Academic contributions resulting from systematic review of the literature

After the presentation of descriptive statistics, including and excluding criteria were applied to the total of publications identified in Scopus, as explained in the methodology. A refined selection of 363 academic contributions was obtained. Therefore, a more selective reading of title, keywords and abstract was performed. In order to provide a more comprehensive map of the relevant literature, resulting from the systematic review, the papers were organized according to their topic, research object, study area and field of research. The papers were divided into four macro areas:

  • • RURAL;
  • • URBAN;
  • • RURAL-URBAN; and
  • • OTHER (meaning not related to rural, urban or rural-urban).

Then subdivided into two subcategories of topics: related to TOURISM (issues or field) or not related to tourism and labelled OTHER. Results are presented in Table 1.1.

Subject area. (Adapted from

Fig. 1.4. Subject area. (Adapted from: Scopus database.)

Table 1.1. Results deriving from reading criteria of the 363 selected papers on ‘*rural*’ AND ‘*urban*’ AND ‘*touris*’.





















Rural and tourism issues are discussed in 66 papers as central subjects. Thirty-five papers discuss rural (and related aspects) and other topics or fields of research, rather than tourism. Urban and tourism are presented as main research objects in 22 of the selected papers. Ten academic contributions, resulting from the systematic literature review, focus on urban and other topics or fields of research, different from tourism.

Tourism is a key topic in 64 academic contributions that do not address directly the urban-rural discussion, while 66 papers, although resulting from the search query of selected keywords (‘*rural* AND *urban* AND *touris*’ in TITLE-ABSTRACT-KEYWORDS) and thus being related to the combination of the three keywords, do not focus on urban-rural and tourism connections as a main research object.

In the end, 100 papers address urban-rural spaces, linkages and connection, but only 65 completely and fully focus on the relationship between rural, urban and tourism. This means that 27.5% of the papers focus on rural-urban interconnections and only 18% of papers develop the relationship topic of tourism in rural-urban linkages.

The 65 papers belonging to the cluster RURAL-URBAN and TOURISM were analysed. According to the literature presented in the second section, and after an in-depth reading and analysis of the academic contributions resulting, the publications can be grouped into three macro areas:

  • 1. COMPARISON between TOURISM related issues, topics, effects, implications, case studies analysed, tested, verified in both RURAL and URBAN areas, communities, visitors, stakeholders.
  • 2. URBAN-RURAL FRINGE, PERI-URBAN contexts of study, typologies of TOURISM related forms: second houses, national parks and shopping malls.
  • 3. URBAN-RURAL and RURAL-URBAN RELATIONSHIPS and TOURISM, partnerships, strategies, relations in terms of rural people’s migration to urban areas and urban residents moving to rural areas (counter-urbanization) linked to tourism activities, reasons, entrepreneurship.
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >