Chapter 3 Chapter 3
3.2 Wine Tourism as a Holistic Territorial Experience
Wine tourism has the capacity to play a signifi cant role in sustainable regional development through its sustenance of the economic and social regional bases and through the care for environmental dimensions (Hall and Mitchell 2000 ). Thus, and since it is through these dimensions (environmental, social and economic) that the
R. Correia and C. Brito
29
attractiveness potential of wine tourism asserts itself, it must be responsible for its undertaking. This becomes a stimulus to keep locally produced arts and crafts.
Often, they are the mainstay of the local population and enable the survival of tradi- tions normally associated with them. The population will then regard wine tourism as an income-generating activity that justifi es their preservation.
Indeed, wine producing and the tourism associated with it, are normally a strong geographical or territorial phenomena, being described by Dickenson and Salt ( 1982 , p. 184) as the “territory’s experience.” Bell and Valentine ( 1997 ) expand on the how the territory’s experience and their culture are intrinsically linked with wine knowledge. Thus, the wine “appellations mix the natural environment of the region with the raw materials (grapes) used and the skill involved in production and pro- cessing, thus ensuring a tie to place. Mutual publicity thus occurs—wines are famous for coming from a particular region, the region is renowned for its wines”
(Bell and Valentine 1997 , p. 147).
One of the major problems associated with wine tourism, however, comes from the diffi culty the wine-producing industry has in conceiving of tourism as a product they can offer and which can generate added value. For many a producer, “their product is their wine rather than the bundle of experiences that a customer may attach to wine consumption” (Hall and Mitchell 2000 , p. 455). It is interesting to see how these actors (wine producers) are quite attached to the wine industry. Wine production is the result of arduous tasks performed on farms or estates aware from the public glare. Tourism requires sensitivity, openness and an understanding of visitors’ motivations and needs (Correia and Brito 2014 ). As an example, Charters and Menival ( 2011 ) found that the nearly 5,000 small producers who sell wine at their cellar doors in the Champagne region do not believe they are involved in wine tourism, while the large wineries that are increasingly visited by tourists view wine tourism as irrelevant to their marketing strategy (Mitchell et al. 2012 ). This fact poses an obstacle to creating an interlinked network between wine and tourism, and consequently to the wine tourism assertion.
The experience of the major attributes of a wine-producing region may be attained through multiple ways, interlinking many partners. From this perspective, wine tourism may be seen as a vast array of attractions made available for a region to exploit. Such attractions have to be coordinated and jointly organised. So, “with the wine tourism product bridging a complex set of industries from grape growers to wineries to restaurants and tour operators the potential exists for building even greater strategic alliances” (Telfer 2001 , p. 21). This happens when one compares the alliances that have generally been made in tourism, moving from a very com- petitive managerial situation to a more collaborative one, (Jamal and Getz 1995 ; Selin and Chavez 1995 ; Palmer and Bejou 1995 ).
Wine tourism development may affect the whole economy of the region in which it occurs. One of the major stimuli to developing wine tourism may come from greater understanding of the latitude of its effects in the region as a whole. It may create, articulate and increase the potential of various associated elements such as:
accommodation, gastronomy, hunting sports and fi shing, among others. A typical example of such articulation is the number of wine festivals, which, as Houghton ( 2001 ) established in his study, become extremely important since they can muster
3 Wine Tourism and Regional Development
30
new tourism segments that go to wine-producing regions and, among other things, allow for the association of cultural, historical and gastronomic traditions.
Jones et al. ( 2013 ) identify nine critical success factors that have shaped and continue to shape Napa Valley as a wine tourism destination: product, lifestyle, embracing tourism, branding, land protection, entrepreneurs/individuals, partner- ships, community involvement and support. Most of this critical success factors are not directly related to the wine industry but to the touristic (and economic) develop- ment of the region as a whole.
Indeed, the experiences and attributes of a wine-producing region can be so var- ied and of such diverse interest, that many of the so-called tourists of wine- producing regions cannot be lumped under such a label or denomination (Charters and Ali- Knight 2002 ). For Brown and Getz ( 2005 ), the needs and motivations of the wine tourists are linked to more holistic leisure and vacation activities and not necessarily to aspects of wine consumption alone. This holistic experience occurs in the context of what is known as a “winescape” (Hall et al. 2000 ; Nowak and Newton 2006 ).
That is, the rural landscape where viticulture is practised, the landscape of vineyards and the wine cellars (Hall et al. 2000 ). The winescape makes it possible for tourists to engage in hedonic experiences, in aesthetically pleasing atmospheres, of both physical and natural origins. That is, a memorable experience does not happen only inside the wine cellar. The “total experience” is a unique combination of atmo- sphere, environment, regional culture and wine (Bruwer and Alant 2009 ).
