ArticlePDF Available

Participatory policy review: "Supportive Tourism" concept for hand-in-hand rural and mountain development

March 2021
Annals of Agrarian Science 18(3):269-281

Authors:

Temur Gugushvili

Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University

Gvantsa Salukvadze

Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University

Ingrid Ute Leonhäuser

Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen

Nino Durglishvili

Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University

Show all 8 authorsHide

This article is an attempt to provide an exhaustive review of governmental policy documents for rural and mountain development in Georgia in the context of the local tourism supply chain (LTSC). Mainly, we examine to what extent policy-makers recognize the importance of the interconnectedness between tourism and other economic sectors. The study employs a systematic literature review and participatory workshops with local stakeholders to avoid observing the issue from a single angle. The analysis of strategic documents shows that tourism is considered vital for mountain and rural settlements' economic welfare, in fact, the narrow sense of its capabilities hinder the full effect on allied economic sectors. More precisely, strategies mostly consider tourism's impact on [mountain, rural] communities in terms of its direct consequences such as new constructions in accommodation and catering units, ski trails, etc. This study provides recommendations, which could facilitate improvements in the integration of farming and non-farming activities into the tourism sector. Based on the research, acknowledging the increasing dependency on such a sensitive economic branch as tourism, we suggest the new tourism advancement concept under the title of "supportive tourism". The paper suggests understanding and utilizing tourism as (i) starting point for other local economic actors; (ii) motto to increase demand for local services and products; (iii) supportive platform for the local economy to enter into new markets. Ultimately, supportive tourism could result in weakening dependence of local economic activities on the local tourism supply chain.

Content uploaded by Temur Gugushvili

Content may be subject to copyright.

269

Annals of Agrarian Science 18 (2020) 269–281

T. Gugushvili et al.

Annals of Agrarian Science

Journal homepage: http://journals.org.ge/index.php

220011992019

11771177

A B S T R A C T

*Corresponding author: Temur Gugushvili; E-mail address: temur.gugushvili155@sps.tsu.edu.ge

Participatory policy review: “Supportive Tourism” concept for

hand-in-hand rural and mountain development

T. Gugushvilia*, G. Salukvadzea, Ingrid-Ute Leonhäuserb, N. Durglishvilia,

N. Pavliashvilia, J. Khelashvilic, J. Salukvadzea, L. Khartishvilid

aIvane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, 3, Ilia Chavchavadze Ave., Tbilisi, 0179, Georgia

bJustus Liebig University Giessen, Center for International Development and Environmental Research, 3, Senckenberg-

strasse, Giessen, 35390, Germany

cIvane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, 2, University Str., Tbilisi, 0186, Georgia

dUniversity of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Institute for Landscape Development, Recreation and

Nature Conservation Planning (ILEN), 65, Peter-Jordan-Strasse, Vienna, 1180, Austria

Received: 20 September 2019; accepted: 15 December 2019

This article is an attempt to provide an exhaustive review of governmental policy documents for rural and mountain development in

Georgia in the context of the local tourism supply chain (LTSC). Mainly, we examine to what extent policy-makers recognize the im-

portance of the interconnectedness between tourism and other economic sectors. The study employs a systematic literature review and

participatory workshops with local stakeholders to avoid observing the issue from a single angle. The analysis of strategic documents

shows that tourism is considered vital for mountain and rural settlements’ economic welfare, in fact, the narrow sense of its capabili-

ties hinder the full effect on allied economic sectors. More precisely, strategies mostly consider tourism’s impact on [mountain, rural]

communities in terms of its direct consequences such as new constructions in accommodation and catering units, ski trails, etc. This

study provides recommendations, which could facilitate improvements in the integration of farming and non-farming activities into the

tourism sector. Based on the research, acknowledging the increasing dependency on such a sensitive economic branch as tourism, we

suggest the new tourism advancement concept under the title of “supportive tourism”. The paper suggests understanding and utilizing

tourism as (i) starting point for other local economic actors; (ii) motto to increase demand for local services and products; (iii) support-

ive platform for the local economy to enter into new markets. Ultimately, supportive tourism could result in weakening dependence of

local economic activities on the local tourism supply chain.

Keywords:

Supportive tourism, Participatory policy review, Local tourism supply chain, Mountain development, Rural Development, Georgia.

