Rural tourism and local food and drink Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Annexes to the final report
15 February 2016
This page is intentionally blank
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Rural tourism and local food and drink Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Annexes to the final report
A report submitted by ICF Consulting Services Date: 15 February 2016 Job Number 30300448
Andy White Senior Consultant 01752 502562 [email protected] ICF Consulting Services Limited Watling House 33 Cannon Street London EC4M 5SB T +44 (0)20 3096 4800 F +44 (0)20 3368 6960 www.icfi.com
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Document Control
Document Title Rural tourism and local food and drink – Annexes to the final report
Job No. 30300448
Prepared by Andy White
Checked by Matt Rayment
Date 15 February 2016
This report is the copyright of Defra and has been prepared by ICF Consulting Services Ltd under contract to Defra. The contents of this report may not be reproduced in whole or in part, nor passed to any other organisation or person without the specific prior written permission of Defra. ICF has used reasonable skill and care in checking the accuracy and completeness of information supplied by the client or third parties in the course of this project under which the report was produced. ICF is however unable to warrant either the accuracy or completeness of such information supplied by the client or third parties, nor that it is fit for any purpose. ICF does not accept responsibility for any legal, commercial or other consequences that may arise directly or indirectly as a result of the use by ICF of inaccurate or incomplete information supplied by the client or third parties in the course of this project or its inclusion in this project or its inclusion in this report. This work contains statistical data from ONS which is Crown Copyright. The use of the ONS statistical data in this work does not imply the endorsement of the ONS in relation to the interpretation or analysis of the statistical data. This work uses research datasets which may not exactly reproduce National Statistics aggregates.
v1 July 2015 i
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Contents
Annex 1 Rapid evidence assessment ...... 3 Annex 2 State of the market report...... 53 Annex 3 Case studies ...... 109 Annex 4 Write-ups of the stakeholder workshops ...... 148 Annex 5 References ...... 187
v1 July 2015 2
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Annex 1 Rapid evidence assessment
A1.1 Introduction The aim of the rapid evidence assessment (REA) is to better understand the type and nature of economic effects associated with tourist destinations having a well-defined local food and drink offer. The review covered literature on the economic benefits to rural areas of localised food and drink offers within tourism food and drink destinations, and wider literature on links between food and tourism in order to assess the range of linkages and models and their economic effects. The REA also addressed the following questions: ■ What are the barriers to increased benefits of local food and drink faced by rural tourism destinations? ■ What are the opportunities related to local food and drink? ■ Are these opportunities limited to small businesses (e.g. local pubs)? Can larger businesses also play a role (e.g. supermarkets, pub chains in rural areas selling local food and drink)? ■ Are there any examples (UK/EU) of policy interventions in support of localised food and drink in tourism destinations? A detailed list of the study objectives and research questions addressed by the REA and by other stages of this project is provided in Table A1.1. The table illustrates the project stages that will address the different study objectives, including the REA. This REA report is structured as follows: ■ The methodology and the main study definitions are summarised in Section A1.2. ■ The results of the REA and links with the objectives and research questions are presented in Section A1.3. ■ Example of the multiplier effect from UK and international literature are presented in A1.4 ■ Examples of businesses that provide a local food and drink offer are included in A1.5. ■ An initial list of case studies identified through the REA and discussions with Defra at the inception phase is provided in A1.6. ■ Examples of operational definitions of ‘local’ identified through the REA are listed in A1.7. ■ The list of references used for the REA is in A1.8.
v1 July 2015 3
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Table A1.1 Study objectives and research questions
Stages Study objectives Research questions Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 REA Data Qualitative Stakeholder review research engagement
1. Review existing evidence of the relationship ■ What is the relationship between local food/drink and tourism? between local food/drink and tourism to provide a ■ What is the evidence on the economic benefits or disbenefits of a more clear evidence based statement on the economic localised food and drink offer to the rural economy? benefits or disbenefits of a more localised food ■ What is the evidence of local multiplier effects (i.e. the number of times and drink offer to the rural economy and whether money flowing into a local economy passes between different entities within this displaces other benefits, on a before and after that local economy before dissipating into a wider ‘national’ economy)? basis. ■ What is the evidence of leakage and displacement effects? 2. Provide a comparison between the outcomes for a ■ How do the outcomes for a rural tourism destination which has a more rural tourism destination which has a more developed local food and drink offer compare against the outcomes for one developed local food and drink offer against the with a less developed local food and drink offer? outcomes for one with a less developed local food and drink offer. 3. Provide an up to date review of the local food and ■ What is the extent of local food/drink related tourism activity in England? drink market in rural tourism destinations. ■ What is the potential scale and impact of local food/drink economies within the tourism sector? 4. Identify the issues, challenges and opportunities ■ What are the opportunities to increase the local food and drink offer in rural to increase localised food and drink offerings in tourism destinations? rural tourism destinations with discussion on the ■ Are these opportunities limited to small businesses? Can larger food and desirability of such an increase. drink businesses also play a role? ■ What are the barriers to increased benefits of local food and drink faced by rural tourism destinations? 5. Identify good practice and share learning gained ■ Are there examples of good practice and shared learning gained from from innovative businesses in the market place innovative businesses in the market place who are delivering localised food who are: (a) delivering localised food and drink and drink offerings in rural tourism destinations? offerings in rural tourism destinations or (b) ■ Are there examples of good practice and shared learning gained from helping to develop links with food and drink outlets innovative businesses in the market place who are helping to develop links to deliver localised produce. with food and drink outlets to deliver localised produce?
v1 July 2015 4
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Stages Study objectives Research questions Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 REA Data Qualitative Stakeholder review research engagement
6. Consider future policy interventions to boost ■ Are there any existing examples (UK/EU) of policy interventions in support of localised food and drink in tourism destinations if localised food and drink in tourism destinations? that is found to be an economically beneficial ■ Which future policy interventions could boost localised food and drink in policy for rural economies. tourism destinations (if that is found to be an economically beneficial policy for rural economies)? 7. Identify suitable rural case study areas that are
developing/ have developed their local food and drink/tourism offer, to inform future ‘what works’ research.
v1 July 2015 5
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.2 Methodology and study definitions This section summarises the methodology adopted for the REA, including a summary of the criteria, sources and search terms used. The first step was the definition of a conceptual framework identifying the links between local food and drink and the tourism economy and potential benefits for rural areas. The framework informed the REA, and will also be used for the next stages of this project. This section also presents study definitions for local food and drink, rural areas, rural food and drink tourism destinations, and economic impacts of tourism on rural economies.
A1.2.1 Overview of steps taken for the REA The methodology used for this REA follows Government guidance, including the REA toolkit developed by the Civil Service (Civil Service, n.d.) and guidance for evaluation by the Cabinet Office (Cabinet Office, 2011 and 2012). The steps to conduct an REA can be summarised as follows (Civil Service, n.d.): ■ Formulate the REA questions: This step involves the identification of the research questions that the REA aims to address. For this REA, research questions have been developed by the study team and agreed with Defra based on the objectives stated in the terms of reference for this study. Objectives and research questions are presented in Table A1.1. According to the Civil Service toolkit, REAs can address different types of question, including impact questions and non-impact questions. The types of questions addressed in this REA are described in Section A1.2.2. ■ Design the conceptual framework: As stated in the Civil Service toolkit, REA questions are generally based on ideological and theoretical assumptions that need to be described before undertaking the review. These assumptions and the links between them form the conceptual framework for the REA. The framework for this study is described in Section A1.2.3. ■ Establish the inclusion and exclusion criteria: An REA should set clear criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of sources to be reviewed. These criteria guide the search strategy. Inclusion and exclusion criteria are presented in Section A1.2.4. ■ Define a search strategy: The search strategy specifies how the search is conducted by defining the REA sources (such as databases for academic literature or sources of grey literature), the search terms that are applied to identify relevant studies, and experts to be contacted for advice. The search strategy for this REA is presented in Section A1.2.5. ■ Define the selection criteria: The evidence identified through the first screening (i.e., by applying inclusion and exclusion criteria) were then reviewed more in depth to assess if they were able to address the research question. Only the sources deemed relevant were then selected for inclusion in this REA. The selection criteria are presented in Section A1.2.6. ■ Apply the search strategy and assess the quality of evidence: The evidence identified through the search was assessed against its relevance to the objectives of this study. The approach used is described in Section A1.2.7. ■ Data extraction and data synthesis: the evidence extracted was organised according to the related study objectives and study question. The subsections of Section A1.3 provide brief introductions on the study objectives that each subsection aims to address. The conclusions of the REA are summarised in Section A1.3.6.
A1.2.2 Formulating the REA questions: impact questions and non-impact questions REAs can address different types of questions, which can be classified as impact questions (or ‘what works?’ questions) and non-impact questions (‘what is required to make it work?’ and ‘what are the costs and benefits?’) (Civil Service, n.d.).
v1 July 2015 6
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
The distinction between impact and non-impact questions should be taken into account when developing the REA methodology. Impact questions are addressed through quantitative studies, while non-impact questions can be addressed through both quantitative and qualitative studies. For example, opportunities to increase the local food offer may be assessed through a qualitative survey of consumer attitudes towards local food. Non-impact questions can be further classified as follows: ■ ‘Needs’ questions: What do people want or need? ■ Process questions: Why/how does it work? ■ Implementation questions: What is required to make it work? ■ Correlation questions: What relationships are seen between phenomena? ■ Attitude questions: What do people think? What are their experiences? ■ Economic questions: How much does it cost and with what benefit/harm? Most of the research questions of this REA can be classified as non-impact questions, as summarised in Table A1.2. When extracting evidence on non-impact questions, it is necessary to specify whether qualitative or quantitative evidence has been collected by the sources selected. This may affect the extent to which the evidence is able to address the search questions. For example, it will be necessary to distinguish whether the opportunities to increase local food and drink are based on quantitative evidence on economic impacts, or perceived opportunities identified through consumer surveys. Government guidance is available to support the quality assessment of quantitative studies (Cabinet Office, 2011 and 2012). This informed the description of the criteria described in Sections A1.2.6 and A1.2.7. Table A1.2 Overall research themes and selection criteria
Objective related to REA questions Classification: impact and non-impact questions 1. Review existing evidence on what the relationship is Research questions under this objective aim at between local food/drink and tourism to provide a investigating economic benefits and disbenefits clear evidence based statement on the economic (economic questions) and links between local food benefits or disbenefits of a more localised food and and drink and rural tourism (correlation questions). These questions can be therefore classified as non- drink offer to the rural economy and whether this impact questions. displaces other benefits, on a before and after basis. 2. Provide a comparison between the outcomes for a This objective focusses on comparing the economic rural tourism destination which has a more developed benefits of different rural tourism destinations. local food and drink offer against the outcomes for Questions to address this objective can be therefore one with a less developed local food and drink offer. classified as non-impact questions (more specifically, economic questions). 3. Provide an up to date review of the local food and This objective is not covered by the REA. drink market in rural tourism destinations. 4. Identify the issues, challenges and opportunities to This objective may imply a mix of impact and non- increase localised food and drink offerings in rural impact questions: for example, challenges and tourism destinations with discussion on the desirability opportunities may be assessed by describing of such an increase. consumer preferences with regard to local food and food companies’ perceived challenges to an increased food offer (attitude questions). This question may also be addressed by research addressing impacts of local food and drink (impact questions), where available. 5. Identify good practice and share learning gained from The identification of good practice examples may be innovative businesses in the market place who are: seen as an attempt to answer both impact questions
v1 July 2015 7
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
(a) delivering localised food and drink offerings in rural (‘what works’) and non-impact questions (e.g., ‘why tourism destinations or (b) helping to develop links and how links with food outlets are developed’). with food and drink outlets to deliver localised produce. 6. Consider future policy interventions to boost localised Research questions linked to this objectives aim at food and drink in tourism destination if that is found to identifying future policy interventions to support local be an economically beneficial policy for rural food and drink: these represent non-impact questions economies. (more specifically, these can be classified as implementation questions). 7. Identify suitable rural case study areas that are This will involve a mix of impact questions (e.g. ‘what developing/ have developed their local food and are areas where an increased local food offer has drink/tourism offer to inform future ‘what works’ impacted on rural tourism?’) and non-impact research. questions (‘what are the interventions that supported the development of the local food and drink offer in the area selected?’)
A1.2.3 Conceptual Framework for the Local Food and Drink and Tourism Economy Defining a conceptual framework helps to identify the different ways in which local food and drink have the potential to benefit the tourism economy, which will then be tested in the research. Understanding the potential impact pathways will help to inform the research questions that were addressed in the REA, and later on, the data analysis, interviews and case studies. The terms of reference for this study are based on a hypothesis that food businesses providing a more localised food and drink offer have the potential to contribute more to the growth of their local economies compared to food businesses that are less locally connected. This may occur for several reasons, for example, because local food economies: ■ maximise the proportion of food and drink sales that are sourced locally, thereby enhancing economic opportunities for local food as well as tourism businesses; ■ increase opportunities for value added, for example where a price premium can be charged for a locally sourced and locally distinctive product; ■ add to the tourism offer, enhancing the attractiveness of a location, thereby benefiting the wider tourism sector; and ■ strengthen local economic multipliers, not just through the links between the food and tourism sectors, but also by extending this to local sourcing of other goods and services (e.g. where a philosophy of sourcing food locally extends to local sourcing of other materials, supplies, and services such as cleaning and transport). These potential impacts are illustrated in Error! Reference source not found..
v1 July 2015 8
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Figure A1.1 Conceptual framework for assessing local food and drink and the tourism economy
Source: ICF
The occurrence and extent of these benefits can be tested through relevant indicators, such as: ■ numbers of visitors, and changes in visitor numbers as a result of growth in the local food offer in a particular location, as well as the proportion of surveyed visitors who cite food and drink as a reason for their visit; ■ expenditure per visitor, especially evidence of average expenditures on food and drink per visit, and trends in this indicator as well as comparisons with locations with a less localised food offer; ■ proportion of food expenditures that are sourced locally, enabling comparisons of local food and drink expenditures in areas with a localised and less localised food economy; and ■ economic multiplier effects, and evidence of the proportion of wider purchases of goods and services that are sourced locally. It is important to examine the issue of additionality1 when considering the economic impact of local food and tourism. Economic leakage and multiplier effects are important considerations in this respect, as they determine the proportion of expenditures that are retained locally and recirculate in local
1 As defined by the Government guidance on policy evaluations (Cabinet Office, 2011), additionality is a measure of the effects or impacts of an intervention. Additionality can be defined as the number of positive impacts of an intervention minus the counterfactual, i.e. the impacts that would have occurred if the policy had not taken place.
v1 July 2015 9
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
economies, supporting local employment and incomes, rather than leaking out of the economy and supporting economic activity elsewhere. Another important aspect of additionality is displacement – the extent to which local food may stimulate economic activity in one area at the expense of reductions elsewhere. For example, expenditures on local produce will reduce demand for produce from other areas, including rural areas within England. On the other hand, displacement of imports (such as Danish bacon) may lead to overall benefits to the English rural economy. Displacement may also take place with respect to visitors themselves – for example where local food encourages them to visit one part of rural England rather than another. Finally, when assessing the case for – and impacts of – public sector interventions with respect to local tourism, it is important to examine the extent of market failure. The benefits that local food and drink bring to tourism economies may occur purely as a result of private sector activity and market- based transactions, and may not depend on intervention. Deadweight refers to cases where an intervention has taken place but the benefits observed would have occurred even in the absence of that intervention. However, in some circumstances markets may fail to take full advantage of a particular area of economic opportunity. With respect to local food and tourism, this could potentially occur as a result of: ■ information failures (for example if there was incomplete information among suppliers or consumers about the sources of food or the benefits of local food); ■ coordination failures (if, for example, markets failed to take advantage of opportunities to bring together local food and drink to form a coherent local offer); or ■ externalities (for example, if the full benefits of local food, including wider benefits in linking consumers to the food system and the environment, were not recognised by markets). Since the study requires us to examine the barriers and challenges to the development of a local food and tourism offer, and possible interventions that might address them, critical analysis of these barriers will be necessary to test whether there are genuine market failures that justify intervention. For example, it will be important to examine whether challenges in developing a local food and drink offer in some areas are the result of a lack of consumer demand, or whether there is such a demand but it is currently difficult to service because of information or coordination failures, or barriers related to government regulation.
A1.2.4 Criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of sources for the REA The research questions have been split into three main themes, and criteria defining the relevance, robustness and utility of the evidence under each one have been specified (Table A1.3). These criteria relate to the ideal characteristics of the evidence sought. For example, ideally evidence would provide robust, quantitative estimates of the economic impact of local food on tourism in rural England, including evidence of additionality and comparisons with areas with non-local food offers. In practice, however, studies meeting all of these criteria are scarce or absent, making it necessary to consider evidence covering some of these elements only (e.g. economic impacts and additionality of local food, and good practice initiatives to promote the local food economy). Table A1.3 Overall research themes and selection criteria
Research theme Selection criteria Economic impact and benefits of localised - Quantified evidence of impact food and drink offer - Evidence of additionality of benefits - Relevance to rural England - Specific reference to local, food, rural and tourism contexts - Comparisons between tourism destinations with a local food and non-local food offer (control group) in order to assess the respective contributions to the local economy - Robustness of findings (methodological rigour, clarity and transparency of approach, peer review)
v1 July 2015 10
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Opportunities and barriers for development - Quantified evidence of opportunity of a local food and tourism offer - Relevance to rural England - Specific reference to local, food, rural and tourism contexts - Robustness of evidence and arguments Good practice examples, policy initiatives - Relevance to rural England and interventions - Specific reference to local, food, rural and tourism contexts - Fit with current policy context - Practicality and feasibility of wider application
The REA focussed on studies providing quantitative evidence of the economic benefits or disbenefits of a more localised food and drink offer. Studies providing qualitative evidence were also considered, as they provided a useful framework to identify the nature of the linkages between local food/drink and tourism. The REA also covered literature identifying the opportunities, issues and challenges of a more localised food and drink offer. The review included materials from the wider tourism and food tourism literature and literature focused on evaluating the economic benefits of tourism as well as grey literature and evidence of practices in other European countries. The REA covered documents published after 2004 (when there was a series of European Union Framework programme research projects on local food), although a small number of earlier studies were included because they provided a description of the approaches and methods for the assessment of the impact of local food and drink on local economies. These approaches represented the point of reference for more recent literature. Documentation published before 2004 was identified through backward citation search (this search technique is described as part of the search strategy in Section A1.2.5.1). As stated in the SoR, this project does not address the environmental benefits, health, taste or nutrition benefits or any other non-economic benefits associated with local food and drink. For this reason, sources that focused only on these benefits were excluded.
A1.2.5 Search strategy The search strategy for this REA included the identification of sources, search terms and experts to be consulted to yield additional evidence. A1.2.5.1 Key sources for the REA Initial searches by ICF and discussion with Defra at the inception meeting led to the identification of the sources listed in Table A1.4.2 Table A1.4 Sources for REA3
Type of source Source to be consulted
Academic literature ■ EBSCO ■ ScienceDirect ■ Ingenta
2 ICF has access to a large number of online academic databases. ICF has a subscription with EBSCO, a leading provider of online information resources to researchers in colleges and universities, research organisations, and government institutions. The EBSCOhost Electronic Journals Service (EJS) acts as a gateway to 20,000 e- journals containing millions of articles from hundreds of different publishers. The subscription covers 20 databases. 3 The sources were selected to cover the different aspects in the scope of this REA: for example, VisitEngland focusses on the rural tourist perspective, while studies undertaken by the New Economics Foundation focus on the local economy and local food aspects.
v1 July 2015 11
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Type of source Source to be consulted
Grey literature ■ Defra, Local Authorities, Regional Development Agencies ■ VisitEngland ■ Regional Development Agencies ■ European Commission (including Framework Programmes) and EU Joint Research Centre ■ Food industry and tourism sector representatives, including the Beer and Pub Association, the Tourism Alliance, the British Hospitality Association, the Manufacturing Advisory Service, the Food and Drink Federation ■ Think tanks, NGOs and other organisations with an interest in local food, (e.g. New Economics Foundation, Campaign to Protect Rural England, Sustain food, and Soil Association) Website searches Google Scholar
A1.2.5.2 Search terms An initial list of search terms was identified by ICF based on the study Specification of Requirements (SoR), an initial screening of sources on local food and rural tourism, and discussions with Defra at the inception meeting.4 The search terms were applied using Boolean operators / truncation where appropriate. We used multiple search terms and appropriate Boolean operators (e.g. ‘AND’; ‘OR’) to focus our search, connect various pieces of information and find the most relevant sources. The list of search terms used for the REA is presented in Table A1.5. Table A1.5 List of search terms
Search term Alternative (OR) AND AND Local food and drink Food Tourism England Food and drink Rural tourism UK Localised food Rural tourism European Union Local food production destination Case studies Local drink Food tourism Good practice Local pub Rural areas Best practice Local meat production Economic benefits Case study Local fish production Economic impacts Agritourism Impacts Culinary tourism Issues Food festival Challenges Wine festival Barriers Wine tourism Rural economy Beer festival Place branding Farmers’ market [other types of local food and drink products and destinations] Local food and drink Localised food and drink Employment Tourism Turnover Food tourism Expenditure Rural tourism Displacement Rural areas
4 The sources screened include those cited in the SoR (e.g. JRC, 2013; New Economics Foundation, 2011; AMIBA, 2012).
v1 July 2015 12
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Search term Alternative (OR) AND AND Local multiplier effect LM3 Food Local purchasing Rural areas
After performing searches based on the identified terms, further related references of interest were searched through a technique known as snowballing. This involves (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2009): ■ backward citation search, which includes selecting key papers identified for inclusion in the REA and then systematically reviewing the reference lists for other relevant sources; and ■ forward citation search, which involves examining articles that have cited the sources already identified (resources such as Google Scholar and Scopus are available for this type of search). The following approach was used for snowballing: ■ Forward and backward citation search was applied to all sources scored as highly relevant to the focus of the study according to the selection criteria in Table A1.6. This involved the screening of the full reference lists and the full list of sources identified through forward citation search. ■ For the sources scored as ‘medium’ in terms of relevance to the focus of the study, a more targeted backward citation search was applied: this search did not involve a full review of all the reference lists. Only the references cited in the main text as sources of evidence on economic impact of local food and drink were reviewed. For example, if the main source cited an economic assessment of the impact of local food undertaken as part of another study, then the latter was identified and reviewed. ■ No forward or backward citation search was applied to sources that were deemed not relevant. This approach was adopted to focus on relevant sources while setting a limit on the REA: if no limits are set, the snowballing technique may lead to the identification of thousands of sources to be reviewed. As indicated in the Civil Service REA toolkit, REA searches should be designed so that they are achievable within the time available. Setting limits is necessary, although it may make the search less comprehensive. A1.2.5.3 Expert advice The following individuals and organisations were contacted by the study team to identify additional evidence: ■ The New Economics Foundation; ■ Sustain: the alliance for better food and farming; ■ The Plunkett Foundation; ■ The Local Food programme funded by the Big Lottery Fund; ■ The Brecon Beacons Tourism Trust; ■ Roger Vaughan, Professor of Tourism Economics, University of Bournemouth; and ■ Sue Slocum, Assistant Professor of Tourism and Events Management, George Mason University, US. Defra also contacted their stakeholder networks to identify relevant sources and provided the sources identified to the study team.
v1 July 2015 13
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.2.6 Criteria for the selection of sources to be reviewed The titles and abstracts of the studies identified through the sources and search terms listed in section A1.2.5.1 and section A1.2.5.2 were screened to determine if they met the inclusion criteria. Where an assessment could not be made based on titles and abstracts alone, the full texts of the studies were also screened. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were reviewed to assess whether and to what extent they were able to address the REA questions. Only the sources that passed this assessment were selected for the extraction of evidence to be included in the REA. Criteria for selection were developed by following the Civil Service REA toolkit. The toolkit states that quality and relevance of studies can be assessed along three dimensions: ■ The methodological quality of the study being considered; ■ The relevance of the research design for answering the REA question; and ■ The relevance of the study focus for answering the REA question. These dimensions were taken into consideration when elaborating the criteria below, which are tailored to the aims and objectives of this study. The sources reviewed were also scored against their relevance and quality; this weighting approach is presented in Table A1.6. Table A1.6 Criteria for the selection of the literature
Criteria Application Weighting approach Selection of studies
Relevance of All studies ■ High: the study covers all of the following Studies scored as ‘low’ were the study focus: screened. elements: not selected for further the extent to – an assessment of economic benefits or review, as the scope was which the study disbenefits of a localised food and/or deemed too broad to provide useful information to inform scope falls drink offer; the REA. within the scope – a description of the links between local of the REA food/drink and tourism; and – focuses on the economic benefits and disbenefits of local food and drink for rural economies. ■ Medium: the study covers only one or two of the elements listed above. ■ Low: the does not cover any of the elements listed. For example, the study represents generic literature on tourism, with no identification of the specific impacts of local food and drink. Relevance of Applied to research ■ High: the study is highly relevant to the Studies scored as ‘low’ were the institutional questions aimed at institutional context for this study. For not selected as they do not background describing case example, the study was conducted in provide evidence that can studies and policy England or the UK. inform the development of interventions to policies addressing local food ■ Medium: the study provides examples that boost local food and drink and/or the tourism are partly relevant to the institutional and drink in sectors of rural economies in tourism background for this study. For example, the England. destinations. study describes interventions implemented in a European country, and these interventions could potentially be replicated in England. ■ Low: none of the conditions above are met.
