ARTICLE IN PRESS

Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128

www.elsevier.com/locate/jrurstud

Re-conceptualising rural resources as countryside capital:

The case of rural tourism
Brian Garrod, Roz Wornell, Ray Youell
Institute of Rural Sciences, University of Wales Aberystwyth, Llanbadarn Campus, Aberystwyth, SY23 3AL, UK

Abstract

Commentators tend to agree that the rural resource is becoming increasingly subject to pressures arising from an ever wider range
of economic, social, political and environmental influences. This paper focuses on the case of rural tourism in illustrating the
advantages of adopting a sustainable development approach to identifying suitable policies and strategic action plans to assist in
addressing these increasingly complex challenges. The central proposition is that much can be achieved in raising the profile of rural
tourism and the nature of its interdependence with rural resources by re-conceptualising the rural resource as a kind of ‘capital asset’
of the rural tourism industry. Drawing on recent thinking by ecological economists, an approach based on the concept of the
constant capital rule is set out. The paper then outlines some of the benefits of re-casting the rural resource as ‘countryside capital’,
using two case-study vignettes by way of illustration. A major conclusion is that re-conceptualising the rural resource as countryside
capital provides a more holistic and integrated understanding of the rural tourism production system, which will be required if rural
communities are to capture more effectively the potential benefits rural tourism has to offer them. This, in turn, enables a much
clearer articulation of the rationale for public-, private- and voluntary-sector investment in rural resources to be made.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Rural tourism; Constant capital approach; Countryside capital; Investment; Promotional images

1. Introduction Moreover, the pace of change is considered to be

increasing, making it ever more difficult for countryside
One of the few things that rural commentators would decision makers to address the challenges they are being
seem to agree on at present is that the countryside is presented with. The increasingly complex and inter-
currently undergoing a period of unprecedented change connected nature of these challenges has led writers such
(Blunden and Curry, 1985; Robinson, 1990; Allanson as Marsden (1998) to employ the term ‘rural restructur-
and Whitby, 1996; Ilbery, 1998; Napton et al., 1999).1 ing’ to reflect the fundamentally different nature of the
changes that are now taking place in the countryside.2
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1970 621638; This complexity and interconnectedness is said to
fax: +44 1970 611264. increase the potential for conflicts to arise (Butler
E-mail address: bgg@aber.ac.uk (B. Garrod). et al., 1998), so that progress in meeting any one of
1
This is not to suggest that any degree of consensus has been reached the specific challenges identified would seem inevitably
among rural commentators about the nature and extent of such to detract from efforts to address one or more of the
changes. In the UK, for example, the problems facing rural areas are
said to range from the uncertain future of farming and increased others. This tends to encourage a view that trade-offs
pressures on farmers to diversify their activities, to the lack of
affordable housing in rural areas and the creep of suburbanisation, to (footnote continued)
concerns relating to the out-migration of younger people and transport fallacious presumptions, and warn against over-simplification of the
problems in rural areas (Countryside Agency, 2003a). Hodge and policy concerns of rural areas.
2
Monk (2004), on the other hand, argue that many generalisations See also Hoggart and Paniagua (2001), who critique and further
about changing conditions in ‘rural England’ are based on essentially develop the concept of rural restructuring.

0743-0167/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.08.001
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
118 B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128

will increasingly need to be made in the rural policy- this approach is that human well-being in the long run
making process. Typically, such trade-offs are depicted depends on the prudent use of natural, social and built
as being between economic, the environmental and the (manufactured) resources in the short run. Since built
social interests. For example, proposals aimed at resources are all derived ultimately from natural
improving the economic status of a particular rural resource inputs, and because social and human re-
area are often opposed on environmental grounds or sources are themselves dependent on a high-quality
because they are thought to threaten rural ways of life. natural environment for their continued well-being,
It is increasingly being recognised, however, that the economic activity of all kinds depends ultimately on
challenges facing the countryside can be more effectively the maintenance of a sound natural capital base.
addressed by applying new ways of thinking and doing
based on the principles of sustainable development
(Sharpley, 1996, 2000; Shepherd, 1998). Such an 2. What is countryside capital?
approach enables social, economic and environmental
objectives to be harnessed together and jointly met: an While terms such as natural capital are long-
outcome that has been described by the UK’s Country- established in the literature, the specific term ‘country-
side Agency (2003a, p. 34) as a ‘triple whammy’ for the side capital’ has entered into academic parlance only in
countryside. Central to the sustainable development the past few years. As such, it has no widely agreed
approach is a clearer appreciation of the nature of the definition. The term seems to have first been used in the
linkages between the economic, environmental and UK by the Countryside Agency as a means of
social dimensions of rural change. conceptually connecting two of its programmes, which
This paper focuses on the case of rural tourism in Slee (2003, p. 16) describes as being at that time
order to illustrate how sustainable development thinking ‘disparate but connected’. The first of these programmes
can be applied to addressing the problems of the involved the establishment of ‘Land Management
countryside. Rural tourism is considered to be particu- Initiatives’ (LMIs), which aimed to address the pro-
larly appropriate as a case study because of the strong blems facing farming by promoting sustainable land
linkages that exist between rural tourism and the management (Countryside Agency, 2002). This implied
countryside. Indeed, the fabric of the countryside is the adoption of land-management practices that at-
very much the lifeblood of rural tourism. Without an tempted not only to benefit the economies of rural areas
attractive and vibrant countryside in which to operate, but also to help maintain the quality of their natural
rural tourism businesses would not have a viable environment and the vitality of their local communities.
product to sell to their customers. Meanwhile, rural The second initiative, known as ‘Eat the View’, sought
tourism has often been identified as a vehicle for to encourage tourism businesses to connect better with
safeguarding the integrity of the countryside resource, their local economy by using and selling locally
enhancing the rural economy and maintaining rural produced food and drink products (Countryside
ways of life (Lane, 1994; Hall and Jenkins, 1998; Agency, 2004). The aim was therefore to help tourism
Roberts and Hall, 2001). It may even be argued that business to capitalise on their local assets, as well as to
the tourism industry has now become the lynch pin of address some of the externalities that are typically
many rural communities, having effectively replaced associated with the transportation of food and drink
agriculture in this role. Indeed, tourism is said now to be products. Hence it could be argued (Slee, 2003) that
more economically significant than agriculture in many while the LMIs focused on encouraging rural businesses
parts of England (English Tourism Council/Countryside to invest in building up their countryside capital, the Eat
Agency, 2001). the View initiative concentrated on persuading them to
The central proposition of this paper is that much can make better use of their existing countryside capital
be achieved in pursuit of raising the profile of assets.
sustainable development in the rural context by re- The definition of countryside capital presently
conceptualising rural resources as ‘countryside capital’. adopted by the Countryside Agency is ‘the fabric of
Essentially this involves re-casting the rural resource as the countryside, its villages and its market towns’
a kind of capital asset that can be invested in and from (Countryside Agency, 2003b, p. 45). While this defini-
which a stream of benefits may be drawn, provided that tion might be considered somewhat simplistic, it is
the asset base is not overstretched by the various nevertheless valuable in that it depicts countryside
demands that are put upon it. This approach borrows capital as comprising various components of the fabric
from the principles of ecological economics, who have of the countryside. These may be primarily natural, such
long used the concept to assist in delivering the central as wildlife populations, primarily built, such as rural
messages of their discipline (e.g. Pearce et al., 1989; settlements, or primarily social, such as local cultural
Daly, 1991; Pearce and Turner, 1992; Costanza and traditions. In practice, of course, most countryside
Daly, 1992; Prugh et al., 1995). The core proposition of capital assets represent an amalgam of these three main
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128 119

