Agritourism’s Multidimensional Impact on Local Development Incorporating Innovation and Resilience Factors: Evidence from Corfu Island, Greece ^†

Abstract

Agritourism, a tourism activity that is related to agriculture, has become more popular and gained importance as a strategy for fostering local development. In this article, we adopt a methodological framework that operationalizes the multidimensional impacts of agritourism on local development, adding issues of innovation as a critical success factor. Primary data were collected through in-depth interviews with the use of semi-structured questionnaires to agritourism units from a case study on Corfu Island, located in the Ionian Sea of Greece. The results reveal that the resilience of the island from tourism activity and the geographic characteristics related to its accessibility also affect agritourism, providing agritourism entrepreneurs a platform to access global markets and embrace sustainable practices.

1. Introduction

Agritourism is defined as a tourism activity that involves local agriculture and often, but not exclusively, farm-based tourism activities. Agritourism can create closer interactions between agriculture and visitors and is widely recognized as a driver of rural economic diversification and local development [1]. In line with [2] definition of local development as a “bottom-up attempt by local actors to improve incomes, employment opportunities, and quality of life,” agritourism can support local livelihoods and community cohesion. Recent research emphasizes that agritourism can drive economic vitality, environmental stewardship, and social cohesion in Mediterranean rural areas [3], others also underline its profound impact on individual happiness and well-being [4]. In Greece, scholars have begun to assess the effects of agritourism more systematically: ref. [5] note that agritourism impacts can be analyzed in terms of the structure of supply, scale of operations, and local networks. Similarly, ref. [6] observes that many rural tourism enterprises originate from agricultural producers seeking diversification and personal fulfillment.

2. Methods

This paper builds on the framework of [7] and the methodology of [5], which contextualize and operationalize the impact of agritourism on local development. It also points out that integrated approaches for local development are largely missing from the relevant literature [8]. More specifically, we use a framework that incorporates the type of agritourism business, its scale of operation, and its local and extra-local networks to estimate its impact on local development. This framework was previously tested in two case studies with different geographic and tourism supply characteristics: an island and a continental locality in Greece. We apply this methodological framework to another island of Greece, Corfu, to examine if the results are the same for an island with high tourism development, adding also issues of innovation for this activity, which is a critical success factor and underlined as less examined and a new trend in recent years in the literature review [8].

This study is organized into two distinct phases: (i) the first phase involves an exploratory investigation of agritourism businesses and services with the goal of creating a comprehensive contact database; (ii) the second phase involves selected agritourism stakeholders participating in in-person, online, and phone interviews using semi-structured questionnaires. A “snowball” sampling technique is utilized, where each interviewee suggests additional relevant contacts involved in agritourism. This process continues until no new contacts are identified, indicating data saturation. The questionnaire covers several key areas: (a) the characteristics of the respondent (e.g., services provided, operational periods); (b) their most significant partners (up to six) and details of the relationships (e.g., geographical proximity, direction of collaboration); (c) personal information about the respondent (e.g., permanent residence); (d) an evaluation of social and economic effects, specifically concerning employment and income; (e) open-ended questions for innovation. The case study area, as also referred to above, is the island of Corfu, the second largest Ionian island, located off the northwest coast of Greece. Its strategic location has historically rendered it a cultural crossroads, evident in its UNESCO World Heritage-listed Old Town. The island’s diverse topography, ranging from mountainous terrain to extensive coastlines, supports varied ecosystems and human activities. Tourism is the most important part of Corfu’s economy. Beyond tourism, the primary economic activities include agriculture (notably olive oil production) and small-scale manufacturing.

3. Results and Discussion

The descriptive statistics and average values of agritourism units from the primary research at Corfu Island, along with the results from previous research of Lesvos Island and Lake Plastira [5], are presented in

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and average values of agritourism units in case study areas.

Case Study Area	N Total	Scale: Number of Tourists	Number of Partners	Number of Local Partners	Number of Horizontal Partners	Number of Vertical Partners	Number of Diagonal Partners	Networks	Number of Employees	Permanent Employees % of Total	Income Classes	Months of Operation	Permanent Residence in Case Study Area (% of Total)	Local Development
Lesvos Island	97	1732	5.03	3.56	0.71	3.35	0.97	16.26	5.2	63	1.6	9.8	87	11.12
Plastiras Lake	63	1784	3.87	1.84	0.63	2.68	0.56	11.48	5.6	61	1.4	10.7	27	10.52
Corfu island	57	9540	2.4	1.3	0.5	1.8	0.2	7.2	9.2	49.2	2.5	9.8	100	11.5

Source: Adapted with permission from Ref. [5], processed by the authors.

. In the case of Corfu Island, the scale of operation is not reflected in the overall impact of local development. Especially, the presence of local and extra-local networks is limited when compared to the island of Lesvos. The number of all kinds of partners (in local, horizontal, vertical, and diagonal types of networks) is very limited, and this consequently results in small values of the composite network indexes. Moreover, on average the number of reported agritourists differs notably, indicating that in the case of high density tourism development of Corfu, agritourism units operate in the margins of mass tourism with similar, if not the same, customers and products (as stated by previous studies in Greece e.g., [9,10].

As for innovation, respondents’ opinions were related to green development and eco-friendly practices, new equipment, and synergies, especially with universities. These responses are categorized mostly as process innovation and organizational innovation, two of four complementary types of innovation developed from [11].

4. Conclusions

In this paper, agritourism units from case study areas with different geographic and tourism supply characteristics are examined: two islands (Lesvos in the Aegean Sea and Corfu in the Ionian Sea) and a continental locality (Plastiras Lake). By concentrating on the varying results and comparing recent and previous studies over time, and more specifically, variables, indexes and answers used in the analysis, we identify guidelines for planning. It seems that a one-size-fits-all policy is not suitable; there are many ideas for innovation from the entrepreneurs, which might not be innovative for others or in another place, but in discussion for local development, the research must be based on and/or in line with the ideas and needs of entrepreneurs-producers with strong networks with researchers (as also stated by the interviewees and in line with the Oslo Manual [11], “The role of innovation is to turn research results into new and better services and products in order to remain competitive in the global marketplace and improve people’s quality of life”). Lessons from rural Greece [12] point out that networks have been shown to be extremely important and effective in terms of the emergence of innovative ideas and initiatives. In the context of the different modalities of rural tourism, agritourism is consistent with what [13,14] underline that farmers are facing a change in role—from food producers to landscape conservationists—and are also considered drivers of the new dynamics of local entrepreneurship, innovation, and development. Perhaps the weak networks and, by extension, the limited local development that were recorded in our study were affected by the research method, which is online and by phone, compared to previous in-person studies. Additionally, data for partners are confidential and not easily referred to.

In the context of the different modalities of rural tourism, agritourism presents itself to contribute favorably to local development dynamics and may play an active role in the green economic transition process. It is in this context that farmers are facing a change in role—from food producers to landscape conservationists—as well as being considered drivers of the new dynamics of local entrepreneurship, innovation, and development.