ArticlePDF Available

Local Food Production Based on Culinary Heritage—A Way to Local Sustainability

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

This research assess the role of traditional food producers’ activities in fostering local sustainability in Poland. The study was carried out at the turn of 2021 and 2022, involving a sample of 70 traditional food producers. It utilized semi-structured interviews, which included two categories of questions: the characteristics of traditional food producers and the significance of their operational goals. Given the unique nature of traditional food in Poland, producers can be categorized into three groups, based on their connection to tradition: local, regional, and national. Differences among these groups were analyzed using a series of t-tests. The findings indicate that in the hierarchy of goals for traditional food producers, socio-cultural objectives take precedence, followed by business goals, while goals related to food safety, quality, and environmental responsibility rank as the least important, with significant differences noted. Producers associated with local traditions, predominantly consisting of family businesses, show the least interest in achieving food safety, quality, and environmental responsibility objectives. While traditional food producers in Poland are adopting pro-ecological practices, these are primarily driven by business considerations and market demands.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Ossowska, L.; Janiszewska,
D.; Kwiatkowski, G.; Oklevik, O.
Local Food Production Based on
Culinary Heritage—A Way to Local
Sustainability. Sustainability 2024,16,
11310. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su162411310
Academic Editors: Karolina Pycia and
Joanna Kaszuba
Received: 21 November 2024
Revised: 21 December 2024
Accepted: 22 December 2024
Published: 23 December 2024
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Article
Local Food Production Based on Culinary Heritage—A Way to
Local Sustainability
Luiza Ossowska 1, *, Dorota Janiszewska 1, Grzegorz Kwiatkowski 1and Ove Oklevik 2,3
1Department of Economics, Koszalin University of Technology, 75-343 Koszalin, Poland;
dorota.janiszewska@tu.koszalin.pl (D.J.); grzegorz.kwiatkowski@tu.koszalin.pl (G.K.)
2
HVL Business School, Faculty of Technology, Environmental and Social Sciences, Western Norway University
of Applied Sciences, Røyrgata 6, 6856 Sogndal, Norway; ove.oklevik@hvl.no
3Department of Marketing, Management and Finance Institute, WSB Merito University in Gdansk,
Al. Grunwaldzka 238A, 80-266 Gdansk, Poland
*Correspondence: luiza.ossowska@tu.koszalin.pl
Abstract: This research assess the role of traditional food producers’ activities in fostering local
sustainability in Poland. The study was carried out at the turn of 2021 and 2022, involving a sample of
70 traditional food producers. It utilized semi-structured interviews, which included two categories
of questions: the characteristics of traditional food producers and the significance of their operational
goals. Given the unique nature of traditional food in Poland, producers can be categorized into
three groups, based on their connection to tradition: local, regional, and national. Differences
among these groups were analyzed using a series of t-tests. The findings indicate that in the
hierarchy of goals for traditional food producers, socio-cultural objectives take precedence, followed
by business goals, while goals related to food safety, quality, and environmental responsibility rank
as the least important, with significant differences noted. Producers associated with local traditions,
predominantly consisting of family businesses, show the least interest in achieving food safety, quality,
and environmental responsibility objectives. While traditional food producers in Poland are adopting
pro-ecological practices, these are primarily driven by business considerations and market demands.
Keywords: culinary heritage; traditional food producers; local sustainability
1. Introduction
Food is a marker of identity, regardless of the geographical, social and political dif-
ferences that divide populations [
1
]. Moreover, food evokes memories, stimulates senses
and emotions, and offers experiences that connect people across space and time, creating
local, regional and national/ethnic identities and connecting the past with the present.
These elements make food a form of cultural heritage that encompasses both material and
immaterial dimensions [2].
The important role of food is demonstrated by its recognition as intangible cultural
heritage by UNESCO for the first time in 2010 [
3
]. Heritage deals with the updating,
adaptation and reinterpretation of elements of a group’s past—its knowledge, skills and
values [
4
]. UNESCO defines cultural heritage as “the heritage of tangible and intangible
attributes of a group or society inherited from past generations, maintained in the present
and transmitted for the benefit of future generations” [5].
Heritage in the context of food—culinary heritage—is defined as a set of tangible and
intangible elements of food cultures that are considered a common heritage or common
good. Culinary heritage includes agricultural products, ingredients, dishes, techniques,
recipes and culinary traditions. In addition, it also includes table manners, the symbolic
dimension of food and, in more tangible aspects, culinary artifacts and table setting: art,
dishes, etc. [
4
]. All these factors have distinguished individual groups and societies for
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411310 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 2 of 18
centuries, creating strong bonds and identities. In a multigenerational environment—
especially a family environment—such traditions were passed down as part of cultural
heritage, which often remains a source of culinary habits and patterns [
6
]. Ramli et al. [
7
]
consider the essence of culinary heritage in various contexts: the relationship to place
and agricultural history, the origin of food products (i.e., fruit and vegetable growing and
livestock breeding related to regional climate and suitability), and food production from
local produce.
Culinary heritage is an evolving conversation about food, society and history that
brings many stakeholders with different perspectives and backgrounds to the table. Culi-
nary heritage stakeholders are a diverse group that includes visitors as well as farmers,
gardeners, chefs and families, who share this heritage as a birthright [
8
]. An interesting
view is presented by Hatchuel et al. [
9
], who believe that culinary heritage is both the
ability to “respect” the tradition of craftsmanship and to “break” traditional rules and
renew traditions. According to Avieli [
10
], culinary heritage has no static dimension. It is a
culturally constructed dynamic process with self-generating capabilities. It includes dishes
consumed by local people and different customers who can assign new meanings to them.
Food heritage encompasses numerous socio-cultural aspects that are generally unique to
local social customs, such as knowledge, cooking techniques, eating and drinking methods,
and food-sharing practices [11].
As Almansour et al. [
12
] emphasize, culinary heritage is particularly important for
local areas, as it is strongly linked to specific food production. In this context, culinary
heritage reflects shared memory and origin, which increases the sense of belonging to the
territory. Moreover, and more valuable, these factors can be motives for attachment to
a specific place/region. Ultimately, this can increase the willingness to develop various
activities in and for the area.
Initiatives related to culinary heritage fit into the concept of sustainable development.
They undoubtedly strengthen local culture and economy. They can also become an ele-
ment of the process of returning to disturbed balance and maintaining it [
13
]. Cultural
sustainability of culinary heritage is just the first step in setting in motion a circle that
brings benefits of social, economic and environmental sustainability [
14
]. Hawkes [
15
]
treats cultural heritage as the fourth pillar of sustainable development, meaning culinary
heritage as part of cultural heritage is also one of the pillars of this development [
11
].
Moreover, food culture and heritage connect food security and sustainable development [
2
].
Culinary heritage in the environmental dimension is the connection of food with nature.
In the economic dimension, it is income generation through sales and connections with
tourism. In the social dimension, the new emotional bonds that are created in the process
of reconstructing the food identity of the communities are very important [16].
In the field of culinary heritage, several research gaps have been identified in the
literature, which are to be filled. According to Almansour et al. [
12
] culinary heritage
encompasses three fundamental dimensions—heritage, people and place. The authors feel
that this concept requires further evaluation, including research with different stakeholders
involved in food production in the field of culinary heritage. Shahrin and Hussin [
17
]
emphasize the need for further empirical research on culinary heritage, especially in terms
of decision-making challenges and the implications of culinary heritage for business devel-
opment. According to Ramli et al. [
18
], future research should investigate patterns of social
interaction in local food and culinary cultures, which could be a beneficial contribution
to more comprehensive sustainable development. Zocchi et al. [
19
] indicate the need to
explore the impacts in the stages before the commercial valorization of culinary heritage, in
more detail. In this respect, research could focus on the diversity, continuity and variability
of traditional foods in the context of keeping traditions alive. Multidisciplinary research
is needed to explore the perspectives and expectations of specific entities (e.g., produc-
ers) and factors that activate the involvement of local communities in the protection of
culinary heritage.
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 3 of 18
To fill the gap regarding the multidisciplinary approach from the perspective of a
specific stakeholder group, the aim of the research is to determine the role of traditional
food producers’ activities for local sustainability in Poland. Additionally, the following
research questions were formulated:
Q1. How can traditional food producers contribute to local sustainability?
Q2. What is the hierarchy of goals of traditional food producers’ activities in relation to
local sustainability?
The article is organized as follows: Section 2contains a theoretical approach.
Section 3
presents the research hypothesis. Section 4describes materials and methods. Section 5presents
the results. Section 6includes discussion. Section 7elaborates on the study conclusions.
2. Culinary Heritage and Its Implementation by Traditional Food Producers in the
Process of Local Sustainability—A Theoretical Approach
2.1. Supporting Cultural Heritage and Local Identity
Analyzing the goals of traditional food producers’ activities, researchers indicate
various categories, including those related to local sustainable development. Among the
socio-cultural goals, the following are mentioned: preserving regional and local cultural her-
itage, enjoying work [
20
], passion [
21
,
22
], sharing passion and interest, and a continuation
of family traditions, promoting local traditions and culture [23].