Table 1 contribution to the quality of the rural tourism

Constituent elements of countryside capital
experience.3
Landscape, including seascape Arguably, however, a particular shortcoming of the
Wildlife, both fauna and flora Countryside Agency’s definition of countryside capital is
Biodiversity that it does not sufficiently emphasise the ‘capital’
Geology and soils dimension of the term. The principal merit of depicting
Air and air quality
Hedgerows and field boundaries
the fabric of the countryside as capital is that doing so
Agricultural buildings highlights the critical role it plays in putting together the
Rural settlements, from isolated dwellings to market towns products of rural businesses. Tourism, like any other
Historical features, such as historic buildings, industrial remnants economic activity, can be thought of essentially as a
Tracks, trails, bridleways, lanes and roads production process in which raw materials are taken in
Streams, rivers, ponds and lakes
Water and water quality
and assembled into final products, which are then sold
Woods, forests and plantations to consumers (McKercher, 1993). In the case of rural
Distinctive local customs, languages, costumes, foods, crafts, festivals, tourism, many of these raw materials are in fact
traditions, ways of life components of the countryside capital stock—land-
scape, biodiversity, historic buildings, etc.—which can
Source: Garrod et al. (2004).
be considered part of the ‘capital assets’ of the rural
tourism industry. Hence, while tourism business might
types (Slee, 2003). Further, the essential components of not recognise these components of countryside capital as
countryside capital may either be tangible or perceptual. valuable raw materials, they are nevertheless vital inputs
For example, while hedgerows make a physical con- into the rural tourism production process and, as such,
tribution to countryside capital as field boundaries and are clearly valuable (Lowe, 1996; Garrod and Fyall,
sanctuaries for biodiversity, they also make a wider 1998).
contribution to countryside capital in terms of the role Another important clarification is that countryside
they play in forming distinctive patterns of landscape. It capital, like any other form of capital, is simultaneously
is relevant to note that this definition covers not only both a stock and a flow concept (Prugh et al., 1995). The
open countryside but also villages and market towns, fabric of the countryside represents the capital stock. By
which are considered to be functional elements of the careful management of flows to and from this stock,
rural economy. Given this definition, Table 1 illustrates society can ensure that sufficient countryside assets
the range of countryside features that may be considered remain available to rural businesses, such as those
to be countryside capital assets. involved in assembling and selling rural tourism
Rural tourism businesses and destinations employ all products.4
of these features of the countryside, albeit to various As previously stated, the concept of capital has long
extents, both in attracting tourists to their local area and been used by ecological economists. A critical recognition
in providing them with satisfying experiences while they
are there. This is further illustrated by Fig. 1, which 3
It is also important to recognise that the importance of countryside
identifies a range of components of countryside capital capital goes far beyond its role in underpinning rural tourism. Indeed,
that might be drawn upon by the rural tourism industry the Countryside Agency (2003b) identifies four further dimensions of
at various stages of the rural tourism value chain. This the importance of countryside capital:
can range from the provision of countryside images used  Providing a market advantage to farmers, food processors and
to promote a rural tourism destination, through distributors
providing rural tourists with things to do and attractions  Representing as asset for heritage and related businesses
to visit, to the contribution made by local traditions and  Supplying key services, e.g. wind energy, flood defence, recreational
resources
customs in making a tourist’s stay memorable.
 Serving as an attractor of inward investment.
As such, the various elements of countryside capital
4
can be thought of as essential components of the asset A financial analogy is often employed to reinforce this point. If an
base of rural tourism businesses. This implies that the individual inherits a capital sum and places it in a bank account at a
quality of the rural tourism experience depends on the certain rate of interest, the capital asset will generate a given flow of
income that will be available to the investor ad infinitum. If, however,
quality of the countryside capital that supports it. This is the individual were to draw out a sum larger than the interest earned in
not to suggest that countryside capital is the only a given period of time, the value of the capital sum must fall, thereby
determinant of the quality of the rural tourism reducing the amount of interest it is able to generate in the future.
experience: other determining factors include amenable Profligate spending today will result in the need for austerity in the
facilities, plentiful information, high standards of service future. If the investor wants to benefit from his or her investment in the
long run, he or she clearly needs to look after it better. Indeed, a wise
and excellent customer care. Rather, the intention is to investor would be able to regain his or her original standard of living
emphasise the tendency for the contribution of country- by replacing sums that were unwisely withdrawn in the past with his or
side capital to be relatively neglected in terms of its her own money.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
120 B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128

