Comparative Analysis of the Management and Planning of Second Homes in Selected Countries

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student of Geography, Payam Noor University, Tehran

2 Associate Professor in Geography, Payam Noor University, Tehran

3 Professor in Geography, Tarbiat Modarres University

4 Associate Professor in Geography, Tarbiat Modarres University

Abstract

Introduction:
Today, a managing issue in rural areas is how to take a proper advantage of beautiful rural lands and landscapes. The utilization of rural lands has several dimensions, but one of the most important and developing usages of these lands is the tourism and entertainment dimension. This type of usage has a great influence on the stability of rural lands and regions through the establishment of the second homes in rural areas and the tourist’s longer residence, compared to other types of tourism. In the procedure of managing and planning of developing the second homes in many countries, the governments try their best to face with the least environmental side effects and therefore, every land usage is determined based on the sustainable development plans. Hence, precise study of managing experiences and second-home planning in other countries can provide the required experiential instructions’ bases to establish the sustainable managing structure with Iran’s situation.
 
Materials and Methods:
This paper is one of those comparative studies with qualitative analysis and content-analysis method. The aim of this paper is to reveal the shortcomings and strengths of the management framework and rural tourism planning (second homes), and to achieve this objective, the rural tourism planning’s structure (second homes) of Iran is compared to Turkey, South Africa, Portugal and Brazil. The selection of these countries is due to the existence of management and planning for second homes in them.
 
Discussion and Results:
The government has a directorial role in tourism planning (second homes) in Portugal and Brazil. In South Africa, the role of local participation has increased. In Turkey and Iran, this planning is centralized and done by the government. The relationship between the different levels of planning in aforementioned countries is based on their planning framework. Plans are done in Iran and Turkey in a concentrated way, but in Portugal, the relationship between the planning levels is based on the Federal system. In South Africa, the planning framework is adapting the local management to the higher levels of management. The level of local management in managing structure of Brazil is also determined. The four aforementioned countries (Brazil, Turkey, Portugal and South Africa) have a native paradigm to plan for second homes in tourism.
 
Conclusion:
According to the study of the planning for rural tourism and second homes in aforementioned countries and comparing such thing to the studies and programs that are formulated in managing and tourism planning  of second homes in Iran, we will face with two types of issues in our country: general issues related to substantial level of planning in this country (comprehensive planning view, being sectional, lack of a proper position for rural tourism and second home in development plans and …) and regional issues (low level of participation of locals and NGOs in rural tourism planning (second homes) – defect in infrastructural facilities – the up-down relationship of management with higher levels and …). Considering the existing issues of management and proper planning for the second homes in Iran, the following strategies are suggested in order to reach to a stable development of second-home tourism:
The levels of planning: national (determining a strategy for rural and tourism problems – determining the position of rural and tourism plans in national plans), regional (the interrelation of governmental and private organizations in rural issues – performing implementation actions for rural and tourism projects – prioritizing the rural and tourism actions), local (providing the required actions for tourism and rural projects – motivating the local tourism in rural institutions – the interrelation of local management with higher levels); designing a native paradigm (considering to the social, cultural, and economical stability in …. – constructing a number of parks to develop the second homes – establishing security, environmental and framework rules); the role of the government (directorial and motivational role for tourism in local level); organizational interrelation (performing the tourism problems in an organization or a ministry).
 