Introduction

Recent decades have marked mountain and ru-

ral tourism as an essential piece of the worldwide

tourism economy pie, introducing immense oppor-

tunities to highland and peripheral communities [1].

Tourism, due to its multifaceted nature, includes a

wide range of economic connections under its um-

brella. Such linkages are characterized by tourism’s

direct (e.g., catering, accommodation, transport) and

indirect (e.g., agriculture, manufacturing) effects on

other economic sectors. Diversified economic ties

position tourism among the economic fields having

the distinctive feature of the multiplier effect on lo-

cal economic areas [2].

Cardinal transformations of the local econo-

my always accompany tourism’s introduction into

mountain and rural settlements, mainly in the rapid

establishment of the previously poorly developed

service sector [3]. According to Heng and Low [4],

270

Annals of Agrarian Science 18 (2020) 269–281

T. Gugushvili et al.

healthy tourism functioning needs the accompany-

ing development of auxiliary services and manufac-

tures. Thus, a broad array of local supplementary

activities can be integrated into the local tourism

supply chain (LTSC). As a result, a supportable in-

terrelationship between tourism and the host econ-

omy will be a prerequisite for effective mountain

and rural development. In particular, sustainable de-

velopment of tourism throughout the process should

ensure the expansion of economic fields that were

previously strong, on the one hand, and give the im-

petus to less-developed branches to move forward,

on the other hand [5-7].

A realistic assessment of tourism’s benefits and

taking the right measures targeted toward local con-

texts and peculiarities plays a vital role in receiving

the anticipated long-term benefits of tourism develop-

ment. According to the UNWTO [8], tourism in moun-

tain areas should be reinvented in the policy strategies

through repositioning the competitive advantages

of particular destinations. More precisely, the global

campaign should be directed toward encouraging lo-

cal, traditional, authentic, and innovative production

rather than promoting a mass-tourism market with

similar product chains in every destination.

Mountainous areas, with their extreme complex-

ity, require more integrated economic development

approaches than the lowlands. As suggested by the

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

Nations and the International Partnership for Sus-

tainable Development in Mountain Regions [9], it

is better to build the mountain economies upon the

strengths of their assets, such as traditional knowl-

edge and niche production. Similarly, a Strategic

Research Agenda on Mountains for Europe’s Future

[10] argues that a shift is necessary in the overall

understanding of mountains and their capacities:

they are unique places with special potential solu-

tions for various pressing challenges, including

sustainable mountain tourism. Therefore, as re-

searchers suggest, mountain tourism should be de-

veloped based on the local, high-value, competitive

products, and services [11,12]. Apparently, such

an approach will better ensure the sustainability of

tourism development, the diversification of the re-

gional economy, and, importantly, the maintenance

of domestic, rooted economic activities.

Based on the assumptions of the UNWTO and

the UNDP [13], the power of tourism is crucial for

achieving the goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustain-

able Development. Developing tourism with strong

linkages to allied economic activities is among the

pillars of the Sustainable Development Goals. Thus,

tourism policymakers should act together with gov-

ernmental and non-governmental institutes and oth-

er relevant stakeholders to harness tourism’s mul-

tiplier effect through integrated policies. In partic-

ular, they must work together to take advantage of

tourism’s economic interlinkages with, and impacts

on, other sectors and activities.

The Association Agreement between the Euro-

pean Union and Georgia 2014–2020 also addresses

tourism: Article 9 indicates Georgia’s development

path in relation to tourism progress. The Georgian

government is responsible for increasing tourism’s

potential and the number of international visitors,

as tourism is among the leading sectors of the econ-

omy, creating several direct and indirect benefits

for host communities. The same article in the As-

sociation Agreement states [14] that Georgia should

maintain “partnership between public, private,

and community interests in the field of tourism,

to strengthen the development of competitive and

sustainable tourism industry as a generator of eco-

nomic growth and empowerment, employment, and

international exchange.”