Fig. 1. The role of countryside capital in the tourism value. Source: Garrod et al. (2004)

is that past, present and future generations in fact all ensure that it passes on a stock of capital as a bequest to
share the same asset base: the capital stocks that the next generation that is neither smaller in size, nor
underpin all economic activity. As such, the quality of lower in quality, than the one it inherited from the
life of today’s generation depends to a significant extent previous generation. This has become known as the
on how wisely past generations have managed these ‘constant capital rule’ and it underpins a great deal of
capital stocks. By the same token, the welfare of future recent thinking on sustainable development.
generations depends substantially on their prudent use
by the present generation. This realisation reflects the
need for considerations based around the concept of 3. A conceptual model of the linkages between rural
‘intergenerational equity’ (fairness across the genera- tourism and countryside capital
tions) to be integrated into economic decision making.
According to writers such as Pearce et al. (1989), the In coming to appreciate more fully the importance of
best way of achieving this is for the present generation to countryside capital, it is helpful to distinguish clearly
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128 121

Physical Natural
Direct and indirect use as: Capital Capital
- visitor attractions Tourists receive
- wildlife resources satisfaction from
- backdrop to experiences Countryside countryside
- destination image experiences
Capital
Economic Social
Resources Capital

Investment in Impacts on
countryside countryside
The Tourism capital capital
Industry The Tourist
Revenues from tourism products and
experiences

Tourism and related products

Fig. 2. A model of the interactions between rural tourism and countryside capital. Source: Garrod et al. (2004).

between countryside capital assets and the wider tourism. Countryside capital has an indirect role to play
economic resources employed by rural industries. in supporting all of these activities.
Fig. 2 clarifies this in the context of rural tourism. The It is also important to recognise that other rural
economic resources of rural tourism are the buildings, industries employ countryside capital assets in the
equipment, raw materials, infrastructure, workforce, production of their goods and services. For example,
skills and knowledge, and so on, that are employed by agriculture, energy production, forestry and the equine
the industry as inputs in assembling their products. industry are all likely to share key countryside capital
These resources are generally recognised as having value assets with the rural tourism industry (Sharpley and
because the costs associated with them are (at least in Sharpley, 1997). Rural tourism is therefore likely to find
greater part) reflected in the market prices of the final itself competing for the use of countryside capital assets
goods and services they are used to produce. This means and this leads to use conflicts. Indeed, since countryside
that the use of such resources must be paid for and as capital assets are often common-pool resources, con-
such they become explicit costs to specific rural tourism flicts can arise between different stakeholders attempting
businesses. Many of these economic resources are, of to use them in mutually contradictory ways. Moreover,
course, also part of the countryside capital stock in some instances this conflict may be internalised,
available to be used by rural tourism businesses. For especially when the tourism business is the result of
example, the building in which a farming museum is diversification from another of the rural industries, such
based might be converted from a disused outbuilding, as a farming or equine business. Under such circum-
which is part of the countryside capital stock. Once the stances, decisions about how best to employ the
building has been converted into a museum, however, it countryside capital assets available to a business may
becomes formally part of the ‘economic capital’ asset be far from clear cut.
base of the rural tourism industry. Another important linkage seen in Fig. 2 relates to the
Fig. 2 also indicates that the contribution of country- role of the tourism industry in investing in countryside
side capital to the rural business may be direct or capital. Rural tourism businesses in general may invest
indirect. Many components of countryside capital make in countryside capital either directly or indirectly. Direct
a direct contribution to the tourist experience. For investment in countryside capital involves developing
example, tourists may wish to see a particular waterfall tourism attractions, facilities and products that recog-
or to take in a specific panoramic scene. However, nise the value of the countryside as a vital capital asset
countryside capital may also have an indirect role to and the need to manage such assets in sustainable ways.
play in providing a backdrop to the rural tourism Examples in the rural tourism context might include:
experience and in generating an image that attracts
tourists to a particular destination area. This role should  Developing an interpretive wildlife-watching tour
be considered no less important than the direct role.  A farm tourism enterprise implementing a habitat
Attracting tourists, satisfying their expectations and, restoration scheme
perhaps most importantly, encouraging them to return  A country estate encouraging public access to the
in the future, are all vital elements of successful rural land it manages
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
122 B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128

 Developing a mountain-biking trail in an area of communities in which they are located. Such activities
woodland. should either be prohibited or, if they are deemed to
make a wider contribution to rural communities,
Indirect investment in countryside capital, on the managed so as to minimise their draw upon various
other hand, involves investing in projects and pro- stocks of countryside capital assets.
grammes that create or strengthen positive links between
rural tourism and countryside capital. Examples might
include: 4. Who invests in countryside capital?

