There are three
–at least- reasons, for which scientific fields from differentdirections could be combined on rural tourism redefinition, towards its social perspective:1.
is mainly a business sector, deriving profit for tourist accommodations and tourism services owners.2.
may be considered at the same time as amethodological tool for local development planners and policymakers.3.
could be concerned as a typical win-win-wincase-study, in the frame of the bargaining problemAccording to those perceptions on rural tourism activity, one should focus on“relations” (economic, social, cultural etc) among the actors, i. e the “providers” of rural tourism services, the “customers”/ clients of those services (tourists)
and the“Community” (local community) in which those accommodations are established or rural tourism services are offered
The point is
“how Rural Tourism- a business activity- could provide the communitywith social results, through its profit diffusion, among the people living in thecommunity, especially in those Less Developed Countries (L.D.C), during theGlobalization Age” ,
taking into account that:
The main feature of globalization conditions consists of setback to real termsof the development due to wealth concentration, regional and localinequalities , the absolute poverty in large parts of the planet, lack of food andmedical care in these parts, increasingly children mortality, increasinglyeconomic migration trends, dramatic climate changes, due to humanactivities, armed conflicts, terms confusion.
Over the second half of the 20
century, we have seen the continuoustransformation of the world's population from rural to urban, and this changeis likely to continue in decades to come. This phenomenon goes beyondmigration statistics.
Rural Tourism may be concerned as a local action promoting both theeconomic and the social dimension ( i.e local development, cultural,environmental and political dimension etc) of a rural place
Rural Tourism may contribute in maintaining the local people in rural places,as well as in convincing young people, living in cities to come back and work in rural places.
It is –therefore- necessary, to redefine
term as a local activity by both, the political-ideological and the strategic dimension thus meetingthe “market rules”, which paper focuses on:
In particular it is necessary tobe proved that “rural tourism” social redefinition must be seen as a typical win-win-win bargaining problem between “providers” the rural services, the“consumers” or clients of those services and the community, in which each part has to win. In this “bargain”, COMMUNITY may be concerned as the“third” (or invisible) part of an hypothetic three-part negotiation taking part at any time of the development process. For those social results to beachieved, it is necessary local cohesion to be based on “information” coming