Keywords: Planning and Management, Second Homes, Rural Tourism.
References:

Beer, A. and Higgins, C. (2000). Environmental Planning for Site Development, A Manual for Sustainable Local Planning and Design, Second Edition.
De matos, F.L. (2013). The Expansion of Secondary Housing in Portugal, department of geography of the faculty of arts- university of portocentre for the study of geography and land planning, (CEGOT): 171-181.
Ghaffari, G. (2008). Comparative research logic and its method issues, Journalof Iranian Social Studies, 4: 99-119, http://www.isa.org.ir/session-report/3021.
Guner, I. (2007). Türkiye’ninCografiKonumu, SinirlariveJeopolitigi/ Geographic Location, Borders and Geopolitics of Turkey, TürkiyeCografyasiveJeopolitigi, (Ed. HakkiYazici, M. KürsatKoca), Ankara: PegemAYayincilik: 1-40.
Hongsrangon, P. (2010). Ubonratchathani Province and its Involvement Stage in the Tourist Destination Life Cycle, UbonrajathaneeUniversity, Available in:http://www.ttresearch.org/pdf.
Huang, Y. (2011). Second home ownership in transitional urban china, Forthcoming in Housing Studies, 26: 1-31.
Fazito, M. and Locatel, C. (2014). Second Homes Tourism, Land Market and Social Inequalities in the Brazilian Northeastern Coast, Journal Name Unknown,Https://Wp.nyu.edu/cts 2015.