 Membership of an environmental accreditation Examining investment in countryside capital is a

scheme complex process in view of the multiplicity of agencies
 Implementing a policy of buying only local food and or enterprises that, in theory at least, have an interest in
drink products making such investments and could potentially do so.
 Making payments into conservation funds To take just one example, investment in hedgerows and
 Destination branding based on local distinctiveness. field boundaries is undertaken by a wide range of
countryside stakeholders, from farmers to private land-
Direct investment in countryside capital is thus owners, local authorities and voluntary conservation
distinct from indirect investment insofar as it is likely groups. The situation is further complicated by the
to have more immediate and tangible effects. Ulti- tendency for such investments to be funded from a wide
mately, however, both are valid means of investing in variety of sources, from private funds to European
countryside capital. funding, central government financing, council tax
There are therefore three main benefits to depicting revenues and charitable donations.
the fabric of the countryside as a capital stock of the Table 2 offers a simplified overview of investment in a
rural tourism industry. The first is that doing so focuses range of countryside capital assets in England, provid-
attention on the vital role played by the countryside at ing examples of organisations and agencies that are
every stage of the rural tourism value chain (see Fig. 1). currently making such investments, be they direct or
This implies that the quality of the countryside must to indirect. The investors included in the table clearly span
some extent determine the quality of the rural tourism the public, private and voluntary sectors. What is
experience. remarkable is that many of these investors in country-
This leads on to a second benefit of adopting the side capital do not actually have rural tourism as their
notion of countryside capital, which is that doing so primary remit. English Nature, for example, is currently
highlights the need for rural tourism businesses to the government agency whose primary role is to
pursue more sustainable relationships with the country- champion countryside conservation in England. How-
side in which they operate. If countryside capital is an ever, many of its activities, including the implementation
essential input to the rural tourism production process, of Biodiversity Action Plans, offer indirect benefits to
then a decline in its quality is likely to be reflected in a rural tourists, businesses and destinations in the form of
similar reduction in the quality of the final product. The the provision of a varied and stimulating rural environ-
reduction in the quality of the countryside capital assets ment in which their activities may take place. In a
may, of course, be due to lack of on-going investment in similar vein, the Royal Society for the Protection of
conserving or maintaining them. According to this same Birds contributes directly to countryside capital through
logic, if rural tourism businesses were to invest in its conservation work, while at the same time offering
protecting and enhancing its countryside capital stocks, tourism and recreational activities for visitors which are
the quality of their final products would also likely be based on and draw from the countryside. The table also
increased. If rural tourism businesses are systematically demonstrates that investment in countryside capital
unable or unwilling to make these investments them- takes place at national, regional and local levels.
selves, then a condition of market failure may be The rural tourism industry clearly invests in country-
considered to exist. In this case, government interven- side capital for a number of reasons. From a purely
tion to make strategic investments in maintaining or tourism point of view, destination managers may feel
enhancing the available stocks of countryside capital on that this kind of investment is likely to help them to gain
society’s behalf may be deemed warranted. or retain a competitive edge over rival destinations with
This helps in turn to identify a third benefit of broadly similar products in offer. This might be in the
conceptualising the rural resource as countryside capi- form of cost advantages such as financial savings
tal, which is to recognise that activities that damage or associated with ‘green’ activities such as energy reduc-
degrade this capital stock, such as poorly managed rural tion or waste recycling. For example, a 1997 survey of
tourism, are clearly not contributing to the sustainable users of the Countryside Agency’s ‘Green Audit Kit’
development of the economies, environments and found that the average cost saving in the order of £1525
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128 123

Table 2
Examples of investment in countryside capital

Component of countryside capital Examples of investors Types of investment

Landscape (including seascape) Department for Environment, Food and Rural Conservation, food production, access for
Affairs (DEFRA), National Trust, Forestry tourism and recreation, agri-environment
Commission, Woodland Trust, local schemes, ‘protected landscapes’, e.g. National
authorities, National Park authorities, Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Countryside Agency, farmers and other (AONBs), Heritage Coasts
landowners
Wildlife (fauna and flora) Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Nature reserves, Special Areas of Conservation
(RSPB), English Nature (SACs), Sites of Special Scientific Interest
(SSSIs), advisory services
Biodiversity English Nature, local and national Advisory services, national and local
conservation non-government organisations biodiversity actions plans, agri-environment
(NGOs), farmers and other landowners, schemes, SACs
Forestry Commission, Environment Agency
Geology and soils Farmers and other landowners, Geological Cultivation
Survey, English Nature
Air and air quality Environment Agency, local authorities, Monitoring, capital investment
individuals
Hedgerows and field boundaries English Nature, DEFRA, farmers and other Planting, advisory services, grant aid
landowners, Forestry Commission, Woodland
Trust
Agricultural buildings Farmers and other landowners, DEFRA, Construction, conversion of redundant
English Heritage buildings, advisory services, grant aid
Rural settlements, from isolated Local authorities, Regional Development Planning guidelines and regulations, capital
dwellings to market towns Agencies (RDAs), Countryside Agency, investment, advisory services
private sector, private individuals
Historical features, such as historic English Heritage, National Trust, local Conservation, maintenance, promotion for
buildings, industrial remnants conservation societies, Civic Trust, private tourism
individuals
Tracks, trails, bridleways, lanes and Highways Agency, local authorities, Forestry Maintenance, provision of access, tourism and
roads Commission, Countryside Agency recreational use, agri-environment schemes
Streams, rivers, ponds and lakes Environment Agency, local authorities, Pollution monitoring, advisory services
farmers, water companies, industry
Water quality Environment Agency Blue Flag Award, Seaside Award, Green Coast
Award
Woods, forests and plantations Forestry Commission, private sector, Timber production, access for tourism and
Woodland Trust, local and national recreation, conservation
conservation NGOs
Distinctive local customs, languages, RDAs, local authorities, Regional Tourist Initiatives, e.g. food and tourism, advisory
costumes, foods, crafts, festivals, Boards (RTBs), individuals, private sector services, special events
traditions, ways of life enterprises, campaign groups

Source: Garrod et al. (2004).

