Abstract
Participative planning approaches are vital to sustainable development in rural areas. However, stakeholder involvement also faces many barriers. In this Danube region case study, barriers to stakeholder involvement across eight rural regions are investigated. With the standardized conditions provided through an ERDF and IPA funded EU project, special attention could be paid to socio-cultural barriers, specifically concerning perception of sustainability and conflicts of interest. The effects of these barriers to the planning process are seen in the comparison of awareness concerning overall goals, indicators and the regional self-assessments. The implications for planning and management in rural tourism areas find that the perception of sustainability varies greatly, perceived deficiencies increase awareness and that crucial indicators need to be understood by stakeholders beginning a participative planning approach.
Highlights
With interest in stakeholder participation growing, there have been both advocates and opponents pointing out the benefits and pitfalls this approach can have on tourism development
This paper addresses the following research questions: Which are the cultural barriers that constrain stakeholder involvement in this south-east European case study? How do these barriers influence the perception of sustainability goals and the respective stakeholder engagement in tourism development?
Since the typical structural and operational barriers were avoided by the cooperation program and the methodological design, the following results focus on the two strongest barriers identified as describing stakeholder involvement in this case study
Summary
With interest in stakeholder participation growing, there have been both advocates and opponents pointing out the benefits and pitfalls this approach can have on tourism development. Fraser et al [3] note that the benefits of participation are felt most strongly if stakeholders are truly incorporated into decision making and final results, and are made more relevant for policy makers. Opponents to this approach are sceptical as they find involvement to be tokenistic [4] or even a simplistic way of creating an illusion of responsibility [5]. Considering this variety in opinion, the perception may be the result of the respective planning approach and significantly influenced by the circumstances, the timeframe and the provided framework
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