Keywords

References

  1. برجی، گلدیس (1389). بررسی ابزارهای مدیریت سرزمین در سیستم برنامه ریزی فضایی کشور پرتغال، آمایش سرزمین، دوره 4، شماره 3: 123-144.
  2. سند برنامه ششم، طرح توسعه گردشگری (1395).
  3. ضرغام بروجنی، حمید؛ بذرافشان، مرتضی و ایوبی یزدی، حمید (1392). شناخت صنعت گردشگری اصول، رویه ها و رویکردها، انتشارات مهکامه، تهران، چاپ اول.
  4. بنکدار، احمد و قرایی، فریبا (1390). تغییر پارادایم ها در اصول طراحی شهری؛ از مولفه های کالبدی و اجتماعی و ادراکی به رهیافت مکان سازی، مجله معماری و شهرسازی، دوره 3، شماره 6: 70-51.
  5. توفیق، فیروز (1384). آمایش سرزمین تجربه جهانی و انطباق آن با وضع ایران، انتشارات مرکز مطالعات و تحقیقات شهرسازی و معماری، تهران، چاپ اول.
  6. رضوانی، محمدرضا (1382). مقدمه ای بر برنامه ریزی توسعه روستایی در ایران، نشر قومس، تهران، چاپ اول.
  7. رضوانی، محمدرضا (1380). نگرشی بر نظام برنامه ریزی توسعه روستایی در ایران، پژوهش های جغرافیایی، دوره 2، شماره 41:  38-25.
  8. رضوانی، محمدرضا و بیات، ناصر ( 1393). تحلیل جایگاه گردشگری روستایی در برنامه های کلان توسعه ی کشور (با تأکید بر برنامه های پنج ساله ی توسعه ی ملی)، مجله ی برنامه ریزی و توسعه گردشگری، دوره 3، شماره 9: 30-11.
  9. رکن الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا (1389). مدیریت توسعه روستایی ( بنیانهای نظری)، انتشارات سمت، تهران، چاپ اول.
  10. رکن الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا؛ بدری، سید علی و سجاسی قیداری، حمدا... (1393). بنیانهای نظریه ای برنامه ریزی کالبدی مناطق روستایی، انتشارات بنیاد مسکن انقلاب اسلامی، تهران، چاپ دوم.
  11. رکن الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا؛ سجاسی، حمدا... و صادقلو، طاهره (1390). تحلیل محتوایی جایگاه توسعه ی پایدار روستایی در برنامه های بعد از انقلاب اسلامی، پژوهش های جغرافیای انسانی، دوره 1، شماره 3:  38-19.
  12. رکن الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا؛ مهدوی، داوود و پور طاهری، مهدی (1389). ارزیابی پایداری گردشگری در روستاهای تاریخی – فرهنگی ایران با تأکید بر پارادایم توسعه پایدار گردشگری، فصلنامه مطالعات گردشگری، دوره 1، شماره 14: 2-39.
  13. سیف الدینی، فرانک و پناهنده خواه، موسی (1389). چالش ها و موانع برنامه ریزی توسعه منطقه ای در ایران، پژوهش های جغرافیای انسانی، دوره2، شماره 73: 83-97.
  14. غفاری، غلامرضا (1388). منظق پژوهش تطبیقی و روش های آن، مجله مطالعات اجتماعی ایران، دوره 3، شماره 4: 24-1.
  15. مرادزاده، فاطمه (1392). روستاهای هدف گردشگری،روزنامه جام جم، شماره 3361: 15.
  16. معاونت برنامه ریزی و نظارت راهبردی رییس جمهور ( 1395).
  17. وزارت کشور، امور عمرانی (1395).
  18. همافر، میلاد و رضوانی، نوید (1394). تحلیل تطبیقی ساختار برنامه ریزی و مدیریت مناطق شهری، فصلنامه مطالعات شهری، دوره1، شماره 12: 86-73.
  19. Afonso , A. (2011). General Socio-Economic Situation in Rural Areas in Portugal, Europian network rural development.
  20. Akca, H. (2006). Assessment of rural tourism in turkey using SWOT analysis, Jourmal of Applied sciences, 13: 2837-2839.
  21. Alden, J. and Pires, A.(1996). Lisbon, strategic planning for a capital city, 1: 25-36.
  22. Analysis of National Strategies for Sustainable Development for Brazil:National Strategy for Brazil. (2004).
  23. Beer, A. and Higgins, C. (2000). Environmantal Planning for Site Development, A Manual for Sustainable Local Planning and Design, Second Edition.
  24. Cavaco, C. (2006). Diferenciação regional da Oferta Turística, Geografia de Portugal, Círculo de Leitores, Lisboa, 3: 394-399.
  25. Cravo, C. and Baioa, D. (2012). Diferenciação regional da Oferta Turística, Geografia de Portugal, Círculo de Leitores, Lisboa, 3: 86-87.
  26. Cruz, R.A.A. (2006). Plancjamento governamental do turismo: Convergencias contradicoes na producao do wspaco, in America Latina: Cidade, Campo e Torismo. Sao paulo: Clacso Departamento de Geografia da universidade de Sao paulo, pp : 337-50.
  27. De Matos, F.L. (2013). The Expansion of Secondary Housing in Portugal, department of geography of the faculty of arts- university of porto centre for the study of geography and land planning,(CEGOT): 171-181.
  28. Departmen tourism  Republic of South Africa. (2010).
  29. Edgell, D., Allen, M., Smith., G. and Swanson, J. ( 2007). Tourism Policy and Planning, Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, Publisher: Butterworth- Heinemann.
  30. EMBRATUR-Instituto Brasileiro de Turismo. (2002). Portraits of a Path: PNMT 8 Years (Retratos de uma caminhada: PNMT 8 anos). Brasília: EMBRATUR.
  31. FAO. (1985). Toward  improved Multilevel planning for Agricultural and Rural Development in Asia And the Pacific,FAO Economic and social Development paper 52.
  32. Fazito, M. and Locatel, C. (2014). Second Homes Tourism, Land Market and Social Inequalities in the Brazilian Northeastern Coast, Journal Name Unknown.
  33. Fayol’s, H. (1985).Industrial Management, Journal of Management History,Unknown number.
  34. Fernández, B. and Garcia,C. (2011). An overview of housing in spain, Facultade de socioloxia, campus Elvina s/n, A Coruna, 15071.
  35. Gallent, N., Hamiduddin,L.,  Juntti,M., Kidd,S.  and Shaw,D. (2015). Introduction to Rural Planning: Economies, Communities and Landscapes.
  36. Gartner, W. C. (2006). Planning and Management of Lake Destination Development: Lake Gateways in Minnesota, In: Colin Michael Hall and Tuija Härkönen, Rural Tourism and Sustainable Business, Channel View Publications.
  37. Gregory, D., Johnston,R., Pratt,G., Watts,M. and Whatmore,S. (2009). The Dictionary of human geography 5th edition, London: John wiley and sons.
  38. Guner, I. (2006). Türkiye’nin Cografi Konumu, Sinirlari ve Jeopolitigi/ Geographic Location, Borders and Geopolitics of Turkey, Türkiye Cografyasi ve Jeopolitigi, (Ed. Hakki Yazici, M. KürsatKoca), Ankara: PegemA Yayincilik: 1-40.
  39. Halkier, H. (2013).  Small-scale Tourism in Rural Areas– Trends and Research in the Nordic Countries, Nordregio Working Paper, 3: 1-24.
  40. Hongsrangon, P. (2010). Ubon ratchathani province and its involvment stage in the tourist destination life cycle, Ubon rajathanee university, Available in:http://www.ttresearch.org/pdf.
  41. Huang, Y. (2011). Second home ownership in transitional urban china, Forthcoming in Housing Studies, 26: 1-31.
  42. Horner, S. and Swarbrooke, J. (2012). International Cases in Tourism Management, Routledge.
  43. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/heritage/cemat/Compendium/Compendium Portugal_en.pdf.
  44. National Planning Commission Secretariat in South African (2015).
  45. National Policy on ;Regional Development in Brazil. (2008).
  46. Ngomane, T.  (2012). Rural Development in South Africa: The role of Agriculture, The Presidency Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation.
  47. Nussbaum, M. (2000). Human Development, Journal Name Unknown.
  48. Özçatalbaş, O., Mansuroglu, S., Ceylan, I. and Akcaoz, H. (2010). The evaluation of the importance of rural tourism extension for community development and Turkey,  Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, 8:  973-975.
  49. Pinho, M. (2013). National Stbatfgic Plan for Tourism, Fostering the Development of Tourism in Portugal, Plano estrategico nacional do tourismo.
  50. Raimundo, S. (2008). Conflicts among second homes, Protected are as and traditional communities in southeatern coast of brazil, Ambiente & Sociedade, 4: 285-304.