Robustness of All studies ■ High: conclusions are supported by Studies scored as ‘low’ were
v1 July 2015 14
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Criteria Application Weighting approach Selection of studies
conclusions screened. quantitative evidence. not selected for further ■ Medium: conclusions are supported by review, as the aim of this REA qualitative evidence. is to provide an evidence ■ Low: there is no evidence in support of the base of economic effects. study’s conclusions.
A1.2.7 Assessing quality and relevance of studies Once the sources for the REA were selected and analysed, an additional screening process was conducted to assess the quality of the evidence extracted. This process aimed at excluding material considered to be of low quality, and at highlighting the gaps and limitations of the material included in the review. A weighting approach for the overall relevance and robustness of sources was undertaken as part of the selection of sources (Table A1.6). This was refined through a further assessment of the methodological quality and relevance of the sources selected. Gaps are highlighted in the REA. Different approaches to assess methodological quality and relevance were adopted depending on the type of source. For example, the weighting approach for the assessment of economic studies was based on the coherence of the study with the logical framework developed for this study. The quality assessment of qualitative studies was informed by the REA toolkit and guidance provided in the Cabinet Office guidance on qualitative evaluation.5 Table A1.7 Criteria for the selection of the literature
Criteria Application Weighting approach
Identification and Economic ■ High: the study identifies economic benefits and disbenefits, including assessment of all studies additionality, displacement and leakages. The methodology adopted is relevant costs therefore coherent with the logic framework developed for this study. and benefits ■ Medium: includes at least two of the elements above (such as assessment of economic benefits and leakages), but does not cover all elements (for example, an assessment of displacement effects is missing). ■ Low: the study only focusses on one aspect (such as economic benefits). Identification of Economic ■ High: the study undertakes counterfactual analysis. causal links studies ■ Low: no counterfactual analysis was undertaken. Transparency of All studies ■ High: the study clearly documents the method used and describes methodology assumptions and gaps. ■ Medium: the study provides a summary description of the method used, but there is no description of assumptions, gaps and caveats. ■ Low: there is no description of methodology.
5 The Cabinet Office guidance provides a framework for the assessment of qualitative evaluations. It includes a set of questions that may be used to appraise the quality of research, and provides guidance for the determination of indicators for quality assessment. Not all questions and indicators provided in the guidance are relevant for this REA (for example, some aspects of the Cabinet Office guidance focus on ethical issues while carrying out research). The most relevant questions included those on the assessment of study findings and study design (examples include: How credible are the findings? How defensible is the research design? ). These questions were tailored to the needs of this REA.
v1 July 2015 15
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.2.8 Definitions The definitions presented in this section were discussed and agreed at the inception meeting with Defra and refined through additional research as part of the REA. These definitions will be adopted and, where necessary, further refined during the course of the project. A1.2.8.1 Local food and drink There are no legal definitions of local food and drink in the European Union (European Union Joint Research Centre (JRC), 2013; Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), 2012b). According to Kneafsey et al. (in CPRE 2012b), local food and drink can be defined by different attributes: ■ local food defined according to product, process and place attributes (e.g. Protected Designations of Origin (PDO) and Protected Geographical Indications (PGI)); ■ local food produced, processed and retailed within a defined radius; ■ local food that delivers certain benefits (e.g. the Soil Association’s definition of local food is based on criteria related to food’s social, environmental and economic benefits); or ■ local based on the type of outlet (e.g. channels used by farmers to distribute food from the farm to the consumer such as road-side stands, farm shops, farmers’ markets and community-supported agriculture). Different definitions incorporating one or more of these attributes have been adopted in the literature reviewed. Table A1.8 provides a summary of definitions and examples of local food and drink identified through the REA. Table A1.8 Definitions of local food and drink in the literature reviewed
Definition Source Definitions applied in literature focussing on UK/England The Welsh Government adopts a practical definition of ‘local sourcing’ for the strategic Welsh implementation of its Local Sourcing Action Plan: Government, “The purchasing of food and drink through various parts of the supply chain, that are 2009 located as close to the point of consumption as reasonably possible, in the light of the needs, resources and strategic priorities of the sourcing organisation.”
The plan also recognises the importance of distance-based definitions commonly found in literature, including: Local Foods – foods retailed within a 30 mile radius of their production. Regional Foods – foods sold in the same region of their production and manufacture. A wider definition of a ‘sustainable local food economy’ is adopted by the Soil Association, Soil which also adds a sustainability and social welfare dimension: Association, “A system of producing, processing and trading, primarily of organic and sustainable forms n.d. of food production, where the physical and economic activity is largely contained and controlled within the locality or region where it was produced, which delivers health, economic, environmental and social benefits to the communities in those areas.” Although no legislative definition of local food exists in the UK, the FSA in its Food Law FSA, 2012 Code of Practice, stipulates that food authorities should interpret both ‘localised’ and ‘local’ as meaning: “Sales within the supplying establishment’s own county plus the greater of either the neighbouring county or counties or 30 miles/50 kilometres from the boundary of the supplying establishment’s county.” Some studies articulate a similar concept of Short Food Supply Chains (SFSC). Alongside Marsden et al., geographic distance, these also aim to take account of market relationships and interaction 2002 between consumers and producers within definitions. Categorisations of SFSCs include: Face-to-face – “consumer purchases a product direct from the producer/ processor on a
v1 July 2015 16
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Definition Source face-to-face basis”. Spatial proximity – “products are produced and retailed in the specific region (or place) of production, and consumers are made aware of the ‘local’ nature of the product at the point of retail”. Definitions applied in European Union countries or by the European Commission A local food system is one in which foods are produced, processed and retailed within a JRC, 2013 defined geographical area. Examples of local food systems are: farmers markets, farmgate sales, vegetable box delivery schemes, community supported agriculture and public procurement schemes which source food from within a defined geographical radius. The foods which are exchanged within local food systems are usually those which are traceable to a particular place of origin, and have distinctive qualities or characteristics. They are often unprocessed or lightly processed foods. EU funded research programmes such as IMPACT, SUPPLIERS or FAAN have generally JRC, 2013 defined ‘Local Food Systems’ as those where the production, processing, trade and consumption of food occur in a defined reduced geographical area (depending on the sources and reflections, of about 20 to 100 km radius). “Local” means the shortest and simplest route from field to plate. In some cases a set Food and Local distance defines this. In all cases it suggests a self-contained local trading area, with close Agriculture contact between all parties and few middlemen. Information Resource (FLAIR), 2002 Other definitions “Local food” is food produced or processed within a three-hour drive of its final point of sale Dougherty, (this definition is applied in a study focussing on US local food networks). Brown and Green, 2013 Canadian governmental agencies increasingly accept the definition that "local food" is food Arnold, 2013 that is grown and produced within the province.
Additional ‘working definitions’ are also used by researchers in order to undertake surveys and evaluate economic impacts of local food and drink (examples of these operational definitions are provided in A1.7). Consumers have different perceptions and interpretations of the meaning of local food and drink: for example, a survey of 1,150 shoppers6 by the CPRE (2012b) found that respondents understood the term ‘local food’ to mean: ■ food from within the region (28 per cent); ■ food from within 30 miles of an outlet (27 per cent); and ■ food from the county (26 per cent).
6 Shoppers were interviewed using a standardised questionnaire. Shoppers were asked to indicate what they understood by the term ‘local food’ and were provided with the following closed list of options: ■ From the region (28 per cent of shoppers gave this response); ■ From within 30 miles of an outlet (27 per cent); ■ From the county (26 per cent); ■ From a local shop (11 per cent); ■ From England (3 per cent); and ■ Other (5 per cent).
v1 July 2015 17
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Some shoppers also understood local food to mean food from a local shop (11 per cent) or food from England (3 per cent). Five per cent cited ‘Other’. Another survey of 1,000 British consumers (Groves, 2005) found that 21 per cent of respondents associated local with the county in which they live, and a further 32 per cent agreed that local means food produced within 30 miles from either where they live or 30 miles from where they buy the product7. Different definitions are also used by food and drink businesses (CPRE, 2012b): ■ Some large retail chains have adopted a definition of local as food produced, grown and processed within 30 miles of the store (e.g. Waitrose, Asda, Booths and The Cooperative). ■ Tesco uses a county or neighbouring county definition. ■ The National Farmers Retail and Markets Association (FARMA) uses 30 miles as the ideal radius for defining ‘local food’, but it can be extended to 50 miles for larger cities, coastal or remote regions. The maximum recommended radius is 100 miles. FARMA also recognises distinct geographical areas such as counties and National Parks. The results of the REA suggest that the definition of local food and drink is predominantly based on the geographical area where food and drink has been produced, processed and sold. A 30 mile radius is commonly adopted as a criterion to define a ‘local’ geographical area. This criterion is adopted by organisations undertaking research on local food and drink, policy makers and food and drink business operators in England and the UK. Consumers also tend to associate the term ‘local food’ with food produced and sold in a specific geographical area (such as a region, a county or a 30 miles radius from an outlet). Additional aspects, such as the protected designation of origin and types of trading arrangements between food and drink business operators, have been identified as relevant elements of some definitions of local food and drink identified by the REA. As agreed during the inception meeting, the geographical definition of local food and drink as that produced within a 30 mile radius from where it is purchased will be used for this study, but the study team will not rely on it exclusively, as other aspects are also relevant. A1.2.8.2 Rural areas In England, rural areas consist of settlements below 10,000 people or open countryside (Office for National Statistics (ONS), 2013). Other areas are classified as urban. Based on dwelling densities, rural and urban areas are classified as either sparsely populated areas (‘settlements in a sparse setting’) and ‘not sparse’ areas. The ONS definition of rural areas is a good starting point for the study, and data on Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) areas based on the ONS definition of rural/urban are available. LEPs are partnerships between local authorities and businesses. LEPs are important stakeholders for this study: they are responsible for designing the EU investment strategies for the delivery of EU funding in England. So far, 39 LEPs have been created. Through their funding strategies, LEPs have the
7 Consumers were asked to choose one of the following options to define local food: ■ ‘Food produced in my county’ (21 per cent associated ‘local’ with the county in which they live); ■ ‘Food produced within 30 miles of where I live’ (17 per cent); ■ ‘Food produced within 30 miles of where I buy it’ (15 per cent); ■ ‘Food produced in England/Wales/Scotland’ (11 per cent); ■ ‘Food produced in my area (e.g. South-West)’ (9 per cent); ■ ‘Food produced in Britain’ (5 per cent); ■ ‘Food produced in adjoining counties to where I live’ (4 per cent); ■ ‘Food produced in an area with a good reputation for that product’ (3 per cent); ■ ‘Don't know’ (10 per cent); and ■ ‘None of these’ (4 per cent).
v1 July 2015 18
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
potential to promote initiatives related to local food and drink and tourism. Our study will include an assessment of tourism data disaggregated by LEPs. Other important stakeholders are Destination Management Organisations (DMOs). DMOS are responsible for the development of tourism in a destination. There are about 150 DMOs in England. The areas under the responsibility of DMOs are not classified based on the ONS definition of rural/urban. This should be taken into account by the study team when undertaking data analysis, as this project will focus only on tourism in rural areas. A1.2.8.3 Tourism, visitor and tourist Statistics by VisitEngland are based on the United Nations World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) definitions of tourism, tourist and visitor. The UNWTO defines tourism as ‘a social, cultural and economic phenomenon which entails the movement of people to countries or places outside their usual environment for personal or business/professional purposes’ (UNWTO, n.d.). The UNWTO also distinguishes between visitor and tourist as follows: ‘a visitor is a traveller taking a trip to a main destination outside his/her usual environment, for less than a year, for any main purpose (business, leisure or other personal purpose) other than to be employed by a resident entity in the country or place visited. A visitor (domestic, inbound or outbound) is classified as a tourist (or overnight visitor), if his/her trip includes an overnight stay, or as a same-day visitor (or excursionist) otherwise.’ A1.2.8.4 Rural food and drink tourism destination The local food sector comprises a range of activities including farming, processing, food service and food retail activities. Agriculture and processing are activities that involve local food production; food service and retailing activities are the means by which local food (and other food) is distributed to/ accessed by tourists. As well as food service activities, the definition of rural food and drink tourism destination should cover food retailing (including specialist shops, food festivals and farmers markets) and processing and manufacturing facilities such as microbreweries and food processors. These emerged as examples of relevant destinations as part of the definitions of ‘local food and drink’ identified in the REA (Section A1.2.8.1) A standard classification of food and drink services has been adopted by the ONS as part of the UK Standard Industrial Classification of Economic Activities 2007 (SIC) (ONS, 2009). Accordingly, food and beverage service activities are classified as shown in Table A1.9.
v1 July 2015 19
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Table A1.9 Food and beverage service activities, SIC8
Division Division Class Class Subclass Subclass code code code 56.1 Restaurants and 56.10 Restaurants and 56.10/1 Licensed restaurants mobile food mobile food service 56.10/2 Unlicensed restaurants and service activities activities cafes 56.10/3 Take away food shops and mobile food stands 56.2 Event catering 56.21 Event catering - - and other food activities service activities 56.29 Other food service - - activities 56.3 Beverage serving 56.30 Beverage serving 56.30/1 Licensed clubs activities activities 56.30/2 Public houses and bars Source: ONS, 2009 The ONS bases its definition of tourism related industries on the ‘United Nations International Recommendations for Tourism Statistics 2008’ (IRTS 2008). The UN recommendations (UN, 2010) indicate that the main outputs of tourism industries are ‘tourism characteristic products’, which are defined as those products typically bought by or produced for tourists.9 A feature of food and beverage serving activities is that although they are considered tourism characteristic activities, establishments in these industries also cater to a large degree to non-visitors, namely, local residents. For some establishments and also for the industry as a whole, these non- visitors might represent the majority of customers, permanently or at certain times of the year only. The SIC definition and UN recommendations will be used in this project as a guide. The study team will explore what data are available at different SIC code levels in order to address the study objectives as part of Stage 2 (see Table A1.1). This will be presented in the review and analysis of available data sources in Stage 2 of the project. A1.2.8.5 Economic impact of tourism on rural economies Official measures of the economic impact of tourism include (Defra, 2011; VisitEngland, 2014a and 2014b): ■ number of enterprises, turnover and employment in tourism related industries; ■ volume of tourism, that is, the number of holiday trips; and ■ tourism expenditure. The overall economic impact of tourism activities can be measured in terms of: ■ employment; and ■ gross valued added (GVA).
8 A more detailed assessment of SIC codes was conducted for the market study in stage 2 of the study. 9 Tourism characteristic products are those that satisfy one or both of the following criteria: (a) Tourism expenditure on the product should represent a significant share of total tourism expenditure (share-of- expenditure/demand condition); and/or (b) Tourism expenditure on the product should represent a significant share of the supply of the product in the economy (share-of-supply condition). This criterion implies that the supply of a tourism characteristic product would cease to exist in meaningful quantity in the absence of visitors.
v1 July 2015 20
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
The study team will also explore, where possible, economic impacts in terms of spillover and multiplier effects of the local food and drink offer in rural tourism destinations. A1.3 Results of the rapid evidence assessment This section presents the results of the REA in addressing the following study objectives and associated research questions: ■ Study objective 1: provide a clear evidence based statement on the economic benefits or disbenefits of a more localised food and drink offer to the rural economy and whether this displaces other benefits. ■ Study objective 4: identify the issues, challenges and opportunities to increase localised food and drink offerings in rural tourism destinations with discussion on the desirability of such an increase. ■ Study objective 6: consider future policy interventions to boost local food and drink in tourism destinations. The REA also identified innovative businesses in the market place and potential rural case study locations, which will inform research in later stages of the study. These are listed in A1.7.
A1.3.1 Local food and drink offer as a driver for rural tourism Expenditures on food and drink account for a substantial proportion of the overall economic impact of the tourism sector. While no overall estimates are available of the value of local food and drink to tourism, survey evidence demonstrates that it serves as an important attraction for visitors. Results from the VisitEngland Great Britain Day Visits Survey (GBDVS)10 suggest that activities related to food and drink consumption are among the most common activities undertaken by tourists in England. In 2013, going out for a meal was the second most common activity11 undertaken by Great Britain residents during tourism day visits in England. Going out for a meal was the main activity in 11 per cent of visits. Money spent during visits where going out for a meal was the main activity represented about 14 per cent of the total expenditure in day trips to England (VisitEngland, 2014b). ‘Going for a meal’ was also the most common activity on tourism day trips to countryside destinations, and ‘going for a drink’ was the third most common activity12 (VisitEngland, 2013a). VisitEngland data also indicate that among the activities undertaken by tourists, eating and drinking out plays an important role in determining expenditure in the areas visited: ■ In 2013, money spent in eating or drinking out during tourism day visits to England by Great Britain residents represented 37 per cent of the total visitor expenditure (or £16,903 million out of £46,024 million; VisitEngland, 2014b). The breakdown is illustrated in Error! Reference source not found.. ■ In 2013, expenditure in ‘eating and drinking out’ represented about a fifth of the total holiday spend on trips in England (VisitEngland, 2013c).
10 The GBDVS is a national consumer survey measuring the volume and value of tourism day visits taken to destinations in the UK by residents of Great Britain. The survey has an annual sample of more than 38,000 interviews with adults in Great Britain. 11 The most common activity was visiting friends or family: this was the main activity in 24 per cent of day trips to England. 12 The top activities on tourism day trips to countryside destinations (millions of trips), as reported by VisitEngland (2013a) were the following (the full list of options selected by survey respondents is not available from the online publication): Go for a meal (81 million trips), Go for a long walk (55m), Go for a drink (45m), Just relax (29m), Short walk (26m), Sightseeing on foot (20m), Visit a garden (15m), Sightseeing by car (15m), and Picnic/ BBQ (15m).
v1 July 2015 21
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
These figures relate to total expenditures on food and drink by tourists. No estimate is available from either the published GBTS data or Great Britain Day Visits Survey (GBDVS) data on how much of this expenditure relates to local food and drink. Figure A1.2 Tourism day visits: total expenditure breakdown for day visits to England
Source: data from VisitEngland, 2014b
There is evidence that a local food and drink offer can serve as an attraction and motivating factor for tourists, including those on holidays to rural destinations. For example, more than half of British tourists surveyed by the 2013 VisitEngland study are interested in food-related activities while on a holiday / break in England. The study found that the activities that attracted the most interest are dining at food service premises serving local food/produce, and buying food or produce local to the destination. Research on attitudes to sustainable tourism found that a majority of tourists surveyed (56 per cent) would chose a hotel offering local food products over another hotel without a local food offer (VisitEngland, 2010). However, less than half of respondents in the study (43 per cent) would prefer to shop at a local, individual shop rather than a well-known chain (VisitEngland, 2010). The proportion of tourists in the 2013 VisitEngland study who indicated they were interested in food- related activities and those who participated in these activities between August 2012 and August 2013 are presented in Figure A1.3. The proportion of tourists that are interested in local food-related activities is higher than the proportion of those who actually take part in these activities. The VisitEngland survey does not explain this gap, but it may be due to issues such as the affordability or availability of local food produce and the lack of easy access to local food and drink in local businesses. These issues are discussed in Section A1.3.5.1.
v1 July 2015 22
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Figure A1.3 Proportion of tourists who participated or were interested in local food related activities as part of their holiday/short break in England
Source: VisitEngland, 2013b
Another possible explanation for this gap may be found in the literature on consumer behaviour when making food and drink purchases: people often express greater willingness or interest (or in some cases, greater aversion) to purchasing some goods than their behaviour demonstrates. For example, literature on consumer behaviour towards genetically modified (GM) food shows that more people say they would not consume GM products than those who actually avoid buying products that may contain them. The discrepancy may be explained by the fact that in a survey situation there is a greater desire to make a socially acceptable choice (such as purchasing non-GM products or buying local food and drink) than in a real-life situation (Mather et al., 2011). Buying local produce is regarded by many consumers as a social choice, that is, as a means to support the local economy: for example, research by the University of Plymouth (2008) shows that one of the most important factors leading to increased purchase of local food and drink is ‘greater support for the local economy’ (reported by close to 25 per cent of 347 respondents to a survey of consumers who buy local and regional food).
