Promoting synergies betweentourism and food

in Denmark and England

Henrik Halkier (halkier@cgs.aau.dk)Laura James (laura.james@humangeo.su.se)

Promoting synergies betweentourism and food

in Denmark and England

Henrik Halkier (halkier@cgs.aau.dk)Laura James (laura.james@humangeo.su.se)

1. Introduction: food and tourism synergies2. Practice perspectives3. Institutions and policies4. Reflections

Objectives

• To compare the actors and institutions involved in the food and tourism sectors in North Jutland, Suffolk and Jämtland, exploring:– the adaptation and recombination of existing food

and tourism practices (production, processing, catering, experience creation, promoting…)

– the institutions and policies shaping interactions between the food and tourism sectors (DMOs, local government, regional development agencies, LAGs…)

“travel informed by the desire to experience a particular type of food or the produce of a specific region” (Hall & Sharples, 2003: 10)

Purpose

Style

Sourcing

Production

FEEDING TOURISTS

Sustenance

Generic

National

Standardized

FOOD TOURISM

Experience

Place specific

Localized

Specialized

Food and Tourism

Tourists and food

Tempting development prospects…

• Food increases attraction/brand of destination (Richards 2002, Presenza & Del Chiappa 2013)

• Extending the season (Hall et al. 2003)• Boost local food production, rural diversification

(Hjalager 2002, Everett & Slocum 2013)• Cultural sustainability, heritage and regional

identity (Long 2004, Sims 2009, Telfer & Hashimoto 2013)

• Environmental sustainability (Hall & Gössling 2013)

Two Perspectives

• Practices – Producing food– Retailing– Catering and hospitality,– Creating experiences– (Promoting tourism)

• How are existing practices adapted, connected, transformed? Are new practices being created?

• Institutions & Policies– Rural development (EU

LAGs) – Destination development

(DMOs)– Economic development

(RDAs, Local Authorities/municipalities)

• How do these:– shape existing practices & the

links between them – Support (or hinder) the

development adaptation, recombination, transformation, etc…

North Jutland (DK), Suffolk (UK)•Coastal destinations with rural hinterlands

– North Jutland – self-catering holiday homes, Germans, Danes, Norwegians, Swedes– Suffolk – Summer/weekends, cottages and 2nd homes, London and South East

•Food tourism ambitions, no ‘magnificent culinary heritage’– Suffolk – wheat/barley, poultry, pork, vegetables– North Jutland – grain, milk, pork, seafood

•Interviews with producers, retailers, restaurants, policymakers

Case Study Destinations

2. Practice

• Reckwitz (2002: 249): Practice as '...a routinized type of behaviour which consists of several elements, interconnected to one another: forms of bodily activities, forms of mental activities, ‘things’ and their use, a background knowledge in the form of understanding, know-how, states of emotion and motivational knowledge'.

• Nicolini’s (2012) sensitizing questions/dimensions of practice– Key and marginal actors, sayings and doings, practical concerns,

temporal organization• A more fine-grained, process-oriented approach

– Not starting with firms, institutions, networks, policies…– What do people do ‘on the ground’

Food/tourism practicesin North Jutland

• Key practices – Producing– Retailing– Catering– Promoting

• Two initiatives aiming to promote cross-sectoral synergies– New signature dishes– Establish local food market

Case: Jammerbugt Signature dish

• Adapting existing practices• fixed items on menus• story telling

• linking in new ways• use of local suppliers?

• new practice• make recipe public• joint branding• DMO developing networks

Case: Hals local food market• adapting existing practice• adding food to existing

summer Saturday markets• producers travelling further to

participate

• linking in new ways• local business development

and tourism promotion connected through development of summer food market

• new practice• DMO developing local product

by initiating event

Key Findings

• Support for marginalised ‘quality’ food production practices, but small scale

• Focus on adapting visible practices (menus, markets) & new temporality (outside main season) rather than localising food chain

• Some practices ‘too difficult’ to change/link together: buying practices of supermarkets and restaurants – Differences and dependencies between practices– What is at stake when practices must be changed or new ones

adopted?– Brokers and boundary objects

Food tourismchange strategies

Primary policy target

Food Tourism

Main level of intervention

Firm-level Innovating Developing experience

Destination Localising consumption Promoting image

3. Institutions and Policy• Conceptualising economic/tourism

development strategies– Contextual drivers (destination branding,

boost local food production, food scares)– Available resources (tourism/food,

public/private)– Change strategies (aims, targets)

North Jutland (DK) Suffolk (UK)

Tourism resources

• Seasonal coastal destination• Mainly self-catering families• Many ‘grill bars’, few high-end

restaurants

• Seasonal coastal destination• Mainly self-catering couples• Many gastro-pubs, few high-end

restaurants

Culinary resources

• No signature dishes• Emerging local quality produce

• No signature dishes• Expanding local quality produce

Private sector

resources

• Some small-scale producers• Some small-scale fishing• Fragmented tourism sector

• Many small-scale producers• Some small-scale fishing• Some larger ‘quality’ producers• Fragmented tourism sector• Commercial distribution to/via

supermarkets etc.

Public sector

resources

• EU LEADER rural programme• Established, well-resourced

DMOs

• EU LEADER rural programme• Limited support for private-sector

led DMOs

Strategising food tourism

North Jutland (DK) Suffolk (UK)

Policy drivers

• Extension of tourism season• Rural development• ‘New Nordic’ cuisine

• Extension of tourism season• Rural development• Food scares - provenance

Initiatives

• Destination branding with food• Support for food events• (LEADER) food network to

link/profile small producers (and restaurants)

• Signature dishes with local ingredients/story-telling

• Destination branding with food• Support for food events• LEADER diversification projects

Challenges

• ‘New Nordic’ is urban• No joint distribution • Limited growth of small-scale

quality production

• Fragmented tourism policy landscape

• Limited financial resources for promotion

Strategising food tourism

Key Findings

Policies focus on• Changes visible to visitors: branding, events, menus, (diversification)• New temporality (outside main season)• NOT localising food chain

Policy differences reflect• Perceived/experienced intensity of demand• Degree of availability of local food (producers, retailers)• Alternatives to diversification for small farmers (wage labour)• (National) preferences for particular policy instruments (networks vs grants)

Long-term strategic weaknesses• Limited funding for promotion/DMOs (UK)• Limited addressing of production/distribution density (DK)• Weak combination of branding AND development in sector-based governance (DK/UK)

4. Reflections and perspectives

• Defining and delimiting practices– Zooming in and out?

• Relationship between practices and strategies– Impacts: continuity and change?

• Comparing and contrasting– Different cross-sectoral coordination strategies

(markets, networks, branding?)