Food and its preparation, as well as the taste choices of individuals and nations, seem
to play an important role in the construction of identity, because, as it is commonly said,
“we are what we eat” and, therefore, “we create ourselves”. Food is therefore attributed
with different meanings for different societies and communities, as well as differences
between individuals within these groups [
24
]. Food can be considered as people’s identity,
considering its uniqueness and diversity. In this approach, culinary heritage is based
on historical, aesthetic and social, but also symbolic aspects [
25
]. Food is a reflection of
society, including traditions, rituals, religious references, and agricultural methods. The
production and consumption of food, especially traditional food, has an impact on those
involved. Thus, culinary heritage has the ability to enhance and showcase the culture of
a given place or destination. Rituals and food traditions reflect the cultural diversity of
a given society [
26
]. Recognizing the value of the specificity of the culinary heritage of
local communities supports cultural diversity. This can contribute to the strengthening of
local communities, which is consistent with the sustainable development goal of reducing
inequality [27].
Traditional cuisine is an integral part of the cultural heritage, offering insight into the
history, lifestyles and values of the people who have inhabited the area for generations. This
connection between food and culture is essential to preserving indigenous knowledge [
28
].
Culinary heritage is therefore a valuable resource that must be protected and promoted. All
territories and communities are rich in a specific food culture. Culinary heritage is a cultural
asset. It connects destinations, entrepreneurs, consumers, tourists and key stakeholders [
29
].
It is also a factor strengthening local identity [30].
Traditional food is inextricably linked to the identity of the area of origin and authentic-
ity, thus it can be an added value [
31
].The importance of authenticity for culinary heritage
is also emphasized by Shahrin and Hussin [
17
]. Authenticity is, in this approach, a factor of
competitiveness and building trust and loyalty of customers, similar to the passion for how
food should be made. In the production of traditional food, passion is very important. It
contributes to the fact that it is not only a business, but also a way of life of producers [
21
].
The activity of traditional food producers allows one not only to pursue one’s own interests
and passions, but also to share one’s knowledge and skills with others [23].
2.2. Supporting Local Business
Referring to the results of other researchers, the business goals of local traditional
food producers include realizing the highest income level [
20
], financial independence [
22
],
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 4 of 18
profit and earnings, having one’s own business and one’s own brand of product [
23
,
32
],
and also building a strong local brandj [30].
Rathor and Parkash [
33
] emphasize the importance of culinary heritage and traditional
dishes in the region’s economic development, and even in that of the country. This is
related to the fact that food is indispensable in human life, which applies to the local
community and tourists. According to Jaroscenkova’s results [
34
], there is a positive
correlation between the level of development of the business environment and the level of
use of culinary heritage. Thus, culinary heritage is an important additional opportunity to
support business and economic growth. By supporting business, the production and sale
of traditional food is consistent with the goal of sustainable development related to decent
work and economic growth [35].
Bolborici et al. [
30
] indicate the possibility of creating and developing a strong local
brand based on culinary heritage. This can strengthen the local economy, both in terms
of income, raw materials and human capital, manifested in specific skills. An important
determinant of culinary heritage is the locality of ingredients. Raw materials should
be produced locally. The broadly understood local climate is conducive to producing
appropriate ingredients for culinary heritage [
36
]. Kumar Singh et al. [
26
] emphasize the
great importance of a well-qualified workforce for the culinary-heritage food segment.
Knowledge and skills are essential in producing traditional food, and experience is also
important. This is important, because culinary heritage is recognized as a challenging
and lucrative market niche in the hospitality sector. Culinary heritage is often used to
run family businesses, where knowledge and skills are passed down from generation to
generation, and employees come from family members. They are usually loyal and reliable
employees, both economically and emotionally involved in the business [37,38].
Besides food production and sale, culinary heritage can also support other types of
profitable activities. Culinary heritage can be a basis for food tourism (culinary tourism
or gastronomy tourism). Culinary tourism has become so popular that it has separated
from cultural tourism, as a separate segment [
39
]. Sustainable tourism is a form of tourism
in which travelers seek authentic, environmentally friendly and culturally enriching ex-
periences [
28
]. Culinary offerings can play a significant role in attracting tourists. As a
separate segment, culinary tourism refers to experiences in which tourists usually embark
on journeys to discover local gastronomy. The connection between regional food and
specific places or regions is strong. This connection can be used to build strategies for these
areas [26].
As Omar et al. [
40
] emphasize, food is a key element of the cultural and heritage
tourism sector, as it reflects the culture and image of the region. Nowadays, tourists are not
only looking for experiences involving the sense of sight; places that provide experiences
for all the senses, including taste, are dying out [41,42].
2.3. Supporting Food Safety and Quality, Environmental Responsibility
Local producers of traditional food also pursue goals related to supporting food safety
and quality and environmental responsibility. These include preserving regional and
local environmental values (nature, landscape), implementing new farming technologies,
producing high-quality products [
20
,
22
,
23
], ecological practices [
28
], and the introduction
of short supply chains for raw materials and products [43].
Kofi Britwum and Demont [
44
] indicate the connection between culinary heritage
and food security. The authors indicate five paths through which cultural heritage can be
used to increase food security. The first is the protection of genetic resources, related to
the use of specific raw materials within the framework of culinary heritage. The second
path is valorization, to generate the necessary market incentives for farmers to preserve
cultural heritage. The valorization of food through the value chain aims to meet the
growing expectations of consumers regarding authentic quality. This is related to the third
path—support for traditional food processing, which is able to preserve the authenticity of
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 5 of 18
heritage. The next paths include consumer preference matching and agritourism, a part of
which may be cuisine using culinary heritage.
Food as a form of heritage plays an important role in defining food security, which
should be included in food security activities at the political, organizational, individual
or educational level. These activities should take into account the importance of food in
relation to memory and expression of identity and different values and traditional ways of
eating. In addition, in relation to food security and culinary heritage, the quality of food
and the growing awareness of consumers in this area are important. The authors point to
the need to include heritage in the definition of food security—alongside access, safety and
sovereignty [2].
The use of traditional dishes and local ingredients is not only a response to the demand
for natural and healthy products. It is also related to the location of food supply chains
in the local area, thus shortening them. Basing food chains on independent and local
production of raw materials contributes to the reduction of intermediary costs (including
transport costs), and often also to greater control of the quality of raw materials, as well as
to less waste of raw materials [
45
]. Hence, there is a growing interest in short food chains
in the context of achieving environmental goals [43].
Food products produced in a traditional way are considered sustainable. Raw mate-
rials come directly from nature, and their usability is usually complete. If there are any
useless residues in the production process, they biodegrade without polluting the envi-
ronment [
22
]. Culinary heritage encourages consumers to make more informed choices,
thus achieving the sustainable development goal of responsible consumption and pro-
duction [
27
]. In relation to culinary heritage, the authenticity of products is extremely
important to consumers, and is related to their quality [17].
Maintaining the culinary heritage, its dishes, ways of eating and handling, and food
sharing practices, are associated with increasing environmental responsibility [
11
]. Culinary
traditions often include sustainable practices such as organic farming, foraging, and using
seasonal, locally available ingredients. As modern society becomes more environmentally
conscious, these practices are in line with the growing global demand for sustainability [
28
].
In addition to traditional practices, modern solutions are also of great importance. In
relation to food production, including traditional food, innovations mainly include the tech-
nological process. Modern solutions contribute to energy savings, shortening production
times, and thus reducing waste and costs [46].
Adomako et al. [
47
] observed that limited resources and capabilities of local, family-
owned businesses make it difficult to fully engage in environmental sustainability orien-
tation. Local producers usually pursue environmental goals while seeking cost-cutting
opportunities, or as a result of market pressure [
48
]. The personal values of the found-
ing owners and family values played a dominant role in decisions and actions regarding
environmental involvement in family businesses [49].
3. Study Context and Research Hypothesis
Based on the literature, the goals of traditional food producers’ activities related to
local sustainability were identified. Social cultural goals include pursuing one’s own
interest, promoting tradition and culture and sharing passion [
20
23
]. Business goals
cover running one’s own business, creating one’s own product brand, and financial
independence [20,23,30,32].
Food safety, quality and environmental responsibility goals
relate to delivering high-quality products, the development and innovation of activities
and introducing ecological solutions [20,22,23,28,43].
Additionally, due to the specific nature of traditional food in Poland, traditional food
producers can be divided into three groups—those related to the national tradition, those
related to the regional tradition and those related to the local tradition. It is believed that
Polish national cuisine was finally shaped in the 19th century. Its character was influenced
by old Polish culinary customs and the influence of foreign nations. A characteristic Polish
product is honey, which was initially collected from forest bees. Herbs and spices (cumin,
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 6 of 18
marjoram, sage, mint, mustard, and lovage) are commonly used in national cuisine dishes,
initially also collected in forests and meadows. A lot of dishes are made on the basis of
cabbage or sauerkraut [50].
The regions have retained their distinct dishes and food traditions to this day. The
most important element of the culinary heritage of the region are products and cuisine
deeply rooted in history, and which is rooted in customs and tradition. Regional cuisine
is an important element of folk culture, shaped over the centuries. It is characterized by
originality, long-standing traditions, and availability mainly in the region from which it
comes. Regional dishes are prepared according to traditional recipes, passed down from
generation to generation. Products characteristic of the region are used to prepare them [
50
].
A kind of autonomy with respect to national cuisine characterizes regional cuisine. Most
often, regional products are an element of the heritage of previous generations, have
a specific character, are original, and are therefore difficult to copy or imitate in other
areas [51].
As in the case of regional products, the locality of a product is determined by its
production area and the range of its occurrence [
51
]. The limitations caused by the financial
situation in various parts of the country forced the population to consume only the available
products—hence, the emergence of local cuisine. The production of local products does not
require the presence of imported raw materials. Their locality consists in using only the
resources of a given area and then giving them a local identity, consisting in identifying
them with a given place [50].