A1.3.2 The economic benefits of local food and drink on rural tourism While the evidence is somewhat fragmented, several studies demonstrate that local food and drink can bring economic benefits to the tourism sector. However, standard and consistent data are scarce and much of the quantitative evidence comes from surveys of local markets and events. Several studies indicate that a local food and drink offer can provide an attraction for visitors and thereby benefit the wider tourism sector. There is also evidence from business surveys that interaction with visitors can benefit the food and drink sector by providing market research. A1.3.2.1 Qualitative evidence of the economic benefits of local food and drink on rural tourism Local food and drink tourism has been found in several studies in Denmark, the US and England to provide a means of increasing tourism visits, tourist spending and, in some cases, to extend the tourist season (Blichfeldt and Halkier, 2013; Dougherty, Brown and Green, 2013; Everett and Aitchison, 2008; Pearson et al., 2011 as cited in JRC, 2013, p.30). Additionally, tourists were found to pay higher prices for locally sourced products (Everett and Aitchison, 2008). Blichfeldt and Halkier (2013) found that all visitors to a local food festival in Denmark who were surveyed knew about the event before they came to the event location. While the case study is
v1 July 2015 23
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
primarily qualitative, interviews with visitors suggest that the festival is a “reason to go” for “some” tourists. Everett and Aitchison (2008) interviewed 12 Cornish restaurant owners who thought that those visiting out of peak season, particularly in the months of May, June and September, are more likely to frequent more expensive food outlets specialising in local produce. Their data shows a clear pattern between specific months and the level of local food-related expenditure. In May, June and September tourists are willing to spend slightly more money, for example, one restaurateur is quoted as saying “in September people come without their children and they will want good quality, different types of fish” (Ibid., p.161). The interviewees reported a change in people’s eating habits and an extension of the season by 1.5 months before and after the high season. Pearson et al. (2011, p. 889 cited in JRC, 2013) suggest that local food systems can increase the economic impact from tourism through local branding and recreational shopping opportunities. Another study drawing on evidence across the EU, indicates that local food and drink systems and their synergies with tourism have been found to have positive impacts on creating and maintaining employment, particularly in rural areas (JRC, 2013). In Herefordshire, more than 40 per cent of inhabitants reside in rural areas. Evidence suggests that visitor expenditure on local food and drink can bring significant benefits to the local food and drink sector, and that local produce may account for a larger proportion of expenditures by visitors than locals (Sherwood, 2013). The study also showed that increasing the proportion of food and drink expenditure that was locally sourced would bring additional benefits to the local economy. Sims (2009) conducted interviews with 78 visitors in the Lake District and Exmoor and found that local food and drinks are an asset to integrated and sustainable tourism because they enable host communities to capitalise on visitors’ desire for some form of “authentic” experience. This arises from local food provision as a means to symbolise the place and culture of the tourist destination, offering “a moral ‘feel-good’ factor” (Ibid. p.328) and allowing visitors to connect with their destination during and after their visit. A study by Sharples (2003) of local cider producers in Somerset found that tourism activity increased margins through direct sale to consumers and provided additional retail outlets, or constituted the only sales opportunity for smaller cider producers who cannot guarantee volume or constancy of supply. Tourism also generated market intelligence on products: cider producers gained instant and valuable feedback on the consumer reaction to their existing products, and were able to trial new additions to their product range. Additional benefits included the opportunity to engage directly with consumers, which in turn created positive relationships with consumers that may lead to both direct sales and indirect sales through positive “word of mouth” advertising. Finally, tourism also provided educational opportunities. Visits to producers helped create awareness and appreciation of cider, apples and the cider industry, the knowledge and interest generated can be expected to result in increased consumption (Sharples, 2003). A1.3.2.2 Quantitative evidence of the economic benefits of local food and drink on tourism The precise nature of the links between local food and tourism, however, remains unexplored (Sims, 2009) and economic benefits of local food and drink are mostly described in qualitative terms. Reasons for this include the lack of longitudinal and baseline data (JRC 2013) which is due to difficulties in collecting data and correctly measuring economic impact (as explained in section A1.3.3). There are some examples of quantitative studies in the UK and internationally that assess the impacts of food and drink on local tourism economies, although they do not always focus on rural areas. Telfer and Wall (2000) as cited in Webber et al. (2011) suggest that spending on eating out during a holiday constitutes approximately one-third of all tourist expenditures. Enteleca Research and Consultancy (2001) report that around 72 per cent of people visiting the UK were interested in local food and beverages during their holiday. The same study found that 67 per cent of tourists were prepared to spend more on local specialties.
v1 July 2015 24
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
This section provides the following examples of the contribution of local food and drink to tourism economies: ■ Sherwood (2013) assessed the potential value of a local food and drink offer in the West Midlands county of Herefordshire; ■ Ward (2013) estimated the potential value of a local food and drink offer in Totnes, a market town in Devon; ■ Hall and Sharples (2008) identified the economic impacts of the Bakewell Farmers’ Market in the Peak District; ■ Tate (2013) identified the economic impacts of the Taste Cumbria Festival; and ■ CPRE (2012b) estimated the economic impacts of local food networks on job creation in England. The potential value of a local food and drink offer in Herefordshire Between 18,500 and 27,000 people were estimated to be employed in the food and drink sector in Herefordshire in 2010 (Sherwood, 2013), accounting for between 21 per cent and 31 per cent of the county’s workforce. And between 2,600 and 3,600 businesses were estimated to operate in the county’s food and drink sector, including agriculture (Ibid.). The sector’s annual gross value added (GVA) was £607 million in the same year, representing 22 per cent total GVA for the county. Sherwood (2013) estimated that in 2010 the total tourism expenditure on food and drink bought from food outlets was around £110 million. The total expenditure in restaurants, bars and pubs in Herefordshire was estimated at £175 million in 2007, but does not include an estimate of the proportion of this expenditure related to sales to tourists. The study also reports that evidence on actual tourist spending in local food and drink was unavailable. Instead, available data on household spending in local food and drink were used to estimate tourist spending on local produce of approximately £34 million in 2010. The study assessed the potential benefits of achieving a target to increase current tourism expenditure in locally sourced food and drink by £16 million, representing a 15 percentage point increase as compared to 2010 levels of expenditure in local produce, (i.e., 15 per cent of £110 million). Sherwood (2013) hypothesises that if this sum is re-spent in Herefordshire (‘local multiplier effect’, see Box 1.1), the total contribution of this additional expenditure to the local economy could reach £25 million. The study did not assess the specific local multiplier effect for Herefordshire, but relied on the NEF ‘80/20 rule’ which assumes that ‘80 per cent of the spend into a national chain will immediately leave the local economy, whereas only 20 per cent of the spend into an independent business will go the same way, leaving 80 per cent to circulate in the local economy’. The potential value of a local food and drink offer in Totnes Ward (2013) estimates that Totnes’ food and drink economy included 380 businesses, employed 1,500 people and was worth around £114 million in 2011. Expenditure on food and drink that has been produced within 30 miles of Totnes is valued at about £8 million, which represents 27 per cent of the total £30 million spend on food and drink. This means that around 63 per cent of the food consumed in Totnes is imported from areas outside the 30 miles radius. The study estimated that if 30 per cent (£6 million) of the expenditure in large food and drink retail chains in Totnes (£20 million) was instead spent in local independent outlets, this could translate to an additional 87 jobs. By applying local multiplier ratios calculated in previous studies by the CPRE, an estimated £6 million expenditure in local shops could mean an additional £15 million that is re-spent in the local economy. The economic impacts of the Bakewell Farmers’ Market in the Peak District The farmer’s market in Bakewell, one of the major market towns in the Peak District National Park in Northern England, has been held monthly since 2000. The market is run strictly according to FARMA
v1 July 2015 25
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
rules.13 Hall and Sharples (2008) found that traders are predominantly based within a 30-mile radius from the market; with the exception of wine and cheese producers who are limited in the area and hence come from farther away. Each month the market has around 43 to 50 stallholders who are registered to trade at the market. Economically, the market forms an important source of income for local producers in the area. Turnover per stallholder ranges from £60 to £2,400 per market, with some traders receiving 100 per cent of their income from this and other farmers’ markets in the area (Ibid.). The average turnover per week for the market is £67,500 (£810,000 per year). The Hall and Sharples (2008) study also found that Bakewell draws some 3,000 to 4,000 customers from Manchester, Sheffield, Cheshire and Derbyshire. Customers spend around £5 to £10 per visit to the market, which comprises 5 - 25 per cent of their weekly spend on food. The market is perceived by customers to be predominantly an extension of a day out and only around 10 per cent of the customer base lives in the immediate area. A number of traders that are involved in the market form part of local food networks, such as Peak Eats, supplying to holiday cottages, as part of a larger Peak District Foods network (Ibid.). The economic impacts of the Taste Cumbria Festival The Taste Cumbria Festival is a three-day food festival held in Cockermouth, Cumbria, during a weekend in September. An economic impact assessment conducted by Tate (2013) revealed the following: ■ The total economic impact of the 2013 Taste Cumbria Food Festival on the local economy by visitors to the event was estimated at £1.9m. This takes into account visitor spend at the festival, additional activity spend and off-site tourism spend whilst also allowing for deadweight, leakage, displacement and multiplier effects. ■ Event expenditure, including equipment costs, logistics, and salaries associated with public relations and project management was estimated at £100,000. ■ Based on this, the return on investment was calculated at £19.15, that is, for each pound invested in the Taste Cumbria Food Festival, more than £19 was put back into the local economy which represents an increase from £11.09 estimated in 2012. Tate (2013) also conducted interviews with 103 visitors, which showed: ■ 92.2 per cent of those interviewed had made their trip to Cockermouth specifically for the Taste Cumbria Food Festival. Another 2.9 per cent were on holiday/general day out, and 4.9 per cent were visiting friends and relatives. ■ When people were asked if they would be doing anything else apart from visiting the festival, just over half said they would be going for a meal or a drink, and 43 per cent planned to do some shopping. During their visit 58 tourists indicated that food and drink made up the highest share (49.4 per cent) of total expenditure (£2,955 or £51 per person), followed by shopping and travel. Thirty-three traders responded to an online questionnaire. Tate (2013) found that: ■ Of the total expenditure per trader surveyed, 18.2 per cent went towards food and drink. ■ Twenty-two per cent achieved profit of between £1,000 and £5,000 and for seven per cent, profits exceeded £5,000. For the majority, the weekend generated £501-£1,000 in profit. Thirty-two per cent of vendors said their profits were less than £500.
13 The National Farmers’ Retail and Markets Association sets out that the person selling at the market must be the producer, produce has to come from within a designated area and produce and ingredients should be sourced as locally as possible.
v1 July 2015 26
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ This was in line with their expectations: 85 per cent of vendors surveyed were hoping to use the festival to achieve customer sales and 97 per cent thought the event was successful for generating customer sales. The impacts of local food networks on job creation in England The CPRE (2012b) carried out an analysis of local food networks in England. This provides evidence of the scale of the local food economy, but does not identify tourism related expenditure within it. Local food networks were defined by the CPRE as ‘the network of links between people who buy, sell, produce and supply food in an area’. The CPRE analysis aimed at assessing the scale and economic impacts of local networks, including estimates of the turnover generated by local businesses and the local job opportunities created. The CPRE’s results are based on interviews with close to 2,000 shoppers and over 600 local food businesses. Case study analysis was also carried out in 19 locations. The CPRE (2012b) estimated that: ■ The annual value of local food sales through local outlets (largely independent and social/co- operative businesses) in 747 towns and cities in England is £2.7 billion per year; and ■ These outlets support over 103,000 jobs (full- and part-time), with over 61,000 due entirely to local food sales. CPRE carried out further analysis to compare the ratio of jobs to turnover in outlets which sell significant to high percentages of local food in national supermarket chains (e.g. Tesco, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons). According to CPRE estimates: ■ local food outlets support on average one job for every £46,000 of annual turnover; ■ supermarket chains support on average one job per £138,000 to £144,000 of annual turnover; and ■ by comparison, pound for pound, smaller independent ‘local food’ outlets support three times the number of jobs as supermarket chains. According to the CPRE, these estimates are conservative. The impact of local food webs on local economies is likely to be higher as the lowest possible multiplier was applied to assess the impacts of local food networks in cities. Multiplier effects are likely to be high in some cities. In Devon, for example, more than half of all food businesses were estimated to be involved in the local food sector in 2001. Producers involved in the local food economy employed on average 3.4 full-time workers compared to the regional average of 2.3 per farm.
A1.3.3 Multiplier Effects Quantitative estimates and qualitative assessments indicate that expenditures in local food systems are likely to be associated with higher multipliers than for non-local food expenditures. However, evidence relating specifically to tourist expenditures on food is lacking. The multiplier effect refers to the extent to which money is retained within a local economy, and continues to flow between local businesses and consumers, rather than leaking out of that economy. The assessment of local multipliers is based on the analysis of how much of the money spent by customers of a local business is retained locally in the form of local salaries, payments to local suppliers and consecutive ‘rounds’ of spending. A tool called ‘local multiplier 3’ (LM3) is often used in these studies. The LM3 tool was developed by the New Economics Foundation, a UK think tank, and has been used to assess local initiatives since 2001. One of the earliest examples of the application of the tool was the assessment of the local multiplier effects of an organic box scheme (Boyde, 2001; New Economics Foundation, 2002 and 2005). A definition of the LM3 model is provided in Box 1.1.
v1 July 2015 27
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Box 1.1 The local multiplier effect
The concept of an economic multiplier effect is that money coming into an economy has a multiplied impact on that economy based on the way the money is spent and re-spent within it. In an economy where everyone spends 100 per cent of their incomes locally, the multiplier effect is high. In an economy where everyone spends their money outside the local economy the multiplier effect is low. The LM3 indicator is equal to the total of the direct, indirect and induced effects divided by the direct effect: ■ Direct effect: this is the first round of local expenditure, which corresponds to expenditures made by customers (e.g. visitors to a farmer’s market). The direct effect corresponds to the total turnover of the local food/drink business assessed. ■ Indirect effect (second round): this corresponds to how much of the total turnover of a local business is re- spent on local salaries, profits to local owners and payments to local suppliers. ■ Induced effect (third round): this is the amount of local spending generated from the salaries of the local business staff and the local spending generated from local business profits. The lowest possible score for LM3 is 1.00 (where nothing is bought locally) and the theoretical maximum is 3.00 where the purchases in the three rounds are all made locally. Source: New Economics Foundation, 2011; Boyde, 2001.
Only one study (TPX, 2013) was identified that estimated the multiplier effect of tourism spend on local food for the local economy14. But the example is from the city of Austin, Texas in the US. The study identified the economic impact of three types of expenditure effects: ■ Direct effects: changes in production arising from immediate effects or final demand changes. ■ Indirect effects: production changes in backward-linked industries caused by the changing input needs of directly affected industries – typically, additional purchases to produce additional output. These have economic effects on other local merchants and workers downstream. ■ Induced effects: changes in regional household spending patterns caused by changes in household income generated from the direct and indirect effects. An output multiplier divides the total (direct, indirect and induced) effects of an initial spending injection by the value of that injection (i.e. the direct effect). The Austin food report (TPX, 2013) found that the aggregate economic activity multiplier for the entire food sector is 1.86, meaning that a dollar of direct activity creates an additional $0.86 of indirect and induced activity. That $1.86 in turn creates $0.99 in value-added, and $0.46 in wages (Ibid.). On the jobs side, the multiplier for the local food sector is 1.46, meaning that every two direct jobs create approximately one additional job through indirect and induced effects (Ibid.). These effects were found to be high, but cannot be generalised to the UK context. Research specifically into the local food sector across the EU suggests that local farming systems and short food supply chains have a higher multiplier effect on local economies than long chains which also impacts on maintaining local employment, particularly in rural areas (JRC 2013). Pearson et al. (2011) claim that the revenue generated from local food networks tends to remain in the local economy, where it has a multiplier benefit by adding to employment in other service industries in the local community. This implies that the amount of expenditure that is re-spent outside of the local economy (leakage effect) is reduced, although the study provides no empirical evidence for this. Similarly, Watts et al. (2005) argue that where local or regional food circulates through conventional distribution networks, the value added will gravitate towards already powerful ‘actors’ (i.e. multiple retailers, large processing companies). Hence, the potential to retain economic impact within the local
14 There are multiplier studies of tourism in rural areas in the UK that were conducted before 2004, but they were excluded from this REA as they did not meet the inclusion criteria.
v1 July 2015 28
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
economy is likely to be higher and last longer where alternative food networks are used to retain value added in the area where the food is produced. The authors grant the possibility, however, that, where powerful actors in conventional food networks are sympathetic to local and regional food producers, and where producers are able to maintain their distinctiveness, lasting rural development benefits can be generated nevertheless (Ibid.). While evidence suggests that tourism helps local farming and local food production to retain a higher share of value added (Ibid.), quantitative evidence of such impacts is poorly documented (Watts et al., 2005 and 2011; Sims, 2009, Pirog and O’Hara, 2013). The only available evidence relates to either local food or tourism economies in general, and is not specific to local food and tourism. Examples of local multiplier effects for local food and drink initiatives, such as organic box schemes and local food procurement in hospitals and schools in England and internationally are summarised in A1.4. The table also includes calculations of multiplier effects for food and drink businesses with a less localised offer, such as large retail chains. Estimating multiplier effects is challenging given the extensive data requirements. It is also difficult to obtain quantitative data because transactions are difficult to monitor (i.e. non-electronic transactions at farmers’ markets), data is not accurately recorded (i.e. farmers selling into local markets or festival attendance at food and drink events) or the data itself is difficult to interpret because counterfactual scenarios of what would happen without local food sales and underlying assumptions are not explicitly stated (Pirog and O’Hara, 2013; Welsh Government, 2011).
A1.3.4 Displacement effects A full assessment of the benefits of local food to the tourism sector needs to take account of potential displacement effects, which may relate to displacement of visitors from other areas, displacement of expenditures from other food outlets and displacement of food produced for export. However, while suggesting that displacement may be an issue, the REA found very little evidence in this area. The local multiplier model does not generally include the calculation of displacement effects (Lobley et al., 2009), and evidence of displacement is lacking in the literature reviewed for this REA. Potential displacement effects have been identified in the literature: for example, as reported by Arnold et al. (2013): ‘land that was used for corn production for global commodity markets is converted into a horticulture field for local markets. The net economic impacts resulting from the production for local markets must take into consideration the loss of benefits from the corn production’. Similarly, employment and expenditure in local food and drink markets may reduce employment and expenditure in other sectors. An example of a farmers market in Askern near Doncaster shows that the increase in income to farmers was predominantly offset against the decline in income for other local businesses (Hall and Sharples, 2008). Compared to the example of the Bakewell Famers’ Market, the reason for this could be that Askern was not able to attract customers with higher incomes. If consumers only have a limited amount of disposable income, then chances for displacement are higher. Secondly, Askern was not able to draw large numbers of external visitors; markets with fewer customers and lower income customers have lower spend (Ibid.), which in turn leads to greater competition between local traders at the market and with other local businesses. Hall and Sharples (2008) suggest this can be overcome by adding additional ways of engaging with visitors, for example, through box schemes, mail order and Internet sales. In this way, local food producers have additional ways of engaging with consumers and consumers have more ways of accessing local food offerings; the authors postulate that this is key to enabling longer-term income generation through local food offerings from farmers’ markets. An evaluation of the Taste Cumbria Food Festival (Tate, 2013) calculated displacement by asking festival participants what else they would be doing had they not been visiting the festival. Only 1.3 per cent of respondents said they would have ‘visited somewhere outside of the county’. This suggests that the festival displaced a limited amount of expenditure from other counties. The total estimated
v1 July 2015 29
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
displacement effect was £14,723, which represents the total visitor expenditure at the festival (on- and off-site) less estimated displacement and leakage effects, multiplied by 1.3 per cent. An additional example of possible displacement effects was identified in a report by the OECD (2012): ‘A possible negative aspect in some circumstances is that too much focus on the special interest food tourism market may mean other tourism and business opportunities are not adequately explored or the market’s perception of a region is not properly understood’. Evidence of these effects has not been identified. A similar effect may arise where people make trade-offs between environmental quality and economic performance and are prepared to tolerate lower productivity occupations (and lower wages) in exchange for living in higher quality environments (Layard, 2003 cited in Webber et al., 2009, p. 672).
A1.3.5 Issues, challenges and opportunities The REA identified a number of barriers and opportunities to increasing the local food and drink offer in rural tourism destinations. These are discussed in this section. A1.3.5.1 Barriers to a local food and drink offer in rural tourism economies Barriers to a local food and drink offer in rural tourism economies were identified from both business and consumer perspectives. Business barriers and issues related to a local food and drink offer in rural tourism economies From a food and drink business’s perspective, the main issues and challenges can be summarised as: agency problems and lack of infrastructure, seasonality, and failure to integrate food and farming with tourism strategies that offer easy access to visitors. These are each described in turn below. Agency problems and lack of infrastructure One of the most commonly reported market failures relates to the difficulties for local growers to access local food and drink supply chains (Irshad, 2010; Dougherty, Brown and Green, 2013; Visser, Trienekens and van Beek, 2013; Halkier, 2012; Little, Maye and Ilbery, 2010). These difficulties relate to the fact that prices and delivery arrangements offered by growers do not always match the requirements of restaurants, food outlets and other distributors. Growers may not be able to ensure a consistent supply of sufficient quantities of products at competitive prices due to factors such as the seasonality of local produce and the small scale of production. Food outlets, restaurants and other tourism destinations may therefore prefer a ‘non-local’ supplier, thus reducing the local food and drink offer to tourists (Halkier, 2012). A survey of 74 US restaurateurs found that the main reasons for not purchasing locally were: inconsistency of delivery and service (cited by 50 per cent of respondents), high prices (36 per cent) and burdensome ordering logistics (25 per cent) (Dougherty, Brown and Green, 2013). Seasonality The seasonality of tourism may limit the capacity of businesses to ensure stable income throughout the year (Everett and Aitchison, 2008). In 2012, almost three quarters of overnight stays at countryside destinations took place in spring and summer (April to September). In 2013, 38 per cent of all holiday trips in England took place during July, August and September, while only 13 per cent took place during the first three months of the year (VisitEngland, n.d.). Tourism expenditure was also concentrated during the summer months (July, August and September accounted for 41 per cent of total holiday spending in 2013). Seasonality issues could arise where there is a mismatch between the timing of supply and demand, or if food producers cannot easily address fluctuating demand (e.g. if production systems rely on constant output and produce is difficult to store) or if local produce is difficult to source at times of high tourism demand. But seasonality can be a strength if food businesses can vary their offer accordingly.
v1 July 2015 30
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
The REA did not uncover evidence of seasonality problems for local food and drink offers to rural tourism areas, but case study consultations with food and drink businesses and tourism representatives will be undertaken in this study to address this issue. Failure to integrate food and farming with tourism strategies to offer easy access to visitors The failure to ‘integrate food and farming with tourism strategies and stakeholders and to offer easy access to visitors’ has also been highlighted as a potential challenge. A study by the JRC (2013) highlighted that some local food businesses in rural areas mainly serve local consumers, rather than tourists. An example is provided by a farm located in the Lavant valley, in Austria. The farm sells all of its produce within a radius of 50 km. The Lavant valley is defined by the study as ‘one of Austria’s prime tourist areas’. Despite this, a limited proportion of the farm’s sales (20 per cent) derive from tourism. One of the factors which determines limited tourist expenditure is the difficulty to access the farm: the lack of coaches is cited as one of the main issues. The risk of fluctuations in demand from tourists also represents a barrier to the integration of tourism in the strategy of the farm: sales to local residents are considered more stable and reliable than sales to tourists. Consumer barriers and issues related to a local food and drink offer in rural tourism economies From a consumer’s perspective, the literature highlights some issues in terms of accessibility, availability and affordability of local food and drink products. Affordability The prices of local food and drink as compared with the prices of ‘non local’ products have been identified as a barrier to consumption. According to a survey of 1,000 UK consumers (Groves, 2005), the excessive price of local food is the main barrier to purchase: 41 per cent of those who purchase local food and 23 per cent of those who do not buy it think that it is generally too expensive. A further 22 per cent of buyers and 11 per cent of non-buyers think it is often more expensive than similar alternatives.15 Another survey commissioned by Defra (University of Plymouth, 2008) found that consumers perceived the fact that local food and drink ‘is expensive’ as the strongest barrier to buying local produce.16 A more recent survey of 800 shoppers undertaken in 13 different locations in England (CPRE, 2012a) also found that the cost of local food is the main reason why local food shoppers do not increase their purchases. Cost was the ‘major deterrent’ (Ibid.) to shoppers buying more: it was cited as a reason for not buying more by 58 per cent of respondents.17 While these studies (Groves, 2005, University of Plymouth, 2008; and CPRE, 2012) provide an indication of affordability as a barrier to increased consumption of local food and drink, they do not provide specific data regarding tourism in rural areas. The studies target consumers, without distinguishing between tourists and other consumers. Additionally, the results of these studies focus on perceived barriers, such as the fact that consumers believe that local food is more expensive than
15 Respondents were asked to rank the reasons why they think that people chose not to buy local food. Respondents were provided with 17 alternatives: It is too expensive; It is more expensive than the alternatives; The quality is not as good; It is difficult to find in supermarket; My local supermarket doesn’t sell it; I don’t have time to visit farmers’ markets or farm shops etc.; There are farmers’ markets or farm shops in my area; I can’t rely on the product being available; I’d rather choose a product that offers the best value for money; I’m not interested in where it comes from; There is not much variety of local foods; Local foods do not offer good value for money; I have no time when I’m shopping to look where a product is from; This area does not have a good reputation for producing food; It is just a gimmick / fad; British food is just as good as food produced locally; Food from abroad is sometimes better than food produced locally; I didn’t know local food was available. 16 The survey base was 1,223 consumers. Respondents were asked to assess their level of agreement with 14 statements relating to why they did not buy local food and drink. The statements were: Is expensive; Not readily available; Information on where to find it is not available; The range of products is limited; Not well promoted; Food produced elsewhere is sometimes better; I have to travel further to do so; The price is not always clear; 17 Based on open responses.
