
massive recent growth in Spain although,
inevitably, there are considerable regional
variations in its relative significance. Therefore,
when Hoggart and Paniagua (2001) claim
that there is little fundamental change in rural
Spain, they may be only partially correct.
Although not manifest everywhere, and in
places somewhat fragile, economic diversifica-
tion, professionalism, environmentalism and
consumerism are increasingly characteristic of
a wide range of rural areas. Yet, the extent to
which this can be described as a fundamental
process of rural restructuring remains uncer-
tain and the evidence presented in this paper is
patchy. More formal research is needed on the
extent to which rural tourism is leading to a
radical restructuring of the rural sector and to
investigate the extent to which the large scale
and recent growth in rural tourism is, in the
areas affected, producing new social and eco-
nomic relationships. Such areas are undoubt-
edly experiencing new forms of activity but
the interesting question is whether or not the
structure of these rural areas and their rela-
tionship to mainstream Spanish society is being
changed in ways that are quite fundamental.
REFERENCES
Aranda Palmero E. 2002. Los movimientos tursti-
cos al lugar de nacimiento. Estudios Tursticos 152:
119128.
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
148
Araque Jimenez E. 1989. La Sierra de Segura: Crisis y
Perspectivas de Futuro de la Montaa Andaluza.
Junta de Andaluca: Seville.
Balance Temporada. 2002/2003. www.atudem.org.
[accessed July 2003].
Bangs PR. 1985. Who takes care of the caretakers
daughter? A song for the conservation of
Spains natural environment (scored for bull-
dozer, plough, regional and central government).
In Proceedings of the First Joint Conference of
Hispanists in Polytechnics and other Colleges
and the Iberian Studies Association, Newton
MT (ed.). University of Keele, August;
141157.
Bardolet E. 2001. The path towards sustainability in
the Balearic Islands. In Mediterranean islands and
Sustainable Tourism Development. Practices, Man-
agement and Policies, Ioannides D, Apostolopoulos
Y, Sonmez S (eds). Continuum: London and New
York; 191213.
Barke M. 1991. The growth and changing pattern of
second homes in Spain in the 1970s. Scottish
Geographical Magazine 107(1): 1221.
Barke M. 2002. Inside and Outside writings on
Spain: their relationship to Spanish tourism. In
Literature and Tourism, Robinson M, Anderson HC
(eds). Continuum: London and New York;
80104.
Barke M, France LA. 1986. Tourist accommodation
in Spain, 19711981. Tourism Management 7(3):
181196.
Barke M, Newton MT. 1995. La iniciativa comuni-
taria LEADER y el desarrollo rural in Espaa.
Estudios Regionales 41: 3963.
Barke M, Newton MT. 1997a. The EU LEADER
Initiative and endogenous rural development:
the application of the programme in two rural
areas of Andalusia, Southern Spain. Journal of
Rural Studies 13(3): 319341.
Barke M, Newton MT. 1997b. Spain, its regions
and the EU LEADER initiative: some critical
perspectives on its administration. Public Policy
and Administration 12(3): 7390.
Barke M, Newton MT. 1997c. The practice of local
rural development in Spain: the implementation
of LEADER I, 19911994. International Journal of
Iberian Studies 10(3): 170180.
Blanco Herranz FJ. 1996. Fundamentos de la poltica
comunitaria y Espaola en material de turismo
rural. Estudios Tursticos 131: 2549.
Bradshaw RP. 1972. Internal migration in Spain.
Iberian Studies 1: 6875.
Butler R, Hall CM, Jenkins JM. 1998. Introduction.
In Tourism and Recreation in Rural Areas, Butler R,
Hall CM, Jenkins JM (eds). Wiley: Chichester;
316.
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
M. Barke
Boyd A. 1969. The Road from Ronda. Collins: London.
Canoves G, Villarino Prez M. 2002. Rural tourism,
gender, and cultural conservation in Spain and
Portugal. In Gender/Tourism/Fun (?), Swain MB,
Momsen JH, (eds). Cognizant Communication
Corporation: New York; 90103.
Chetwode P. 1965. Two Middle-aged Ladies in
Andalusia. John Murray: London.
Crain M. 1996. The Doana National Park. In Coping
with Tourists: European Reactions to Mass Tourism,
Boissevain J (ed.). Berghahn: Oxford; 2756.
De Souza Iglesias A. 1997. Anlisis normative de la
poltica de turismo rural en Canarias, Estudios
Tursticos 134: 3541.
Douglas N, Douglas N, Derrett R. 2001. Special
Interest Tourism. Wiley: Milton, Queensland.
Eden J. 1996. The Natural Park of Cazorla, Segura
and Las Villas: a case study of tourism develop-
ment in a rural area. In Tourism in Spain: Critical
Issues, Barke M, Towner J, Newton MT (eds). CAB
International: Wallingford; 375400.
Fuentes Garca R. 1995. Anlisis de las principales
caractersticas de la demanda de turismo rural en
Espaa. Estudios Tursticos 127: 1952.
Garcia-Olaya DLC. 1991. Farm tourism. A possible
resource for the rural population (Spain). Tourism
Recreation Research 16(1): 8384.
Garcia-Ramon MD, Canoves G, Valdovinos N. 1995.
Farm tourism, gender and the environment in
Spain. Annals of Tourism Research 22(2): 267282.