There is currently high international emphasis

on developing tourism with strong linkages to al-

lied economic activities. However, recent research

projects carried out in mountainous Georgia have

revealed weak interrelations between tourism and

other economic sectors. According to Gugushvili

et al. [15], the Greater Caucasus experiences weak

and non-resilient economic linkages between tour-

ism and agriculture. This significantly hinders the

possible benefits and hand-in-hand progress for the

local community. It also reduces the stability and

sustainability of local tourist markets. Khelashvili

[16] observed the lowest emphasis on the consump-

tion of local products. Furthermore, his findings re-

vealed the low multiplier effect from tourism-gen-

erated income and high import dependency. Papava

[17], in his policy paper, also highlights that only up

to 20% of Georgia’s consumer basket is produced

within the country, whereas the remaining 80% is

imported. Such a character of tourism—not con-

suming local products—contributes instead to the

economies of the exporting countries and leads to

the leakage of tourism’s economic benefits.

Several research projects have apparently been

conducted on linkages between tourism and other

economic activities. However, few, if any, attempts

were made to translate existing scientific evidence

into practical solutions and integrate them into the

271

strategic documents. Based on this gap, the following

questions were raised and are answered in this paper:

(i) do the strategic documents address issues related

to the LTSC? (ii) what kinds of evidence/suggestions

do scientific articles offer for tourism development

strategies in the mountain and rural areas? and (iii)

how do the local people imagine using the immense

opportunity of the tourism multiplier effect?

Methodology

The presented study combines a systematic lit-

erature review of articles (Georgia’s context) and

policy documents, as well as applying a participato-

ry workshop. The analysis of the scientific sources

and the integration of local perspectives played a

decisive role in identifying the current gaps and for-

mulating recommendations for policy documents,

which express the needs of the locals.

Systematic Literature Review

The initial phase of the study was conducted

based on the principles of the systematic literature

review [18]. First, peer-reviewed publications were

collected on the study topic using keyword (“tour-

ism” and “Georgia”) searches in electronic databas-

es, such as Web of Science, Scopus, ResearchGate,

and Google Scholar. Given the scarcity of available

literature in the context of tourism in Georgia, the

search was not limited to a particular topic. After col-

lection of the relevant articles, pre-defined inclusion

criteria, including geographical peculiarities (rural

and mountain areas) and the particular topic of tour-

ism study (linkages between the tourism industry

and other economic sectors) were used during the

systematic analysis of the literature. More precisely,

certain parts of the paper, such as the abstract and

conclusion, were assessed in compliance with the

determined inclusion criteria. The comprehensive

literature search resulted in ten articles (Table 1),

including conference proceedings and unpublished

articles. Our approach allowed synthesis of the re-

search findings to reveal how the LTSC functions in

rural and mountainous Georgia and creation of the

strategic recommendations.

FFiigg 11..

Phases for Participatory Policy Review

Source: Figure -

Phases for Participatory Policy Review

was developed by the authors

SSyysstteemmaattiicc LLiitteerraattuurree RReevviieeww

The initial phase of the study was conducted based on the principles of the systematic literature

review [18]. First, peer-reviewed publications were collected on the study topic using keyword

(“tourism” and “Georgia”) searches in electronic databases, such as Web of Science, Scopus,

ResearchGate, and Google Scholar. Given the scarcity of available literature in the context of

tourism in Georgia, the search was not limited to a particular topic. After collection of the

relevant articles, pre-defined inclusion criteria, including geographical peculiarities (rural and

mountain areas) and the particular topic of tourism study (linkages between the tourism

industry and other economic sectors) were used during the systematic analysis of the literature.

More precisely, certain parts of the paper, such as the abstract and conclusion, were assessed

in compliance with the determined inclusion criteria. The comprehensive literature search

resulted in ten articles (Table 1), including conference proceedings and unpublished articles.

Our approach allowed synthesis of the research findings to reveal how the LTSC functions in

rural and mountainous Georgia and creation of the strategic recommendations.

Systematic

Literature Review

Policy Documents

Review

Participatory

Workshop

The academic articles were reviewed

focusing on the issues related to LTSC.

-Selection of relevant publications;

-synthesize the research findings of

selected articles;

-preparation of preliminary

recommendations.

The following development documents

were reviewed:

-Development of High Mountain

Regions of Georgia (2019-2023);

-Rural Development Strategy of

Georgia (2017-2020);

-Georgian Tourism Development

Strategy (2019-2025).

Workshop was carried out in the one

of the mountain regions of Georgia

with locals.

During the workshop LTSC -related

topics and recommendations for

development documents were

discussed.