v1 July 2015 31
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
other produce. Quantitative evidence providing a comparison between the prices of local food and drink offered to tourists in rural England has not been identified by this REA. Availability and accessibility Groves (2005), University of Plymouth (2008) and CPRE (2012) suggest that availability and accessibility, together with affordability are perceived by consumers as the most significant barriers to buying local food and drink. Groves (2005) identifies availability as the second greatest barrier after affordability: 27 per cent of consumers who purchase local food and 11 per cent of those who do not buy it believe that local food is difficult to find in the supermarket. CPRE (2012) found that 51 per cent of shoppers surveyed did not increase their local food purchases because of lack of availability and choice. Similar results are reported in University of Plymouth (2008) where the second and third main barriers to purchase (after affordability) are respectively the fact that local food and drink is perceived as not readily available and that information on where to find it is not available. The seasonality of some local produce limits its availability to consumers, as compared to some ‘mainstream’ products that are available throughout the year thanks to national and international sourcing strategies (JRC, 2013; Visser, Trienekens and van Beek, 2013). The difficulties faced by primary producers in marketing their products may also affect accessibility (JRC, 2013). Examples of these difficulties include agency problems, lack of infrastructure and the lack of integration between food and farming with tourism strategies described above. Opportunities to increase the economic benefits to rural tourism from local food and drink According to the literature reviewed, key opportunities to increase the local food and drink offer in rural tourism destinations include: ■ Strengthening supply side engagement; ■ Developing the supermarket offer of local food and drink; and ■ Local branding strategies. Strengthen supply side engagement There is some evidence to suggest that small restaurants are often unaware of fresh, local food supply (Alonso and O’Neill, 2010; Alonso, 2010). Two examples identified in the hospitality industry showed that despite close geographical proximity to local producers and a farmers market offering fresh, local supplies, restaurant and cafe owners in the US did not offer locally sourced food and drink. Lack of awareness of the availability of fresh supply nearby and the convenience of direct delivery from out of state distributors were mentioned as the main reasons for this. This points to a missed opportunity from the supply side where increased marketing and improved relationships with the hospitality industry could increase demand by opening up a new market segment. Develop supermarket offer of local food and drink The literature suggests that local food and drink is generally marketed through local independent stores and food service outlets, or sometimes sold directly to the public (for example, at farmers’ markets). Based on quantitative evidence from company data, a study by CPRE (2012) estimated that local food sales represent less than four per cent of the turnover of two of the biggest national supermarket chains (Asda and Tesco18). CPRE also highlighted that the definition of ‘local food’ adopted by large retailer chains varies widely: for example, some retailers define local produce as product from Britain; other as produce sourced in the region where it is sold. But large retailers could be more involved in local food and drink networks. Supermarkets may support the tourism-related offer by creating the conditions for the local food and drink economy to develop
18 Data for Morrisons and Sainsbury’s was sought but not found by the CPRE team.
v1 July 2015 32
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
and become sustainable: through local sourcing strategies, supermarkets can provide a source of income for local suppliers. Supermarkets may also promote local products and participate in strategies for local branding (FAAN, 2010; CPRE, 2012b). A good practice example as identified by CPRE (2012a) is provided in Box 1.2. Box 1.2 Good practice example of local networks: Spar County Store, Ledbury
The Spar County store in Ledbury supplies a wide range of local foods: cider, beer, crisps, ice cream, pies, bread, eggs, soft fruit, salad bags, tomatoes and meats. Local sourcing creates some challenges, including the fact that supply of some fresh produce is seasonal, and that dealing with multiple suppliers requires additional work. However, local sourcing is regarded by the management of the outlet as a beneficial strategy which ensures the provision of fresh produce and differentiation from other high street shops. According to the store manager, this strategy allows the store to meet consumers’ preferences for products that support local producers. Additionally, the manager reported that generally the prices of products sourced by independent, local producers are in line with wholesaler prices. Source: CPRE, 2012a
Marketing opportunities and place branding The literature suggests that local food and drink offer ‘place-branding opportunities’: local sourcing may be used by food and drink operators as a marketing strategy to differentiate one tourism destination from another and increase tourism (Blichfeldt and Halkier, 2012; Chang Mazza, 2013; OECD, 2013; Steinmetz, 2010). For example, a survey of 74 US farmers found that ‘local’ was the most significant product descriptor used to market food products. Also restaurants indicated the availability of local food on their menus to promote their food offer (Dougherty, Brown and Green, 2013)19. A1.3.5.2 Policy interventions that increase local food and drink offers in tourism destinations According to a report by the EU Joint Research Centre (JRC, 2013) there are different opportunities for policy interventions to increase the offer of local food and drink in rural tourism areas. National and regional strategies can play an important role in supporting territorial branding and promoting the development of local food and drink networks. These opportunities have been recognised in the strategies of public authorities at local and national level. In Wales, for example, the promotion of the ‘Wales the True Taste’ brand is an integral part of the national food strategy (Welsh Assembly Government, 2010). Some local authorities in England integrate the value of local food and drink networks in their local food strategies: an example is the ‘Sustainable local food strategy’ by County Durham (County Durham Food Partnership, 2014) and the ‘Food strategy and action plan for Brighton & Hove’ (Brighton & Hove Food Partnership, 2012). A summary of the tourism-related background and action points of the Durham strategy is provided in Box 1.3. Box 1.3 The Sustainable local food strategy by County Durham
The County Durham sustainable local food strategy aims at achieving six strategic objectives, including supporting the local economy, environmental sustainability and health. The strategic aim of supporting the local economy through a competitive local food sector is structured according to three themes: local supply chains, public sector procurement, and tourism. The tourism theme recognises the fact that tourism provides a growing contribution to the local economy: between 2003 and 2012, tourist expenditure increased by more than £71 million to a total value of £738 million. Over the same period, the yearly number of overnight visitors in County Durham has increased from 1.3 million to 1.5 million.
19 Other descriptors included, for example, ‘fresh’, ‘natural’ and ‘heirloom varieties’.
v1 July 2015 33
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
In 2011, food and drink accounted for 50 per cent of the total visitor expenditure. There were 9,026 individuals directly employed in tourism, 47 per cent of which were in the food and drink sector. The County Durham Food Partnership also recognises that the rural landscape, one of the main tourist attractions, is closely linked to local agricultural systems. For example, the strategy states that ‘the sheep that graze most of the land in the upland areas of the Durham Dales are vital to the retention of a much loved landscape that provides a tourist attraction for lovers of the outdoors’. In order to strengthen the links between local food and drink production and tourism, and with the objective to maximise the economic impacts on local economies, the strategy envisages the following action points: ■ Development of the ‘Taste Durham’ quality scheme. The Taste Durham scheme was introduced in 2009 by the local tourism management agency (Visit County Durham) to promote County Durham’s food and drink. Businesses that sell directly to consumers can take part in an assessment process which involves an assessor from Quality in Tourism, the assessment service for VisitEngland. Based on the assessment’s results, businesses can achieve one of two awards (the Taste Durham Quality Assured award or the Taste Durham Highest Quality Assured award). In addition, businesses can achieve the citation Taste Durham Local Produce Champion if they meet criteria relating to local produce and local sourcing. ■ Start to develop clear routes for buyers (e.g. hospitality and retail businesses with strong visitor economy links) to connect with local food suppliers/producers. ■ An increase in the percentage of local food offered by ‘Taste Durham’ branded eateries/food outlets. ■ Grow County Durham as a food tourism location where visitors can experience food that is a unique product of the landscape, soils, climate, cultural traditions, and culinary and creative skills. Support the development of food and drink in the county that will respond to the needs of visitors. Sources: County Durham Food Partnership, 2014; Visit County Durham, n.d.
An EU funded project on local food systems (Facilitating Alternative Agro-food Networks, FAAN) conducted case studies of local food production in five EU countries (i.e. England, Poland, Austria, Hungary and France) and identified a number of policies which were perceived by food producers as factors that may hinder or facilitate local food systems. A summary of the policies identified with regards to the two English case studies assessed by the project20 is provided in Table A1.10. Table A1.10 Policies which may hinder or facilitate local food systems21
Policy Hindering Facilitating
CAP ■ Funding requirements (including ■ Leader programmes facilitate cooperative emphasis on productivity and networks among producers and with retailers. modernisation, and co-funding ■ Infrastructure for local processing and marketing requirements) may benefit large are provided by local authorities. processors. ■ Rural Development Programme grants (RDP) and Structural Funds promoted agri-food-tourism links and agri-ecological cultivation methods, e.g. low-input, organic conversion. ■ Small grants are available. Hygiene ■ Strict rules presume industrial contexts ■ Lighter rules for on-farm processing. regulations and methods. For example, government ■ Flexibility in rules according to production inspectors must be present whenever method and sales context. animals are killed.
20 The two case studies assess local food systems in Cumbria and Manchester. 21 The policies listed were those that were identified by food producers at the time when the study was undertaken; these policies may not be in place at the time of writing this report.
v1 July 2015 34
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Trading / ■ Direct sales face rigid and/or ■ Box schemes are exempt from rules on labelling employment inconsistent criteria from various specific products. laws regulatory requirements and agencies. ■ No exemptions for small business. Public ■ ‘Economically advantageous’ criteria ■ Contracts favour local suppliers. procurement favouring the lowest price and larger producers. ■ ‘Best value’ through aggregated purchasing to minimise the price, without clear criteria to justify a higher price. Territorial ■ PDO or PGIs to be marketed anywhere, ■ Funding promotes local provenance and regional branding bypassing local economies. identity. Source: FAAN, 2010
The challenges and facilitating factors identified in Table A1.10 are partly under the scope of EU legislation and policies (such as the CAP and EU hygiene regulations). However, there is also room for facilitating actions implemented at local and national level. The FAAN project assessed facilitating actions in two case studies of local food networks in England: a rural case study (Cumbria) and an urban case study (Manchester).Good practice examples of policies implemented in Cumbria are summarised in Box 1.4. Box 1.4 Good practice examples of policy interventions: a case study in Cumbria
In Cumbria, a number of examples of policies have been identified as good practice in support of local food and drink networks, including the following: ■ The Cumbria Rural Enterprise Agency, a not-for-profit organisation supported by the Rural Development Programme for England, helps small-scale food producers by providing facilities, such as commercially equipped kitchens, refrigeration, and storage. The burden to meet food hygiene regulations in food production and handling facilities is therefore partially shared between local businesses and the Agency.
■ Several grant schemes facilitate local networks and small scale producers, including those offered by Organic Entry Stewardship, the Leader programme, local charities and foundations, the Regional Development Agency, the European Social Fund and charitable trusts. ■ The Rural Development Programme in Northwest England focusses on reconnecting with the local community rather than efficiency of food and drink production. The programme includes ‘sense of place’ and ‘know your place’ training packages to create local pride, develop community spirit and contribute to the local tourism offer. ■ Food Northwest, the body representing the food and drink industry in the Northwest of England, focusses its funding for the promotion of quality products on local provenance and regional identity. ■ Leader Local Action Groups target community links and local needs with a limited budget. Sources: Balázs, 2009; FAAN, 2010.
A1.3.6 Conclusions The REA focused on research questions related to study objectives 1, 4 and 6. It collected evidence on the type and nature of economic effects associated with tourist destinations having a well-defined local food and drink offer. A summary of REA conclusions against these objectives is provided below.
v1 July 2015 35
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
We will build on the available evidence and address gaps, where possible, in the next stages of research foreseen by this project, namely: ■ Data collection and data analysis: this stage will aim at identifying additional evidence of the potential economic benefits of local food and drink. ■ Qualitative research: qualitative evidence from case studies can help in describing how leakages and displacement effects may occur. A1.3.6.1 Objective 1: provide an evidence-based statement on the economic benefits of a more localised food and drink offer to the rural economy The first study objective is to review existing evidence on the relationship between local food and drink and rural tourism to provide a clear evidence based statement on the economic benefits or disbenefits of a more localised food and drink offer to the rural economy and whether this displaces other benefits, on a before and after basis. Overall: ■ Results from tourism studies highlight that food and drink are among the main factors attracting tourists to rural areas in England. Local food and drink may play an important role in attracting tourists to England’s countryside. ■ Evidence suggests that local food and drink provides benefits to local economies in terms of job creation and increased turnover from sales to tourists. ■ Evidence on multiplier effects suggests that local food and drink offers high multipliers, and therefore a high proportion of expenditure on local food and drink is retained by local economies. But these studies focus on local food and drink initiatives such as food box schemes and local procurement in hospitals and schools. Evidence of multiplier effects specifically comparing food and drink in rural tourism destinations has not been identified. ■ Some evidence on the benefits of the rural tourism economy has been identified in the studies reviewed (including studies on local multiplier effects), although most REA case studies focus on overall benefits of local food/drink for the local economy, without isolating benefits related to the rural tourism economy. And the comparisons provided by studies on local multiplier effects do not always provide quantitative evidence of the increase in average spending per person derived from the provision of local food and drink. ■ Evidence on displacement effects is very limited; the evidence obtained suggests that displacement effects exist and warrant further consideration. Most of the evidence found was qualitative, but the evidence reviewed supports the hypothesis that local food and drink provide economic benefits for local economies. While several studies reviewed have investigated the benefits of local food and drink for local economies, less evidence is available on how this translates into encouraging visitors to spend more and how this translates into added value to the rural tourism industry. For example, there are a number of studies indicating that local food and drink initiatives have high multiplier effects on local economies, although these studies mostly focus on initiatives in urban areas, or do not isolate the impacts on tourism from the overall impacts on local economies. Additionally, quantitative evidence of the potential increase in average individual spending derived from the provision of local food and drink is not always available. A further limitation is the lack of studies that focus on England or the wider UK, limiting the relevance of findings. The case study examples identified by the REA provide an indication of the potential additionality and displacement effects from a local food and drink offer in rural tourism destinations. Qualitative and quantitative evidence of these effects is, however, scarce when looking at regional and national level impacts of local food and drink.
v1 July 2015 36
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.3.6.2 Objective 4: identify the issues, challenges and opportunities to increase the local food and drink offer in rural tourism destinations The fourth study objective is to identify the issues, challenges and opportunities to increase localised food and drink offerings in rural tourism destinations with discussion on the desirability of such an increase. The REA results suggest that there are barriers for both producers and consumers, real and perceived. These include: ■ Difficulties for suppliers of local food and drink products to meet the requirements of food/drink services and outlets. Local suppliers may face difficulties in ensuring a stable supply of products due to different factors, including the small scale of production, the lack of infrastructure for distribution, and the seasonality of local produce; ■ Seasonality of tourism and fluctuation in the demand for local food and drink produce; and ■ Failure to integrate food and farming with tourism strategies and stakeholders and to offer easy access to visitors. There are also opportunities, including: ■ Strengthening supply-side engagement; ■ Developing the supermarket offer of local food and drink; and ■ Local branding strategies. Available evidence on these opportunities is limited. A1.3.6.3 Objective 6: consider future policy interventions to boost the local food and drink offer in rural tourism destinations The sixth study objective is to consider future policy interventions to boost localised food and drink in tourism destination if that is found to be an economically beneficial policy for rural economies. Some information on UK and EU examples of successful and less-successful policies to promote food and drink tourism in rural areas have been identified. These include: ■ support to initiatives to promote local food and drink branding through quality assurance schemes; ■ provision of facilities and infrastructure in support of local businesses; and ■ linking the provision of funding to the promotion of quality and regional identity, rather that efficiency in food and drink production. There is little evidence, however, to explain how or why these interventions work (and ways in which they may not). Consultations undertaken in the next phase of the study will need to investigate these possibilities further and test their likely application in rural tourism locations in England.
v1 July 2015 37
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.4 Rapid evidence assessment – Annex 1 – The multiplier effect: examples from UK and international literature
Case study Description Multiplier effect of Comparison with non- Definition of local Source local food production local food supplier and methodology used Cumbria Assessment of total economic impact of the 2013 Taste Based on HM County Tate 2013 Cumbria Food Festival on the local economy by visitors Treasury: 1.7 to the event. Northumberland In 2004, the Northumberland County Council assessed LM3: 2.76 LM3: 1.36 Region New Economics the economic impacts of the Council’s food supply Foundation, contracts, and compared the average multiplier effects 2005 related to local suppliers against that of non-local suppliers. Cornwall Food The Cornwall Food Programme was developed by the LM2: 1.52 LM2: 1.05 Region New Economics Programme Cornwall Healthcare Community in 2003. The LM3: 1.81 – 1.95 Foundation, programme took a number of steps to improve its local 2005 economic impact, including local sourcing of cheese and ice cream. Lothian Primary The Royal Edinburgh Hospital decided to procure LM3: 1.99 City Thatcher and Care Trust/Royal lunches locally, and in 1999 it contracted a supplier Sharp, 2008 Edinburgh based in Edinburgh. The study assesses the benefits Hospital gained from local sourcing. food services Nottinghamshire This case study focusses on an initiative for local LM3: 2.19 50 miles radius New Economics sourcing for school meals in Nottinghamshire. The Foundation, initiative was launched in 2004 with the decision from 2011 the Council to procure more seasonal and local ingredients for schools. Plymouth This case study focusses on an initiative for local LM3: 1.85 50 miles radius New Economics sourcing for school meals in Plymouth. Local authorities Foundation, in Plymouth decided to focus their procurement 2011 strategies on local food and drink since 2009. Cusgarne The study measured the benefits of an organic box LM3: 2.59 Supermarket: 1.40 15 miles radius Boyde, 2001
v1 July 2015 38
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Case study Description Multiplier effect of Comparison with non- Definition of local Source local food production local food supplier and methodology used Organics (UK) scheme to sell locally-grown produce. Graig farm The study measured the benefits of meat production in LM3: 2.20 15 miles radius / New Economics organics (UK) an organic farm based in Wales. Most of the staff and ‘local shops’ as Foundation, many of suppliers of the farm are local. understood by 2002 interviewees (as compared to supermarkets) Cusgarne The study measured the benefits of an organic box LM3: 2.00 15 miles radius New Economics Organics (UK) scheme to sell locally-grown produce. Foundation, 2002 Fresh City, The study measured the local multiplier effects of the Fresh City - Small Conventional retail Region (Ontario) Arnold et al., Ontario Fresh City food box scheme, by using two theoretical supplier, LM3: 2.84 chain, LM3: 1.73 2013 case studies: one where food is provided by small farms Fresh City - Large and another where all suppliers are large farms. The supplier, LM3: 2.44 results are compared with the multiplier effects of food box schemes of large retailers.
v1 July 2015 39
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.5 Rapid evidence assessment – Annex 2 – Preliminary list of businesses providing a local food and drink offer Table A1.11 Businesses providing a local food and drink offer
Local food/drink Reason for inclusion Details Delivery of Development of Sources for tourism localised food & links with food & additional destination drink offerings in drink outlets to information rural tourism deliver localised destinations produce New Close Farm Identified by REA Family run farm shop, stocking own produce as well as County Durham and Farm Shop also working with local producers, breeders and Food Partnership, organic suppliers who sell via the farm shop. Produce 2014 includes local and organic fruit and vegetables, rare http://fooddurham.n breed meat, dairy products and free range slow grown et/wp- poultry. The Farm Shop has become a hub for the sale content/uploads/20 and marketing of locally produced and seasonal foods. 14/03/SLFS- 2014.pdf Dowfold House Identified by REA Award-winning B&B business (winner of sustainability County Durham B&B, Crook and tourism awards). Business supports local food and Food Partnership, local food businesses through their sourcing policies, 2014 and promotes their suppliers in a leaflet and on their http://fooddurham.n website. Some produce is also home grown. et/wp- content/uploads/20 14/03/SLFS- 2014.pdf Autumn apple Proposed by Promotes traditional apple orchards, through the http://www.bigapple festivals, such as ICF/emerged during celebration and sale of local apple varieties. Based .org.uk/ the Big Apple in discussion with Defra mostly around seasonal harvest times. Herefordshire County Store – Identified by REA County Store stocks a wide range of local foods http://www.cpre.org. SPAR – Ledbury including cider, beer, crisps, ice cream, pies, bread uk/resources/farmin and eggs, as well as strawberries, raspberries, salad g-and-food/local- bags and tomatoes in season. They also support other foods/item/2739- local food retailers through the sale of produce from from-field-to-fork- these businesses, including local butchers. ledbury Farm service Proposed by First family run motorway service station in the UK. http://www.tebayser
v1 July 2015 40
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Local food/drink Reason for inclusion Details Delivery of Development of Sources for tourism localised food & links with food & additional destination drink offerings in drink outlets to information rural tourism deliver localised destinations produce station in ICF/emerged during Serves home cooked locally sourced food. Business vices.com/ Cumbria discussion with Defra also owns hotel, visitor attraction and two farm shops selling local produce including a sustainable local meat offer with a 'nose to tail' approach to butchery. Farmers Markets Proposed by High profile, thriving farmers’ markets in rural tourist http://www.fresh-n- with multiple links ICF/emerged during destinations. Examples include Stow-on-the-Wold, local.co.uk/markets/ to producers and discussion with Defra Gloucester and Stroud. Stroud Farmers’ Market has stroud.php initiatives, e.g. won multiple awards, and is among the busiest and the high profile most popular markets in the UK. A huge selection of Stroud farmers' local produce is sold. market Gloucester farm Proposed by Sister business of Tebay Services, Cumbria – one of http://www.gloucest service station ICF/emerged during two family run motorway service stations in the UK. erservices.com/our- discussion with Defra Source a range of local produce for their café from story local suppliers in the region. Hawkshead Proposed by Hand brewed, traditional beer offer. Hawkshead is one http://www.hawkshe brewery in Lake ICF/emerged during of the most successful of the new wave of independent adbrewery.co.uk/ District discussion with Defra breweries, spearheading a revival in traditional British brewing. Local Food links Proposed by One of a number of community led initiatives around http://www.transitio projects such as ICF/emerged during the UK aiming to strengthen the links between local ntowntotnes.org/gro Transition Town discussion with Defra producers and outlets. Notable examples include ups/food- Totnes Transition Town Totnes which among its other group/food-link- activities has initiated the Totnes Food-Link project. project/ This brings together producers, retailers and restaurants, building trust and confidence between local food stakeholders. Other projects include ‘Grown in Totnes’ which attempts to set a standard for 'local', including food production, marketing and delivery. Ludlow food Proposed by Ludlow is one of the most popular local food http://www.foodfesti
v1 July 2015 41
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Local food/drink Reason for inclusion Details Delivery of Development of Sources for tourism localised food & links with food & additional destination drink offerings in drink outlets to information rural tourism deliver localised destinations produce festival ICF/emerged during destinations in the UK. Festival showcases more than val.co.uk/ discussion with Defra 180 top quality small independent food and drink producers from the England-Wales border country. It also features many other tourist and food related events including local food trails and tasting events. Northumberland Proposed by Developed as part of the Northern Lands programme http://www.visitnorth Food Trails ICF/emerged during to develop tourism in the North East’s protected umberland.com/eat/ discussion with Defra landscapes with the aim of attracting more visitors and food-trails increase tourist spending. Trails feature local restaurants, inns and cafés sourcing from producers in Northumberland.