was made by those who had followed the kit’s advice issue is discussed further in the following section of this
and recorded the cost savings made (Countryside paper.
Agency, 2001). Alternatively, competitive benefits might The public sector, meanwhile, may be more interested
present themselves in the form of improved market in bringing about sustainable rural development more
share or the ability to charge premium prices. Thus, for generally. In this respect, investment in countryside
example, access to attractive landscape images can give capital can benefit the local community by providing
a vital marketing edge to the area as a tourism recreational opportunities, facilities and amenities that
destination, provided of course that these images are would otherwise be unavailable. Alternatively, investing
successfully captured and promoted effectively. This in countryside capital may help to secure or improve the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
124 B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128

quality of the rural environment, and thereby to rural tourism destination image to project is rarely
enhance the quality of life experienced by people living forthcoming. In such circumstances there is the potential
in rural communities. It may also help to stimulate for an ambiguous and potentially detrimental destina-
inward investment that may well be to the economic and tion image to emerge.
social benefit of the rural community. Such motivations Morgan et al. (2002) propose that destination image
are, of course, not wholly limited to public-sector and identity comprise both functional and non-func-
organisations; voluntary organisations may well have tional attributes, where the former includes ‘physical’
very similar aims, and will find that investing either aspects such as location, ease of access, accommodation,
directly or indirectly in countryside capital is an efficient activities and service, and the latter includes the more
and effective means of achieving them. ‘emotional’ aspects such as landscape, atmosphere and
friendliness of the host population. These attributes
combine together to form the overall identity of the
5. How countryside capital contributes to the identity, rural tourism destination and, as such, represent a
success and promotion of rural tourism destinations critical link between rural tourism and countryside
capital. In order to meet with continued success in the
The available evidence tends to suggest that while the marketplace, a rural destination will need to build an
use of images and imagery within tourism promotion identity or brand image that sums up for potential
does not necessarily convince uncommitted potential visitors the essence of the physical qualities, landscape,
customers to visit a destination, it can serve to reinforce people, culture, quality and vibrancy of the area. There
the intentions of those who are already pre-disposed to is a considerable body of evidence to suggest that
visit (Morgan et al., 2002). Destination choice is greatly visitors to the countryside place a high value on these
influenced by a perceived sense of empathy with the area elements (Scott, 2002; Tress and Tress, 2003; Wakeford,
and this itself is a function of the destination identity 1999). These are, of course, all constituent elements of
that is being projected. the stock of countryside capital a destination has to
The role of destination imagery is becoming ever more offer.
critical. Indeed, Buck (1993, p. 14) argues that ‘tourism Two short case-study vignettes follow.5 These are
is an industry based on imagery: its overriding concern intended to illustrate the links between rural tourism
is to construct, through multiple representations of destination imagery and countryside capital. The first
paradise, an imagery that entices the outsider to place examines an instance in which tourism destination
him or herself into the defined space’. However, as the marketing based on television images of the ‘rural idyll’
number of tourism destinations continues to rise, it is has promoted ambiguous and unrealistic imagery, which
becoming increasingly difficult for tourism destinations in turn has resulted in low satisfaction levels among
to differentiate themselves from one another. In effect, a visitors. The second examines an instance of destination
dilution of destination identities seems to be taking branding in which some re-investment has been made in
place. At the same time, the intangible nature of the the countryside capital of the area, mainly by encoura-
tourism product makes it hard for potential customers ging visitors to make specific and targeted contributions.
to inspect or try the product before purchasing it Moreover, and somewhat unusually for the UK, this
(Seaton and Bennett, 1996). Consequently, destination approach has been promoted in a very overt manner by
managers are finding it increasingly difficult to establish destination managers. Despite this overt approach,
and maintain distinctive identities that not only appeal however, it is clear that this example is still only
to target market segments but also reflect the reality of scratching at the surface of the potential for visitor
the experiences their destination has to offer (Butler and contributions to help maintain and enhance the country-
Hall, 1998). side capital of the rural tourism destination area.
Rural tourism destinations face particular challenges
in respect of creating and projecting effective marketing 5
Both case-study vignette locations are in the north of England, UK.
identities. One important reason is the relatively limited The rural village of Goathland is located in the Yorkshire Dales
pulling power that rural destinations are able to achieve National Park. Its connection with rural tourism is relatively recent,
in increasingly competitive and global tourism markets beginning in earnest in the mid-1990s when it became famous as a
filming location for a popular television drama. The Lake District, on
(Ritchie and Crouch, 2003). Another is that the rural the other hand, represents one of the UK’s strongest rural tourism
tourism industry remains highly fragmented, tending to images, having developed on the back of its status as one of Britain’s
comprise a large number of relatively small, generally first National Parks. The case studies were developed using a
family-run businesses (Roberts and Hall, 2001). This combination of literature review techniques, supplemented by a small
limits the industry’s ability to work together to create number of interviews with key informants. Interviewees were all
employed in managerial positions within rural tourism stakeholder
and maintain a clear and competitive destination image organisations (as illustrated more generally in Table 2) and were
(Dolli and Pinfold, 1997). An important implication is selected on the basis of their likely interest in the application of the
that in rural areas, full agreement on which particular concept of countryside capital.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128 125