Several hypotheses were tested, taking into account the division of traditional food
producers into those associated with national, regional, and local traditions. Based on the
literature review, the following research hypotheses were formulated.
Due to the connection with the traditions of previous generations and a strong, histori-
cally established connection [50,51]:
H1. The group of traditional food producers with the greatest use of family knowledge and old
recipes is most interested in achieving socio-cultural goals.
Due to the desire to use local production and gain additional income [50,52]:
H2. The group of traditional food producers with the largest share of micro enterprises are most
interested in achieving business goals.
Due to limited possibilities of implementing new, including ecological, solutions to
family businesses [4749]:
H3. Among traditional food producers, the importance of environmental goals is the lowest, and is
significantly different from the importance of social and economic goals.
Wherein
H3.1. The group of traditional food producers with the largest share of family businesses is the least
interested in achieving environmental goals.
4. Materials and Methods
The research was conducted at the turn of 2021 and 2022 on a sample of 70 producers,
who produce and sell traditional food, understood as high-quality food, and produce this
using traditional methods, constituting an element of the region’s cultural heritage and
local identity. “Traditional” means documented as having been in use in the domestic
market for a period capable of being passed down from generation to generation, a period
which will be at least 30 years [53].
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 7 of 18
The research was conducted on producers who belonged to the European Culinary
Heritage Network, which promotes food produced locally and regionally in relation to
culinary traditions. It should be emphasized that, at the end of 2022, Polish regions
withdrew from the association due to formal and legal transformations in the European
Culinary Heritage Network.
The surveyed food producers came from five voivodeships belonging to the Euro-
pean Culinary Heritage Network until 2022, namely the ´
Swi˛etokrzyskie, Wielkopolskie,
Małopolskie, Pomorskie, and Zachodniopomorskie voivodeships. The main intention of
the research was to obtain knowledge about food producers’ activities and approaches to
culinary heritage. The mailing list of respondents was created based on information posted
on the websites of the Regional Culinary Heritage of individual regions.
To achieve the research goal, research was conducted in the form of semi-structured
interviews [
54
]. The surveyed food producers received a questionnaire prepared using
the Google Forms tool. The questions were closed, semi-open and open. Some of the
questions used a five-point Likert scale [
55
]. In addition, telephone conversations were
conducted with respondents to supplement the information and opinions provided in the
questionnaire. A total of 70 semi-structured interviews were conducted.
The questionnaire contained two groups of questions. The first group concerned the
characteristics of traditional food producers. The questions concerned sources of knowledge
about culinary traditions, forms of promoting culinary traditions, cooperation, business
duration, business legal form, source of income, employment, sources of semi-finished
products and raw materials, sales methods, and new solutions. Authors conducting
research in this field have raised these issues [5660].
In the second part, questions concerned the importance of the goals of traditional
food producers’ activities, which were selected based on the literature [
20
23
,
28
,
30
,
32
,
43
].
Respondents assessed the following goals using a Likert scale: pursuing one’s own interest,
promoting tradition and culture, sharing passion, running one’s own business, creating
one’s own product brand, financial independence, delivering high-quality products, devel-
opment and innovation of activities, and introducing ecological solutions.
Additionally, the obtained data were divided into three groups of respondents based
on their culinary tradition origin—national (related to Polish culture), regional (related
to regional culture) and local (related to local culture). A series of t-tests examined the
differences between these groups.
5. Results
5.1. Characteristics of the Surveyed Food Producers
In terms of culinary tradition origin, producers of food referring to national culture
constitute 24.29%, producers of food referring to regional culture 31.43%, and producers of
food referring to local culture 32.86%. The predominance of local and regional traditions
results from the fact that they are more strongly connected with the regional and local level
at which the research was conducted.
The respondents produce various agricultural products. The majority of them process
fruit and vegetables (32.86%)—this is particularly true for food referring to regional and
local culinary traditions. These products include jams, juices and syrups, dried fruit and
vegetables. The next group is meals and dishes (18.57%)—particularly in terms of regional
traditions and characteristic dishes. The next two product groups are honey and bee
products and bread and baked goods (both 17.14%). Honey and bee products refer, in
particular, to national and local traditions. On the other hand, bread and baked goods
refer to regional traditions. Three product groups gained a 10% share each: dairy and eggs,
meat and cold cuts, and herbs. Interestingly, no herbal products refer to local traditions.
Alcoholic beverages covered 8.57% of products—not referring to regional traditions at all.
The smallest group turned out to be fish and fish products (4.29%), which are typical of
coastal and lake areas and refer to regional and local traditions.
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 8 of 18
Table 1contains the main features of food producers in groups referring to national,
regional and local traditions. The features were divided into three categories—supporting
cultural heritage and identity (sources of knowledge about culinary traditions, forms of
promoting knowledge about culinary traditions and cooperation with other producers in
the exchange of knowledge and skills), supporting business (business duration, business
legal form, source of income and employment) and supporting food safety and quality, and
environmental responsibility (sources of semi-finished products and raw materials, sales
methods and introducing new solutions).
Table 1. Characteristics of the surveyed food producers.
Variables
National Tradition
Regional Tradition Local Tradition
All Respondents
Sample size (Number of Entities) 25 22 23 70
Responses in %
Supporting cultural heritage and identity
Sources of knowledge about culinary traditions
Family knowledge 56.00 90.91 78.26 74.29
Old recipes 52.00 90.91 43.48 61.43
Training, workshops 28.00 22.73 30.43 27.14
Cookbooks, guides 16.00 36.36 21.74 24.29
Other vendors and manufacturers 24.00 18.18 17.39 20.00
Internet 20.00 13.64 17.39 17.14
Forms of promoting knowledge about culinary traditions
Tastings 44.00 50.00 47.83 47.14
Workshops 28.00 54.55 26.09 35.71
Lectures 24.00 36.36 13.04 24.29
Food festivals 72.00 77.27 78.26 75.71
Others 12.00 27.27 0.00 12.86
Cooperation with other producers in the exchange of knowledge and skills
With producers from the local environment 44.00 81.82 34.78 50.00
With producers outside the local environment
44.00 50.00 34.78 42.96
Supporting business
Business duration
Below 10 28.00 36.36 34.78 32.86
10–20 20.00 18.18 47.83 28.57
20 and more 52.00 45.45 17.39 38.57
Business legal form
Individual farmer 44.00 27.27 56.52 42.86
Individual registered business 28.00 54.55 34.78 38.57
Company 28.00 4.55 8.70 14.29
Association/Foundation 0.00 13.64 0.00 4.29
Traditional food production as a source of income
The only one 24.00 4.55 13.04 14.29
Main 48.00 50.00 43.48 47.14
Additional 28.00 45.45 43.48 38.57
Employment
1–9 employees (micro) 84.00 77.27 86.96 81.43
10–50 employees (small) 12.00 13.64 13.04 14.29
50 and more employees (medium) 4.00 9.09 0.00 4.29
Family member employment 68.00 68.18 91.30 75.71
Seasonal employment 40.00 54.55 56.52 50.00
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 9 of 18
Table 1. Cont.
Variables
National Tradition
Regional Tradition Local Tradition
All Respondents
Supporting food safety, quality and environmental responsibility
Sources of semi-finished products and raw materials
From own crops and breeding 64.00 77.27 82.61 74.29
From local market 36.00 68.18 21.74 41.43
From regional market 40.00 36.36 13.04 30.00
From national market 16.00 9.09 8.70 11.43
From international market 12.00 4.55 0.00 5.71
Sales ways
Sales at the production place or direct
delivery 28.00 31.82 26.09 28.57
Festivals and events 72.00 77.27 78.26 75.71
Physical own stores 44.00 63.64 43.48 48.57
Online own stores 32.00 22.73 17.39 27.14
Intermediary stores and wholesalers 60.00 40.91 56.52 50.00
Introducing new solutions
Product innovations 76.00 59.09 73.91 70.00
Ecological solutions in the production process
72.00 72.73 52.17 65.71
Source: Own survey.
By far the most important source of knowledge about traditions of all three groups
of food producers is family knowledge, passed down from generation to generation. This
source was indicated by 56.00% of producers associated with national traditions and over
78.26% of producers associated with local traditions. In the case of producers referring
to regional traditions, family knowledge was indicated by almost 90.91% of respondents,
as were old recipes—another source of knowledge about traditions. Old recipes are also
of great importance for producers associated with national (52.00%) and local (43.48%)
traditions. The surveyed producers also use—although to a lesser extent—training and
workshops, cookbooks and guides, or other vendors and manufacturers. It is worth
emphasizing that, despite its general availability, the Internet enjoys less interest. This
source was indicated by only 13.64% of producers associated with regional traditions,
17.39% associated with local traditions and 20.00% associated with national traditions. This
may result from the desire to use proven, old sources, which is more characteristic of family
knowledge or old recipes.
The respondents also indicated the forms of promoting knowledge about culinary
traditions. The most frequently used form is participation in culinary festivals—in all
three groups surveyed, this option received over 70.00% of responses, and in the case of
producers associated with regional and local traditions, almost 80.00%. Culinary festivals
offer many opportunities. They are not only an opportunity to promote tradition, but
also to promote and sell your own products, establish contacts, and cooperation. Another
popular form of promoting knowledge about traditions are tastings. They are organized by
44.00% of producers associated with national traditions, 50.00% associated with regional
traditions and almost 47.83% associated with local traditions. Similarly to festivals, tastings
also offer many other opportunities, such as establishing contacts with customers. Pro-
ducers associated with regional traditions often organize workshops as part of promoting
traditions (54.55%). In the case of producers associated with national and local traditions,
this form of knowledge promotion did not exceed 30.00%. Promotional lectures are also
most often organized by producers associated with regional tradition (36.00%). It is also
worth adding that producers associated with national and regional tradition also indicated
other forms of promoting knowledge, including participation in culinary programs on
television and the Internet.