Preparation of Final Recommendations for Rural &Mountain Regions

Phase

Phase #4

-Synthetization of systematic literature review and participatory workshop outcomes;

-Elaboration of final recommendation for development strategy documents;

-Identification of the possible subchapter for integration of proposed practical solutions.

Fig 1. Phases for Participatory Policy Review

Source: Figure - Phases for Participatory Policy Review was developed by the authors

Annals of Agrarian Science 18 (2020) 269–281

T. Gugushvili et al.

272

Policy Document Review

The second phase of the study was focused on

reviewing policy documents aiming to assess the

national perspective on tourism development, par-

ticularly regarding the supply side of tourism and

its role in mountain and rural advancement. For

this reason, we selected and reviewed the following

policy documents: (i) Rural Development Strate-

gy of Georgia (2017–2020); (ii) Georgian Tourism

Development Strategy (2019–2025); and (iii) De-

velopment of High Mountain Regions of Georgia

(2019–2023). We applied computer-assisted quali-

tative data analysis software to analyze the collect-

ed materials. The analysis process was focused on

reviewing whether the selected strategic documents

integrate the findings of recently implemented sci-

entific studies. Furthermore, measures were taken

to support scaling up the locally initiated economic

activities and their integration in the LTSCs. As a

result of the open coding, the primary thematic cat-

egories, such as Importance of Tourism, Ecotour-

ism Development, Importance of LTSC, and Data

on Tourism Development, were formulated.

Participatory Workshop

The core concept of the presented methodol-

ogy is to promote active engagement of the local

community, who represent final beneficiaries of the

analyzed policy documents, in the study. More pre-

cisely, the workshop—as an effective participatory

TTaabbllee 11..

Publication collected for Systematic Literature Review

Publication

Status

Publication

Date

published 2020

Published 2020

Published 2019

Published 2018

Published 2017

Publication Title

Is Tourism the Beginning or the End?

Livelihoods of Georgian Mountain People at

Stake

Spatial Peculiarities of Local Tourism

Supply-Chains in High Mountainous

Georgia: Challenges and Perspectives.

Rural Tourism in Georgia in Transition:

Challenges for Regional Sustainability

Analyzing Tourism Influence on

Agricultural Products’ Market: A Case Study

of the Mestia Municipality, Georgia

Clustering the Problems of Sustainable

Tourism Development in a Destination:

Tsaghveri Resort as A Case

The Role of Tourism in Economic

Development of Georgia

Social and Economic Challenges of

Sustainable Tourism Development in

Georgia

Fragmented Development: Tourism-driven

Economic Changes in Kazbegi, Georgia

Rural tourism as a promising trend of small

business in Georgia: Topicality, capabilities,

peculiarities

Linking agricultural food production and

rural tourism in the Kazbegi district – A

qualitative study

Author/s

Salukvadze, Gvantsa

Backhaus, Norman

Salukvadze, Gvantsa

Gugushvili, Temur

Salukvadze, Joseph

Khartishvili, Lela

Muhar, Andreas

Dax, Thomas

Khelashvili, Ioseb

Sharia, Mariam

Khelashvili, Ioseb

Khartishvili, Lela

Khokhobaia, Merab

Arghutashvili, Valeri

Khelashvili, Ioseb

Gugushvili, Temur

Salukvadze, Gvantsa

Salukvadze, Joseph

Paresishvili, Otar

Kvaratskhelia, Laura

Mirzaeva, Valentina

Hüller, S.

Heiny, J.

Leonhäuser, I.-U.

Published 2017

Table 1. Publication collected for Systematic Literature Review

representatives. The distinguished triggers cover a wide range of topics that should be

addressed in the policy for sustainable rural tourism and healthy LTSC development, as well

as in the strategies for rural, mountain, and tourism development.

TTaabbllee 22..

Triggers and recommendations for developing effective LTSC in terms of agriculture

Topics Triggers and recommendations Authors

Absence of food

processing

infrastructure

Agricultural products’

integration in tourism

Agricultural extension

service for local

farmers

The article indicates that in the research region, the absence

of professional food processing infrastructure

(slaughterhouses and milk collection centers) makes it

challenging for local small-scale farmers to deliver agri-food

products that fit safety standards. Along with infrastructural

shortcomings, an agricultural extension service, especially

training in agri-

marketing for local farmers, would play a

vital role in the process of reaching the tourism market. The

authors propose marketization of agri-pr

oducts, such as

honey, herbal tea, potatoes [25], and cheese, which may have

the potential to be integrated into the LTSC.

