In this paper, we will examine the Romanian agritourism from the perspectives ofÂ supply for agritourism in comparison with those of Romanian tourism markets in general.Â In Romania, a rural tourist infrastructure with small dimension accommodation functionsÂ (agritourist and tourist guesthouses) was developed with priority. If we compare theÂ evolution of the number of agritourist guesthouses to that of the total number of touristÂ structures in Romania, the significant rhythm of growth (+2472.13 %) is noticeable in theÂ case of agritourist guesthouses compared to the growth (+96.32%) registered by the totalÂ number of tourist accommodation structures existent in Romania. Following only theÂ agritourist guesthouses by comparison of their number to the accommodation capacity, inÂ the analyzed dynamics it is apparent that rhythms of growth decreased in the number ofÂ units, but increased in accommodation capacities. Thus, the number of units increases byÂ +2472.13 %and the accommodation capacity existent increases by +8168.96% respectivelyÂ +9302.73% 

Calina, A.

Calina, Jenica

Stoian, Maria

Annals of the University of Craiova - Agriculture, Montanology, Cadastre Series

Analele Universităţii din Craiova, seria Agricultură – Montanologie – Cadastru (Annals of the University of Craiova - Agriculture,Montanology, Cadastre Series) Vol. XLV 201534THE SUPPLY TENDENCY OF ROMANIAN AGRITOURISMCĂLINA JENICA1, CĂLINA A1., STOIAN MARIA21 University of Craiova, Faculty of Agronomy2University  of Agronomic Science and Veterinary Medicine, BucharestKeywords: agritourism, agritourist guesthouses, supply side.ABSTRACTIn this paper, we will examine the Romanian agritourism from the perspectives ofsupply for agritourism in comparison with those of Romanian tourism markets in general.In Romania,  a rural tourist infrastructure with small dimension accommodation functions(agritourist and tourist guesthouses) was developed with priority. If we compare theevolution of the number of agritourist guesthouses to that of the total number of touriststructures in Romania, the significant rhythm of growth (+2472.13 %) is noticeable in thecase of  agritourist guesthouses compared to the growth (+96.32%) registered by the totalnumber of tourist accommodation structures existent in Romania. Following only theagritourist guesthouses by comparison of their number to the accommodation capacity, inthe analyzed dynamics it is apparent that rhythms of growth decreased in the number ofunits, but  increased in accommodation capacities. Thus, the number of units increases by+2472.13 %and the accommodation capacity existent increases by +8168.96% respectively+9302.73% .INTRODUCTIONComprehensive examination of the literature reveals numerous labels anddefinitions for agritourism based on a variety of characteristics (Phillip et al. 2010). Eachcountry, subregion and sector has its own particular characteristics, aspirations andpriorities (Hall 2004).Agritourism has become a central concept in recent debates on rural developmentpolicies, practices and initiatives (van der Ploeg et al. 2000; Marsden et al. 2001; van derPloeg&Renting 2004; Kizos&Iosifides 2007). In theory agrotourism contributes toeconomic developmentin rural areas with out putting much pressure on natural resourcesor social and community values, thus allowing locals and visitors to interact positively andshare common created experiences (Anthopoulou et al. 2000).Agrotourism refers to specific places, and its activities are linked with certain localtraditions and landscapes; apart from a local orientation to production, consumption is alsokept local (Marsden 1999).In Romania, agritourism appeared after the fall of communism, has adapted to theeconomic reality and is limited to the rural households converted in agritouristguesthouses. Agritourism is practiced by small owners in the countryside, usually as asecondary activity, the main activity being that carried out in their own household, whichserves as the main occupation and source of income (Calina 2008, 2015b; Glavan 2000).MATERIALS AND METHODSIn Romania it was developed, with priority, a rural tourist infrastructure with smalldimension accommodation functions. As the reception structures in the rural environmenthave a certain characteristic, for authorization it is necessary to be compliant with theregulation documents in force. The specificity of agritourist guesthouses also implies acertain term in ranking these units, namely daisies (flowers). This means thecomplementarity of rural/agritourist households, very much preferred by the inhabitantsfrom the urban area (Calina 2011).Analele Universităţii din Craiova, seria Agricultură – Montanologie – Cadastru (Annals of the University of Craiova - Agriculture,Montanology, Cadastre Series) Vol. XLV 201535Agritourist guesthouses are tourist reception structures, having an accommodationcapacity of up to 8 rooms, functioning in the households of the citizens or in independentbuildings, which ensure, in specially