Producers associated with regional tradition are the group most willing to cooperate—
81.82% cooperate with other producers from the local environment, and 50.00% also
from outside the local environment. This cooperation aims to exchange knowledge and
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 10 of 18
skills necessary in the production process. For the remaining groups of producers, this
cooperation is of lesser importance, with 44.00% of producers associated with national
tradition and 34.78% associated with local tradition cooperating with other producers.
Undoubtedly, culinary heritage can be a factor supporting business. When analyzing
business duration, it should be emphasized that in groups related to national and regional
tradition, companies operating on the market for 20 years or more dominate, constituting
about half of the entities studied. The longest-operating companies in all three groups of
producers have been operating on the market for about 40 years. These are companies
with many years of tradition and an established market position. In turn, the youngest
companies (less than 10 years) in all the groups studied covered about one-third of the
entities. However, these are not new companies—the youngest in all the groups studied
have been operating for 3–4 years. It is worth emphasizing that the data shows that the
youngest group is definitely made up of producers associated with local tradition (average
business duration 8 years), followed by those with regional tradition (average 11.5 years).
The oldest is the group of producers associated with national tradition (average 20 years).
It is worth emphasizing that, due to the specific nature of the activities of the surveyed
producers in this industry, business duration is important. The production of traditional
food requires experience and skills acquired over time. Moreover, it may be much more
difficult for young companies to convince customers to buy their traditional products,
because tradition is associated with time, history, and family knowledge passed down from
generation to generation.
In terms of business legal forms, individual farmers dominate among the surveyed
producers. They constitute 56.52% of respondents in the group associated with local
tradition, 44.00% in the group associated with national tradition and 27.27% in the group
associated with regional tradition. Farmers are interested in traditional food production for
several reasons. First, they can use raw materials from their own fields, i.e., raw materials
of known origin and quality. Second, they can use available space and buildings, and food
production is an additional source of income for them. Third, they often continue family
traditions and acquire the necessary knowledge and skills from childhood.
A registered business is another group of traditional food producers, covering 54.55%
of producers associated with regional tradition, almost 34.78% associated with local tra-
dition, and 28.00% associated with national tradition. Registered business is the most
popular legal form of business activity in Poland. Its establishment is simple, and there
are no special requirements in this respect. It is characteristic of small companies, often
with additional activities to the main source of income. The situation is different in the
case of companies, the establishment of which is associated with agreements between
partners. Companies include 28.00% of the producers related with national tradition and
only 8.70% associated with local tradition and 4.55% with regional tradition. It should be
emphasized that the group associated with the regional tradition also includes associations
and foundations (almost 13.64%). These are specific forms of conducting business—they
are not focused on profit, but on achieving other goals. In the case of traditional food, they
often promote this type of product.
The data show that traditional food production is the main source of income for
most producers. This applies to about half of producers associated with national and
regional traditions and over 43% associated with local traditions. For many respondents
associated with regional (45.45%) and local (43.48%) traditions, traditional food production
is an additional source of income, accompanying only the main activity. Traditional food
production is the only source of income for 24.00% of producers associated with national
traditions, for 13% associated with local traditions and 4.55% with regional traditions.
In relation to the size of enterprises measured by employment, micro enterprises
employing up to nine people definitely predominate. They constitute about 80% of the sur-
veyed entities, and in the group associated with local tradition, 86.96%. Small enterprises
(10–15 employees) covered about 12–14% of respondents. These values turned out to be
quite similar in all three groups. Medium-sized enterprises concern only producers associ-
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 11 of 18
ated with regional (9.09%) and national (4.00%) traditions. There are no large enterprises in
the surveyed group of respondents; all belong to the SME sector. It is worth adding that the
majority of surveyed enterprises are family businesses. In the group associated with local
tradition, 91.30% are family businesses, and in the remaining groups about 68%. Some of
the surveyed producers employ seasonal workers—among producers associated with local
and regional tradition, more than half employ seasonal workers, and among producers
associated with national tradition, it is 40.00%. Seasonal workers are often employed by
farmers during the period of field work and harvest.
The surveyed food producers use their own crops and breeding for production. In the
case of producers associated with local traditions, the share of this group reached almost
82.61%, those associated with regional traditions exceeded 77%, and those associated with
national traditions 64.00%. Supplies from the local market are mainly used by producers
associated with regional traditions (68.18%), and, to a lesser extent, by those associated with
national (36.00%) and local (21.74%) traditions. The regional market supplies raw materials
and semi-finished products mainly for producers associated with national (40.00%) and
regional (36.36%) traditions. Producers associated with local traditions use the regional
market much less often (13.04%). Raw materials and semi-finished products from the
domestic market serve all groups of producers to a small extent, especially those associated
with national traditions. Only some producers associated with national (12.00%) and
regional (4.55%) traditions use supplies from the international market.
In terms of sales methods, producers associated with regional traditions use indirect
forms to the least extent (40.91%). Other producers are more likely to use intermediary
stores and wholesalers—56.52% associated with local traditions and 60.00% associated with
national traditions. Similarly, producers associated with regional traditions use direct forms
of sales more often, shortening the supply chain. They most often use the opportunity to sell
products at culinary festivals (77.27%) and in their own physical stores (63.64%). In general,
sales at culinary festivals are the most frequently used method of selling traditional food.
They provide the possibility of direct contact with customers, and the opportunity to talk
about the product and the tradition associated with it. About 44% of producers associated
with national and local traditions have their own physical stores. It should be emphasized
that producers from these groups use the help of sales intermediaries more often. Due to
the specificity of the products, online sales are not very popular. Food products have special
requirements regarding packaging, and often transport, which makes such sales difficult.
Most producers introduce product innovations, adapting to market needs. This is
done by 76.00% of producers associated with national tradition, 73.91% with local tradition
and 59.09% with regional tradition. These innovations are introduced mainly as part of
improving the competitiveness of products. On the other hand, pro-environmental solu-
tions in the surveyed group mainly concern the technological process. These are solutions
that allow for energy savings and reduction of waste and costs, as well as shortening the
production time. Pro-environmental solutions are most willingly introduced by producers
associated with regional tradition (72.73%) and national tradition (72.00%), and slightly
less willingly by producers associated with local tradition (52.17%).
5.2. Comparison of the Activity Goals of the Surveyed Food Producers
The research analyzed the activity goals of three groups of producers and the dif-
ferences between the goal categories (Table 2). Three items were used to measure each
category. For each goal category, an aggregate measure was determined, based on items.
Generally, among the three groups of producers, those associated with national tradi-
tion identified socio-cultural goals as the most important (mean = 4.57); promoting culture
and traditions is especially important for them. Producers associated with local tradition are
less interested in achieving socio-cultural goals (mean = 4.35). This group is more focused
on business goals (mean = 4.45), and creating their own product brand is especially impor-
tant for them. In relation to food safety, quality and environmental responsibility goals, the
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 12 of 18
most interested group are producers associated with national traditions
(mean = 4.44),
for
whom it is particularly important to deliver high-quality products.
Table 2. Main activity goals of food producers related to tradition: a comparison.
Variables
National Tradition
Regional Tradition Local Tradition
All Respondents
Average * (and Standard Deviation)
Socio-cultural goals
Pursuing one’s own interests 4.64 (±0.64) 4.55 (±0.67) 4.39 (±0.99) 4.53 (±0.77)
Promoting tradition and culture 4.56 (±0.65) 4.68 (±0.57) 4.39 (±0.78) 4.54 (±0.67)
Sharing passion 4.52 (±0.71) 4.41 (±0.80) 4.26 (±0.81) 4.40 (±0.77)
Socio-cultural goals—aggregated measure 4.57 (±0.06) 4.55 (±0.14) 4.35 (±0.08) 4.49 a(±0.08)
Business goals
Running one’s own business 4.20 (±0.87) 4.18 (±0.85) 4.22 (±1.17) 4.20 (±0.96)
Creating one’s own product brand 4.60 (±0.76) 4.41 (±0.73) 4.74 (±0.62) 4.59 (±0.71)
Financial independence 4.32 (±0.75) 4.59 (±0.67) 4.39 (±0.84) 4.43 (±0,75)
Business goals—aggregated measure 4.37 (±0.21) 4.39 (±0.20) 4.45 (±0.27) 4.40 b(±0.19)
Food safety, quality, and environmental responsibility goals
Delivering high-quality products 4.84 (±0.37) 4.59 (±0.50) 4.35 (±0.93) 4.60 (±0.67)
Development and innovation activities 4.76 (±0.44) 4.41 (±0.67) 4.17 (±0.65) 4.46 (±0.63)
Introducing ecological solutions 3.70 (±0.84) 3.86 (±0.77) 3.48 (±0.99) 3.69 (±0.88)
Food safety, quality, and environmental
responsibility goals—aggregated measure 4.44 c(±0.62) 4.29 d(±0.38) 4.00 c,d(±0.46) 4.25 a,b(±0.49)
* Likert scale: 1—definitely not, 2—rather not, 3—neutral, 4—would prefer, and 5—definitely yes. Means with
same superscripts are significantly different from each other, a,c p< 0.01, b,d p< 0.10. Source: Own survey.
