Promoting synergies between tourism and food in Denmark and England

1. Promoting synergies betweentourism and food in Denmark and England Henrik Halkier (halkier@cgs.aau.dk) Laura James (laura.james@humangeo.su.se)

2. Promoting synergies betweentourism and food in Denmark and England Henrik Halkier (halkier@cgs.aau.dk) Laura James (laura.james@humangeo.su.se) Introduction: food and tourismsynergies Practiceperspectives Institutions and policies Reflections

3. Objectives • To compare the actors and institutions involved in the food and tourism sectors in North Jutland, Suffolk and Jämtland, exploring: • the adaptation and recombination of existing food and tourism practices (production, processing, catering, experience creation, promoting…) • the institutions and policies shaping interactions between the food and tourism sectors (DMOs, local government, regional development agencies, LAGs…)

4. Food and Tourism “travel informed by the desire to experience a particular type of food or the produce of a specific region” (Hall & Sharples, 2003: 10)

5. Tourists and food

6. Tempting development prospects… • Food increases attraction/brand of destination (Richards 2002, Presenza & Del Chiappa 2013) • Extending the season (Hall et al. 2003) • Boost local food production, rural diversification (Hjalager 2002, Everett & Slocum 2013) • Cultural sustainability, heritage and regional identity (Long 2004, Sims 2009, Telfer & Hashimoto 2013) • Environmental sustainability (Hall & Gössling 2013)

7. Two Perspectives • Practices • Producing food • Retailing • Catering and hospitality, • Creating experiences • (Promoting tourism) • How are existing practices adapted, connected, transformed? Are new practices being created? • Institutions & Policies • Rural development (EU LAGs) • Destination development (DMOs) • Economic development (RDAs, Local Authorities/municipalities) • How do these: • shape existing practices & the links between them • Support (or hinder) the development adaptation, recombination, transformation, etc…

8. Case Study Destinations North Jutland (DK), Suffolk (UK) • Coastal destinations with rural hinterlands • North Jutland – self-catering holiday homes, Germans, Danes, Norwegians, Swedes • Suffolk – Summer/weekends, cottages and 2nd homes, London and South East • Food tourism ambitions, no ‘magnificent culinary heritage’ • Suffolk – wheat/barley, poultry, pork, vegetables • North Jutland – grain, milk, pork, seafood • Interviews with producers, retailers, restaurants, policymakers

9. 2. Practice • Reckwitz (2002: 249): Practice as '...a routinized type of behaviour which consists of several elements, interconnected to one another: forms of bodily activities, forms of mental activities, ‘things’ and their use, a background knowledge in the form of understanding, know-how, states of emotion and motivational knowledge'. • Nicolini’s (2012) sensitizing questions/dimensions of practice • Key and marginal actors, sayings and doings, practical concerns, temporal organization • A more fine-grained, process-oriented approach • Not starting with firms, institutions, networks, policies… • What do people do ‘on the ground’

10. Food/tourism practicesin North Jutland • Key practices • Producing • Retailing • Catering • Promoting • Two initiatives aiming to promote cross-sectoral synergies • New signature dishes • Establish local food market

11. Case: JammerbugtSignature dish • Adapting existing practices • fixed items on menus • story telling • linking in new ways • use of local suppliers? • new practice • make recipe public • joint branding • DMO developing networks

12. Case: Hals local food market • adapting existing practice • adding food to existing summer Saturday markets • producers travelling further to participate • linking in new ways • local business development and tourism promotion connected through development of summer food market • new practice • DMO developing local product by initiating event

13. Key Findings • Support for marginalised‘quality’ food production practices, but small scale • Focus on adapting visible practices (menus, markets) & new temporality (outside main season) rather than localising food chain • Some practices ‘too difficult’ to change/link together: buying practices of supermarkets and restaurants • Differences and dependencies between practices • What is at stake when practices must be changed or new ones adopted? • Brokers and boundary objects

14. 3. Institutions and Policy • Conceptualisingeconomic/tourismdevelopmentstrategies • Contextual drivers (destination branding, boostlocalfoodproduction, foodscares) • Availableresources (tourism/food, public/private) • Change strategies (aims, targets)

15. Strategising food tourism

16. Strategising food tourism

17. Key Findings Policies focus on • Changes visible to visitors: branding, events, menus, (diversification) • New temporality (outside main season) • NOT localising food chain Policy differences reflect • Perceived/experienced intensity of demand • Degree of availability of local food (producers, retailers) • Alternatives to diversification for small farmers (wage labour) • (National) preferences for particular policy instruments (networks vs grants) Long-term strategic weaknesses • Limited funding for promotion/DMOs (UK) • Limited addressing of production/distribution density (DK) • Weak combination of branding AND development in sector-based governance (DK/UK)

18. 4. Reflections and perspectives • Defining and delimiting practices • Zooming in and out? • Relationship between practices and strategies • Impacts: continuity and change? • Comparing and contrasting • Different cross-sectoral coordination strategies (markets, networks, branding?)