arranged spaces, the accommodation of tourists andthe conditions to prepare and serve meals, as well as the possibility to participate indomestic or handicraft activities. Food for tourists comes from natural products,preponderantly from their own household or from local authorized producers. Withinagritourist guesthouses agricultural activities (cultivation of plants, livestock farming,vegetable growing, fruit growing wine growing) or handicraft activities (workshops weredifferent handicraft products are manufactures) are carried out. Ranking categories ofagritourist guesthouses are determined by the compliance with all compulsory criteriareferred to in the Official Gazette no. 312, Part I /2010 (Order no. 1296/2010).Only by the set up of the evolution and dynamics of a system of indicators aperspective over the entire tourist activity carried out in rural area may be obtained.(Badita, 2004). Concerning offer in agritourism, references to accommodation capacityhave been made, which mean statistical measurement and are based on notionsregarding the total number of places and their structure in the form of: existentaccommodation capacity (Cext), expressed in number of places; accommodation capacityin use (Cf), expressed in  number-places-days.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONTourism comes under the category of open systems, characterized by thephenomena of growth, amplification of functions, accumulations of large properties,adaptability to environment conditions, restructurings, etc. In the organizational structure ofagritourism a series of integrated components are included, where an important place isheld by the space structure. This structure is represented through the heterogeneousmode of space repartition of elements of tourist potentials, referring especially toaccommodation structures and capacity (Calina 2012, 2015a).Quantitative and qualitative representation of the technical-material basis inagritourism is related to reception structures. Their economic functions impose analyticalknowledge of the current situation of reception structures. Only this way can concrete andeffective solutions be presented in order to capitalize on the agritourist potential.With regard to the total number of agritourist guesthouses, significant increases aredetermined; thus, if in the year 1996, at national level, there were only 61 such units, in theyear 2012, 1569 are registered (Tab.1). If we compare the evolution of the number ofagritourist guesthouses to that of the total number of tourist structures in Romania, thesignificant rhythm of growth (+2472.13 %) is noticeable in the case of agritouristguesthouses compared to the growth (+96.32%) registered by the total number of touristaccommodation structures existent in Romania. Out of this overall knowledge of thesereception structures at national level it results an appreciable existent potential.Table 1.The supply side of Romanian agritourismSpecification 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012Number of establishmentsTotal (All types ofaccommodation),of which2965 3127 3121 3339 3900 4710 4840 5222 5821Agritouristguesthouses61 213 400 682 892 1259 1348 1354 1569Existing accommodation capacity (number of places)Total (All types ofaccommodation),of which288206 287268 280005 272596 275941 287158 294210 311698 301109Analele Universităţii din Craiova, seria Agricultură – Montanologie – Cadastru (Annals of the University of Craiova - Agriculture,Montanology, Cadastre Series) Vol. XLV 201536Agritouristguesthouses332 1003 3544 6219 9405 14551 16906 20208 27453Accommodation capacity in use (thousand places – days)Total (All types ofaccommodation),of which53639 53164 50197 50752 53989 56500 59187 63808 74135Agritouristguesthouses73 248 805 1270 2132 3188 4038 4891 6864Source: National Institute of StatisticsThe accommodation capacity gathers the total of different equipments necessaryfor tourists in transit or during stay, a period of variable length, in a territory other than theplace of residence. Having special regard towards agritourist guesthouses, the increase ofthe existent accommodation capacities are of +8168.96% (from 332 in the year 1996 to27453 places in the year 2012). The total at national level registers at this indicatordecreases from 288206 (1996) to 272596 number of places (2002).The accommodation capacity in use reflects similar tendencies, but with differentrhythms. The total at national level registers increases from 53639 to 74135 thousandplaces-days, the growth being of +38.21%, the decreases are maintained for the sameperiod 1998-2002, due to the diminution of accommodation units. For agritourist guesthouses the growth is very significant (from 73 thousand places-days in the year 1996 to6864 thousand places-days in the year 2012, which represents a growth rhythm of 94.02times).Following only the agritourist guesthouses by comparison of their number to theaccommodation capacity, in the analyzed dynamics, rhythms of growth evidently decreasedin the