v1 July 2015 42
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.6 Rapid evidence assessment – Annex 3 – Tourism locations with a local food and drink offer Table A1.12 Tourism locations identified through the REA with a local food and drink offer
Rural area Reason for inclusion Details Rural areas that Rural areas Sources for additional have a well- that are information developed offer developing their offer Cumbria Identified by REA Focus on food & drink, digital and creative, agri- https://www.gov.uk/gove business/forestry and adventure/country sports plus rnment/uploads/system/ support for social and women-led enterprises across an uploads/attachment_dat upland area. The Lake District is famous for specialities a/file/183286/regr-rural- such as Cumberland sausage, Kendal Mint Cake and growth-networks.pdf; Grasmere Gingerbread. The Lake district has been Sims, 2009 identified by VisitEngland as one of the top performing VisitEngland, 2013c destinations in terms of high tourist satisfaction. Yorkshire – Identified by REA Has been identified by VisitEngland as one of the top VisitEngland, 2013c Moors, Dales, performing English tourist destinations in terms of high Coast & York tourist satisfaction. Cotswolds Identified by REA Has been identified by VisitEngland as one of the top VisitEngland, 2013c performing English tourist destinations in terms of high tourist satisfaction. New Forest, Identified by REA Have been identified by VisitEngland as among the top VisitEngland, 2013c Bath, Isle of performing English tourist destinations in terms of high Wight & Torquay tourist satisfaction. Cornwall Identified by REA Cornwall is acknowledged as an area with a distinctive Everett and Aitchison, regional identity and geography. Cornwall is also heavily 2008 reliant on the tourism industry and has been identified by VisitEngland, 2013c VisitEngland as one of the top performing English tourist destinations in terms of high tourist satisfaction. Exmoor Identified by REA Part of a region well known for cream teas, cider and Sims, 2009 Cheddar cheese rooted in its distinctive landscape. Ledbury Identified by REA Relatively high numbers of outlets selling local produce, a http://www.cpre.org.uk/r large number of suppliers and good availability. For their esources/farming-and-
v1 July 2015 43
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Rural area Reason for inclusion Details Rural areas that Rural areas Sources for additional have a well- that are information developed offer developing their offer size, local food supports a relatively high number of jobs food/local- and turnover in and around these towns. foods/item/2897-from- field-to-fork Otley Identified by REA Relatively high numbers of outlets selling local produce, a http://www.cpre.org.uk/r large number of suppliers and good availability. For their esources/farming-and- size, local food supports a relatively high number of jobs food/local- and turnover in and around these towns. foods/item/2897-from- field-to-fork Penrith Identified by REA Relatively high numbers of outlets selling local produce, a http://www.cpre.org.uk/r large number of suppliers and good availability. For their esources/farming-and- size, local food supports a relatively high number of jobs food/local- and turnover in and around these towns. foods/item/2897-from- field-to-fork Totnes Identified by REA Relatively high numbers of outlets selling local produce, a http://www.cpre.org.uk/r large number of suppliers and good availability. For their esources/farming-and- size, local food supports a relatively high number of jobs food/local- and turnover in and around these towns. foods/item/2897-from- field-to-fork Melton Mowbray Proposed by Well-established food destination. Popularly known as the http://meltonmowbrayfoo ICF/emerged during UK’s Rural Capital of Food; home to one of the largest dfestival.co.uk/ discussion with Defra regional food festivals in the country. Padstow Proposed by Well-established food destination ICF/emerged during discussion with Defra Newquay Proposed by Developing food destination ICF/emerged during discussion with Defra Ilfracombe Proposed by Large range of local food outlets, in particular food service ICF/emerged during establishments with a distinctive local food offer. discussion with Defra
v1 July 2015 44
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Rural area Reason for inclusion Details Rural areas that Rural areas Sources for additional have a well- that are information developed offer developing their offer Haslemere and Identified by REA Haslemere is a small, affluent market town by the Surrey http://www.cpre.org.uk/r Grayshott Hills, bordering three counties. It provides an esources/farming-and- important base for tourists to the region, especially since food/local- the formal designation of the nearby South foods/item/2859-from- Downs National Park. The town and nearby Grayshott field-to-fork-haslemere have a relatively good number of outlets and a mix of traditional independent traders – including bakers, butchers, a greengrocer, delicatessen, health food shop, two farm shops and a monthly farmers’ market – which provide customers with a range of local foods, alongside large and small supermarkets. Nevertheless much scope remains to improve the local food offer further. Hexham Identified by REA Moderately strong local food system, though with some http://www.cpre.org.uk/r weakness as identified in CPRE report on local food in esources/farming-and- Hexham (compared to other locations studied). Range of food/local- independent retailers selling local food, though threat from foods/item/download/24 growing supermarket presence. 01
v1 July 2015 45
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.7 Rapid evidence assessment – Annex 4 – Working definitions of ‘local’ used in multiplier assessment studies
Study Working definition of local Northumberland County Council County level – local suppliers defined as those based within (NEF, 2005) the Northumberland County were assessed against ‘non-local’ suppliers outside the county. Cornwall Food Programme, operated by the County level – local suppliers defined as those based and Cornwall producing in Cornwall. Healthcare Community (Thatcher and Sharp, 2008) Lothian Primary Care Trust/Royal Edinburgh Not defined – local multiplier assessment was conducted on Hospital food services (NEF, 2005) one supplier. Local sourcing for school meals, Defined as suppliers producing / wholesalers sourcing within Nottinghamshire (NEF, 2011) 30 miles of Nottinghamshire schools. It is not clear from the study whether a 30 mile radius was taken independently for each school or generalised from a central reference point within the county. Local sourcing for school meals, Plymouth Defined as suppliers producing / wholesalers sourcing within (NEF, 2011) 30 miles of Plymouth. Cusgarne Organics (UK) (Boyde, 2001) Defined as being within a 15 mile radius of Cusgarne Farm. Graig farm organics (UK) (NEF, 2002) 15 miles radius/’local shops’ as understood by interviewees (as compared to supermarkets) Cusgarne Organics (UK) (NEF, 2002) Defined as being within a 15 mile radius of Cusgarne Farm. Fresh City, Ontario (Arnold et al., 2013) Defined as food grown and produced within the province of Ontario.
v1 July 2015 46
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A1.8 Rapid evidence assessment – Annex 5 – References ■ Abatekassa, G. and Peterson, H. C., 2011. Market Access for Local Food through the Conventional Food Supply Chain, http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/download/pdf/6429813.pdf. ■ Alonso, A.D. and O'Neill, M. 2010. Small hospitality enterprises and local produce: a case study, British Food Journal, Vol. 112 Iss: 11, pp.1175 – 1189. ■ Alonso, A.D. 2010. Farmers' relationship with hospitality businesses: a preliminary study, British Food Journal, Vol. 112 Iss: 11, pp.1163 – 1174. ■ AMIBA, 2012. Ten New Studies of the "Local Economic Premium", http://www.amiba.net/resources/studies-recommended-reading/local-premium. ■ Arnold, Dr. T., et al. 2013. Fresh City: Impacts of local food – Social, environmental, economic dimensions. Food system assessment report, Grey Bruce Centre for Agroecology, Ontario, November 2013, http://gbcae.com/GBCAEdownloads/FreshCityImpacts_Main.pdf. ■ Balázs, B. 2009. Comparative analysis of the context of AAFNs at the local, national and European level. FAAN Report, http://www.faanweb.eu/sites/faanweb.eu/files/FAAN_D3_Comparative_analysis_AAFNs.pdf. ■ Bird, A. 2011, Wine + food = record year: Event’s economic impact highest ever, analysis finds, Post and Courier, 21 October. http://www.crda.org/news/local_news/wine___food___record_year__event_s_economic_impact_h ighest_ever__analysis_finds-1582. ■ Blichfeldt, B. S. and Halkier, H., 2012. Mussels, Tourism and Community Development: A Case Study of Place Branding Through Food Festivals in Rural North Jutland, Denmark, http://www.marbio.sdu.dk/uploads/MarBioShell/Blichfeldt%20and%20Halkier%202013.%20Mussel s,%20Tourism%20and%20Community%20Development,%20A%20Case%20Study%20Of%20Bra nding%20Through%20Food%20Festivals%20in%20Rural%20North%20Jutland,%20Denmark.pdf. ■ Boyde, T. 2001. Cusgarne organics local money flows. http://www.i-r-e.org/docs/a001_cusgarne- organics-local-money-flows.pdf. ■ Boyne, S., Hall, D. & Williams, F. (2003). Policy, support and promotion for food-related tourism initiatives. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 14, 131-154. ■ Brighton & Hove Food Partnership, 2012. Spade to Spoon: Digging Deeper. A food strategy and action plan for Brighton & Hove, http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/sites/brighton- hove.gov.uk/files/downloads/sustainability/Final_2012_Spade_to_spoon_Food_Strategy_low_res. pdf. ■ Cabinet Office, 2011. The Magenta Book, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/220542/magenta_b ook_combined.pdf. ■ Cabinet Office, 2012. Quality in qualitative evaluation, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/190986/Magenta_B ook_quality_in_qualitative_evaluation__QQE_.pdf. ■ Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2009) Systematic Reviews CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care, CRD, University of York, January 2009. ■ Chang Mazza, G. M.-A., 2013. Gastronomic Tourism: Implications for Singapore, http://laudergastronomy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Gastronomic-Tourism-Implications-for- Singapore_Grace-Chang-Mazza.pdf. ■ Civil Service, n.d. Rapid Evidence Assessment toolkit, http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/networks/gsr/resources-and-guidance/rapid-evidence- assessment/how-to-do-a-rea.
v1 July 2015 47
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ County Durham Food Partnership, 2014. 2014 – 2020 Sustainable Local Food Strategy, http://fooddurham.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/SLFS-2014.pdf. ■ CPRE, 2012a. From field to fork: Ledbury, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2739-from-field-to-fork- ledbury. ■ CPRE, 2012b. From field to fork: The value of England’s local food webs, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2897-from-field-to-fork. ■ Day-Farnsworth, L. et al., 2009. Scaling Up: Meeting the Demand for Local Food, http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5091489. ■ Defra, 2011. September 2011 Statistical Feature Report ‐Tourism https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/86109/Tourism_Fea ture_Report_Sep11.pdf. ■ Defra, 2012. Rural Economy Growth Review, Rural Tourism Package – Main points, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/183287/regr- tourism-mainpoints.pdf. ■ Deloitte and Oxford Economics, 2013. Tourism: jobs and growth. The economic contribution of the tourism economy in the UK, http://www.visitbritain.org/Images/Final%20proof%2015%20Nov_tcm29-39296.pdf. ■ Deloitte, 2008. The economic case for the Visitor Economy, http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom- UnitedKingdom/Local%20Assets/Documents/UK_THL_VisitorEconomy_Sept08.pdf. ■ Dougherty, M. L, Brown, L. E. and Green, G. P., 2013. The social architecture of local food tourism: challenges and opportunities for community economic development, http://www.ag.auburn.edu/auxiliary/srsa/pages/Articles/JRSS%202013%2028%202%201-27.pdf. ■ Enteleca Research and Consultancy. (2001). Tourist attitudes towards regional and local food. Richmond upon Thames, Enteleca Research and Consultancy. ■ Eriksen, S. N., 2014. Meanings of Local Food in Danish Print Media: From Marginal to Mainstream, http://www.ijsaf.org/archive/21/2/eriksen.pdf. ■ Everett, S. and Aitchison, C., 2008. The Role of Food Tourism in Sustaining Regional Identity: A Case Study of Cornwall, South West England, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2167/jost696.0#.VGJEujSsXTo. ■ Everett, S. and Slocum, S.L. (2013). Food and Tourism, an Effective Partnership? A UK based review. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp. 789-809. ■ FAAN, 2010. Local food systems in Europe. Case studies from five countries and what they imply for policy and practice, http://www.faanweb.eu/sites/faanweb.eu/files/FAAN_Booklet_PRINT.pdf. ■ Foundation for Local Food Initiatives, 2002. FLAIR. The Local Food Sector. Its size and potential. http://localfood.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/flair-report-Apr-02.pdf. ■ FSA, 2012. Guidance for local authority authorised officers on the approval of establishments, http://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/multimedia/pdfs/enforcement/approvalsguidance.pdf. ■ Groves, A. 2005. The Local and Regional Food Opportunity. March 2005, http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/food/industry/regional/pdf/localregfoodopps.pdf. ■ Halkier, H. 2012. Local Food for International Tourists, http://vbn.aau.dk/files/71041596/fremtidensferiehus_delrapport_3.pdf. ■ Hall, M. 2005. Rural wine and food tourism cluster and network development. Chapter 9, Rural Tourism and Sustainable Business. ■ Hall, M.C. and Sharples, L. (Eds.) 2008. Food and Wine Festivals and Events Around the World: Development, Management and Markets. Elsevier Ltd.
v1 July 2015 48
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
file:///C:/Users/30267/Downloads/__Food_and_Wine_Festivals_and_Events_Around_the_World__ Development__management_and_markets%20(1).pdf. ■ Haven-Tang, C. (2005). Using Local Food and Drink to Differentiate Tourism Destinations Through a Sense of Place: A Story from Wales-Dining at Monmouthshire's Great Table. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 4 (4), 69-86. ■ Haven‐Tang, C. and Jones, E. 2012. Local leadership for rural tourism development: A case study of Adventa, Monmouthshire, UK. ■ Hjalager, A.-M. and Johansen, P. H. Food tourism in protected areas – sustainability for producers, the environment and tourism? http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09669582.2012.708041#.VGpB5TSsXTo. ■ Irshad, H. 2010. Local Food – A Rural Opportunity, http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$Department/deptdocs.nsf/ba3468a2a8681f69872569d60073fde1/59 3337cbd907813a8725782c0058ae97/$FILE/Local-Food-A-Rural-Opp.pdf. ■ Joubert, E., 2012 The economic impact of the Wacky Wine Festival, http://dspace.nwu.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10394/7598/Joubert_E.pdf?sequence=2. ■ JRC, 2013. Short Food Supply Chains and Local Food Systems in the EU. A State of Play of their Socio-Economic Characteristics, http://agrilife.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/SFSChainFinaleditedreport_000.pdf. ■ Little, R., Maye, D. and Ilbery, B., 2010. Collective purchase: moving local and organic foods beyond the niche market, http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/download/pdf/6332344.pdf. ■ Lobley, M. et al, 2009. Analysis of socio-economic aspects of local and national organic farming markets, Centre for Rural Policy Research, University of Exeter, http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/90374/2/CRPR29.pdf. ■ Mason, M. and Paggiaro, A. (2012) Investigating the role of festivalscape in culinary tourism: The case of food and wine events Tourism management 33.6 (2012) 1329-1336. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.12.016. ■ Marine Environmental Research. 2013. Understanding the Market and Supply Chain for Fish Caught and Landed in Northern Devon. http://mediafiles.thedms.co.uk/Publication/CW- NDevT/cms/pdf/ND%20Fish%20- %20Understanding%20the%20Local%20Market%20%26%20Supply%20Chain%20(2013).pdf. ■ Marsden, T., Banks, J. and Bristow, G., 2002. Food Supply Chain Approaches:Exploring their Role in Rural Development. Sociologia Ruralis. Volume 40, Issue 4. ■ N.A. Melton Mowbray Events Review. 2013. file:///C:/Users/30267/Downloads/ITEM_6__HR__Events_Review_App_1.pdf. ■ North Devon. N.d. Northern Devon FLAG's 'Seafood & Festivals' Project. http://www.northdevonplus.com/what-we-do/seafood-festivals-support-fund.aspx. ■ New Economics Foundation, 2002. The Money Trail. Measuring your impact on the local economy using LM3, http://b.3cdn.net/nefoundation/7c0985cd522f66fb75_o0m6boezu.pdf. ■ New Economics Foundation, 2005. Public spending for public benefit. http://b.3cdn.net/nefoundation/bafccecadede5da071_okm6b68y1.pdf. ■ New Economics Foundation, 2011. The benefits of procuring school meals through the Food for Life Partnership, http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/entry/the-benefits-of-procuring-school- meals-through-the-food-for-life-partnershi. ■ OECD, 2013. Food and the tourism experience http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/industry-and- services/food-and-the-tourism-experience_9789264171923-en.
v1 July 2015 49
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ ONS, 2009. UK Standard Industrial Classification 2007 (SIC 2007), http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/classifications/current-standard-classifications/standard- industrial-classification/index.html. ■ ONS, 2013. The Rural – Urban Classification for England, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/248666/Rural- Urban_Classification_leaflet__Sept_2013_.pdf. ■ Organ, K., Koenig-Lewis, N., Palmer, A., Probert, J. (2015). Festivals as agents for behaviour change: A study of food festival engagement and subsequent food choices. Tourism Management, Volume 48. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2014.10.021. ■ Pirog, R. and O’Hara, J.K. (2013). Economic Analysis of Local and Regional Food Systems: Taking Stock and Looking ahead. Michigan State University Centre for Regional Food Systems. http://foodsystems.msu.edu/uploads/files/econ-analysis-brief.pdf. ■ Scott Wilson, 2009. East Riding Tourism Accommodation Study. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations, http://www.eastriding.gov.uk/corp- docs/forwardplanning/docs/tourism/ERTourismStudy.pdf. ■ SERI and Ecosgen (2014). South Hams Area Profile Produced for Devon County Council. http://www.devonomics.info/sites/default/files/documents/South%20Hams%20Area%20Profile.pdf. ■ Sharples, Ann Elizabeth. 2003. Cider and the Marketing of the Tourism Experience in Somerset, England: Three Case Studies. In Wine, Food, and Tourism Marketing, Hall, M. file:///C:/Users/30267/Downloads/Wine,%20Food%20&%20Tourism%20Marketing.pdf. ■ Sherwood, N., 2013. Herefordshire Economic Evaluation. Opportunities to grow our local food economy, http://www.reconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Herefordshire-Economic- Evaluation-TEEconomy-Food-report.pdf. ■ Sims, R. 2009. Food, place and authenticity: local food and the sustainable tourism experience.
■ Skuras D., Dimara E. and Petrou A (2006) Rural tourism and visitors' expenditures for local food products,Regional Studies 40, 769–779. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00343400600660771#.VI2KhyusVpt. ■ Soil Association, n.d. Local Food Routes. A summary report of Food futures, http://www.soilassociation.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=oIO9YbFBqpo%3D&tabid. ■ Steinmetz, R., 2010. Food, Tourism and Destination Differentiation: The Case of Rotorua, New Zealand, http://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10292/1090/SteinmetzR.pdf?sequence=3. ■ Tate, H. 2014. Taste Cumbria Food Festival 2013: Evaluation http://www.cockermouthbusiness.org/sites/default/files/documents/taste_cumbria_festival_evaluati on_2013.pdf. ■ Tellstrom, Gustafsson, I., Mossberg, L. (2005). Local food cultures in the Swedish rural economy Sociologia Ruralis, 45 (4), pp. 346–359. ■ Thatcher, J. and Sharp, L. 2008. Measuring the local economic impact of National Health Service procurement in the UK: an evaluation of the Cornwall Food Programme and LM3. ■ The Isle of Anglesey County Council and the Tourism Comppany. 2013. Anglesey Food Tourism Strategy and Action Plan. http://www.anglesey.gov.uk/Journals/2014/10/09/a/l/x/Anglesey-Food- Tourism-Strategy-and-Action-Plan.pdf. ■ Thomas, Ian (2012). The economic impact of tourism in Northumberland in 2011. Newcastle Gateshead Initiative. file:///C:/Users/30267/Downloads/Northumberland%20Steam%20report%202011%20(1).pdf.
v1 July 2015 50
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ TXP, Inc. 2013 The Economic Impact of Austin’s Food Sector. http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Redevelopment/Economic_Development/TXP_A ustin_Food_Sector_Report_03282013_FINALv1.pdf.
■ Pinchot, Ariel. 2014. The Economics of Local Food Systems: A Literature Review of the Production, Distribution and Consumption of Local Food Systems. University of Minnesota. http://www.extension.umn.edu/community/research/docs/2014-Economics-of-Local-Food- Systems.pdf. ■ The Plunkett Foundation, 2014a Co-operative pubs 2014. A better form of business, http://www.plunkett.co.uk/resources/publications.cfm. ■ The Plunkett Foundation, 2014b. Community shops 2014. A better form of business, http://www.plunkett.co.uk/resources/publications.cfm. ■ UN, 2010. International Recommendations for Tourism Statistics 2008, http://unstats.un.org/unsd/publication/Seriesm/SeriesM_83rev1e.pdf. ■ UNWTO, n.d. Understanding Tourism: Basic Glossary, http://media.unwto.org/en/content/understanding-tourism-basic-glossary ■ University of Plymouth, 2008. Understanding of Consumer Attitudes and Actual Purchasing Behaviour, with Reference to Local and Regional Foods, http://www.serio.ac.uk/resources/files/Understanding%20of%20Consumer%20Attitudes%20and% 20Actual%20Purchasing%20Behaviour.pdf. ■ Visit County Durham, n.d. Taste Durham fact sheet, http://www.vcd-marketing.co.uk/forms/taste- durham-fact-sheet.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2008. Determining the Local Economic Impact of Tourism, http://www.visitengland.org/england-tourism- industry/DestinationManagerToolkit/destinationmonitoring/3CDeterminingtheLocalEconomicImpact ofTourism.aspx?title=3C:%20Determining%20the%20Local%20Economic%20Impact%20of%20T ourism. ■ VisitEngland, 2010. Sustainability – Consumer Research. Summary of Findings, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Sustainabilty%20consumer%20research%20- %20March%202010_Layout%201_tcm30-19334.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2013a. England’s Countryside: What are the opportunities?, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Country%20report_FINAL_v2_without%20summary_tcm30- 39462.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2013b. Local food & produce. Domestic Trip Tracker Additional Food Questions – August 2013. http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Domestic%20Trip%20Tracker%20Additional%20Food%20Que stions%20-%20August%202013_tcm30-38546.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2013c. The GB Tourist. Statistics 2013. http://www.visitengland.org/Images/GB%20Tourist%202013_240914_tcm30-42628.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2013d. Understanding Visitor Satisfaction 2012-13, Debrief by TNS at VisitEngland 28th August 2013, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/VE%20Visitor%20Satisfaction%20Deep%20Dive%202012- 13%20FV_V2_tcm30-38999.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2014a. Great Britain Tourism Survey June 2014 Update, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/05-14-June_2014_Summary_Sheet%20VE_tcm30-42606.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2014b. The GB Day Visitor Statistics 2013, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/GBDVS%20Annual%20Report%202013_Redesigned%20versi on%20v1%2016%2009%2014_tcm30-42547.pdf.
v1 July 2015 51
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ VisitEngland, n.d. England Domestic Overnight Holidays Summary – 2013, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/England%20Holidays%202013_REV_tcm30-42817.pdf. ■ Visser, J., Trienekens, J. and van Beek, P., 2013. Opportunities for local for local food production: a case in the Dutch fruit and vegetables, http://centmapress.ilb.uni- bonn.de/ojs/index.php/fsd/article/viewArticle/295. ■ Ward, F. 2012. Totnes & District Economic Blueprint - Food - detail section, final version, http://www.transitiontowntotnes.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/TD-Economic-Blueprint-Food- detail-section-final-version1.pdf. ■ Ward, F., Tompt, J. and Northrop, F. 2013. Totnes & District Local Economic Blueprint, file:///C:/Users/30214/Downloads/TD-Local-Economic-Blueprint-final_high_res.pdf. ■ Watts D., Leat P., Revoredo-Giha, C. Local Food Activity in Scotland: Empirical Evidence and Research Agenda. 2011. Regional Studies Volume 45, Issue 9. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00343400903380416#.VIscrTGsVps. ■ Webber, D., Curry, N., Plumridge, A. (2009) Business Productivity and Area Productivity in Rural England, Regional Studies, 43:5, 661-675, DOI: 10.1080/00343400701874156. ■ Welsh Assembly Government, 2009. Local Sourcing Action Plan. ‘Food and Drink for Wales’, http://wales.gov.uk/docs/drah/publications/090601localsourcingactionplanen.pdf. ■ Welsh Assembly Government, 2010. Food for Wales, Food from Wales 2010 | 2020, Food Strategy for Wales, http://www.physicalactivityandnutritionwales.org.uk/documents/740/Food%20Strategy%202010- 2020-eng.pdf. ■ Welsh Government – FMDD, 2011. Monitoring and Evaluation of Food Festivals. Supported by the Welsh Assembly Government, http://wales.gov.uk/docs/drah/publications/110719millerresearchevaluationoffoodfestivalsen.pdf.
v1 July 2015 52
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Annex 2 State of the market report
A2.1 Introduction The aim of this report is to assess the state of the market for local food and drink and its linkages to tourism activity in rural areas of England. More specifically, it aims to cover the following: ■ The extent of local food and drink related tourism activity in England, including quantification of the overall scale and value of national food and tourism economies in terms of business numbers, employment, turnover, purchases and GVA. Where possible, the analysis has also been presented for rural areas. ■ A review of the number of visitors, visits and expenditures associated with the consumption of food and drink in rural areas. ■ Analysis of the potential scale and impact of local food and drink economies within the tourism sector. ■ A comparative analysis of the economic outcomes for two destinations: one with a more developed local food and drink offer, and one with a less-developed offer. The ultimate aim is to try to estimate the scale and value of local food and drink-related tourism activity in rural areas of England. The Venn diagram in Figure A2.1 shows the different aspects of the food and tourism sectors (i.e. local and non-local food and rural and urban tourism), and highlights the segment of the market that was targeted and assessed in this report. Figure A2.1 Estimating local food-related tourism activity in rural areas.