The first step in our analysis was to test if there are any differences between the three
groups, both at the aggregated level, but also at single-item level. To achieve this goal, we
carried out an ANOVA (Levene’s) test. We did not find any significant mean differences be-
tween the three groups for the social-cultural goals or business goals, either on a aggregated
level or a single-item level (all p> 0.10). For the food safety, quality, and environmental
responsibility goals we found a significant difference between the three groups at aggre-
gated level (p< 0.10) and for two out of three single-item measures, delivering high-quality
products (p< 0.05) and developing innovative activities (p< 0.05). The last item within
this category, including ecological solutions showed no significant differences between the
mean scores of the groups (p> 0.10). In order to achieve a deeper understanding of the
underlying structure within the three goal groups, we further employed post hoc tests. The
results from the post hoc test shows that there is significant differences between means
of the national and local groups (p< 0.05) at the aggregated level, and for the two items
mentioned above (both p< 0.05). For the item “development and innovative activities”,
there is also a significant difference between the regional and national groups (p< 0.05).
To check for any differences in aggregated measures between the three aggregated
variables, we used a series of t-tests. We also used the t-tests to validate the findings
from the ANOVA and post hoc analysis. Overall, the mean of socio-culture goals and
food safety, quality and environmental responsibility goals are significantly different from
each other
(p< 0.01).
This result means that hypothesis H3 was verified positively, which
is in accordance with the studies by Adomako et al. [
47
], Curado and Mota [
48
], and
Kariyapperuma and Collins [49].
The mean of business goals and food safety, quality and environmental responsibility
goals are significantly different from each other, but only at the 10% level (p< 0.10).
According to socio-cultural goals, the mean score is highest in the national tradition-related
group (mean = 4.57), followed by the regional tradition-related group (mean = 4.55) and
with the lowest mean score in the local tradition-related group (mean = 4.35). However,
none of these mean scores are significantly different from each other (all p> 0.10). The
results confirms the findings from the ANOVA and post hoc analyses above. These results
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 13 of 18
do not confirm hypothesis H1, and therefore differ from the results of Makała [
50
] and
Mazur and Dominik [51].
The same pattern occurred in the business goals, with no significant differences
and a very similar mean structure across the three traditional food-producer groups
(meannational = 4.39,
mean
regional
= 4.37, mean
local
= 4.45, all p> 0.10), which also con-
firms the findings from the ANOVA and post hoc analyses above. Despite the fact that the
group associated with local tradition (in which the largest share are microenterprises) is
most interested in achieving business goals, hypothesis H2 was not statistically supported.
Therefore, the results are consistent with the trends indicated by Makała [
50
] and Mazur
and Dominik [
51
], but are not statistically confirmed, due to too small differences between
the studied groups of producers.
In the last goal group, the food safety, quality, and environmental responsibility goal,
the national tradition-related group has the highest mean score at 4.44, followed by the
regional tradition-related group with a mean = 4.29, and the local tradition-related group
with a mean = 4.00. The mean score in the regional tradition-related group was significantly
different from the mean score in the local tradition-related group (p< 0.10). The mean score
in the national tradition-related group is significantly different from the mean score in the
local tradition-related group (p< 0.01). This confirms the findings from the ANOVA and
post hoc analyses above, except for the finding in the item “development and innovative
activities”, where the ANOVA also showed a significant difference between locals and the
regional group. However, the results from The ANOVA/post hoc analyses and the series
of t-test confirms our findings. This means that hypothesis H3.1 was verified positively,
and the results are in accordance with Adomako et al. [
47
], Curado and Mota [
48
], and
Kariyapperuma and Collins [
49
]. However, the mean scores in the national tradition and
the regional tradition were not significantly different from each other.
6. Discussion
In the hierarchy of goals of traditional food producers, socio-cultural goals are the most
important, followed by business goals; food safety, quality and environmental responsibility
goals are the least important. The importance of food safety, quality and environmental
responsibility goals differs significantly from the importance of socio-cultural goals and
business goals. This means that hypothesis H3 was confirmed. There are many reasons for
this situation. The uniqueness of this goal may result from its lesser connection with the
realization of producers’ own goals. Producers prioritize goals that directly satisfy their
needs and the needs of their customers. Environmental goals are more indirect in nature,
resulting from ecological awareness. However, their realization may be forced, for example,
by rising prices of raw materials and energy (cost reduction), which is confirmed by the
results of Leroy et al. [
46
] and Curado and Mota [
48
]. In addition, the respondents are
dominated by family businesses, which are characterized by specific features. This group
has limited possibilities of implementing new solutions, and is also characterized by a lower
propensity to risk [
47
,
49
]. This also confirms the findings that the group of producers with
the largest share of family businesses is the least interested in achieving food safety, quality
and environmental responsibility goals. This group consists of producers associated with
local tradition. The importance of food safety, quality and environmental responsibility
goals in this group of traditional food producers is the lowest, and is statistically different
from the other surveyed groups. Therefore, hypothesis 3.1 was also confirmed.
According to the results, producers associated with local tradition are most interested
in achieving business goals. These are usually micro-enterprises for whom running their
own, profitable business is particularly important. This allows using local resources, which
often appear as a result of running another activity—agricultural. This is consistent with
Makała [
50
] and Nummendal and Hall [
52
]. However, there were no significant differences
between the three producer groups regarding business goals, so the hypothesis was not
statistically confirmed.
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 14 of 18
The results indicate that producers associated with national traditions are most in-
terested in socio-cultural goals. It should be emphasized that no significant statistical
differences were found between individual producer groups regarding the importance
of socio-cultural goals. Hypothesis H1, according to which the group of producers with
the highest share of family knowledge and old recipes is most interested in achieving
socio-cultural goals, was not confirmed. According to the results, producers associated
with regional traditions have by far the highest share of family knowledge and old recipes.
The data show that the group of producers associated with regional traditions uses the most
sources of knowledge about culinary traditions, is most involved in promoting knowledge
about culinary traditions, and is most willing to cooperate with other producers in the
ex-change of knowledge and skills. It can, therefore, be stated that they are most involved
in the process of supporting culinary heritage and building identity. This may result from
both economic and social premises, such as the attachment of these food producers to the
place of residence and activity or the desire to support the development of this place. This
confirms the views of Mazur and Dominik [51].
The data show that the most “closed” group are producers associated with local
tradition, who use primarily their own raw materials to produce food, and to a much lesser
extent using offers from other suppliers—even local ones. And although local and one’s
own crops are conducive to producing appropriate ingredients [
36
], this means that the
possibilities of supporting the local economy by producers associated with local tradition
are limited mainly to their own needs.
Producers associated with regional traditions are much more willing to cooperate with
their environment, and they are happy to use raw materials and semi-finished products
supplied by local and regional suppliers. Producers associated with regional traditions are
most involved in building short supply chains and least willing to use sales intermediaries.
This may result from the desire to reduce costs [45] or their involvement in implementing
socio-cultural goals, including promoting culinary heritage [
29
,
30
]. Direct sales provide
an opportunity to contact customers and to share passion and knowledge. Producers
associated with regional tradition introduce relatively few product innovations, and the
most pro-ecological ones. This results from the desire to maintain product recipes as close
as possible to the original and to the tradition, as well as from the care for high product
quality. Such a product may prove to be more competitive on the market than innovative
products. Care for the recipe shows commitment to the process of maintaining knowledge
and skills related to a given tradition [51].
The most “open” to the environment are producers associated with national tradition,
who use external supplies of raw materials (from the national and international markets)
and sales intermediaries to a greater extent than the other groups. This may result from
the greater range of their sales, as well as the fact that their products are better known and
recognizable in the country, and are not treated only as local culinary attractions. Producers
associated with national tradition introduce the most product innovations, as well as quite
a lot of pro-ecological ones. They are more prone to risk, and are also characterized by
the smallest share of family businesses [
49
]. Producers associated with national traditions
connect the local economy with the external environment, but in such a situation it is more
difficult to shorten supply chains or close the circle of the local economy [43].
The main limitations of the research are related to the sample size. The small size
of the research sample limits the possibility of formulating generalizations, due to the
low representativeness of such a group. It should be emphasized that the size of the
sample was dictated by the data collection method—semi-structured interviews are time-
consuming and require a lot of direct involvement of researchers. However, this method
allows for the collection of not only quantitative, but also qualitative data, with great detail.
Another limitation is the inclusion of only one group of stakeholders, which makes the
obtained results one-sided, but this is a good basis for further analysis. In addition, the
research group was included only from one country, which makes it impossible to conduct
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 15 of 18
international comparisons and present the situation of Polish traditional food producers in
a broader context.
Further research should focus on other stakeholder groups of culinary heritage. These
include customers buying traditional food as well as the local community or local authori-
ties. All these groups benefit from culinary heritage by participating in local development.
Inter-regional and international comparisons would also be interesting, and could con-
tribute to the development and implementation of a list of inter-regional and international
good practices. It should be added that such studies are planned in the near future—
comparing Poland with Scandinavian countries. They will provide valuable information
on the functioning of traditional food ecosystems, both in Poland and abroad.