number of units, yet increased in accommodation capacities. Thus, the number ofunits increases by +2472.13% and the accommodation capacity existent increases by+8168.96% respectively +9302.73% .CONCLUSIONSFor Romania, a preponderantly agricultural country, but with a diverse natural andcultural patrimony in good condition of preservation, agritourism represents a viablealternative, still insufficiently exploited. Even if during the period 1996-2012 a significantincreased rhythm (+2472.13 %) of the number of agritourist guesthouses in Romania wasregistered, the rural tourist infrastructure with small size accommodation function(agritourist guesthouses) has not reached a satisfactory development level, especiallyfrom a qualitative point of view, for the market requirements both at national andinternational level. This development has not been carried out in a durable manner andmost frequently has not been correlated to the improvement of the quality of touristservices (promotion, information, marketing), to the development of transportinfrastructure, of recreational services and units. Probably the clearest indicator of theincrease of interest for agritourism in Romania is represented by the expansion ofagritourist guesthouses, stimulated to a certain extent by the availability of European fundsfor rural development pre and post-adhesion.BIBLIOGRAPHY1. Anthopoulou T., 2000 - Agrotourism and the rural environment: constraints andopportunities inthe Mediterranean less-favoured areas, in Tourism and the Environment.Regional, Economic,Cultural and Policy Issues, eds H. Briassoulis & J. Van der Straaten,Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 357–373 pp;2. Badita M., 2004 - Statistics for business in trade-tourism, Luceafarul Publishing House,Bucharest, pp. 145;Analele Universităţii din Craiova, seria Agricultură – Montanologie – Cadastru (Annals of the University of Craiova - Agriculture,Montanology, Cadastre Series) Vol. XLV 2015373. Calina A., Calina J., 2015a - Research on the Production of Forage for the Agro-touristic Farms in Romania by Cultivating Perennial Leguminous Plants. EnvironmentalEngineering and Management Journal, 14(3), 657-663 pp;4. Calina A., Calina J., & Buzatu C., 2012 - Study on the National and InternationalEvolution Perspectives of Tourism and Agrotourism up to 2020, Annals of the University ofCraiova-Agriculture, Montanology, Cadastre Series, 42(2), 299-304 pp;5. Calina J., 2008 - Agrotourism, Craiova: Sitech , pp. 45;6. Calina J., Calina A., 2011 - Technical – Material Basis of Agro Tourism Support ofTouristic Potential in Romania. Bulletin of the University of Agricultural Sciences &Veterinary 68 (1), 83-88 pp;7. Calina J., Călina A., 2015b - The Evolution of Agritourism Demand in Romania, 2ndInternational Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts, SGEM2015 Conference Proceedings, Vol. 3, 839 - 846 pp;8.Glăvan V., 2000 - Tourism in Romania. Bucharest: Economic Publishing House, pp. 67;9. Hall D., 2004 - Rural Tourism Development in Southeastern Europe: Transition and theSearch for Sustainability. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6 (3), 165–176 pp;10. Kizos T., & Iosifides T., 2007 - The contradictions of agrotourism development inGreece: evidence from three case studies. South European Society and Politics, 12 (1),59–77pp;11. Marsden T., 1999 - Rural futures: the consumption countryside and its regulation,Sociologia Ruralis, 39(4), 501–520 pp;12. Marsden T., Banks,J., Renting H. & van der Ploeg J. D., 2001 - The road towardssustainable rural development: issues of theory, policy and research practice, Journal ofEnvironmental Policy and Planning, 2(2), 75–83 pp;13. Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism, (2010), Order of the Ministry ofRegional Development and Tourism 1296/2010 for the approvalof methodological normsconcerning the classification of the touristic receival structures. The Official Gazette ofRomania, no. 312, Part I, from 12th of May, 2010, Bucharest;14. National Institute of Statistics, 2015 - Online database of National Institute forStatistics: Bucharest, accessed between 25th January – 23th September of 2015,https://statistici.insee.ro.;15. Phillip S., Hunter C., Blackstock K., 2010 - A typology for defining agritourism,Tourism Management  31 (6), 754–758 pp ;16. Van Der Ploeg J. D., Renting H., Brunori G., Knickel K., Mannion J., Marsden T.,De Roest K., Sevilla-Guzmán E., and Ventura F., 2000 - Rural Development: FromPractices and Policies towards Theory. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(4), 391–408 pp;17. Van der Ploeg J. D. & Renting H. (2004) Behind the redux: a rejoinder to DavidGoodman, Sociologia Ruralis, 44 (2) pp. 233–242.

THE SUPPLY TENDENCY OF ROMANIAN AGRITOURISM

http://anale.agro-craiova.ro/index.php/aamc/article/download/267/257

THE SUPPLY TENDENCY OF ROMANIAN AGRITOURISM

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Annals of the University of Craiova - Agriculture, Montanology, Cadastre Series