There is a lack of data relating to local food and drink and the purchases made during visits to rural destinations in England. However, this report has used available data and statistics to produce estimates of the overall food and tourism sectors in England, before estimating the extent to which activities and expenditures in these sectors occur in rural economies and relate to local food and drink. The remainder of this report is structured as follows: ■ Section A2.2 provides supply-side estimates of local food and drink activities and the wider food chain; ■ Section A2.3 provides estimates of relevant tourism expenditures including those associated with purchases of local food and drink; ■ Section A2.4 presents a comparative analysis of two rural destinations: one with a more developed local food offer and one with a less-developed offer; and ■ Section A2.5 presents the conclusions of the report.
v1 July 2015 53
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.2 Food and drink The local food and drink sector is a relatively small sub-sector within the wider food chain (i.e. the total food and drink industry). In order to assess the extent of local food and drink activities in England, it is important to begin with an understanding of the overall scale and value of the wider food chain. This section aims to quantify the overall scale and value of the wider food chain, both nationally and focusing on rural areas, before exploring the likely scale of local food and drink activities.
A2.2.1 Defining the food chain The food chain is difficult to define in terms of standard industrial classification (SIC 2007) codes because it spans a number of different sectors including agriculture, manufacturing, wholesale, retail and food service. The broad SIC codes also tend to include the manufacture, wholesale and retail of food and drink alongside other products, and particularly tobacco. It is possible to separate most of these activities using more disaggregated SIC codes, but this depends on the availability of data at different geographical levels. There are a number of existing definitions of the food chain. For example, Defra defines the food sector22 as comprising: ■ Food manufacturing activities: – SIC 10: Manufacture of food products – SIC 11: Manufacture of beverages ■ Food wholesale activities: – SIC 46.17: Agents involved in the sale of food, beverages and tobacco – SIC 46.3: Wholesale of food, beverages and tobacco ○ Excl. SIC 46.35: Wholesale of tobacco ■ Food retailing activities: – SIC 47.11: Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating – SIC 47.2: Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco ○ Excl. SIC 47.26: Retail sale of tobacco products – SIC 47.81: Retail sale via stalls and markets of food, beverages and tobacco products ■ Non-residential catering activities: – SIC 56: Food and beverage service activities Defra also provides a definition of the wider ‘agri-food’ sector, which comprises the above sectors in addition to: ■ Agriculture activities: – SIC 01: Agriculture ■ Fishing and aquaculture activities: – SIC 03: Fishing and aquaculture Other sources have included additional manufacturing, wholesale and retail activities in definitions of the food chain. For example, a report produced for the South West Food & Drink organisation23 also included the following activities: ■ SIC 28.93: Manufacture of machinery for food, beverage and tobacco processing;
22 Defra, 2014. Food Statistics Pocketbook 2014 23 South West Food & Drink, 2011. SW Food & Drink Sectors
v1 July 2015 54
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ SIC 46.11: Agents involved in the sale of agricultural raw materials, live animals, textile raw materials and semi-finished goods; and ■ SIC 46.2: Wholesale of agricultural raw materials and live animals. Other sectors, such as ‘SIC 52.1: warehousing and storage’, ‘SIC 55: accommodation’ and ‘Section R: Arts, Entertainment and Recreation’ are also closely associated with the food chain, although it is not possible to use SIC codes to establish how much of the activity in these sectors can be attributed to food and drink. A2.2.1.1 Proposed definition The above definitions include some activities that are not directly related to the food chain. This study has therefore defined the food chain as comprising the following sectors: ■ SIC 01: Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities – Excl. SIC 01.15: Growing of tobacco; – Excl. SIC 01.16: Growing of fibre crops – Excl. SIC 01.3: Plant propagation – Excl. SIC 01.43: Raising of horses and other equines ■ SIC 03: Fishing and aquaculture ■ SIC 10: Manufacture of food products – Excl. SIC 10.9: Manufacture of prepared animal feeds ■ SIC 11: Manufacture of beverages ■ SIC 28.93: Manufacture of machinery for food, beverage and tobacco processing ■ SIC 46.11 Agents involved in the sale of agricultural raw materials, live animals, textile raw materials and semi-finished goods ■ SIC 46.17: Agents involved in the sale of food, beverages and tobacco ■ SIC 46.21: Wholesale of grain, unmanufactured tobacco, seeds and animal feeds ■ SIC 46.23: Wholesale of live animals ■ SIC 46.3: Wholesale of food, beverages and tobacco – Excl. SIC 46.35: Wholesale of tobacco products ■ SIC 47.11 Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating ■ SIC 47.2: Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores – Excl. SIC 47.26: Retail sale of tobacco products in specialised stores ■ SIC 47.81: Retail sale via stalls and markets of food, beverages and tobacco products ■ SIC 56: Food and beverage service activities
A2.2.2 Estimating the scale and value of the national food chain A2.2.2.1 The UK food chain The definition provided in section A2.2.1.1 has been used to estimate the overall scale and value of the UK food chain. The analysis has used published statistics including: ■ Annual Business Survey (ABS) data relating to turnover, GVA, purchases of goods and services, employment and wages; ■ Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR) data relating to numbers of business enterprises at a national level and data relating to turnover, employment and business enterprises at a local level; ■ Business Register and Employment Survey (BRES) data relating to employment in Great Britain;
v1 July 2015 55
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Northern Ireland Census of Employment data relating to employment in Northern Ireland; ■ HMRC data (accessed via uktradeinfo) relating to imports and exports; ■ ONS Consumer Trends data relating to consumer expenditure; ■ ONS mid-year population estimates; and ■ Defra data relating to the agriculture sector24 25, which is not fully covered by the other sources. The results of the analysis are presented in Figure A2.2 below, which shows the structure of the UK food chain and the scale and value of the individual components. The activities in the UK food chain are estimated to have directly contributed £103 billion to the UK economy in 2013, directly supporting 3.9 million jobs in 421,000 businesses and paying £53 billion in wages. The sector therefore accounted for approximately 7% of national gross value added (GVA) and 13% of employment in the UK in 2013. Table A2.1 UK food chain, 2013
UK food chain 2009 2013 Growth (2009-13) Enterprises 418,000 421,000 1% GVA £86bn (2009 prices) / £103bn Nominal growth = 20% £94bn (2013 prices) Real growth = 10% Employment 3,890,000 3,920,000 1% Wages £49bn (2009 prices) / £53bn Nominal growth = 9% £53bn (2013 prices) Real growth = 0% The UK food chain has been growing over time. Employment in the industry has increased slightly since 2009, although overall UK employment has grown at a faster rate (increasing by around 3% since 2009). The number of enterprises in the industry has also increased and has grown at a similar rate to the total UK economy. GVA in the UK food chain has been growing more rapidly, suggesting considerable increases in productivity since 2009. GVA growth in the industry has been much stronger than for the UK economy as a whole, having increased by 20% since 2009 in nominal terms, compared to 13% for the total UK economy.
24 Defra, 2014. Agriculture in the UK 2013 25 Defra, 2014. Structure of the agricultural industry in England and the UK
v1 July 2015 56
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Figure A2.2 UK food chain
A2.2.2.2 The food chain in England Since the focus for this study is England, the industrial analysis has been extended to provide estimates of food and drink activities in England. These are presented in Figure A2.3. The figures are based on BRES and IDBR data for England to estimate employment and numbers of enterprises in each sub-sector in England (plus Defra data for agricultural activities). Regional ABS data is available for 2-digit SIC sectors and has been used, where possible, to provide estimates of turnover, GVA, purchases and wages (such as for the food and drink manufacturing and food service activities). For the more disaggregated sectors (such as the food-related wholesale and retail sub-sectors), metrics have been calculated from the UK data and applied to the data for employment in England for
v1 July 2015 57
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
those specific sub-sectors. For example, turnover and GVA per UK employee has been calculated from the UK data and applied to the number of employees in England. Figure A2.3 Food chain in England, 2013
The results of the analysis suggest that the food chain in England is estimated to have directly contributed £82 billion to the national economy in 2013, directly supporting 3.2 million jobs in 269,000 businesses and paying £42 billion in wages.
v1 July 2015 58
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Table A2.2 England food chain, 2009 and 2013
England food chain 2009 2013 Growth (2009-13) Enterprises 273,000 269,000 -1% GVA £72bn (2009 prices) / £82bn Nominal growth = 14% £78bn (2013 prices) Real growth = 5% Employment 3,150,000 3,170,000 1% Wages £39bn (2009 prices) / £42bn Nominal growth = 6% £43bn (2013 prices) Real growth = -2% The food chain has also been growing over time in England, albeit at a slower rate than the whole of the UK. The data in Table A2.2 suggest that employment in food and drink activities in England has increased in line with the UK, but the other indicators are slightly weaker for England. The number of enterprises has fallen by 1% in England since 2009, while the growth in GVA has been slightly lower than for the UK. Wages for food and drink employees in England have increased in nominal terms over the period, although real wages have fallen slightly. A2.2.2.3 Data issues There is comprehensive data available for all economic indicators at the UK level and the above estimates are considered robust for the UK. The availability of data is slightly more complicated for England. The estimates of food and drink enterprises and employment are based on BRES and IDBR data. The value estimates (i.e. estimates of turnover, GVA, purchases and wages) are based on data from the regional ABS outputs for sub- sectors that can be defined by 2-digit SIC codes (i.e. agriculture and fishing and food and drink service sectors). However, the value estimates for the other sub-sectors, which are defined using more disaggregated SIC codes, have had to be estimated using metrics of turnover, GVA, etc. per employee for the UK, which have been applied to employment data for England. This approach is still considered likely to provide accurate estimates for England but is slightly less robust than the UK data. The other issue with all of the supply-side estimates is that SIC codes are unable to provide a complete and accurate coverage of all food and drink activities. Figure A2.2 and Figure A2.3, respectively, highlight key differences between the estimates of consumer expenditure on food and drink purchased through retailers and expenditures on eating and drinking out at restaurants, cafés, pubs, etc. and the equivalent estimates of turnover for these sectors. In each case: ■ consumer expenditure on eating and drinking out is significantly larger than the turnover of the food service sector; and ■ consumer expenditure on food and drink purchased through retailers is significantly lower than the turnover of the food retail sector. These issues arise because the food service sector, defined in terms of SIC codes, excludes the activities of businesses for which food and drink services are not their primary activity. For example, the food service sector will exclude the activities of hotel restaurants, cafés operated by theatres, swimming pools, other sports centres, etc. The sector therefore underestimates the true scale of food and drink service activities because a proportion will be captured under other SIC codes such as ‘SIC 55: accommodation’ and those in ‘Section R: Arts, Entertainment and Recreation’. In contrast, the turnover of the food retail sector is higher than the equivalent estimate of consumer expenditure because the sub-sectors, particularly ‘SIC 47.11: Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating’, will include ‘non-food’ sales and activities of retailers such as supermarkets that also sell electronic goods, clothing, etc. There is insufficient data available to be able to include robust estimates of the ‘food and drink’ activities of other ‘non-food’ businesses or to exclude the ‘non-food’ activities of retailers that
v1 July 2015 59
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
predominantly focus on food and drink. The data presented in the above analysis are therefore considered the best available estimates of the food chain. Since one of these issues results in an over-estimate and the other causes an underestimate of food and drink activities, these issues will cancel themselves out to some extent. However, it is important to highlight the fact that the estimates for the food service sector are likely to underestimate food and drink related activities, while the estimates for food retail are likely to overestimate food and drink related activities. These issues will be addressed by comparing the supply-side data with the relevant tourism data relating to tourism expenditures.
A2.2.3 The food chain in rural areas In order to explore the linkages between local food and drink and rural tourism in England, it is important to understand the scale of food and drink activities in rural areas. This is difficult as there is a lack of data relating to economic activities in urban and rural areas. It has therefore been necessary to collate economic data at the most disaggregated level available and then aggregate these to match the latest ONS definitions of rural areas in England. A2.2.3.1 Rural areas The ONS adopts a settlement-based approach to defining rural areas in England and Wales. Settlements with a population of more than 10,000 are classified as ‘urban’. All other areas, comprising ‘towns and fringes’, ‘villages’ and ‘hamlets and isolated dwellings’, are classified as ‘rural’. Each type of settlement is also classified as being ‘sparse’ or ‘less sparse’, depending on the density of dwellings in each area. The ONS also provides toolkits for converting different geographies (including super output areas, wards and local authorities) into urban and rural areas. These conversion toolkits are most accurate for more localised geographical areas such as super output areas (SOAs). For larger geographies, such as local authorities, the toolkit has categorised each area as being predominantly urban or rural, although it should be noted that some ‘rural’ local authorities will include settlements with populations in excess of 10,000 and some ‘urban’ local authorities will also include rural areas. To help overcome this issue, the most recent rural-urban classification of local authorities in England not only classifies each local authority to a rural-urban category (i.e. mainly rural, largely rural, urban with significant rural, urban with city and town, urban with minor conurbation or urban with major conurbation), but also estimates the share of the local population that is classified as ‘rural’26. A2.2.3.2 Food retail and food service sectors in rural areas Visitors to rural areas purchase and consume food and drink through local shops and markets and food service establishments including local restaurants, cafés and pubs. The supply chains for these food and drink retailers and food service outlets are likely to include food and drink wholesalers, manufacturers and producers based in a variety of urban and rural locations both within and beyond the local area. Purchases of food and drink in rural areas will therefore benefit suppliers in urban and rural locations. This analysis therefore focuses on estimating the scale and value of food and drink retailers and food service outlets located in rural areas of England. The impacts for suppliers will be considered later and estimated using economic multipliers. The IDBR is the most useful and adaptable source of economic data as it provides sectoral data for the number of enterprises, turnover and employment across a range of geographical areas including local authorities, wards and SOAs. It has therefore been possible to use IDBR data for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) and convert these into urban and rural areas to provide an assessment of enterprises, turnover and employment in relevant sectors in rural areas. The other economic indicators (i.e. GVA, purchases from suppliers and wages) have been estimated by applying metrics calculated from the England data to estimate activities in rural areas. It has
26 For more information on the ‘2011 Rural-Urban Classification of Local Authority Districts and other higher level geographies’ please see https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/2011-rural-urban-classification-of-local- authority-and-other-higher-level-geographies-for-statistical-purposes (accessed July 2015)
v1 July 2015 60
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
therefore been necessary to assume that GVA, purchases and wages account for the same proportion of turnover in urban and rural areas of England. The resulting estimates are provided in Table A2.3. This shows that there are estimated to be more than 31,000 enterprises delivering food retail and food service activities through 37,000 outlets in rural areas of England. These outlets are estimated to generate gross sales of around £22 billion and directly contribute £6.8 billion of added value to the rural England economy and support the employment of 350,000 people in rural areas. These figures will comprise sales to local residents as well as visitors. Section 0 assesses the contribution of tourism expenditures to these sales of food and drink in rural locations. Table A2.3 Food and drink retail and catering activities in rural locations in England, 2013
Food and drink Food service outlets retailers (restaurants, cafés, pubs, etc.) Enterprises 8,000 23,100 Local outlets 10,200 26,500 Turnover £13.1bn £8.9bn GVA £2.4bn £4.4bn Purchases £10.7bn £4.6bn Employment 117,000 233,000 Wages £1.4bn £2.4bn Source: ONS, 2015, based on ICF analysis of IDBR data accessed via the ONS Virtual Microdata Laboratory (VML) Business Structure Database (BSD) A2.2.3.3 Consumer expenditure in rural areas This section analyses consumer expenditure estimates of residents living in rural areas. The ONS living costs and food survey27 suggests that average expenditures on food and drink are significantly higher for people living in rural areas. The data estimates indicate that the average person living in rural England spent £47.79 per week on food and drink products in 2013, compared to a much lower average of £40.60 per week in urban areas. In both types of area, 71% was spent on supplies for the home and 29% was spent on products for consumption outside the home. Extrapolating these estimates across the wider rural and urban populations28 suggests that while residents of rural areas account for 17% of the total population of England, their expenditures on food and drink account for 19.8% of the national total. This includes 19.9% of expenditure on food and drink supplies for the home and 19.5% of expenditure on food and drink consumed outside the home. Applying these figures to the national consumer expenditure estimates suggests that in 2013 people living in rural areas spent £32.6 billion on food and drink, comprising: ■ £18.8 billion on food and drink supplies for the home; and ■ £13.7 billion on food and drink consumed outside the home. These estimates are significantly higher than those based on supply-side estimates. This is primarily because the estimates are based on the home location of the consumer, rather than the location of the expenditure and some of the expenditures of residents of rural England will take place in shops and food service outlets in urban areas. However, both sets of estimates suggest a similar proportion of food and drink expenditure is spent in retailers (approximately 60%) and in food service outlets (around 40%) as shown in Table A2.4 below.
27 ONS, 2014. Living costs and food survey - Expenditure on household and eating out food & drink by urban or rural location 28 Based on the population estimates of 9.3 million in rural areas and 43.7 million in urban areas of England. Defra, 2014. Statistical Digest of Rural England 2014
v1 July 2015 61
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Table A2.4 Estimates of food and drink sales and consumer expenditure in rural areas, 2013
Supply-side estimates Expenditures of consumers living in rural areas £ % £ % Food and drink retail £13.1bn 60% £18.8bn 58% Eating and drinking out £8.9bn 40% £13.7bn 42% Total food and drink expenditure / sales £22.0bn 100% £32.6bn 100% A2.2.3.4 Data issues The estimates for food and drink retailers and food service outlets in rural areas of England were produced from the raw IDBR data, and provide the best possible estimates of business numbers, turnover and employment in rural areas. However, the IDBR does not provide data relating to GVA, purchases and wages, so it has been necessary to apply national metrics to produce these estimates. The estimates of GVA, purchases and wages therefore do not take account of any differences between rural businesses and businesses in urban areas.
A2.2.4 Estimating local food and drink sales A2.2.4.1 Published statistics This section presents data relating to the local food and drink sector. Unfortunately SIC codes do not provide an appropriate means of differentiating local food and drink activities from wider food and drink activities. Section A2.6 provides a full list of the SIC codes included in the definition of the wider food chain. Some of these sectors are more likely to be closely associated with local food and drink than others. The sectors most likely to have strong links to local food and drink are: ■ Farming of animals, fruits and vegetables; ■ Fishing activities; ■ Manufacture of lightly processed food and drink such as meat, vegetables and dairy products, baked products, fruit juices and alcoholic beverages; ■ Retail of food and drink through specialised stores such as butchers, bakers, fishmongers, etc; and ■ Retail sale of food and drink via stalls and markets. However, even these sectors will include activities that are unrelated to local food and drink. For example, the outputs of the farming, fisheries and food processing sectors may be sold to national or international markets, while local retail outlets are likely to combine food produced locally with produce imported from further afield. Alternative approaches have also been considered, such as taking account of the size of enterprises in these sectors (based on an assumption that local food and drink activities are more likely to be undertaken by smaller businesses) but there do not appear to be any robust approaches to estimating local food and drink from the published statistics. A2.2.4.2 Other research Some estimates of local food and drink sales have been produced by existing research studies and surveys. For example, Mintel estimated the UK retail market for locally sourced food to total £4.8 billion in 200829 based on sales from farm shops, farmers’ markets, specialised retailers and supermarkets. A more recent report from Mintel is reported to estimate that UK retail sales of locally- sourced food have since increased to £5.7 billion and are expected to continue to increase rapidly
29 Mintel, 2008. Locally Sourced Foods – UK
v1 July 2015 62
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
over the next few years30. These are useful estimates of retail sales of local produce but exclude sales of local food and drink through food service outlets such as restaurants, cafés and pubs. The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) undertook an analysis of local food networks in England in 201231. These networks were defined as ‘the links between people who buy, sell, produce and supply food in an area’. The research was based on evidence collected from approximately 2,000 shoppers and more than 600 food businesses located in 19 different local food networks across England. The results of the research were extrapolated across the 747 towns and cities in England to provide an estimated annual value of local food sales of £2.7 billion. The outlets selling local food were estimated to support more than 103,000 jobs across England, of which over 61,000 could be attributed to local food sales. The CPRE study also considered the indirect effects of these local food purchases on local supply chains of producers located within 30 miles and suggested that the overall impact of local food purchases contributes £6.75 billion of value to local economies across England per annum. These results are described in greater detail below in the analysis of multipliers. The CPRE estimates are somewhat lower than the Mintel estimate, although both are likely to underestimate the overall value of local food sales because the research focuses mainly on retail activities and, in most cases, excluded the sales through food service outlets such as restaurants, cafés and pubs. The CPRE also acknowledges that the estimates are likely to be conservative and the impact of local food networks on local economies is likely to be higher than the estimates used by the CPRE. Nevertheless, the CPRE data appears to provide the most robust data relating to local food sales and provides some useful metrics with which to estimate local food activities in rural areas of England. A2.2.4.3 Estimating local food and drink sales in England The CPRE study suggests that sales of local food and drink account for between 0% and 4% of the total turnover of supermarkets, while its survey of independent outlets found that local food and drink sales accounted for: ■ 0-25% of turnover for 32% of independent outlets; ■ 26-50% of turnover for 15% of independent outlets; ■ 51-75% of turnover for 22% of independent outlets; and ■ 76-100% of turnover for 31% of independent outlets. This information can be used to produce an estimate of local food and drink sales in England based on conservative assumptions that local food and drink accounts for: ■ 2% of turnover in supermarkets (i.e. the mid-point of the CPRE estimate). This can be applied to the ABS estimate of turnover in ‘SIC 47.11: Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating’. This sector includes supermarkets and any other stores that provide other lines of merchandise in additional to their main sales of food, beverages and tobacco; and ■ 25% of turnover in independent stores (compared to the CPRE survey results, which suggest that local food sales account for more than 25% of turnover for two-thirds of independent stores). This can be applied to the ABS estimate of turnover for ‘SIC 47.2: Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores’ (excluding ‘SIC 47.26: Retail sale of tobacco products in specialised stores’) and ‘SIC 47.81: Retail sale via stalls and markets of food, beverages and tobacco products’. These sectors include specialist food retailers, stalls and markets including greengrocers, butchers, fishmongers, bakers, confectionery stores, off licences, etc.