[20]

Ineffective

communication

between LTSC actors

Shortcomings in

agriculture

The a

uthor argues that even though the development of the

tourism sector opened the opportunity for local farmers to

sell their agricultural products to the local market, they

cannot fully embrace the potential. Sharia points to the

leading reasons preventing integration of local agricultural

products in the LTSC. This fact is triggered, on the one hand,

by the weak communication between the actors from tourism

and agriculture businesses, and, on the other hand, the

existing challenges faced by the agricultural

sector in the

region.

[21]

Annals of Agrarian Science 18 (2020) 269–281

T. Gugushvili et al.

273

technique—was applied to ensure the integration of

the local voices in the process of developing rec-

ommendations. The meeting organized for the lo-

cal stakeholder with cooperation with Local Action

Group (LAG) in one of the mountain settlements in

Georgia - Mestia Municipality. Around 20 attendees

represented different genders, generations and eco-

nomic fields.

The first part of the workshop was dedicated to

the researchers’ presentation of the main findings of

the systematic literature review regarding the LTSC

in the mountain and rural areas of Georgia. The sec-

ond part consisted of a follow-up teamwork discus-

sion: in small groups, one to three particular topics

were selected from the provided issues for further

debate. The following topics were discussed: (i)

alternative integration strategies in the LTSC; (ii)

barriers and possible ways to integrate agriculture

in the LTSC; and (iii) challenges with scaling up

the economic activities, mainly agriculture. Hence,

such an approach revealed the topics that are of pri-

mary importance to the local population.

Results

Results of the systematic literature review

The reviewed articles cover a wide range of is-

sues from general questions (the role of tourism in

economic development on the national or region-

al level) to narrower topics (rural tourism and the

LTSC). Most of the publications employ qualitative

methods, using in-depth interviews, focus groups,

and workshops with various stakeholders, such as

local community members, representatives of the

tourism industry, associations, experts, and practi-

tioners in the study field. A broad representation of

different voices is an essential prerequisite for the

co-creation of knowledge and the development of

inclusive, practical, reliable, and justified solutions.

In the literature discussing tourism broadly, in

the context of regional development, scholars out-

line the multiplier effect of the sector, which is not

fully embraced [16]. It has the potential to catalyze,

stimulating satellite economic branches in the re-

gion and beyond [19].

Some scholars are focused on the challenges and

perspectives of the LTSC. The latest studies imple-

mented in the Kazbegi Municipality [15, 20] show

that while the advancement of tourism is rapid, the

indicators of agricultural activities are significantly

decreasing in the region. Based on such a finding,

the scholars highlight the crucial importance of in-

tegrating local agricultural product supplies into the

tourism industry chain [15]. Furthermore, scholars

note that the local farmers can improve their liveli-

hoods by supplying the products to tourist facilities

(e.g., guesthouses, catering services) [20]; the desti-

nation may even create an authentic niche by provid-

ing and promoting local, natural agri-food products

to tourists [21], which itself is a pillar of sustainable

rural tourism development [22,23]. Salukvadze and

Backhaus [24] argue that tourism-led fragmentation

in the local livelihood system may prevent diversifi-

cation of economic activities and even increase tour-

ism-dependence of the host community.

Most importantly, the outcomes of several stud-

ies (Table 2) mentioned above also include the rea-

sons for the existing weak linkages between agri-

food producers and tourism industry representa-

tives. The distinguished triggers cover a wide range

of topics that should be addressed in the policy for

sustainable rural tourism and healthy LTSC devel-

opment, as well as in the strategies for rural, moun-

tain, and tourism development.

Table 2. Triggers and recommendations for developing effective LTSC in terms of agriculture

representatives. The distinguished triggers cover a wide range of topics that should be

addressed in the policy for sustainable rural tourism and healthy LTSC development, as well

as in the strategies for rural, mountain, and tourism development.

TTaabbllee 22..