7. Conclusions
In accordance with the primary objective, this article examines the role of traditional
food producers’ activities for local sustainability in Poland. For the purposes of the research,
traditional food producers in Poland were divided into three groups, depending on the
tradition to which their products refer. It should be emphasized that traditional food
producers contribute to local sustainability. They are particularly strongly involved in the
economic dimension, as well as the socio-cultural dimension. Traditional food production
is not only a source of income for them, it allows them to use their own and local raw
materials, and also provides broader opportunities in the form of additional activities
related to it, such as culinary tourism. Recreating culinary heritage is also often a passion
for those interested, which is associated with the desire to share these interests with others.
Maintaining culinary heritage contributes to building a local identity, and practices related
to traditional food production are considered sustainable because they are based on natural,
high-quality raw materials. Often, the production process reduces waste generation, and, if
it does occur, it is biodegradable, due to its natural origin. Traditional food producers also
willingly use direct sales, shortening the supply chain.
Importantly, in terms of the hierarchy of activity goals, it turned out that traditional
food producers are less interested in environmental goals than in socio-cultural and eco-
nomic ones. They implement them, but mainly because their business or market pressure
forces them to do so. This is particularly true for food producers associated with local
traditions. They turned out to be the most ‘closed’ group, acting primarily in their own
interest and based on their own raw materials and labor resources.
In terms of managerial implications, it is necessary to emphasize the need to support
traditional food producers in Poland in the implementation of pro-environmental goals,
including the necessary investments in this area. These are primarily representatives of
small and micro enterprises, often family businesses. The main limitation to implementing
pro-ecological solutions is the financial and cost side. Hence, the role of broadly understood
external support—both systemic and financial—may prove important.
Traditional food producers are extremely important members of the local community.
They maintain knowledge about the area’s traditions and history, build local identity, and
support the local economy. These processes are particularly important in rural areas or
those associated with small towns, of which there are many in Poland, and which struggle
with development problems in both the social and economic sense.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; methodology, L.O., D.J., G.K.
and O.O.; software, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; validation, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; formal analysis,
L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; investigation, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; resources, L.O., D.J., G.K. and
O.O.; data curation, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; writing—original draft preparation, L.O., D.J., G.K.
and O.O.; writing—review and editing, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; visualization, L.O., D.J., G.K. and
O.O.; supervision, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; project administration, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O.; funding
acquisition, L.O., D.J., G.K. and O.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 16 of 18
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: The original contributions presented in this study are included in the
article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
1.
Ramli, A.M.; Zahari, M.S.M.; Halim, N.A.; Aris, M.H.M. The Knowledge of Food Heritage Identity in Klang Valley, Malaysia.
Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016,222, 518–527.
2.
Kapelari, S.; Alexopoulos, G.; Theano Moussouri, T.; Sagmeister, K.J.; Stampfer, F. Food Heritage Makes a Difference: The
Importance of Cultural Knowledge for Improving Education for Sustainable Food Choices. Sustainability 2020,12, 1509. [CrossRef]
3.
Di Giovine, M.A.; Brulotte, R.L. Introduction Food and Foodways as Cultural Heritage. In Edible Identities: Food as Cultural
Heritage; Di Giovine, M.A., Brulotte, R.L., Eds.; Routledge: Routledge, UK, 2014; pp. 1–27.
4.
Matta, R. Valuing Native Eating: The Modern Roots of Peruvian Food Heritage, Anthropology of Food. Available online:
http://aof.revues.org/7361 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
5.
European Parliament, 2018, Cultural Heritage in EU Policies, European Parliamentary Research Service. Available online: https://
www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2018/621876/EPRS_BRI(2018)621876_EN.pdf
(accessed on 8 November 2024).
6. Dominik, P. Food tourism as a tool for intergenerational transfer of culinary traditions. Geogr. Tour. 2020,8, 115–124.
7.
Ramli, A.; Zahari, M.M.; Ishak, N.; Sharif, M.M. Food heritage and nation food identity formation. In Proceedings of the
International Hospitality and Tourism Conference (IHTC 2013), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 10–15 August 2013; Sumarjan, N.,
Zainal, A., Radzi, S.M., Mohi, Z., Radzi, S.M., Saiful Bakhtiar, M.F., Artinah, Z., Bakhtiar, S., Hafiz, M., Hanafiah, M., et al., Eds.;
Taylor and Francis Group: London, UK, 2014; pp. 407–411.
8.
Fisher, C.; Ardren, T. Partaking in Culinary Heritage at Yaxunah, Yucatán during the 2017 Noma Mexico Pop-Up. Heritage 2020,3,
474–492. [CrossRef]
9.
Hatchuel, A.; Le Masson, P.; Weil, B.; Carvajal-Perez, D. Innovative Design within Tradition—Injecting Topos Structures in
C-K Theory to Model Culinary Creation Heritage. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Engineering Design
(ICED19), Delft, The Netherlands, 5–8 August 2019; pp. 1542–1543.
10.
Avieli, N. What is ‘Local Food?’ Dynamic culinary heritage in the World Heritage Site of Hoi An, Vietnam. J. Herit. Tour. 2013,8,
120–132. [CrossRef]
11. Choi, B.-Y.; Yang, S.J. Sustainability of Food Heritage in Birthday Rituals. Sustainability 2024,16, 7718. [CrossRef]
12.
Almansouri, M.; Verkerk, R.; Fogliano, V.; Luning, P.A. Exploration of heritage food concept. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021,111,
790–797. [CrossRef]
13.
Aleffi, C.; Cavicchi, A. The Role of Food and Culinary Heritage for Postdisaster Recovery: The Case of Earthquake in The Marche
Region (Italy). J. Gastron. Tour. 2020,4, 13–128. [CrossRef]
14.
Cerquetti, M.; Ferrara, C.; Romagnoli, A.; Vagnarelli, G. Enhancing Intangible Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Tourism
Development in Rural Areas: The Case of the “Marche Food andWine Memories” Project (Italy). Sustainability 2022,14, 16893.
[CrossRef]
15.
Hawkes, J. The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability: Culture’s Essential Role in Public Planning. Common Ground. 2001. Available
online: https://www.culturaldevelopment.org.au/downloads/FourthPillarcomplete.pdf (accessed on 2 October 2024).
16.
Thomé-Ortiz, H. Social Construction of Mycological Culinary Heritage as a Tourist Resource and its Dimensions of Sustainability.
Folia Tur. 2020,55, 45–66. [CrossRef]
17.
Shahrin, N.; Hussin, H. Negotiating Food Heritage Authenticity in Consumer Culture. Tour. Hosp. Manag. 2023,29, 27–37.
[CrossRef]
18.
Ramli, A.M.; Zahari, M.S.M.; Suhaimi, M.Z.; Talib, S.A. Determinants of Food Heritage towards Food Identity. In Proceedings
of the Asia Pacific International Conference on Environment-Behaviour Studies, AicE-Bs2015, Barcelona, Spain, 30 August–4
September 2015; pp. 207–216.
19.
Zocchi, D.M.; Fontefrancesco, M.F.; Corvo, P.; Pieroni, A. Recognizing, Safeguarding and Promoting Food Heritage: Challenges
and Prospects for the Future of Sustainable Food Systems. Sustainability 2021,13, 9510. [CrossRef]
20.
Dunay, A.; Lehota, J.; Mácsai, É.; Bálint Illés, C. Short Supply Chain: Goals, Objectives and Attitudes of Producers. Acta Polytech.
Hung. 2018,15, 199–217. [CrossRef]
21. Yankellow, J. Defining Artisan: What It is and What It Means. Perspectives 2018,63, 52–55.
22.
Luki´c, T.; Kalenjuk, B.; Ðerˇcan, B.; Bubalo-Živkovi´c, M.; Solarevi´c, M. Traditional Food Producers and Possibilities of Their Tourist
Affirmations the Territory of Baˇcka (Serbia). Eur. Geogr. Stud. 2017,4, 70–79.
23. Janiszewska, D.; Ossowska, L. Food Festival Exhibitors’ Business Motivation. Sustainability 2021,13, 4920. [CrossRef]
24.
Partarakis, N.; Kaplanidi, D.; Doulgeraki, P.; Karuzaki, E.; Petraki, A.; Metilli, D.; Bartalesi, V.; Adami, I.; Meghini, C.; Zabulis, X.
Representation and Presentation of Culinary Tradition as Cultural Heritage. Heritage 2021,4, 612–640. [CrossRef]
25.
Mercado, J.M.T.; Andalecio, A.B.P. Ysla de Panciteria: A preliminary study on the culinary heritage significance of pancit using
the heritage documentation approach—The case of Luzon Island, Philippines. J. Ethn. Foods. 2020,7, 19. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 17 of 18
26.
Kumar Singh, S.; Srivastav, D.; Singh, S.; Tripathi, R.; Kumar, S. Culinary Heritage of Awadh Region: Key Factor for Gastronomy
Tourism Promotion. Int. J. Interdiscip. Organ. Stud. 2023,18, 1940–1955.
27.
Fontefrancesco, M.F.; Zocchi, D.M.; Pieroni, A. Scouting for Food Heritage for Achieving Sustainable Development: The
Methodological Approach of the Atlas of the Ark of Taste. Heritage 2022,5, 526–544. [CrossRef]
28.
Sharma, R. Rediscovering the Lost Cuisines of the Himalayas: A Study on Traditional Culinary Practices, Cultural Heritage and
their Potential for Sustainable Tourism. Int. J. Multidimens. Res. Perspect. 2024,2, 73–85. [CrossRef]
29.