30 http://www.specialityfoodmagazine.com/content/news/local_food_worth_5.7_billion_says_mp 31 CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: The value of England’s local food webs
v1 July 2015 63
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
The estimates produced using these assumptions suggest that retail sales of local food and drink totalled £5 billion in England in 2013, as shown in Table A2.5 below, accounting for 3.7% of total food and drink retail sales. There is a lack of evidence relating to sales of locally sourced food and drink through food service outlets. While sales of local food and drink are likely to vary significantly between different restaurants, cafés and pubs, one would expect these types of outlets to sell more locally sourced produce than supermarkets, on average, but perhaps less than specialist food retailers and markets. In the absence of other estimates it is therefore assumed that local food and drink sales account for 10% of total sales through food service outlets, totalling £4.6 billion in England in 2013. However, it is important to note that this is an illustrative example and is not based on any robust data. These assumptions suggest local food sales of almost £10 billion in England in 2013. Table A2.5 Estimates of local food sales in England, 2013
Turnover Local food sales Estimated local (England) as % of turnover food sales in England Supermarkets £126.8bn 2% £2.5bn - SIC 47.11 – Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages & tobacco predominating Independent stores £9.9bn 25% £2.5bn - SIC 47.2 – Retail sale of food & beverages in specialist stores (excl. SIC 47.26 – retail sale of tobacco) - SIC 47.81 – Retail sale via stalls & markets of food, beverages & tobacco products Total food & drink retailers £136.7bn 3.7% £5.0bn Food service outlets £45.9bn 10% £4.6bn - SIC 56 – Food & beverage service activities Total food & drink retailers/ service outlets £182.6bn 5.3% £9.6bn
Sources: ICF analysis of ABS data and CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: The value of England’s local food webs An alternative estimate of consumer expenditure of local food and drink can be obtained using the results of a survey of shoppers undertaken as part of the CPRE study. The CPRE study undertook interviews with shoppers in the different locations and found that the average weekly expenditure on food was £71, of which £22 (31%) was spent on local food and drink. Applying this assumption to total food and drink expenditures in England of £164.5 billion in 2013 suggests that purchases of local food and drink could have totalled £51 billion. This estimate appears high and the CPRE report states that there may have been a selection bias towards shoppers who buy local food and drink. It might therefore be more realistic to assume that the results suggest that local food and drink purchases account for 31% of the total food and drink expenditures amongst those consumers who are committed to buying local produce. It is therefore suggested that the supply-side estimate of £9.6 billion is the best estimate of local food and drink sales in England in 2013, based on the available data. However, it needs to be treated with caution because of the assumptions necessary to estimate the local food element. A2.2.4.4 Estimating local food and drink sales in rural areas of England It is possible to follow the same approach using estimates of food and drink sales in different types of outlets in rural areas. The results of this analysis are presented in Table A2.6. As before, the analysis assumes that local food sales account for 2% of the turnover of supermarkets and 25% of the turnover of independent, specialist food retailers and markets. However, the assumptions for food service outlets have been modified for rural areas. The large majority of food
v1 July 2015 64
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
service outlets in rural areas are expected to be independent establishments and are therefore considered much more likely to provide locally sourced food and drink compared to restaurant and pub chains and other multiple outlets that are more likely to be located in urban areas and more likely to source products and supplies from further afield, through centralised procurement channels. This analysis therefore applies the same assumption to rural food service outlets as for independent retailers, that local food and drink sales account for 25% of their total turnover. However, it should be noted that this estimate is based on an assumption and not on robust evidence. The results estimate local food and drink sales of £2.9 billion in rural areas of England in 2013, representing 13% of all food and drink sales in these areas. The value of these sales associated with tourism expenditures is explored in the following chapter. Table A2.6 Estimates of local food sales in rural areas of England, 2013
Turnover Local food sales Estimated local (rural England) as % of turnover food sales in rural England Supermarkets £11,411m 2% £228m - SIC 47.11 – Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages & tobacco predominating Independent stores £1,701m 25% £425m - SIC 47.2 – Retail sale of food & beverages in specialist stores (excl. SIC 47.26 – retail sale of tobacco) - SIC 47.81 – Retail sale via stalls & markets of food, beverages & tobacco products Total food & drink retailers £13,112m 5% £653m Food service outlets £8,886m 25% £2,222m - SIC 56 – Food & beverage service activities Total food & drink retailers/ service outlets £21,998m 13% £2,875m
Sources: ICF analysis of IDBR data and CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: The value of England’s local food webs A2.2.4.5 Additional evidence This ‘state of the market’ report is produced as part of a wider project commissioned by Defra to explore linkages between rural tourism and local food and drink. The project also included interviews with eight independent retailers of food and drink and nine food service businesses, which were undertaken to inform case studies in six rural areas of England32. The case study businesses reported some very high estimates of sales of local food and drink as a proportion of their overall turnover. For example, they suggested that sales of local food and drink accounted for: ■ around 60% of the turnover of the food service outlets; and ■ 33% of the turnover of food retailers (or 80% if the motorway services are excluded). These high proportions are likely to be because the sample of case study businesses was skewed towards businesses with a strong local food and drink offer. These findings should therefore not be used to refine the above assumptions but do provide further evidence that sales of local food and drink can be significant for some businesses, and support the view that the above assumptions are likely to be conservative. The case studies also included interviews with seven hotels and B&Bs and found that sales of local food and drink accounted for more than a third of their total turnover. While this figure is again likely to be relatively high compared to the sector as a whole (because the sample was skewed towards
32 Case studies were undertaken in Amble, Bude, Dersingham and Hunstanton, Exmoor, Padstow, and Tebay and Gloucester services.
v1 July 2015 65
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
accommodation providers that served local food and drink), it does suggest that there are likely to be significant additional sales of local food and drink that have not been captured in the above analysis. For example, IDBR data suggest that businesses listed in ‘SIC 55.10: Hotels and similar accommodation’ generated a total turnover of £3.1 billion in rural areas of England in 2013. If 5% of this turnover was associated with sales of local food and drink, this could add a further £155 million of local food and drink sales to the figures in Table A2.6 and increase the total sales of local food and drink in rural areas to more than £3 billion. However, the lack of robust evidence of sales of local food and drink through accommodation providers means that it is not possible to produce assumptions with any degree of confidence and the above estimates are considered more robust if these additional sales are excluded. A2.2.4.6 Data issues As stated above, it is not possible to use SIC codes to define local food and drink activities. The CPRE research provides useful metrics to estimate sales of local food and drink as a proportion of the overall turnover of retailers. The CPRE findings were based on interviews with more than 200 retailers and are considered reasonably robust. However, there is a gap in terms of understanding the sales of local food and drink in food service outlets. The CPRE research included some food service outlets but was much more strongly focused on retail outlets. It has therefore been necessary to use assumptions that sales of local food and drink will account for: ■ 10% of the turnover of food service outlets in England; and ■ 25% of the turnover of food service outlets in rural England (i.e. that same as the independent outlets in the CPRE research. Interviews with a small number of businesses (undertaken as part of this research project) also provide evidence that these assumptions are likely to be conservative. However, in the absence of relevant and robust data, the estimates in this section are based on assumptions made by ICF and further study would be required to deliver more robust estimates.
A2.2.5 The economic contribution of local food and drink in rural areas The direct economic contribution of these expenditures can be assessed using estimates of turnover, GVA and employment for the total food chain in rural areas. The estimates in section A2.2.3.2 suggest that: ■ Every £1 of turnover in food and drink retailers in rural areas generates £0.18 of GVA, while every £1 of turnover in food service outlets in rural areas generates £0.49 of GVA; and ■ £112,000 of turnover is required to support 1 job in rural food and drink retailers, while £38,200 of turnover is required to support 1 job in food service outlets in rural areas. Applying these ratios suggests that sales of local food and drink support £1.2 billion of GVA and 64,000 jobs in rural areas, including: ■ £120 million of GVA and 5,800 jobs in food and drink retailers in rural areas; and ■ £1.1 billion of GVA and 58,200 jobs in food service outlets in rural areas. Furthermore, sales of local food and drink will generate additional economic benefits for the local food and drink supply chain, through the food and drink products and services purchased by the retailers and food service outlets. The intermediate consumption of goods and services between different sectors can be assessed at the UK level using supply and use tables33. However, the supply and use tables do not provide a sufficiently disaggregated list of sectors to be able to provide robust estimates for the food chain.
33 ONS, 2014. Supply and use tables, 1997 – 2012 (consistent with UK National Accounts 2014 Blue Book)
v1 July 2015 66
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
However, these effects can be estimated through the use of multipliers and there are a number of studies providing quantitative evidence of the local multiplier effect of local food production. The concept of an economic multiplier is that money coming into an economy has a multiplied impact on that economy based on the way the money is spent and re-spent within it. Multipliers are used to measure how money flows through a local economy and assess how much is retained locally in the form of salaries paid to local residents and purchases of goods and services from local suppliers, and how much leaks from the local economy through salaries paid to non-local residents and purchases from non-local suppliers. A tool called ‘local multiplier 3’ (LM3), which was developed by the New Economics Foundation (NEF), is commonly used to calculate economic multipliers in local economies. The LM3 indicator takes account of: ■ Direct effects: these are the effects of expenditures made by customers in local economies, which support jobs and incomes in the local food and drink businesses; ■ Indirect effects: these effects are generated when local food and drink businesses re-spent the direct consumer expenditure on wages for local employees, profits for local owners and purchases of goods and services from local suppliers; and ■ Induced effects: these effects are generated from the re-spending of wages and profits by the local employees and business owners. The LM3 indicator is the ratio of the combined direct, indirect and induced effects against the original direct effect. The lowest possible score for LM3 is 1.00 (where nothing is retained locally), while the theoretical maximum is 3.00 where all purchases and re-spending occurs in the local economy. The available evidence suggests that local food and drink activities offer relatively high multiplier effects, which suggests that a high proportion of expenditure on local food and drink is retained by local economies. A review of relevant studies, undertaken to inform this study, found that the multiplier effect for local food and drink activities ranged from 1.8 to 2.8, while equivalent multipliers for non-local food and drink activities were considerably lower at between 1.05 and 1.75. The average multiplier effect for local food and drink activities identified by these studies was 2.2, and this value has been used to produce the estimates in this report. The case studies undertaken as part of this research project support these findings and also suggest that local multiplier effects are likely to be strong for local food and drink activities. For example, the case study businesses reported that the large majority of their employees reside within the local area, rather than commuting from further afield, while purchases from local suppliers were also reported to be strong. Applying a local multiplier of 2.2 suggests that sales of local food and drink in rural areas are estimated to support £2.65 billion of GVA and 140,000 jobs in local rural economies across England.
v1 July 2015 67
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.3 Tourism
A2.3.1 Defining tourism Tourism is a multidimensional and multifaceted activity, which covers a variety of different economic activities, and it can therefore be difficult to define and assess its economic contribution. The Tourism Satellite Account (TSA) is recognised as the ‘international standard’ for measuring tourism activities and their economic contribution34. The TSA produces estimates of tourism based on: ■ Estimates of the supply side using data from published estimates for each of the industries that serve tourists (listed in Table A2.7); and ■ Estimates of the demand side, based on estimates from the core UK surveys of tourism – i.e. the Great Britain Tourism Survey (GBTS), the Great Britain Day Visits Survey (GBDVS) and the International Passenger Survey (IPS). This approach is necessary because the supply side estimates are associated with all goods and services produced and provided by those sectors, regardless of whether the consumer is a tourist or non-tourist. The TSA therefore uses demand side data to develop ‘tourism ratios’ and estimate the proportions of products and services that are consumed by tourists. The TSA approach calculates the value of tourism in a way that allows it to be compared with other economic activities, and with tourism in different locations. The tourism sectors included in the TSA are presented in Table A2.7 below, alongside the latest tourism ratio. Table A2.7 Tourism ratios for the UK
Tourism ratio Accommodation services for visitors 90.5% Food and beverage serving services 31.8% Railway passenger transport services 47.3% Road passenger transport services 29.5% Water passenger transport services 16.2% Air passenger transport services 67.5% Transport equipment rental services 5.4% Travel agencies & other reservation services 94.3% Cultural activities 44.0% Sport and recreation activities 18.2% Exhibitions & Conferences, etc. 1.1% Other consumption products 1.3% All products 3.6% Source: ONS, 2013. The Economic Importance of Tourism: UK Tourism Satellite Accounts 2010 and 2011
A2.3.2 Total tourism A recent study of the economic contribution of tourism to the UK economy has been undertaken for Visit Britain35. The approach used in the study is consistent with the UK TSA methodology in terms of quantifying the direct contribution of tourism activities to the UK economy. The study also extends this
34 UN, 2010. International Recommendations for Tourism Statistics 2008 35 Deloitte and Oxford Economics, 2013. Tourism: jobs and growth - The economic contribution of the tourism economy in the UK
v1 July 2015 68
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
approach to produce estimates of the indirect and induced effects of tourism activities in the UK. It therefore provides three measures of the contribution of these activities to the UK economy: ■ Direct industry – the contribution made by visitor spending and tourism economy-related government spending (direct effects)36; ■ Tourism economy – which includes the direct industry as well as private and government investment in the travel and tourism sectors, and the domestic supply chains providing inputs for the direct industry (indirect effects); and ■ Total contribution – which includes the tourism economy as well as the impact of spending by employees within the tourism economy (induced effects). The report estimates that tourism related expenditures totalled £94.2 billion in England in 2013. These expenditures were estimated to have: ■ directly contributed £48.3 billion in value added to the English economy, accounting for 4% of England’s GDP, and directly supported 1.44 million jobs in tourism businesses, accounting for 5.2% of all employment in England in 2013; ■ directly and indirectly contributed £106 billion of value added and supported 2.58 million jobs, when tourism supply chains and private and public travel and tourism investment are also included. These estimates account for 8.8% of total GDP and 9.4% of total employment in England in 2013; and ■ contributed a total of £114.1 billion in value added, supporting 3.14 million jobs in England when the impacts of expenditures of employees of the tourism industry are also included. This suggests that the tourism industry supports 11.1% of total GDP and 11.4% of total employment in England in 2013.
A2.3.3 This study The challenge for this study is to refine these tourism estimates to focus on the local food and drink sector and associated tourism expenditures in rural areas. This requires a similar approach to the UK TSA which combines the supply side data presented in Section A2.2 with demand side data from the core tourism surveys (relating to visits and purchases associated with local food and drink in rural areas) to estimate the scale and value of local food and drink purchases that are supported by tourism expenditures in rural areas. A large proportion of purchases of local food and drink will be captured through ‘food and beverage service activities’ such as restaurants, cafés and pubs. However, local food and drink is also purchased from retailers and markets and directly from food producers (e.g. via farm shops). Some purchases of local food and drink will therefore also be included in the ‘other consumption products’ category, listed above in Table A2.7.
A2.3.4 Tourism surveys This section involves the production of estimates of tourism trips in England, including those undertaken to rural locations, and the associated expenditures on food and drink. A2.3.4.1 Great Britain Tourism Survey The GB Tourism Survey (GBTS) provides estimates of volumes and values of domestic tourism that includes an overnight stay in Great Britain. It defines tourism as any journey away from home lasting for one or more nights, to any destination within Great Britain, by any mode of transport, for any purpose, and staying in any type of accommodation. It provides data relating to: ■ the number of trips taken by GB residents;
36 This approach is consistent with the UK Tourism Satellite Account (TSA) and the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) Tourism Satellite Accounting methodologies.
v1 July 2015 69
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ the number of nights spent away from home on these trips; and ■ the value of spending on those trips. Estimates for England The GBTS estimated that 101.8 million trips were taken in England in 2013, involving 297.2 million bed-nights and expenditures of £18.7 billion. These estimates suggested that the number of trips taken in England had declined by 2.6% since 2012, while the number of bed-nights and associated expenditures had fallen by 4.2% and 4.1% respectively. Table A2.8 Tourism trips involving an overnight stay in England by location, 2013
Trips Bed-nights Expenditure Seaside 18.60m 18% 70.9m 24% £3,886m 21% Large city / large town 44.03m 43% 102.5m 34% £8,104m 43% Small town 23.35m 23% 65.2m 22% £3,464m 19% Countryside / village 18.30m 18% 57.9m 19% £3,188m 17% Total England 101.76m 297.2m £18,710m Source: GB Tourism Survey
Estimates for rural locations There are different ways of estimating the frequency and duration of trips and expenditures in rural locations in England. The simplest approach is to use the results for ‘countryside / village’ locations, as shown in Table A2.8. This suggests that 18 million trips (involving an overnight stay) were taken to countryside / village locations in England in 2013, involving 58 million bed-nights and tourism expenditures of £3.2 billion. However, these estimates are likely to be conservative as they exclude overnight trips to rural destinations in ‘seaside’ locations. An alternative approach to estimating tourism in rural areas is to use GBTS data for local authorities in 2013 and apply the ONS tool for converting local authorities to rural and urban areas. The results of this analysis are presented in Table A2.9. The data suggest that in 2013, an average of 32 million trips per annum were undertaken to local authorities in England that are classified as being significantly or predominantly rural. These trips are estimated to have involved 113 million bed-nights and expenditures of £6.3 billion per annum. Table A2.9 Rural and urban estimates for England based on GBTS data for local authorities (2013)
Trips Bed-nights Expenditure Mainly Rural (i.e. >80%) 19.3m 19% 73.0m 25% £4.1bn 22% Largely Rural (i.e. 50-79%) 13.1m 13% 40.4m 14% £2.2bn 12% Total Rural 32.4m 32% 113.4m 39% £6.3bn 35% Urban with Significant Rural 13.8m 13% 38.2m 13% £2.1bn 12% (i.e. 26-49%) Urban with City and Town 28.1m 27% 72.4m 25% £4.3bn 24% Urban with Minor Conurbation 2.8m 3% 6.7m 2% £0.4bn 2% Urban with Major Conurbation 25.7m 25% 56.5m 20% 5.0bn 27% Total Urban 70.4m 68% 173.8m 61% £11.8bn 65% Total 102.8m 287.2m £18.1bn Source: ICF analysis of raw data by local authority from the GB Tourism Survey Note: Total differs from the England total in Table A2.8 because the destination local authority was not always known.
v1 July 2015 70
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
As stated above, the most recent rural-urban classification of local authorities in England has also estimated the share of the local population of each local authority that is classified as ‘rural’. Applying these estimated shares to the tourism data for each local authority is likely to provide the most accurate estimates of tourism trips, nights and expenditures in rural areas. These estimates are very similar to the rural sub-totals in Table A2.9 and suggest that tourism visits involving an overnight stay in rural locations of England in 2013 comprised: ■ 34 million trips; ■ 114 million bed-nights; and ■ tourism expenditures of £6.4 billion. Food and drink expenditures The GBTS also provides a breakdown of tourism expenditures across England, which can help estimate tourism expenditures on food and drink. The different categories of expenditure and associated values are presented in Table A2.10 below. Table A2.10 Expenditure estimates in England (2013)
Total England Rural locations in England Local authorities Based on rural classed as mainly shares for each or largely rural local authority Price of package holiday/inclusive trip £0.7bn 4% £0.2bn 4% £0.2bn 4% Accommodation £6.4bn 34% £2.3bn 37% £2.4bn 37% Travel costs to and from destination, £3.9bn 21% £1.1bn 17% £1.1bn 18% and during the trip Services or advice (e.g. travel guides, £0.04bn 0.2% <£0.01bn 0.1% <£0.01bn 0.1% tourist information) Buying clothes £0.9bn 5% £0.3bn 4% £0.3bn 4% Eating and drinking out £3.8bn 20% £1.2bn 19% £1.3bn 20% Other shopping £1.6bn 8% £0.7bn 10% £0.6bn 10% Entertainment £1.2bn 6% £0.4bn 6% £0.4bn 6% Anything else £0.3bn 2% £0.1bn 2% £0.1bn 2% Total Expenditure £18.7bn £6.3bn £6.4bn Source: ICF analysis of raw data by local authority from the GB Tourism Survey
The data suggest that eating and drinking out accounts for around 20% of the overall expenditures of overnight domestic visitors in rural areas and across England as a whole. However, this excludes some other purchases of food and drink (e.g. food and drink purchased from a farmers market, farm shop or other retailer) that are likely to be included in the broad ‘other shopping’ category. It is not possible to disaggregate the ‘other shopping’ category, however, it is possible to produce an estimate of retail purchases of food and drink using evidence from the GB Day Visits Survey (GBDVS) for England. For instance, the GBDVS found that ‘Food bought in shops / takeaways and consumed on the trip’ accounted for 20% of all ‘retail’ purchases. If it is assumed that overnight visitors share similar expenditure patterns to day visitors, then ‘Food bought in shops / takeaways and consumed on the trip’ can be estimated at £0.3 billion for all overnight trips in England made by domestic visitors and £0.1 billion for overnight trips in rural locations. This suggests food and drink related expenditures across England as a whole of £4.1 billion, comprising: ■ £3.8 billion on food and drink through food service outlets; and ■ £0.3 billion on food and drink through retailers.
v1 July 2015 71
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
It also suggests that overnight domestic visitors spent £1.4 billion on food and drink in rural areas in 2013, comprising: ■ £1.3 billion on food and drink through food service outlets in rural areas; and ■ £0.1 billion on food and drink through retailers in rural areas. Local food and drink In order to fully understand the impact of local food and drink on rural tourism, it would be useful to know: ■ The number of trips motivated by local food and drink; and ■ The associated expenditures on local food and drink products. Unfortunately the GBTS does not collect information relating to motivations or purchases of local food and drink. The GBTS does ask respondents about the activities they have undertaken on trips, one of which is ‘attending a food/local produce event’. Additional analysis of these activities has been possible for Great Britain as a whole and summary findings are presented in Table A2.11. The data show that only 0.3% of overnight trips by domestic visitors were associated with ‘attending a food/local produce event’ in 2013. However, these trips were relatively high in value. The average expenditure per night for trips involving these activities was £92, which is almost 50% higher than the overall average of £62 per night. Similarly, the average expenditure on food and drink was more than 40% higher than the overall average (£17.50 for trips including ‘attending a food/local produce event’ compared to an average of £12.40). While these findings do not provide evidence of the extent to which visitor trips are motivated by food and drink, they do suggest that those participating in food and drink activities are likely to have higher than average expenditures on food and drink and other items. Table A2.11 Overnight trips by domestic visitors in Great Britain, 2013
Attended a food/local Total tourism day visits in produce event (e.g. food GB festival, farmers market) Number % Number % Trips 0.4m 0.3% 122.9m 100% Bed-nights 1.0m 0.3% 373.6m 100% Total expenditure £89m 0.4% £23.3bn 100% Average spend per night £91.56 £62.35 Food and drink expenditure £17m 0.4% £4.6bn 100% Average food and drink spend per night £17.49 £12.41 Source: ICF analysis of the GB Tourism Survey
A2.3.4.2 Great Britain day visits survey The GBDVS provides estimates of volumes and values of day visits undertaken in the UK by residents of Great Britain. The survey collects information relating to three different definitions of ‘day visit’, which include: ■ Leisure day visits – defined as a trip outside of the respondent’s home to participate in one of fifteen leisure activities; ■ 3 hour+ leisure day visits – defined as ‘leisure day visits’ that last at least three hours including travel; ■ Tourism day visits – defined as ‘3 hour+ leisure day visits’ that: – Do not include an activity which is undertaken "very regularly"; and
v1 July 2015 72
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
– Take place in a destination outside the respondent's place of residence (or place of work if this was the start point of the trip)37. The list of fifteen leisure activities includes a number of activities that could be associated with local food and drink, such as: ■ ’Special’ shopping for items that you do not regularly buy; ■ Going out for a meal; ■ Going on a night out to a bar, pub and/or club; and ■ Going to special public event such as a festival, exhibition, etc. Estimates for England The GBDVS estimated that almost 7 billion day visits were taken in England by GB residents in 2013. Approximately 2.2 billion of these day visits lasted for more than three hours (including travel time) and 1.4 billion are classed as tourism day visits because they included activities that are not undertaken ‘very regularly’ and took place in a destination outside the respondent’s place or residence or work. These 1.4 billion tourism day visits are relevant for this study and are estimated to have involved expenditures of £46 billion in 2013. Table A2.12 Day visits in England, 2013
Day Visits Expenditure Leisure day visits in England 6,970m - 3 hour+ leisure day visits in England 2,185m £61,734m Tourism day visits in England 1,370m £46,024m Source: GB Day Visits Survey
Estimates for rural locations The GBDVS also collects information about the destination of each day visit and data for the four summary categories are presented below in Table A2.13. As before, the simplest approach to estimate visits and expenditures for rural locations in England is to use the results for ‘countryside / village’ locations. This suggests that 308 million tourism day visits were taken in 2013 to ‘countryside / village’ locations, involving tourism expenditures of £8.1 billion. However, as stated above, these estimates exclude day trips to rural destinations in ‘seaside’ locations. Table A2.13 Tourism day visits in England by location (by main type of place visited), 2013
Day Visits Expenditure Seaside 117m 9% £3,886m 8% Large city / large town 597m 44% £23,995m 52% Small town 313m 23% £8,610m 19% Countryside / village 308m 22% £8,095m 18% Total tourism day visits in England 1,370m 100% £46,024m 100% Source: GB Day Visits Survey
As with the GBTS, it is possible to use GBDVS data for local authorities and apply the ONS tool for converting local authorities to rural and urban areas. The data in Table A2.14 suggest that in 2013, 304 million tourism day visits were undertaken to local authorities in England that are classified as being mainly or largely rural. These day visits were associated with average expenditures of £8.7 billion.
