Cows, Critters, and Kiwis:
Building a research
agenda that won't bore
you to tears or drive you
crazy
Nancy Gard McGehee, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Hospitality and Tourism Management
Virginia Tech








Grew up on a farm along the Ohio River
BS in Sports Management, Marshall
University
Health Club Mgt., Sports Medicine Clinic, and
Pro Baseball, West Palm Beach, FL
MS in PRTM, North Carolina State University
ATRDC, Athens, WV
MS and PhD in Sociology, Virginia Tech
PRTM NCSU faculty 1999-2001
HTM VT faculty since 2001
Who Am I?






I am a Rural Sociologist, interested in many forms of
Sustainable Tourism, particularly through the eyes of
the Resident/Host.
I believe that truly Sustainable Tourism must include
a Socio-Cultural component.
My ontological perspective: I am a Critical Theorist,
but love applying a variety of sociological theories to
tourism.
My methodological bent: mixed-methods, but
my
belongs to Qualitative Methods.
Currently, I am particularly interested in Social
Capital as it pertains to Sustainability in a variety of
forms of tourism.
Forms of tourism that are currently capturing my
interest: Volunteer Tourism and Locally-Driven Rural
Tourism.
Who Am I?
Socio-Cultural Impacts of Tourism
Sustainable Rural
Tourism Development






Craft Marketing
Cooperatives
Agri-tourism motivation
& cooperation
Rural resident attitudes
DMO’s & social capital
Parkway Sustainable
Tourism Project
Rural tourism in the
tropics & social capital
Volunteer Tourism





VT & social movement
participation
VT and resident
attitudes
VT expectations
Critical Theory & VT
VT & social capital

McGehee, N.G. and K. Kim (2004). “Motivation
for Agri-tourism Entrepreneurship.” Journal of
Travel Research, 43:2 161-170.

N.G. McGehee K. Kim and G. Jennings (2007).
“Gender and Motivation for Agri-tourism
Entrepreneurship.” Tourism Management, 28:1
(280-289).

N.G. McGehee (2007). “An Agri-Tourism Systems
Model: A Weberian Perspective.” Journal of
Sustainable Tourism. 15:2, 111-124.
Virginia Agri-tourism (Cows)


VA farm families (survey, 412 of 987, 42%)
Weber’s formal and substantive rationality as
framework for motivation
◦ Formal (primarily economic)
◦ Substantive (primarily socio-cultural)

Most were motivated by a formal-substantive mix of
motivations
◦
◦
◦
◦

Additional income
Fully utilize our resources
Educate consumers
A family-oriented hobby
Motivations were most influenced by acres owned,
dependence on farming, and household income
Agri-tourism Entrepreneurship


Again, VA farm families
Chiappe and Flora’s alternative agricultural
paradigm
◦ Past research in A. A. focused on men and then was
generalized for all; Chiappe and Flora focused on women.
◦ A.A. Paradigm includes: harmony with nature,
independence, contribution to community, diversity of
product. Could this perspective of A.A. also apply to agritourism?

Paradigm based differences were not found, BUT
women in this study reported to be more highly
motivated to develop agri-tourism as a source of
entrepreneurial enterprise than their male
counter-parts.
Gender, Motivation, and Agritourism Entrepreneurship
Back to Weber’s rationality!
 Research unearthed problems, the big
picture

◦ Lack of communication between agri-tourism
providers, DMO’s, and agri-tourists
◦ Lack of understanding across the three groups
creates obstacles to strong relationships
◦ Weber’s formal-substantive rationality could
contextualize the relationships
Agri-tourism Systems Model
Stakeholder
Groups
Agri-tourists
Needs
Motivations
Characteristics
Agri-tourism
providers
Needs
Motivations
DMOs
Needs
Best Practices
OBSTACLES TO PARTICIPATING IN AGRI-TOURISM SYSTEM
Figure 1 An Agri-Tourism Systems Model
Successful Agri-tourism System:
Stakeholders communicating
and engaging in mutually
beneficial relationships
Agri-tourists
Communication
obstacles
Formal-Substantive Mix
Relationship
Communication
obstacles
Agri-tourism
providers
Substantive
Relationship
Formally-Rational
Relationship
DMOs
Research question 1:
Research question 2:
What are the needs and
motivations of each agritourism stakeholder
group? How is their
rationality formal,
substantive, or both?
What obstacles does each
stakeholder group face in fulfilling its
role in the successful agri-tourism
system? How can these obstacles be
reduced or eliminated?
Communication
obstacles
Research question 3:
What obstacles weaken communication among
agri-tourism stakeholder groups? How can
these obstacles be reduced or eliminated?
How might the recognition of the rationality of
each relationship (formal, substantive, or a mix
of both) improve communication amongst the
groups?