Triggers and recommendations for developing effective LTSC in terms of agriculture

Topics Triggers and recommendations Authors

Absence of food

processing

infrastructure

Agricultural products’

integration in tourism

Agricultural extension

service for local

farmers

The article indicates that in the research region, the absence

of professional food processing infrastructure

(slaughterhouses and milk collection centers) makes it

challenging for local small-scale farmers to deliver agri-food

products that fit safety standards. Along with infrastructural

shortcomings, an agricultural extension service, especially

training in agri-marketing for local farmers, would play a

vital role in the process of reaching the tourism market. The

authors propose marketization of agri-pr

oducts, such as

honey, herbal tea, potatoes [25], and cheese, which may have

the potential to be integrated into the LTSC.

[20]

Ineffective

communication

between LTSC actors

Shortcomings in

agriculture

The a

uthor argues that even though the development of the

tourism sector opened the opportunity for local farmers to

sell their agricultural products to the local market, they

cannot fully embrace the potential. Sharia points to the

leading reasons preventing integration of local agricultural

products in the LTSC. This fact is triggered, on the one hand,

by the weak communication between the actors from tourism

and agriculture businesses, and, on the other hand, the

existing challenges faced by the agricultural

sector in the

region.

[21]

Annals of Agrarian Science 18 (2020) 269–281

T. Gugushvili et al.

274

representatives. The distinguished triggers cover a wide range of topics that should be

addressed in the policy for sustainable rural tourism and healthy LTSC development, as well

as in the strategies for rural, mountain, and tourism development.

TTaabbllee 22..

Triggers and recommendations for developing effective LTSC in terms of agriculture

Topics Triggers and recommendations Authors

Absence of food

processing

infrastructure

Agricultural products’

integration in tourism

Agricultural extension

service for local

farmers

The article indicates that in the research region, the absence

of professional food processing infrastructure

(slaughterhouses and milk collection centers) makes it

challenging for local small-scale farmers to deliver agri-food

products that fit safety standards. Along with infrastructural

shortcomings, an agricultural extension service, especially

training in agri-

marketing for local farmers, would play a

vital role in the process of reaching the tourism market. The

authors propose marketization of agri-pr

oducts, such as

honey, herbal tea, potatoes [25], and cheese, which may have

the potential to be integrated into the LTSC.

[20]

Ineffective

communication

between LTSC actors

Shortcomings in

agriculture

The author argues that even though the development of the

tourism sector opened the opportunity for local farmers to

sell their agricultural products to the local market, they

cannot fully embrace the potential. Sharia points to the

leading reasons preventing integration of local agricultural

products in the LTSC. This fact is triggered, on the one hand,

by the weak communication between the actors from tourism

and agriculture businesses, and, on the other hand, the

existing challenges faced by the agricultural sector in the

region.

[21]

Cooperation between

the institutions

Institutional

development

In the article, scholars draw readers’ attention to the project

Marani Wine Tours, which is an obvious example of how

cooperation between associations and government

institutions have succeeded in the valorization of Qvevri1

ine. Such a practice represents an example of how to

stimulate adjoined economic activities—in this case, agri-

tourism.

The article also outlines the initiated network between

between organic farmers and tourism actors supported by

NGOs via external fund

ing. Based on the evidence, they

argue that the absence of governmental organizations in this

initiative has resulted in incomplete development and weak

sustainability.

The authors foresee that institutional development

(institutions for rural tourism development and destination

management organizations (DMOs)) will ensure the

sustainable development of rural tourism, including hand-in-

hand development of agriculture and tourism in the

destination.

[23]

Cooperation between

the institutions

Analyzing existing

practices

Local context

Similarly to the previously discussed article [23], the author

stresses the benefits of strengthened interlinkages between

the private sector, governmental and educational institutions.

Furthermore, the author highlights the importance of

analyzing already existing experience in foreign countries as

well as considering the local context with its full advantages,

resources, and development prospects.

[19]

1 Qvevri wine-making is practiced throughout Georgia, particularly in village communities

where unique varieties of grapes are grown. The Qvevri is an egg-shaped earthenware vessel

used for making, ageing and storing the wine. https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/ancient-georgian-

traditional-qvevri-wine-making-method-00870

Cooperation between

the institutions

Institutional

development

In the article, scholars draw readers’ attention to the project

Marani Wine Tours, which is an obvious example of how

cooperation between associations and government

institutions have succeeded in the valorization of Qvevri1

ine. Such a practice represents an example of how to

stimulate adjoined economic activities—in this case, agri-

tourism.