Rivza, B.; Foris, D.; Foris, T.; Privitera, D.; Uljanova, E.; Rivza, P. Gastronomic heritage: A contributor to sustainable local tourism
development. Geoj. Tour. Geosites 2022,44, 1326–1334. [CrossRef]
30.
Bolborici, A.-M.; Lupu, M.I.; Sorea, D.; Atudorei, I.A. Gastronomic Heritage of Fagaras, Land: A Worthwhile Sustainable Resource.
Sustainability 2022,14, 1199. [CrossRef]
31.
Suwandojo, D.P.E.H.; Handajani, S.; Annisa, R.N. Satay as a Culinary Heritage of Indonesian Gastronomy. Tour. Res. J. 2023,7,
120–132. [CrossRef]
32.
Ossowska, L.; Janiszewska, D.; Kwiatkowski, G.; Kloskowski, D.; Oklevik, O. Traditional Food Vendor-Producer Innovation
Capabilities. Sustainability 2024,16, 2844. [CrossRef]
33.
Rathor, A.; Parkash, G. Culinary Study and Cultural Heritage of Delhi: Tourist’s Perspective. In Proceedings of the 10th
International Conference on Digital Strategies for Organizational Success, Gwalior, India, 5–7 January 2019. Available online:
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3320674 (accessed on 8 November 2024). [CrossRef]
34.
Jeroscenkova, L. Culinary Heritage in Latvian Municipalities and Its Role in the Development of Entrepreneurship. Res. Rural
Dev. 2014,2, 252–257.
35.
Ebekozien, A.; Ohis Aigbavboa, C.; Shaharudin Samsurijan, M.; Didibhuku Thwala, W.; Hafez Ahmed, M.A. The role of
apprenticeship in skills development of construction artisans to achieving Sustainable Development Goal 8: Stakeholders’
unexplored approach. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2024,31, 411–429. [CrossRef]
36.
Almansouri, M.; Verkerk, R.; Fogliano, V.; Luning, P.A. The heritage food concept and its authenticity risk factors—Validation by
culinary professionals. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2022,28, 100523. [CrossRef]
37.
Wardhana, D.Y.; Hariwibowo, I.N. Sustainability Analysis of Family Based Culinary Industry in Indonesia. Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ.
Res. 2020,9, 465–479.
38.
Balzano, M.; Marzi, G. Osmice at the crossroads: The dialectical interplay of tradition, modernity and cultural identity in family
businesses. J. Manag. Hist. 2024. [CrossRef]
39.
Sahoo, D. Promoting Culinary Heritages as a Destination Attraction: A Case Study of Ancient Temple Food ‘Mahaaprasaada’. Int.
J. Relig. Tour. Pilgr. 2020,8, 60–76.
40.
Omar, S.R.; Karim, S.A.; Omar, S.N. Exploring International Tourists’ Attitudes and Perceptions: In Characterizing Malaysian
Heritage Food (MHF) as a Tourism Attraction in Malaysia. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Hum. 2015,5, 321–329. [CrossRef]
41.
Haukeland, J.V.; Jacobsen, J.S. Food and cuisine as tourism attractions on the top of Europe. In Proceedings of the 10th Nordic
Tourism Research Conference, Vasa, Finland, 18–20 October 2001.
42.
Lin, Y.-C.; Pearson, T.E.; Cai, L.A. Food as a form of Destination Identity: A Tourism Destination Brand Perspective. Tour. Hosp.
Res. 2011,11, 30–48. [CrossRef]
43.
Canfora, I. Is the short food supply chain an efficient solution for sustainability in food market? Agric. Agric. Sci. Procedia 2016,8,
402–407. [CrossRef]
44.
Kofi Britwum, K.; Demont, M. Food security and the cultural heritage missing link. Glob. Food Secur. 2022,35, 100660. [CrossRef]
45.
Zocchi, D.M.; Fontefrancesco, M.F. Traditional Products and New Developments in the Restaurant Sector in East Africa. The Case
Study of Nakuru County, Kenya. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2020,4, 599138. [CrossRef]
46.
Leroy, F.; Scholliers, P.; Amilien, V. Elements of Innovation and Tradition in Meat Fermentation: Conflicts and Synergies. Int. J.
Food Microbiol. 2015,212, 2–8. [CrossRef]
47.
Adomako, S.; Amankwah-Amoah, J.; Danso, A.; Konadu, R.; Owusu-Agyei, S. Environmental sustainability orientation and
performance of family and nonfamily firms. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2019,28, 1250–1259. [CrossRef]
48.
Curado, C.; Mota, A. A Systematic Literature Review on Sustainability in Family Firms. Sustainability 2021,13, 3824. [CrossRef]
49.
Kariyapperuma, N.; Collins, E. Family logics and environmental sustainability: A study of the New Zealand wine industry. Bus.
Strat. Environ. 2021,30, 3626–3650. [CrossRef]
50.
Makała, H. Tradycje w kuchni polskiej jako atrakcja dla turystów (in Polish). Zesz. Naukowe. Tur. I Rekreac. Sci. Papers. Tour.
Recreat. 2015,1, 17–27.
51.
Mazur, A.; Dominik, P. Wykorzystanie potencjału kuchni regionalnych i ˙
zywno´sci tradycyjnej w rozwoju regionalnym (in Polish).
Przedsi˛ebiorczo´c I Zarz ˛adzanie Entrep. Manag. 2017,18, 61–72.
52.
Nummendal, M.; Hall, C.M. Local food in tourism: An investigation of the New Zealand South Islands bed and breakfast sector’s
use and perception of local food. Tour. Rev. Int. 2006,9, 365–378. [CrossRef]
53.
Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on Quality Schemes
for Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2012/1151/oj (accessed on 8
November 2024).
54.
Adeoye-Olatunde, O.A.; Olenik, N.L. Research and scholarly methods: Semi-structured interviews. J. Am. Coll. Clin. Pharm. 2021,
4, 1358–1367. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2024,16, 11310 18 of 18
55. Willits, F.K.; Theodori, G.L.; Luloff, A.E. Another Look at Likert Scales. J. Rural Soc. Sci. 2016,31, 126–139.
56.
Chen, S.C.; Elston, J.A. Entrepreneurial motives and characteristics: An analysis of small restaurant owners. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.
2013,35, 294–305. [CrossRef]
57.
Getz, D.; Carlsen, J. Characteristics and goals of family and owner-operated businesses in the rural tourism and hospitality
sectors. Tour. Manag. 2000,21, 547–560. [CrossRef]
58.
Pret, T.; Cogan, A. Artisan entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2019,
25, 592–614. [CrossRef]
59.
Tregear, A. Lifestyle, growth, or community involvement? The balance of goals of UK artisan food producers. Entrep. Reg. Dev.
2005,17, 1–15. [CrossRef]
60. Hjalager, A.M.; Corigliano, M.A. Food for tourists—Determinants of an image. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2000,4, 281–293. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose Studies show that apprenticeships can enhance skills development and economic growth. There is a paucity of academic literature concerning apprenticeship’s role in developing Nigerian construction artisans’ skills, especially regarding achieving Sustainable Development Goal 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth). Thus, this study aims to appraise the role of apprenticeship in developing construction artisans’ skills and suggest measures to improve skills development for artisans’ on-the-job training mechanisms to achieve Goal 8. Design/methodology/approach Given the unexplored nature of the problem, the study utilised face-to-face data collection via a qualitative research approach. It covered two major cities in Nigeria and achieved saturation at the 29th chosen interviewee. Also, the study adopted a thematic method to analyse the data from selected construction artisans, construction firm management staffers and consultant experts in skills matters. Findings Enhancing skills development, replacing the ageing workforce through practical broad-based skills training, bridging skills gaps, enhancing work-integrated learning and economic upliftment emerged as apprenticeship’s role in developing artisans’ skills in the Nigerian built environment if well implemented. Apprenticeship to develop skills in the built environment is not without hindrances. The perceived 34 barriers were re-clustered into employee, employer and government-related. Findings show that achieving Goal 8 may be threatened if these hindrances are not mitigated. They suggest improving skills development for artisans’ on-the-job training mechanisms to achieve Goal 8. Originality/value This study demonstrates that apprenticeship’s role in developing construction artisans’ skills should be all-inclusive. Also, the three stakeholders must do more concerning training programmes to improve artisans’ skills development to achieve Goal 8.