Gil de Arriba C. 1998. Turismo rural en la Montaa
Palentina, vas y orientaciones para un desarrollo
local sostenible. Estudios Tursticos 135: 5166.
Gilmore DD. 1980. The People of the Plain. Class and
Community in Lower Andalusia. Columbia Univer-
sity Press: New York.
Gmez Gmez MJ. 1999. Sistema de calidad para
casas rurales. Estudios Tursticos 139: 8994.
Graham B, Murray M. 1997. The spiritual and the
profane: the pilgrimage to Santiago de Com-
postela. Ecumene 4(4): 389409.
Guia de Alojamiento en Casas Rurales de Espaa. 1996.
El Pais Aguilar: Madrid.
Guia de Alojamiento en Casas Rurales de Espaa. 2003.
El Pais Aguilar: Madrid.
Guia de Alojamientos de Turismo Rural. 2003. Anaya
Touring Club y Ciriec: Madrid.
Guillermo A. 2003. El turismo deportivo se con-
solida en Semana Santa. Actualidad Economia 17
April: 73.
Hermans D. 1983. Spanish women in business. The
case of Cambrils. Etnologia Europea 13(1): 1327.
Hoggart K, Paniagua A. 2001. The restructuring of
rural Spain? Journal of Rural Studies 17: 6380.
Hoggart K, Buller H, Black R. 1995. Rural Europe:
Identity and Change. Arnold: London.
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)
Rural Tourism in Spain
Hunter-Jones P, Morpeth N. 1996. Sustaining
Spanish culture: El Camino Frances? In Tourism and
Cultural Change, Robinson M, Evans N, Callaghan
P (eds). Business Education Publishers:
Sunderland; 109128.
Jenkins JM, Hall M, Troughton M. 1998. The restruc-
turing of rural economies: rural tourism and
recreation as a government response. In
Tourism and Recreation in Rural Areas, Butler R,
Hall CM, Jenkins JM (eds). Wiley: Chichester;
4367.
Kastenholz E, Davis D, Paul G. 1999. Segmenting
tourism in rural areas: the case of north and
central Portugal. Journal of Travel Research 37:
353363.
Lara Sanchez F. 1977. La Emigracion Andaluza.
Ediciones de la Torre: Madrid.
Leontidou L, Marmaras E. 2001. From tourists to
migrants. Residential tourism and littoraliza-
tion. In Mediterranean Tourism: Facets of
Socioeconomic Development and Cultural Change,
Apostolopoulos Y, Loukissas P, Leontidou L
(eds). Routledge: London; 257267.
Maiztegui-Oate C, Areitio Bertoln MT. 1996. Cul-
tural Tourism in Spain. In Cultural Tourism in
Europe, Richards G. (ed). CAB International:
Wallingford; 267281.
Martn Gil F. 1994. Nuevas formas de turismo en los
espacios rurales espaoles. Estudios Turisticos 122:
1539.
Ministerio de Comercio y Turismo. 1994. Guide to
Health Spas. Turespaa, Secretaria General de
Turismo: Madrid.
Montfort Mir VM, Ivars Baidal JA. 2001. Towards a
sustained competitiveness of Spanish tourism. In
Mediterranean Tourism: Facets of Socioeconomic
Development and Cultural Change, Apostolopoulos
Y, Loukissas P, Leontidou L (eds). Routledge:
London and New York; 1738.
Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
149
Munoz de Escalona F. 1994. Turismo rural inte-
grado: una frmula innovadora basada en un
desarrollo cientfico. Estudios Turisticos 121: 525.
Murray M, Graham B. 1997. Exploring the dialectics
of route-based tourism: the Camino de Santiago.
Tourism Management 18(8): 513524.
Paniagua A. 2002. Urbanrural migration, tourism
entrepreneurs and rural restructuring in Spain.
Tourism Geographies 4(4): 349371.
Pearce DG. 1996. Regional tourist organisations in
Spain: emergence, policies and consequences.
Tourism Economics 2(2): 119136.
Pearce DG, Priestley GK. 1998. Tourism in Spain: a
spatial analysis and synthesis. Tourism Analysis
2:185205.
Ribeiro M, Marques C. 2002. Rural tourism and the
development of less favoured areas between
rhetoric and practice. International Journal of
Tourism Research 4: 211220.
Selwyn T. 2001. Tourism, development and society
in the Insular mediterranean. In Mediterranean
islands and Sustainable Tourism Development.
Practices, Management and Policies, Ioannides D,
Apostolopoulos Y, Sonmez S (eds). Continuum:
London and New York; 2344.
Vacas Guerrero T. 2001. Los espacios naturales
protegidos como recurso turstico, metodologa
para el estudio del Parque Nacional de Sierra
Nevada. Estudios Tursticos 147: 5781.
Valenzuela M. 1998. Spain: from the phenomenon
of mass tourism to the search for a more diversi-
fied model. In Tourism and Economic Development:
European Experiences, 3rd edn, Williams AM,
Shaw G (eds). Wiley: Chichester; 4374.
Waldren J. 1998. The road to ruin. The politics of
development in the Balearic Islands. In Anthropo-
logical Perspectives on Local Development, Abram S,
Waldren J (eds). Routledge: London and New
York; 120140.
Int. J. Tourism Res. 6, 137149 (2004)