The article also outlines the initiated network between

between organic farmers and tourism actors supported by

NGOs via external fund

ing. Based on the evidence, they

argue that the absence of governmental organizations in this

initiative has resulted in incomplete development and weak

sustainability.

The authors foresee that institutional development

(institutions for rural tourism development and destination

management organizations (DMOs)) will ensure the

sustainable development of rural tourism, including hand-in-

hand development of agriculture and tourism in the

destination.

[23]

Cooperation between

the institutions

Analyzing existing

practices

Local context

Similarly to the previously discussed article [23], the author

stresses the benefits of strengthened interlinkages between

the private sector, governmental and educational institutions.

Furthermore, the author highlights the importance of

analyzing already existing experience in foreign countries as

well as considering the local context with its full advantages,

resources, and development prospects.

[19]

1 Qvevri wine-making is practiced throughout Georgia, particularly in village communities

where unique varieties of grapes are grown. The Qvevri is an egg-shaped earthenware vessel

used for making, ageing and storing the wine. https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/ancient-georgian-

traditional-qvevri-wine-making-method-00870

The competitiveness

of local agricultural

products

Shortcomings in

agriculture

Agricultural extension

service for local

farmers

Unstable supply of

agri-products

The article pays attention

to local products’ lack of

competitiveness compared to alternative suppliers’

distributed goods from outside the region. The authors reveal

the reasons in favor of non-

local products. The main

advantage is the lower price of the mass-produced, low-

quality products delivered to the region, which seems to be

acceptable for the tourism recipients, especially catering

providers. Furthermore, such ‘outside’ markets have

additional advantages, such as broad spatial coverag

e of

product delivery and barter options (e.g., a natural exchange

of cheese to vegetables). Altogether, this significantly

weakens the competitiveness of local products.

Some findings in this article are in line with the perspectives

of other scholars [20] and support the view that local farmers’

weak marketing skills and lack of enthusiasm to offer their

products to tourism recipients are core shortcomings of weak

collaboration between farmers and tourism representatives.

The article complements Sharia’s [21]

findings regarding

existing shortcomings in agriculture that significantly hinder

its integration into the LTSC. Alo

ng with the mentioned

weaknesses in agriculture, additional shortcomings are

observed, such as unstable supply (e.g., seasonality, volatile

number of products), outdated infrastructure, and lack of

modern technology.

[11]

Recent publications using data from the research project “Linkages between Tourism and

Community-driven Economic Activities: Shaping Sustainability in Mountain Regions” provide

a new angle for LTSC study. More specifically, the central settlements (e.g., Townlets) in the

mountain districts are identified as the primary consumers (e.g., cafes, hotels, guesthouses) of

the agri-products delivered from nearby or distant villages [11]. Such a finding indicates the

inevitable need for stable connectivity between rural and urban settlements, including road

infrastructure, transport, and information flow to pave the way for small-scale farmers’

integration within the LTSC.

A recent article by Salukvadze and Backhaus [24] was dedicated to analyzing the tourism-led

transformation in mountain and rural areas of the Greater Caucasus. Based on the findings,

scholars determined the following main types of livelihood alteration on the household level:

(i) developing agri-tourism; (ii) increasing agricultural activities; (iii) reducing agricultural

activities; and (iv) expanding non-agricultural activities. The existence of the latter type

outlines that the local community’s involvement in the tourism supply chain is possible

through types of products and services other than agriculture.

Destinations face several tourism-related challenges at the same time, rather than single

problem alone. Scholars introduce various scientific tools for sorting out problems to solve

them effectively. Khelashvili, Khartishvili and Khokhobaia [26] proposes a system-based

methodology, allowing researchers to identify the interrelation between destination’s

problems to cluster and determine the leverage factors. Ultimately, such an approach enables

practitioners to identify problems, which should be addressed on the initial stage of destination

development.

TThhee LLTTSSCCss aanndd ddeevveellooppmmeenntt ssttrraatteeggiieess

Annals of Agrarian Science 18 (2020) 269–281

T. Gugushvili et al.

275