5.1. Case study: ‘Heartbeat Country’ The imagery of countryside capital as used in the
1990s promotion of Heartbeat Country led to an
The television programme ‘Heartbeat’, set in the expectation in visitors of being able to interact with
1960s and filmed in the real rural village of Goathland, the media depictions of Goathland: to experience a
inspired the brand development of the Heartbeat ‘window on the past’. The reality of Goathland did not
Country brand image. The TV series and subsequent satisfy or reinforce the pre-experience identity of the
tourism promotion in the mid-1990s depicted a rural village and therefore visitors felt no incentive to
idyll that idealised the countryside in such a way as to contribute either economically or socially (through
create the anticipation of an experience similar to but interaction with the community and the landscape) to
more immediate than that offered by watching Heart- maintaining the countryside capital of the area.
beat on television. This example highlights the potential negative aspects
The recognition that the promotional imagery of of using aspects of countryside capital in touristic
Heartbeat Country utilises images of countryside capital promotion and imagery. However, areas such as Goath-
to the full—the expanses of inviting walking country land are dependent on tourism and the Yorkshire
dotted with stone walls, agricultural activity, and so Tourist Board has recently moved to use the association
on—is not to say that these images are false. Rather, with the Heartbeat programme as adding value to the
they are used in such a way that limits the Goathland area’s existing offer, rather than attempting to represent
offer to that of the TV series, in place of the relationship it as the prime attraction.
of the village and its surroundings being promoted as an
additional aspect that could be experienced and 5.2. Case study: Cumbria—The Lake District
appreciated by visitors to the area. Focus group research
carried out in the late 1990s (Mordue, 1999) showed that Despite the role played by Cumbria Tourist Board
the tourism market has changed considerably over the (CTB) in the utilisation of countryside capital and the
period in which the TV show has been running. encouragement given to visitors to ‘go out and use it’,
The publication of maps, guides and trails packaging the Board recognise that their role in maintaining
the Heartbeat experience led visitors to expect the countryside capital is one of advocacy and facilitation
landscape and rural community depicted in the series. rather than direct economic input. Yet Cumbria is one
The use of images of countryside capital for tourism of the more active regions in its attempts to encourage
purposes in effect commodifies the destination or the links between tourism and countryside capital to be
landscape involved, making it easier for the visitor to made more overt to tourists, residents and stakeholders
‘buy into’ the experience. The previously examined in the area.
analogy between countryside capital and economic The Lake District Tourism and Conservation Part-
capital highlights that in order to survive and flourish, nership is perhaps the most widely acknowledged
countryside capital needs to be maintained in the same organisation in the region that recognises the impor-
way as economic capital. Indeed, the depiction of tance of countryside capital to both rural tourism and to
Goathland as ‘Heartbeat Country’ resulted, in the late the wider community. Despite being seen initially as
1990s, with both visitors and residents being dissatisfied. competition for the likes of the National Trust and the
For instance: National Park Authority, the key public-sector stake-
holders in the Partnership are now English Nature, the
I expected to come here and see it how you see it on National Park Authority and the CTB (to the tune of
the TV y it should be more sixties-like really y 40% of total funds). The remaining 60% of funding
(Visitor, quoted in Mordue, 1999, p. 641) comes directly from the private sector through member-
ship fees (Pers. comm. 2003, Lake District Tourism &
This dissatisfaction may result, in such cases, with the
Conservation Partnership).
depletion of the capital stock of the countryside as visitors
The Partnership does not create projects itself: rather
are less likely to contribute through such means as
it works within the existing programmes of such bodies
purchasing local goods, spending on local accommoda-
as the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers;
tion or in local shops. This is then compounded by a lack
Cumbria Wildlife Trust; the National Trust;
of repeat visits or recommendation to friends and family.
the National Park Authority and Red Alert (a
y we call them where I work the fifteen p people, all body interested in protecting red squirrels). This
they have time to do is spend fifteen p. Now that is allows projects to be adopted that can be offered to
not adding to the economy of the village really6 participating members that are matched to their target
(Shop Worker, quoted in Mordue, 1999, p. 637) market. Projects range from the well-known ‘Our Man
at the Top’, where funding is given towards employment
6
Here ‘p’ stands for pence, which is one hundredth of a UK pound of three National Trust footpath repair wardens, to
sterling, the British unit of currency. four participating tourism accommodation providers
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
126 B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128

operating a visitor payback scheme,7 to 25 members education amongst both tourism operators and the
supporting conservation schemes such as the main- wider community (Pers. comm. 2003, Lake District
tenance of dry-stone walling, hedgerows and red Tourism & Conservation Partnership). This is echoed by
squirrels through various methods such as proceeds CTB’s recognition that visitors need to be made more
from bike and map hire, visitor payback and donation aware of where their money is going and what is it being
boxes. used for. For example, money paid in a National Park
Tourism operators have the choice to adopt a project car park will contribute in an indirect way towards the
as ‘their own’, such as the restoration of Howe Ridding maintenance of countryside capital and yet the visitor
Damson Orchard, adopted by one hotel using the will remain unaware of their contribution to this.
payback scheme, which in a few years aims to be using Currently the Partnership recognises itself as a ‘visitor
the produce from the orchard in their menus, jams and payback expert’, concentrating on environmental con-
chutneys. Alternatively, operators within an area can servation and enhancement. Future plans for the
join together to adopt a project such as the Grasmere Partnership include a more holistic outlook, with an
Lakeshore Footpath whereby six tourism operators in aim of funding social, cultural and heritage projects that
Grasmere are contributing towards the maintenance and play a part in the tourism satisfaction chain and that
enhancement of the only public access to the lakeside. could benefit from the kind of support currently
Visitors are made aware of the work of the Partner- available to environmental concerns through the Part-
ship and its members through information made nership. There is little doubt however that the work of
available at the time of enquiry to the tourism operator the Partnership plays an important role in maintaining
with further information made available on line at the the countryside capital of Cumbria through tourism
Partnership’s website (http://www.lakespartnership.co.uk/ resources, and by so doing plays an important role in
rtscheme.html). That tourism operators are enthusiastic maintaining tourism activity within the region
about the work of the Partnership is encouraging,
revealing an understanding of the importance of the
countryside in a holistic sense and a commitment to 6. Conclusions
contributing towards its maintenance as countryside
capital. Tourism businesses contribute in a very real The central tenet of this paper has been to recognise
sense, both financially and otherwise, towards the that while rural tourism has long been understood as an
success of both individual projects and the Partnership important force in the countryside, there has been little
as a whole. Not only do the industry have ownership of understanding of its crucial linkages to and dependence
the Partnership, which is considered ‘‘vital for its on the countryside capital assets that are its funda-
integrity’’ (Pers. comm. 2003, Lake District Tourism & mental resource. By utilising established thinking
Conservation Partnership) but the majority of busi- surrounding sustainable development as a framework
nesses also match-fund each contribution made by for understanding the links between rural tourism and
visitors to projects, thereby doubling the prospective countryside capital, it has been illustrated that country-
funding base. side capital assets are crucial in putting together and
The Partnership does not limit its membership to providing rural tourism products.
tourism organisations, although these are best placed to A better understanding of this dependence is vital if
make financial contributions towards maintaining coun- tourism is to continue to make a positive contribution to
tryside capital. Other businesses such as printers, sustainable rural development. If the tourism industry
solicitors and even a laundry are members of the and its stakeholders neglect this resource base then the
Partnership, giving of their time and services rather quality of the tourism experience is bound to decline,
than direct financial contribution. This reveals a wider and so will the rural tourism industry itself in turn.
recognition not only of the importance of tourism to the By re-conceptualising the rural resource as country-
area, but also recognition of the importance of the work side capital, the rural tourism industry, from theorists
of the Partnership in contributing towards the main- through managers to operators, will be better able to
tenance of the fabric of the countryside. understand and communicate the need for a holistic
However successful the Partnership and its projects approach to managing the rural resource base. The fact
has been so far, there is still recognition that more could that contributions can be made both in direct ways (e.g.
be achieved. Despite 85% of all monies raised being footpath maintenance work undertaken by a local
spent on environmental projects and almost all visitors authority) and indirect ways (e.g. an accommodation
who utilise members’ tourism resources opting to base participating in an environmental grading scheme)
contribute to the projects, the Partnership recognises is not often recognised by tourism practitioners. Indeed,
that there is a need for increased information and many of the public-sector and other organisations that
do make valuable contributions, such as those illu-
7
For a general discussion of such schemes see Scott et al. (2003). strated in this paper, do not necessarily recognise the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128 127