Being extremely territorialized, the wine tourism concepts demand a strong attention to the interactions and relations occurring at a micro level that refl ect in diverse regional processes (Fig. 3.1 ). Wine regions must be analysed in a continuous
Traditions Authenticity Environment Culture Interactions
(…)
Wine producers Cellars Restaurants
Landscape Touristic actors
(…)
INTANGIBLE COMPONENTS
TANGIBLE COMPONENTS Wine Tourism Territorial Experience
Intangible Components
They are the main differentiation source of a wine tourism region. Nevertheless, they are difficult to potentiate due to the collective participation and touristic knowledge they require.
Tangible Components
They are necessary but insufficient on their own for success in wine tourism. They hardly differentiate the destination by themselves.
Fig. 3.1 Wine tourism as a territorial experience. Source : the authors
R. Correia and C. Brito
31
relationship with the economy and not as a separate entity which is truly independent from economic actions (Dicken and Malmberg 2001 ; Bathelt and Glückler 2003 ; Yeung 2005 ). The position of the Relational Geography is especially useful to understand the relevance of these interactions and link the dynamics of the regions to the actions of their actors (Storper 1997 ; Dicken et al. 2001 ; Dicken and Malmberg 2001 ; Bathelt and Glückler 2003 ; Boggs and Rantisi 2003 ; Ettlinger 2003 ; Amin 2004 ; Yeung 2005 ; Bathelt 2006 ).
In fact, Relational Geography offers “a theoretical orientation where actors and the dynamic processes of change and development engendered by their relations are central units of analysis” (Boggs and Rantisi 2003 , p. 109). This stream of research came about as a result of traditional approaches of economic geography being unable to explain micro-dynamics which support different means of economic coor- dination (Boggs and Rantisi 2003 ). The regions in such (traditional) approaches are considered as economic actors, while the real actors (people, fi rms and institutions) with the capacity to change and mould the region are often ignored.
In a recent study on three winegrowing clusters located in Italy and in Chile, Giuliani ( 2007 ) demonstrates that the interaction and knowledge transfer in the clusters surfaces in a selective manner for predetermined reasons and not randomly, whereas all can benefi t and interact just by being there. Innovation and interaction cannot be explained by mere geographical proximity and company bundling (Gertler and Wolfe 2004 ; Boschma 2005 ). In this assertion, a signifi cant number of wine producers and potential tourist attractions do not guarantee in themselves a dynamic touristic wine region. “Neighbours might ignore or even hate one another. Local fi rms can be rivals and refuse any cooperation” (Torre and Rallet 2005 , p. 48). The relational component is essential to generate a distinctive element. Companies do not cooperate and effi ciently interact in a wine route just because someone orders them to do so. Thus, economic actors and their action and interaction should be at the core of a theoretical framework to understand the dynamics of a region (Bathelt and Glückler 2003 , pp. 123–124).
Relational Geography can be neatly applied to and has a strong affi nity with the wine tourism studies. The interactive relationship between fi rms and regions, how- ever, has not been suffi ciently dealt with in wine touristic studies. Existing publica- tions reveal that one “has tended to have a naive view of the spatial character of fi rms and of the ways in which fi rms relate to territory” (Dicken and Malmberg 2001 , p. 355). A model to promote wine tourism should have this strong connection in its structural foundation. The connection between these theoretical orientations can make both gain momentum and more importantly, help to effectively promote wine tourism.
Wine tourism studies are very focused on typical characteristics that the wine regions generally have. A signifi cant number of wine producers and a wine produc- tion tradition associated to the region are two of those relevant characteristics (Bruwer 2003 ; Correia et al. 2004 ; Getz and Brown 2006 ). However, evidence, shows that this is not enough to create a dynamic wine tourism region. It is also essential that the regional wine actors establish interaction between themselves
3 Wine Tourism and Regional Development
32
(Telfer 2001 ), and have both an interest in and the competences necessary for joining an industry (tourism) that in its essence is very different from that of wine producing, as shown in Fig. 3.1 .
At the same time, regions do not react in the same way to the fi rm’s presence and the opportunities for regional dynamics that come with them (Correia 2010 ).
Regions are also fairly heterogeneous and have specifi c development paths and con- texts that condition the fi rms’ strategic action and relationships. Consequently, such specifi city means that the same recipe cannot be used to stimulate the development of all wine regions. The relationship between fi rms and regions will always be region-specifi c and impossible to replicate. Therefore, there is no unique mecha- nism or generic law to explain how a wine region comes to be a dynamic one. Such specifi city renders fragile the wine tourism literary trend which points to a generic thesis of wine tourism development based upon the combination of various typical factors inside a geographically delimited space.
Wine routes have been one of the major solutions adopted by the wine tourism to assert itself, and a major part of its structure and dissemination is based upon wine routes. These stimulate cooperation between groups of wine producers around com- mon objectives and are able to offer a coherent product and create added value to the original activity, which is wine producing.