Development of a sustainable tourism
centerpiece project and regional sustainable
tourism plan for the Rocky Knob region of the
Blue Ridge Parkway
Research framework that included
◦
◦
◦
◦
Community asset and resource inventory
Community and stakeholder input
Survey of current visitors
Land use suitability and tourism scenario
development
◦ Survey of potential visitors
◦ Economic impact analysis of recommended
scenarios
Rocky Knob BRP NPS Project







McGehee, N.G. (2002). “Alternative Tourism and
Social Movement Participation.” Annals of Tourism
Research, 29:1, 124-143.
McGehee, N.G. and W.C. Norman (2002).
“Alternative Tourism as Impetus for ConsciousnessRaising.” Tourism Analysis, 6:3/4, 239-251.
McGehee, N.G. and C. Santos (2005). “Social
Change, Discourse, and Volunteer Tourism.” Annals
of Tourism Research, 32:3, 760-779.
McGehee, N.G. and Andereck, K. (2008) “’Pettin’ the
Critters’: Exploring the complex relationship
between volunteers and the voluntoured in McDowell
County, WV, USA and Tijuana, Mexico” in S. Wearing
and K. Lyons (eds) Journeys of Discovery in
Volunteer Tourism: International Case Study
Perspectives. CABI, Oxfordshire, UK.
McGehee, N.G. and Andereck, K. (2009). Volunteer
Tourism and the “Voluntoured”: The case of Tijuana,
Mexico.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17:1 (3954).
Andereck, K., McGehee, N.G., Lee, S. and Clemmons
D. (in press). “Experience expectations of
prospective volunteer tourists.” Journal of Travel
Research.
McGehee, N.G. (accepted with revisions).
“Oppression, emancipation, and volunteer tourism,”
Annals of Tourism Research.
Slingin’ concrete
Resident Attitudes and
Voluntourism (Critters)


Comparative case study of the relationship
between voluntourists and the voluntoured in
Tijuana, Mexico and McDowell Co., WV
Mixed methods
◦
◦
◦
◦

Interviews (formal and informal)
Questionnaires
Web site content analysis
Participant observation
Two major themes emerged
◦ Dependency
◦ The role of organized religion

And one great story emerged
◦ Pettin’ the critters
Pettin’ the Critters


Application of critical theory and social
movement theory to volunteer tourism
Recognizing the contradictions of volunteer
tourism through research propositions
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦

oppressor-emancipator?
dependency perpetuator or self-efficacy empowerer?
resource abuser or resource mobilizer?
network creator or agitator?
stereotype perpetuator or consciousness-raiser?
The ultimate question: how can we find ways to
use volunteer tourism to further social change?
Oppression, emancipation, and
volunteer tourism
Dominant
Hegemony
(current systems
of power and
status quo)
The Social
Construction of
Volunteer Tourism
Volunteer tourism
discourse
Level of human
emancipation
included as part
of a volunteer
tourism
organization’s
goals
The Voluntourism
Critical Theory Model
Level of volunteer
tourism
organization’s actions
working to equalize
power inequalities
between hosts and
guests (economic,
social,
environmental) and
therefore facilitate
emancipation of the
“voluntoured”
Opportunities for
Human
emancipation of
the voluntourist
(working and
middle class, the
proletariat)
Actual degree of
equality
between the
local community
and volunteers
(economic
,social,
environmental)
environmental)
Level of
Human
emancipation
Self-Efficacy
Network
Facilitation
between
volunteers
and the
voluntoured
Resource
Mobilization
Volunteer
Tourism
Volunteer
Participation
Tourism
Participation
Consciousnessraising
experience
Social
Movement
Participation
Network
Facilitation
amongst
volunteers
Personal as
Political
Social Change
Social
Change
The Voluntourism Social Movement Theory Model

A slightly different direction, but the same
purpose
◦ Cultivating community capital through volunteer tourism

Project with Anne Zahra, Waikato Mgt. School,
Hamilton, NZ, targeting volunteer tourism in the
Philippines
◦ Examining the potential for volunteer tourism to form a
framework for the introduction of bridging social capital
as well as create opportunities for internal bonding social
capital within the volunteer tourism host community and
subsequently exploring how these bridging and bonding
social capital networks exert an influence on other forms
of capital: financial, natural, political, cultural, built, and
human, within the host community.
◦ Exploring the use of appreciative inquiry as a method
NZ Project (Kiwis)
Virginia and North Carolina Legislature’s
Opinions of Tourism
 “The Quiet Good” (CSR and the Lodging
Industry)
 Creation of a Statewide Tourism
Development Plan for Virginia

Some projects don’t always fit…or
do they?









Inspire both you and others
Be something you feel passionate about but
still pays the bills
Pass the “elevator speech” test
Be flexible
Be trackable and tangible (think key words)
Find its way into your teaching and service
activities
Be the foundation for a career that you can
be proud of
NOT be stagnant…consistent doesn’t mean
boring!
Encourage you to become a “bricoleur”
A great research agenda needs
to…
Other Strategies and Suggestions?