fact that they are so doing. In this context, there is a funds footpath repairs in the area and the visitor
need to establish and promote best practice among all payback scheme operated by a small group of accom-
those involved in rural tourism. This should of necessity modation providers. An important feature of the
include disseminating and understanding that invest- Partnership is that it does not create such projects itself;
ment in countryside capital should not be seen as an rather it provides a framework within which such
optional extra but rather as a core component of projects can be identified, nurtured and brought to
successful and sustainable rural tourism. fruition. Many projects are match-funded by participat-
The case-study vignettes presented in this study focus ing rural tourism businesses. This enables rural tourism
particularly on the tendency for rural tourism to draw providers to develop a sense of ownership of the
on its countryside capital in terms of the images that are projects, strengthening the link between the economic
adopted and sometimes manipulated in order to attract success of rural tourism in the area and the maintenance
rural tourists to the destination area. The vignettes also of a secure and sustainable countryside capital base. An
highlighted the need for constituent businesses and additional encouraging factor has been the extent to
stakeholder organisations in the rural tourism industry which such projects have been able to win the
to invest, either directly or indirectly, in this element of commitment rural tourists themselves and this has been
countryside capital. These relationships are both de- supported by well-directed promotional work on the
picted in Fig. 2 of the paper, while the latter is illustrated part of the Partnership. Directly asking rural tourists
in Table 2. In this particular respect a number of themselves to assist in supporting the countryside capital
important conclusions were drawn. of the place they have come to visit—and therefore
First, with respect to the case of Goathland, it is clear presumably value—has also assisted greatly in this
than in drawing marketing and promotional images for process. This could nevertheless be further strengthened
rural tourism from an area’s countryside capital, by making tourists more aware of where their money is
ambiguous and potentially detrimental pubic percep- going and what it is being used for.
tions of a place can emerge. This is important, since it is
also argued that the growth of rural tourism destina-
tions has led to a dilution of destination identities; Acknowledgement
creating and maintaining a strong set of destination
images is becoming increasingly crucial to the vitality of This paper derives from a research study funded by
rural tourism destinations. Meanwhile it was argued the Countryside Agency (see Garrod et al., 2004) and
that the commodification of various elements country- the authors are grateful to the Agency for granting
side capital in the form of promotional images permission to disseminate the study’s findings more
effectively brings them into being part of the economic widely.
capital of the destination area’s rural tourism industry.
As such, it is important that the capital stock is
maintained. The vignette suggests two important ways References
in which this should be done: by disentangling the
fictional elements of the destination’s image and its Allanson, P., Whitby, M., 1996. Prologue: rural policy and the
factual characteristics, in order to create an unambig- British countryside. In: Allanson, P., Whitby, M. (Eds.), The
Rural Economy and the British Countryside. Earthscan, London,
uous and robust destination image; and by investing pp. 1–16.
further in the imagery component of the area’s country- Blunden, J., Curry, N. (Eds.), 1985. The Changing Countryside. Helm/
side capital, either directly or indirectly. The former has Open University, Bromley.
to some extent already taken place, with the de- Buck, E., 1993. Paradise Remade. The Politics of Culture and History
in Hawai’i. Temple University Press, Philadelphia.
emphasis of ‘Heartbeat’ in the Tourist Board’s promo-
Butler, R., Hall, C.M., 1998. Image and reimaging of rural areas. In:
tional material. The latter, however, needs more work; Butler, R., Hall, C.M., Jenkins, J.M. (Eds.), Tourism and
possible mechanisms for investing in countryside capital Recreation in Rural Areas. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 115–122.
are illustrated in Table 2 of this paper. Butler, R., Hall, C.M., Jenkins, J.M., 1998. Introduction. In: Butler,
The second case study, meanwhile, which focuses on R., Hall, C.M., Jenkins, J.M. (Eds.), Tourism and Recreation in
rural tourism in the Lake District, presents some specific Rural Areas. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 3–16.
Costanza, R., Daly, H.E., 1992. Natural capital and sustainable
mechanisms by which investment in countryside capital development. Conservation Biology 6 (1), 37–46.
by all of the various stakeholders in rural tourism can be Countryside Agency, 2001. Green Audit Kit: Investing in Your
encouraged. In particular, the benefits of creating an Business and the Environment. Countryside Agency, Cheltenham.
umbrella organisation were highlighted. In this case the Countryside Agency, 2002. Land Management Initiatives. Countryside
key organisation is Lake District Tourism and Con- Agency, Cheltenham.
Countryside Agency, 2003a. The State of the Countryside 2003.
servation Partnership, the role of which is both to Countryside Agency, Cheltenham.
stimulate and support investment in countryside capital. Countryside Agency, 2003b. Rural economies: stepping stones to
Examples include the ‘Our Man on Top’ scheme, which healthier futures. Countryside Agency, Cheltenham.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
128 B. Garrod et al. / Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2006) 117–128

Countryside Agency, 2004. Eat the view, online document found at Napton, D., Walford, N., Everitt, D., 1999. Continuity and change in
http://www.countryside.gov.uk/caseStudies/Eat_the_View.asp (accessed the developed countryside. In: Walford, N., Everitt, J., Napton, D.
19 May 2004). (Eds.), Reshaping the Countryside: Perceptions and Processes of
Daly, H.E., 1991. Steady State Economics, second ed. Island Press, Rural Change. CABI, Wallingford, pp. 1–11.
Washington, DC. Pearce, D.W., Turner, R.K., 1992. Economics of Natural Resources
Dolli, N., Pinfold, J.F., 1997. Managing rural tourism businesses: and the Environment. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead.
financing, development and marketing issues. In: Page, S.J., Getz, Pearce, D., Markandya, A., Barbier, E.B., 1989. Blueprint for a Green
D. (Eds.), The Business of Rural Tourism: International Perspec- Economy. Earthscan, London.
tives. International Thomson Business Press, London and Boston, Prugh, T., Costanza, R., Cumberland, J.H., Daly, H., Goodland, R.,
pp. 38–58. Norgaard, R.B., 1995. Natural Capital and Human Economic
English Tourism Council/Countryside Agency, 2001. Working in the Survival. ISEE Press, Solomons.
Countryside: A Strategy for Rural Tourism in England 2001–2005. Ritchie, J.R.B., Crouch, G.I., 2003. The Competitive Destination,
English Tourist Board, London. A Sustainable Tourism Perspective. CABI Publishing, Cambridge.
Garrod, B., Fyall, A., 1998. Beyond the rhetoric of sustainable Roberts, L., Hall, D., 2001. Rural Tourism and Recreation: Principles
tourism? Tourism Management 19 (3), 199–212. to Practice. CABI, Wallingford.
Garrod, B., Youell, R., Wornell, R., 2004. Links Between Rural Tourism Robinson, G.M., 1990. Conflict and Change in the Countryside.
and Countryside Capital. Countryside Agency, Cheltenham. Wiley, Chichester.
Hall, C.M., Jenkins, J.M., 1998. The policy dimensions of rural Scott, A., 2002. Assessing public perception of landscape: the
tourism and recreation. In: Butler, R., Hall, C.M., Jenkins, J.M. LANDMAP experience. Landscape Research 27 (3), 271–295.
(Eds.), Tourism and Recreation in Rural Areas. Wiley, Chichester, Scott, A., Christie, M., Tench, H., 2003. Visitor payback: panacea or
pp. 19–42. Pandora’s box for conservation in the UK? Journal of Environ-
Hodge, I., Monk, S. (Eds.), 2004. Editorial: The economic diversity of mental Planning and Management 46 (4), 583–604.
rural England: stylised fallacies and uncertain evidence, Journal of Seaton, A.V., Bennett, M.M., 1996. Marketing Tourism Products:
Rural Studies 20 (3), 263–272. Concepts, Issues, Cases. Thomson Business Press, London and
Hoggart, K., Paniagua, A., 2001. What is rural restructuring? Journal Boston.
of Rural Studies 17 (1), 41–612. Sharpley, R., 1996. Tourism & Leisure in the Countryside, second ed.
Ilbery, B. (Ed.), 1998. The Geography of Rural Change. Longman, ELM, Huntingdon.
Harlow. Sharpley, R., 2000. Tourism and sustainable development: exploring
Lane, B., 1994. What is rural tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism the theoretical divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 8 (1), 1–19.
2 (1&2), 7–21. Sharpley, R., Sharpley, J., 1997. Rural Tourism: An Introduction.
Lowe, P., 1996. Blueprint for a rural economy. In: Allanson, P., International Thomson Business, London and Boston.
Whitby, M. (Eds.), The Rural Economy and the British Country- Shepherd, A., 1998. Sustainable Rural Development. Macmillan,
side. Earthscan, London, pp. 187–202. Basingstoke.
Marsden, T., 1998. Economic perspectives. In: Ilbery, B. (Ed.), The Slee, B., 2003. Countryside capital: what’s the interest? Inaugural
Geography of Rural Change. Longman, Harlow, pp. 13–30. professorial lecture, November, Countryside and Community
McKercher, B., 1993. Some fundamental truths about tourism: Research Unit, University of Gloucestershire.
understanding tourism’s social and environmental impacts. Journal Tress, B., Tress, G., 2003. Scenario visualization for participatory
of Sustainable Tourism 1 (1), 6–16. landscape planning: a study from Denmark. Landscape and Urban
Mordue, T., 1999. Heartbeat country: conflicting values, coinciding Planning 64 (3), 161–187.
visions. Environment and Planning A 31 (4), 629–646. Wakeford, R., 1999. Countryside character. In: Hughes, J. (Ed.),
Morgan, N., Pritchard, A., Pride, R. (Eds.), 2002. Destination Using Local Distinctiveness as an Economic Development Tool.
Branding. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. Cardiff University Press, Cardiff, pp. 1–7.