51- Risteski,M., Kocevski, J. and Arnaudov,K. (2012). Spatial planning and sustainable tourism as basis for developing competitive tourist destinations, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 44: 375-386.

52- Santos, J. and Ranieri,y. (2014). Tourism in Vargas era and the Press and Propaganda Department (O Turismo na era Vargas e o Departamento de Imprensa e Propaganda-DIP). Cultur-Revista de Cultura e Turismo,7: 102-115.

53- Schneider, S., Shiki, S.  and Belik,W. (2010). Rural development in Brazil: overcoming inequalities and building new markets, Rivista di economia agrarai. 

54- Sobral, L. and Duarte, M. (2014). Neo-Rural settlements in continental Portugal:Threaths and opportunities for rural planning, Tecnico Lisboa, Journal Name Unknown.

55- Spenceley, A. and Seif, J. (2003). Strategies, Impacts and Costs of Pro-Poor Tourism Approaches in South Africa, PPT Working, Paper, 11.

56- State Planning Organizationa in turkey-country. (2015).

57- Tourism Conference Report National Annual in South Africa. (2012).

58- Trentin, F. (2010). National Policy of Tourism in Brazil: From Municipalisation to Regionalization, China-USA Business Review, 7: 718-727.

59- Trentin, Fábia. and Fratucci, A. (2013). National Policy of Tourism in Brazil: From Municipalisation to Regionalization, China-USA Business Review, 7: 718-727.

60- Woods,M. (2005). Rural Geography, London : SAGE.

61- Woods,M. and Goodwin,M. (2003). Appling the rural: governmance and policy in rural in rural areas. In : Cloke,P.(ed),Country Vision. London : pearson,PP: 245-262.

62- UNITED NATIONS. (2002). European countries planning structure : PORTUGAL.

Journal of Tourism Planning and Development
Volume 6, Issue 23
March 2018
Pages 31-58

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics