Visitors and values: A qualitative analysis of agritourism operator motivations across the U.S.

Abstract

Owners of small- and medium-sized farms are increasingly interested in engaging in agritourism and direct sales in order to increase income, provide family employment, and educate the public about agriculture, among other reasons. Prior research on agritourism operator motivations largely focuses on economic goals and benefits, while acknowledging the strong influence of non-economic factors. However, more research is needed to better understand the nuances and breadth of non-economic motivations underlying agritourism operator decisions. In addition, research on U.S. agritourism tends to be at the state level, which raises questions about overall national trends and inter-study comparability. To address these gaps, we analyzed transcripts from semistructured interviews with small- and medium-sized farm owners engaged in agritourism from five states across the U.S. We examined the results through the theoretical lens of Allport’s “contact hypothesis” in order to further understand how agritourism helps operators meet stated goals. Our results suggest that consistent with previous literature, nonmonetary motivations are high priorities for farmers engaged in agritourism. In particular, motivations related to community engagement/leadership and quality-of-life emerged as forceful and reoccurring themes. We found that although Allport’s contact hypothesis holds some important explanatory power for understanding agritourism operators’ community-related goals—including reducing prejudice and increasing understanding between farmers and consumers in relation to agriculture—increased inter-group contact also has potential to create new conflicts between farmers and neighbors related to tourism. These findings have important implications for future research as well as for policies and programs aimed at supporting agritourism.

Factors Related to Profitability of Agritourism in the United States: Results from a National Survey of Operators

“…Development of the survey instrument integrated three sources: (1) synthesis of related literature (referenced above), (2) qualitative interviews of 23 farms and ranches in 5 US states (Vermont, Oregon, California, Minnesota, and West Virginia) [15], and (3) survey instruments previously applied to related studies used with the permission of authors [2,7,[43][44][45][46]. The questions measured four types of attributes, building on categories outlined in the literature review: farmer demographic, farm firmographic, and geographic region; product and experience offerings; and motivations.…”

“…Despite the interest in agritourism on the demand side (from tourists) and the supply side (from farmers, ranchers, and tour operators), limited research is available to guide practitioners as they make management decisions about agritourism destination development and investment. Although there are many non-economic benefits to both agritourism operators and the regions where they operate [14,15] the success of agritourism entrepreneurs requires attention to issues of profitability. Some studies have explored profitability in agritourism [16][17][18][19], which differs from the profitability of farms more broadly [20].…”

Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Farm Tourism Microentrepreneurship

“…A sense of nostalgia evoked by farmscapes also seems to drive some visitors who desire to reconnect with the past ( Joyner et al, 2018 ). On the supply side, despite strong non-pecuniary motivations ( Quella et al, 2021 ), many farmers look at agritourism as an indispensable income source to retain family farmland and lifestyle in the face of financial pressure ( Ollenburg and Buckley, 2007 ). The continued price drop of commodity crops ( Barbieri and Mahoney, 2009 ) as well as the demise of tobacco farming in some states ( Benson, 2008 ) are well documented threats to the traditional production-oriented farm.…”

Challenges for the agritourism sector in the United States: Regional comparisons of access

“…Though a few studies have been conducted on a national-scale in the United States (e.g... Barbieri, 2013), their sample size is small. By presenting this research, we hope to add to the breadth of agritourism research in the United States with a national scope, like that of Liang and Dunn (2014), , and Quella et al (2021), but that is divisible by region. Additionally, while a few examples exist (e.g., Bagi & Reeder, 2012; J. P. Brown et al, 2014;Liang & Dunn, 2014;Rilla et al, 2011;Wilson et al, 2006), more effort and more current inquiry is needed to better understand the challenges experienced by agritourism operators.…”

“…Studies on agritourism have explored the place-based growth of agritourism Wilson et al, 2006), the economic benefits of agritourism (J. P. Brown et al, 2014), and the motivations and behavior of agritourism operators (Bagi & Reeder, 2012;Gascoigne et al, 2008;Liang & Dunn, 2014;Quella et al, 2021). More recently, the COVID-19 global pandemic has introduced more challenges for operators as consumers demand more local foods (Kolodinsky et al, 2020) and leave cities, flocking to rural spaces (Wojcieszak-Zbierska et al, 2020).…”