INTRODUCTION
Agritourism, defined as activities offered on working
farms and other agricultural settings for entertainment
or educational purposes (Rich et al., 2012), has been
increasing over the last ten years (Cordell, 2008). Despite
its growth, there is uncertainty about the benefits
that agritourism brings to society, especially to rural
communities. Understanding the benefits of agritourism is
essential to further develop this recreational activity and
to strengthen marketing efforts to attract more visitors
to farms. To document perceptions of the socio-cultural,
environmental, and economic benefits of agritourism, an
online survey was conducted in 2010 among North Carolina
agritourism providers (“farmers”) and a non-random panel
of current and potential visitors (“residents”).1
RESPONDENT PROFILE
Responding farmers (63%) and residents (57%) were
predominantly female. In general, farmers were older (53
years old) than residents (46 years old). Most farmers
(59%) reported an annual household income between
HOW BENEFICIAL IS AGRITOURISM?
North Carolina Farmers and Residents Respond
1The study sample was composed of 604 agritourism farmers (listed in the North Carolina Agritourism Networking Association) and a non-random panel of 675 North
Carolina residents (purchased from a web marketing company); they were emailed and asked to access the survey by clicking on a link. The survey received 676
responses: 173 farmers and 503 residents. Farmers’ responses were weighted to compensate for disproportionate sample sizes when applicable. T-tests were used to
compare perceived benefits between farmers and residents (p < 0.05), and Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Tests were used to compare the order rank of perceived socio-cultural,
environmental, and economic benefits (Bonferroni adjusted p < 0.003, p < 0.008, and p < 0.003, respectively).
2The overrepresentation of low-income and part-time employed residents in this study cautions for generalizing results to all North Carolina residents. However, results
reflect the perceptions of residents with enough interest in agritourism to respond to a survey that did not include a participation incentive.
$35,000 and $99,999 before taxes; a relatively large proportion
(25%) earned more than $100,000 (Figure 1). About half (46%) of
the residents reported an annual household income smaller than
$34,999. This is consistent with the low proportion of full-time
employees among the respondents (28%), an occurrence most
likely due to the economic crisis underway during the time of
the study.2
Less
than
$25,000
$25,000
-­‐
$49,999
$50,000
-­‐
$99,999
$100,000
-­‐
$149,999
$150,000
or
more
9%
23%
42%
14%
11%
30%
34%
29%
5%
2%
Farmers
Residents
Figure
1.
Respondents
Household
Incomes
($)
(n =
163)
(n =
499)