| Research on rural tourism development has generally focused on impact identification and sustainability, rarely on the process of building a tourism system. Further, past work utilizes the generic “tourism community” as the unit under study, rather than specific subtypes. Case studies providing comprehensive information on “successful” destinations—attractions, services, organizational structure, funding, marketing—offer a unique Opportunity to study tourism evolution, and how it varies for distinct classes of communities.; Quantitative analysis of qualitative data was conducted. Content analysis of text narratives from 174 destination representatives was performed within strict coding guidelines. In an initial analysis phase, frequency analysis and cross-tabulations on 91 system variables provided an overview of general community characteristics. In particular, findings on reasons for starting a formal tourism initiative, flexibility in the attraction base, measures of tourism dependence through private sector indices, and the plethora of funding, organizational and marketing arrangements offer new areas of exploration.; In the primary analysis, a set of variables expanded from the classic tourism life cycle model were used to identify new start-up and mature, mass-market destinations, endpoints on a development continuum. These variables included time, visitor volume, lodging structure, access, and product strength. Using the same set of descriptive variables, “intermediate-stage” classifications were sequentially extracted. Day-use Destinations lacked lodging options. Easy Access Destinations were located near the generating market and freeways. Pass-through Communities had locational advantages and a concentrated service sector, but a weak attraction base. Traditional Destinations had been in tourism industry for over 50 years but had not reached mass visitation levels. Gateway Communities were located near well-know natural resource protected areas, with significant lodging sector development. Niche Destinations provided a single product, whereas Complex Product Destinations offer a combination of attractions.; In a final analysis phase, general patterns for strategic activity selection, negative tourism impacts, barriers to advancement, and reasons for success were profiled for all case studies. The conclusion of this exploratory work is that replication of the destination typology through survey research using this conceptual framework will advance understanding of how rural tourism development proceeds in any single destination. |