Article
Full-text available
For the last decade, cultural heritage has been recognized as the fourth most important field of sustainability, but insufficient empirical research has focused on social participants’ intent to inherit intangible cultural capital. Based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB), this study investigated the influence of cultural significance and successors’ perceptions of traditional foods served during landmark birthday rituals in South Korea. The results show that, while historical stability and instrumental healing are important cultural values for South Koreans, perceived behavioral control, subjective norms, and a perceived female role affect the intention to preserve traditional food heritage for landmark birthdays. In addition, we examined the differences between genders and age groups in terms of the influence of perceived behavioral control and the perception of the female role and found that both impacts increased in the older group. The contributions to the field are discussed in terms of cultural sustainability and TPB, along with the managerial implications for policymakers.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose – This study aims to explore the dialectical interplay between traditional roots and contemporary challenges faced by family businesses, specifically focusing on “Osmice” (in Slovenian; in Italian, “Osmize”), which are family enterprises that embody the cultural and historical heritage at the intersection of Italy and Slovenia. In particular, the purpose of this study is to understand how these businesses, deeply rooted in the communal life of the Karst region, evolve amidst changing social, economic and cultural landscapes. Design/methodology/approach – Building on an alternate template analysis, the research includes the examination of archival data and 34 in-depth narrative interviews. This approach captures details about the historical establishment, persistence and evolution of Osmice, with a particular focus on their ways of facing contemporary challenges while preserving their traditional roots. Findings – The findings reveal that Osmice navigate the tension between past and present through high sensitivity to the cultural identity of the land in which they are embedded. Thus, the study interprets these dynamics through a dialectical lens as the synthesis of preserving traditional roots and adapting to contemporary challenges, articulated through a particular sensitivity to cultural identity. Originality/value – This investigation contributes to the discourse on how family businesses can maintain their traditional roots while adapting to contemporary challenges. It offers novel insights into the role of cultural identity in balancing tradition and modernity. Through this lens, the study underscores the capacity of family businesses such as Osmice to thrive amidst change, providing implications for both theory and practice in the field of business studies. Family business, Cultural identity, Dialectical process, Family legacy, Osmica, Osmiza
Research
Full-text available
The definition of culinary tourism, particularly in Awadh, is the first section of this paper. gastronomy tourism promotion refers to the deliberate undertaking of travel experiences driven by a keen interest in food and beverages, encompassing an educational component that delves into the cultural significance of culinary products. The tourism industry has substantially increased its role in driving economic growth in Awadh. Culinary tourism has had a profound impact on the entirety of the culinary sector, presenting challenges for chefs in their endeavours to develop food and brands that authentically embody cultural elements. The occupation of chefs within the travel and hospitality industry necessitates acquiring both technical and creative aptitude, rendering it one of the most demanding professions. In light of the recent surge in culinary tourism, it has become imperative for chefs to possess a high level of proficiency and expertise in several elements of cooking and food preparation. In order to effectively address the requirements of the rapidly evolving culinary tourism industry, chefs must continuously update their knowledge and skills as culinary professionals. This research aims to investigate the role of chefs in the present surge of culinary tourism in Awadh. The significance of tourism as a cultural component is increasingly evident, with gastronomy emerging as a fundamental element within this context. Tourists demonstrate a positive reception towards indigenous gastronomy, particularly meals that are representative of a specific geographical or cultural origin. Moreover, tourists are increasingly inclined to explore and appreciate the unique culinary offerings of specific regions, nations, and localities. The primary tourist attraction lies in the consumption of locally sourced food and beverages, as it provides visitors with an authentic cultural encounter. Promoting food as an integral component of India's tourist appeal is currently in its nascent phase. The primary objective of this effort is to foster a connection
Article
Full-text available
Nowadays, introducing innovations is treated as a necessity to ensure market survival. However, this may be difficult, especially for food entrepreneurs whose innovations are strongly connected with tradition. The main aim of this study was to assess the innovation abilities and potential of traditional food producers in the context of the classic dilemma of innovation-and-tradition interplay. The surveyed food producers were from five Polish voivodeships belonging to the European Culinary Heritage Network. The study conducted 70 semi-structured interviews. The respondents were divided into two groups: the innovative and non-innovative groups. The statistical significance of the differences between the two groups was tested using a two-independent-samples t test. A comparison revealed significantly different average results for the following variables: general managerial education, business duration, sources of knowledge about traditions, profits and earnings, and own product brand. For the remaining variables (employment, sales range, financial capital sources, business goals in total, and own business), no significant differences were found between the mean results. Both tested hypotheses were verified to be valid. The vendors-producers of traditional food in this study showed innovative abilities and untapped innovation potential.
Article
Full-text available
The definition of culinary tourism, particularly in Awadh, is the first section of this paper. gastronomy tourism promotion refers to the deliberate undertaking of travel experiences driven by a keen interest in food and beverages, encompassing an educational component that delves into the cultural significance of culinary products. The tourism industry has substantially increased its role in driving economic growth in Awadh. Culinary tourism has had a profound impact on the entirety of the culinary sector, presenting challenges for chefs in their endeavours to develop food and brands that authentically embody cultural elements. The occupation of chefs within the travel and hospitality industry necessitates acquiring both technical and creative aptitude, rendering it one of the most demanding professions. In light of the recent surge in culinary tourism, it has become imperative for chefs to possess a high level of proficiency and expertise in several elements of cooking and food preparation. In order to effectively address the requirements of the rapidly evolving culinary tourism industry, chefs must continuously update their knowledge and skills as culinary professionals. This research aims to investigate the role of chefs in the present surge of culinary tourism in Awadh. The significance of tourism as a cultural component is increasingly evident, with gastronomy emerging as a fundamental element within this context. Tourists demonstrate a positive reception towards indigenous gastronomy, particularly meals that are representative of a specific geographical or cultural origin. Moreover, tourists are increasingly inclined to explore and appreciate the unique culinary offerings of specific regions, nations, and localities. The primary tourist attraction lies in the consumption of locally sourced food and beverages, as it provides visitors with an authentic cultural encounter. Promoting food as an integral component of India's tourist appeal is currently in its nascent phase. The primary objective of this effort is to foster a connection between tourism and gastronomy to amplify the cultural relevance of various sites. This empirical study examines how food, culture, and travel contribute to promoting and developing tourism in India. The current study will also examine regional
Article
Full-text available
Purpose – Food has entered commerce as an intangible cultural heritage (ICH) because consumers want authentic food and memorable consumption experiences. Food culture and the marketplace are arenas for the creation and articulation of identities and meanings, enabling dynamic conditions that encompass multiple positions and authenticity validations in consumption experiences. This study offers insight into the authentication of gastronomic heritage from a consumer culture perspective. Design / Methodology – A thematic review is conducted to analyse and summarise the literature on gastronomic heritage, authenticity, commercialization, and consumer behaviour in the food industry. Approach – Literature works from databases and academic platforms were used to highlight several key thematic points and arguments related to the authentication process and consumer behaviour. Findings – Food authenticity is socially negotiated by a variety of actors who mobilise resources and a web of interactions, creating identity and value according to their position as they respond to differences in market culture. The negotiation of authenticity mediates the assumption of legitimacy, quality, and identity that diversifies consumption patterns. Originality of the research – The article contributes to a theoretical discourse that extends the conceptualisation of authenticity in addressing food heritage within a dynamic consumption context and commercialisation agenda.
Article
Full-text available
In the context of increasing interest in the contribution made by culture to the implementation of the goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the present research investigates how intangible cultural heritage (ICH) can help sustainable tourism in rural areas. Adopting a case study methodology, we analyzed the “Marche Food and Wine Memories” project, an initiative promoted by CiùCiù, a winery based in Offida, a small village in the Marche region (Italy). After discussing the strategies and tools adopted to enhance rural heritage, the analysis focuses on the involvement of local communities and businesses in the different phases of the process. The research aimed to understand: (1) the project’s current contribution to the economic, social, cultural and environmental dimensions of sustainability; and (2) its strengths and weaknesses and possible future improvements. The research findings confirm the high potentialities of ICH-based initiatives for sustainable tourism development in rural areas, but also reveal the need to improve the level of networking with local businesses and highlight gaps in marketing and management skills. Finally, the results provide policy and managerial implications for similar ICH-based initiatives.
Article
Full-text available
Gastronomic heritage is undergoing significant developments, creating a need for competitive strategies to develop food tourism in certain regions. The research explores food culture and tourism in three case studies of Latvia, Romania, and Italy. The article focuses on the information about gastronomic heritage that food lovers request, and the critical components required at a destination for food tourism to flourish. A survey of people involved in gastronomic tourism (151 in Romania, 112 in Italy, 126 in Latvia) using a simple random sample. Based primarily on respondent observations, descriptive and qualitative analysis and nonparametric method are used to explain the phenomenon. SPSS software (26 version) was used to analyze the statistical data. The findings show that people need of information and a new kind of interaction between tourist/consumers and home producers that they can trust. Many of the information are hidden and there is a lack of voice about the gastronomic heritage specially on home producers. The promotion of home producers could be successful if emphasis is placed on attracting tourists and on their visits to home producers, as well as on attracting tourists from abroad. In different countries does not actively promote the opportunity to experience at home producers. A digital food resource and the role of home-organized markets is encouraged in destinations that is promoted to focus the lens on the gastronomic heritage and all its experiences.
Article
This study explores the rediscovery and promotion of the lost cuisines of the Himalayas, focusing on their cultural significance, traditional culinary practices, and potential for sustainable tourism. The unique geography and cultural diversity of the Himalayan region have given rise to distinct food traditions, deeply embedded in the local environment and history. However, modernization, globalization, and shifting socio economic conditions have increasingly threatened these practices. This research aims to document and preserve the traditional culinary heritage of the region, while examining how it can be integrated into sustainable tourism strategies. Utilizing qualitative research methods, including interviews with local community members and tourism stakeholders, field observations, and a review of secondary literature, the study investigates the role of food in maintaining cultural identity and supporting local economies. The findings suggest that traditional Himalayan cuisine, characterized by its use of locally sourced, organic ingredients and sustainable practices, aligns with the growing global demand for eco-friendly tourism and wellness experiences. The study identifies challenges, such as the risk of cultural commodification and the need for infrastructure development, but highlights the significant potential of culinary tourism as a tool for cultural preservation and economic empowerment. By promoting traditional food practices within a sustainable tourism framework, local communities can benefit from increased revenue while safeguarding their cultural heritage. The research concludes that rediscovering the lost cuisines of the Himalayas offers a valuable opportunity to preserve cultural traditions, promote sustainable development, and create meaningful tourism experiences that benefit both visitors and local populations.