37 The exceptions to this are trips to special public events, live sporting events and visitor attractions.
v1 July 2015 73
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Table A2.14 Rural and urban estimates for England based on GBDVS data for local authorities (2013)
Day Visits Expenditure Mainly Rural (i.e. >80%) 152m 12% £4.1bn 9% Largely Rural (i.e. 50-79%) 152m 12% £4.6bn 11% Total Rural 304m 23% £8.7bn 20% Urban with Significant Rural (i.e. 26-49%) 163m 13% £5.3bn 12% Urban with City and Town 300m 23% £11.6bn 27% Urban with Minor Conurbation 38m 3% £1.0bn 2% Urban with Major Conurbation 489m 38% £16.4bn 38% Total Urban 989m 77% £34.3bn 80% Total tourism day visits in England 1,293m £43.0bn Source: ICF analysis of raw data by local authority from the GB Day Visits Survey Note: Total differs from the England total in Table A2.13 because the destination local authority was not always known.
It is also possible to apply the estimated ‘rural’ shares to the GBDVS data for each local authority. As above, this is expected to provide the most accurate estimates of tourism day visits and expenditures in rural areas and suggests that tourism day visits to rural locations of England in 2013 comprised: ■ 330 million day visits; and ■ tourism expenditures of £9.6 billion. Food and drink expenditures The GBDVS provides a more comprehensive breakdown of food and drink expenditures than the GBTS, as shown in Table A2.15 below. Food and drink expenditures are captured in the eating and drinking category, which disaggregates eating and drinking in cafés, restaurants, etc. from purchases of food in shops, takeaways, etc. Eating and drinking is by far the largest category of expenditure for day visits, accounting for 42% of all day visit expenditure in England, and the large majority of this was associated with eating and drinking out in cafés, restaurants, etc. Visitors spend an even larger proportion of their expenditure on food and drink during day visits to rural locations. The analysis of local authority data suggests that around 45% of tourism expenditures are spent on food and drink in rural areas. The preferred approach, based on the application of rural shares for each local authority, suggests that £4.3bn was spent on food and drink during day visits to rural locations in 2013. The large majority (£3.8bn) was spent on eating and drinking out, while £0.5bn was spent on retail purchases of food and drink in shops, takeaways, etc. Table A2.15 Day visit expenditure estimates in England (2013)
Total England Rural locations in England Local authorities Based on rural classed as mainly or shares for each local largely rural authority Eating and drinking – total £19.1bn 42% £3.8bn 44% £4.3bn 45% - Eating/drinking out in cafes, £16.9bn 37% £3.4bn 39% £3.8bn 40% restaurants, etc. - Food bought in shops / £2.2bn 5% £0.4bn 5% £0.5bn 5% takeaways and consumed on trip Other expenditure £26.9bn 58% £4.8bn 56% £5.2bn 55% Total Expenditure £46.0bn £8.7bn £9.6bn Source: ICF analysis of raw data by local authority from the GB Day Visits Survey
v1 July 2015 74
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Local food and drink The GBDVS does not collect information relating to motivations for day visits or purchases of local food and drink. However, the GBDVS does ask respondents about the activities that they undertook on day visits. Four of the activities are related to food and drink and are potentially related to local food and drink. These are relatively high value activities. The average expenditures for day visits involving these activities are significantly higher than the overall average of £33.59 per day visit, and range from £44.66 for those going out for a drink to approximately £53 for those going out for a meal or snack, and for those attending a food / local produce event. One in three day visits in 2013 involved an activity relating to food and drink. The most common food- related activity was going out for a meal. 21% of day visits involved a meal out and these trips accounted for a third of all day visit expenditures. Going out for a drink was also a popular activity, undertaken as part of 15% of day visits, with these trips accounting for 20% of all day visit turnover. Going for a snack and attending a food/ local produce event were less common, and were associated with 5% and 1% of day visits respectively. Table A2.16 Tourism day visits in England by activity, 2013
Day Visits Expenditure Average expenditure per visit Went for a drink in a pub, club, hotel, etc. 207m 15% £9,245m 20% £44.66 Went for a meal in a restaurant, café, 294m 21% £15,583m 34% £53.00 hotel, pub, etc. Went for a snack in a fast food outlet, 65m 5% £3,446m 7% £53.02 takeaway, etc. Net: Eating and drinking 457m 33% Attended a food/local produce event 11m 1% £582m 1% £52.91 (e.g. food festival, farmers market) Total tourism day visits in England 1,370m 100% £46,024m 100% £33.59 Source: GB Day Visits Survey
A2.3.4.3 International passenger survey The International Passenger Survey (IPS) suggests that overseas visitors made 28.6 million visits to England in 2013. The overall duration of these visits was 217 million nights at an average of 7.6 nights per visit. International visitors to England spent a total of £18.4 billion at an average of almost £85 per night. IPS data relating to the activities undertaken by overseas residents in 2011 are available from VisitEngland. The data show the number of visits including a visit to the ‘countryside or villages’, but are only able to show the total number of visits, nights and expenditures for the entire trip, rather than those specifically undertaken in the countryside. The data suggest that UK trips that included a countryside visit accounted for: ■ 20% of the total number of visits from overseas visitors; ■ 35% of the total number of nights involving overseas visitors; and ■ 27% of the total expenditures of overseas visitors. Applying these assumptions to the 2013 data for England suggests that 6 million trips to England included a countryside visit, involving up to 76 million nights and expenditures of up to £5 billion spent in countryside locations. However, it is likely that many of these trips will have included significant time and expenditures in urban areas. In the absence of alternative evidence, an illustrative example would be to assume that 50% of these nights and expenditures would have occurred in rural areas. This
v1 July 2015 75
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
suggests that overseas visitors undertook 6 million trips to rural areas of England in 2013, involving 38 million nights, and expenditures of £2.5 billion in rural areas. The IPS data does not separate expenditures into retail purchases of food and drink and eating and drinking out. Estimates have therefore been produced based on an assumption that overseas visitors spend the same proportion of their expenditure on food and drink as domestic overnight visitors. This suggests that: ■ overseas visitors to England spend an estimated £3.7 billion on eating and drinking out and a further £0.3 billion on food and drink retail purchases; and ■ overseas visitors to rural areas of England spend an estimated £500 million on eating and drinking out and £40 million on food and drink retail purchases. A2.3.4.4 Domestic Trip Tracker In 2013, VisitEngland added questions to the Domestic Trip Tracker survey38 to collect information regarding participation and interest in a range of activities associated with local food and drink. The questionnaire for the August 2013 survey was extended to ask a representative sample of 1,253 adults whether they had undertaken any holidays, breaks or day trips in England in the last 12 months39 that involved the following activities: ■ Going to a food festival; ■ Visiting a farmer’s or local produce market; ■ Dining at a restaurant, café, pub, etc. serving local food / produce; and/or ■ Buying food or produce local to the destination visited. The results of the survey are presented in Figure A2.4. It shows that there was very little difference between the proportion of respondents who had undertaken each local food-related activity as part of a day trip or as part of a holiday, although respondents were slightly more likely to have undertaken each activity during day trips. The most common of the local food-related activities was dining in an establishment serving local produce. Approximately 30% of respondents reported dining in an establishment serving local produce as part of day trips and holidays in the previous 12 months. More than 20% of respondents reported buying local food or produce during these trips or holidays. A smaller group of around one in seven had visited a farmer’s or local produce market (14% as part of a day trip and 13% as part of a holiday), and almost one in ten had gone to a food festival (9% during day trips and 8% during holidays) during the last 12 months. The survey also found that participation in local food-related activities was relatively high amongst families with children and those in higher social grades. For example, families were more likely to have visited food festivals and farmer’s markets during day trips (15% and 19% respectively), while AB social grades were more likely to have dined in an establishment serving local produce as part of day trips (40%) and holidays (35%) in the previous 12 months. However, it is not clear whether these activities were a key motivation for undertaking the trip or holiday. For example, the survey findings do not tell us whether or not the food festival was a prime motivation for undertaking these trips or holidays or whether respondents chose to dine in these establishments because they served local produce, or whether they just happened to visit such an establishment. Furthermore, the survey did not collect information about the number of holidays or trips taken in the last 12 months or the scale of tourism expenditures associated with these activities.
38 The Domestic Trip Tracker is a short, online survey of approximately 1,200 adults aged 16 and above and is undertaken before the main bank holidays periods of the year (i.e. the Easter, August and the Christmas/New Year periods). 39 The 12 months between August 2012 and August 2013
v1 July 2015 76
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Figure A2.4 Proportion of visitors participating in local food-related activities as part of their holiday or day trip in England
The survey also asked respondents about their interest in participating in these local food-related activities as part of future holidays in England. The survey found that more than half of respondents would be interested in undertaking each of these activities during future holidays.
A2.3.5 Analysis of tourism expenditures The above estimates of tourism trips and expenditures are presented in Table A2.17 below. Total tourism expenditures on trips to England and rural areas of England have been estimated by aggregating the expenditure estimates for domestic overnight visitors, domestic day visitors and overseas visitors. This suggests that visitors spent £83 billion on trips in England in 2013, of which £18.5 billion was spent in rural areas. It is estimated that approximately one third of these expenditures were spent on food and drink in England (£27 billion) and rural areas of England (£5.7 billion). As one would expect, the large majority of tourism expenditures on food and drink in England take place in food service outlets (90%), with the remainder (10%) spent of food and drink purchased from retailers and markets. Food and drink expenditures in rural areas are even more concentrated on food service outlets (91%), with only 9% of food and drink purchased from retailers and markets. Table A2.17 Tourism trips, nights and expenditures in England and rural areas, 2013
Total England Rural Areas Domestic overnight trips 102m 34m Domestic bed-nights 297m 114m Domestic overnight expenditures £18.7bn £6.4bn - Eating & drinking out £3.8bn £1.3bn - Food & drink retail purchases £0.3bn £0.1bn
Day visits 1,370m 330m Day visit expenditures £46.0bn £9.6bn - Eating & drinking out £16.9bn £3.8bn - Food & drink retail purchases £2.2bn £0.5bn
Overseas visitor trips 29m 6m Overseas bed-nights 217m 38m Overseas visitor expenditures £18.4bn £2.5bn
v1 July 2015 77
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
- Eating & drinking out £3.7bn £0.5bn - Food & drink retail purchases £0.3bn £0.04bn
Total tourism expenditures £83.1bn £18.5bn - Total food & drink expenditures £27.2bn £6.2bn - Eating & drinking out £24.4bn £5.6bn - Food & drink retail purchases £2.8bn £0.6bn Source: ICF analysis of GBTS, GBDVS and IPS data
The tourism data does not disaggregate tourism expenditures into purchases of local and non-local food and drink. However, these have been estimated by assessing tourism expenditures alongside the supply-side estimates, based on an assumption that tourism expenditures account for the same proportion of sales of local food and drink as non-local food and drink. As visitors are considered more likely to purchase local food and drink than non-visitors, this assumption is likely to produce a conservative estimate of tourism expenditures on local food and drink. The analysis is presented in Table A2.18. It shows that tourism expenditures on eating and drinking out are estimated to account for 53% of overall sales in the food service sector in England and 63% in rural areas. Similarly, tourism expenditures are estimated to account for 2% of food and drink retail purchases in England and 5% of purchases in rural areas. These percentages appear high for expenditures in the food service sector and relatively low in the retail sector. As described above, this is primarily because the supply-side sales data are skewed towards the retail sector. The overall estimates appear more realistic with tourism expenditures accounting for 15% of all food and drink sales in England and 28% of food and drink sales in rural areas. If the same ratios of tourism expenditures to industry sales are applied to the supply-side estimates for local food and drink, it is estimated that tourism expenditures on local food and drink total: ■ £2.55 billion in England, comprising £2.45 billion spent on eating and drinking out and £0.1 billion spent on retail purchases of local food and drink; and ■ £1.44 billion in rural areas of England, comprising £1.4 billion spent on eating and drinking out and £40 million spent on retail purchases of local food and drink. Table A2.18 Estimating tourism expenditures on local food and drink, 2013
Total England Rural areas Total food Local food Total food Local food and drink and drink and drink and drink Eating & drinking out Tourism expenditures £24.4bn £2.45bn £5.6bn £1.4bn Supply-side sales / turnover £45.9bn £4.6bn £8.9bn £2.2bn Tourism expenditures as % of total sales 53% 53% 63% 63% Food and drink retail Tourism expenditures £2.8bn £0.10bn £0.6bn £0.04bn Supply-side sales / turnover £136.7bn £5.0bn £13.1bn £0.7bn Tourism expenditures as % of total sales 2% 2% 5% 5% Total food & drink Tourism expenditures £27.2bn £2.55bn £6.2bn £1.44bn Supply-side sales / turnover £182.6bn £9.6bn £22.0bn £2.9bn Tourism expenditures as % of total sales 15% 27% 28% 50% Source: ICF analysis
v1 July 2015 78
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.3.5.2 Data issues VisitEngland provides comprehensive data on the number of domestic visitors and expenditures associated with visits to destinations in England, including rural destinations. Further analysis of the raw data from the GBTS and GBDVS has also enabled food and drink expenditures to be disaggregated from overall expenditures at the local authority level as well as at the national level. This has enabled the production of detailed estimates for rural areas and for England as a whole. However, the GBTS and GBDVS do not collect information relating to expenditures on local food and drink or the extent to which visits were motivated by food and drink. It is therefore not possible to produce estimates of the following: ■ Tourism expenditures on local food and drink – the analysis has had to compare tourism expenditures on food and drink with the supply-side estimates of food and drink sales and assume that tourism expenditures on local food and drink account for the same proportion of overall sales of local food and drink; and ■ The extent to which visits were motivated by local food and drink – the analysis has not been able to provide an assessment of trips that were motivated by local food and drink, which can attract expenditures on other, non-food goods and services in rural areas. The IPS also provides useful data on visitors and expenditures at the national level. However, there were also specific issues that could not be addressed by the available IPS data, which are described below: ■ While it is possible to identify the number of overseas visitors that visited rural areas during their stay in England, it is not possible to disaggregate their total trip expenditures to include only those that took place in rural areas – the analysis has assumed that 50% of the expenditures of those who visited rural areas during their trip, were actually spent in rural areas. This is an illustrative example and further study would be required to produce a more robust estimate; and ■ The IPS data does not provide estimates of food and drink related expenditures – the analysis has had to assume that expenditures of overseas visitors on food and drink represent the same share of overall expenditures as for domestic visitors on overnight trips.
A2.3.6 Economic impacts and additionality Tourism expenditures on local food and drink will generate multiplier effects for local economies by supporting additional employment and incomes amongst the supply chain for local food and drink and the additional employment and incomes supported by the re-spending of wages and profits in local economies, as described in section A2.2.5 above. However, the analysis should also take account of displacement and the extent to which increased visits and tourism expenditures on local food and drink are offset by reductions in expenditures elsewhere. A2.3.6.1 Displacement There is a lack of evidence relating to the displacement of tourism expenditures on local food and drink products. The issue is highlighted in a report by the OECD, which states that ‘A possible negative aspect in some circumstances is that too much focus on the special interest food tourism market may mean other tourism and business opportunities are not adequately explored or the market’s perception of a region is not properly understood’40. However, the report does not provide evidence of the extent of these displacement effects. Another study suggests that displacement effects are likely to be minimal. The report on tourism accommodation services in East Riding suggests that displacement effects are likely to be minor, and that expenditure on local products tends to be additional to expenditure on other products. This is
40 OECD, 2013. Food and the tourism experience
v1 July 2015 79
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
reported to be because local products are generally perceived as ‘special’ purchases rather than meeting everyday needs41. The case studies undertaken to inform this study were also unable to provide much evidence about the significance of displacement effects. The case study businesses described views about what might happen in the absence of a local food offer but these were somewhat speculative and varied between the case study locations. A2.3.6.2 Multipliers The above estimates suggest that tourism expenditures on local food and drink totalled £1.44 billion in rural areas of England in 2013, comprising £1.4 billion spent on eating and drinking out and £40 million spent on retail purchases of local food and drink. Applying the same metrics as before suggests that sales of local food and drink to visitors support £700 million of GVA and 37,400 jobs in rural areas, including: ■ £14 million of GVA42 and 700 jobs43 in food and drink retailers in rural areas; and ■ £690 million of GVA44 and 36,700 jobs45 in food service outlets in rural areas. If the same local multiplier of 2.2 is applied, this suggests that tourism expenditures on local food and drink in rural areas are estimated to support £1.5 billion of GVA and 81,000 jobs in local rural economies across England. This is considered the best estimate given the available data. However, as stated above, existing research of the multiplier effect for local food and drink activities has produced estimates ranging from 1.8 to 2.8 for different activities and different locations. This suggests that the overall impacts of tourism expenditures on local food and drink could fall between £1.2 and £1.9 billion of GVA and between 67,000 and 104,000 jobs in rural economies in England.
A2.3.7 Sensitivity analysis There is clearly a degree of uncertainty associated with the above estimates of GVA and employment impacts. Sensitivity analysis is important to test the vulnerability of these estimates to uncertainties relating to the assumptions used. There is a risk that the assumptions may not be accurate, and the resulting impacts may therefore be lower, or indeed higher, than those presented above. This analysis focuses on the potential that the key assumptions have overestimated the true scale of local food and drink activities in rural areas of England. The main assumptions in the analysis are described below: ■ Sales of local food and drink in rural areas account for: – 2% of the turnover of supermarkets; – 25% of the turnover of specialist food retailers, stalls and markets; and – 25% of turnover of food service outlets. ■ Overnight visitors’ spend on retail purchases of food and drink is proportionate to day visitors (i.e. purchases of food and drink account for 20% of all retail purchases); ■ Rural areas account for 50% of the time and expenditures of overseas visitors who have visited the ‘countryside or villages’ during their time in England;
41 Scott Wilson, 2009. East Riding Tourism Accommodation Study. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations 42 Assuming that every £1 of turnover in food and drink retailers in rural areas generates £0.18 of GVA 43 Assuming that £112,000 of turnover is required to support 1 job in rural food and drink retailers 44 Assuming that every £1 of turnover in food service outlets in rural areas generates £0.49 of GVA 45 Assuming that £38,200 of turnover is required to support 1 job in food service outlets in rural areas
v1 July 2015 80
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Overseas visitors in rural areas spend the same proportion of their expenditure on food and drink as domestic overnight visitors (i.e. 2% of their overall expenditure is spent on ‘retail purchases of food and drink’ and 20% is spent on ‘eating and drinking out’); and ■ Tourism expenditures account for the same share of local food and drink sales in rural areas as total food and drink sales (i.e. tourism expenditures account for 5% of the retail sales of food and drink and 63% of the food and drink sales of food service outlets in rural areas). These assumptions have been informed by different sources of tourism and economic data and additional research reports. The study team believes that they provide realistic and conservative estimates and represent the best available estimates. However, they are subjective and there is a risk that each of these assumptions might have over-estimated the sales and visitor purchases of local food and drink in rural areas of England. The sensitivity of these key assumptions has been tested and the results are presented in Table A2.19 below. The test involved reducing each of the above assumptions by 50% to see what effect this would have on the overall GVA and employment impacts resulting from sales of local food and drink to visitors in rural areas of England. For example, the above analysis assumes that local food and drink sales account for 25% of the total turnover of specialist food retailers, stalls and markets. The sensitivity test has therefore examined the change in GVA and employment impacts that would occur if it was assumed that local food and drink sales accounted for only 12.5% of the turnover of specialist retailers, stalls and markets. The results show that most of these changes to assumptions would have only a minimal effect on the overall GVA and employment impacts. However, the overall impact estimates are very sensitive to two of the assumptions, for which a 50% reduction in each assumption would cause the overall GVA and employment impacts to fall by almost 50%. Both of these highly ‘sensitive’ assumptions relate to sales of local food and drink in food service outlets and are listed below: ■ Local food and drink sales account for 25% of the total turnover of food service outlets in rural areas; and ■ Tourism expenditures account for the same 63% share of local food and drink sales in food service outlets in rural areas as total food and drink sales. The reason that the impact estimates are so sensitive to these two assumptions is because more than 95% of tourism spend on local food and drink in rural areas takes place in restaurants, pubs, etc. Therefore any change in the assumed level of tourism expenditures in food service outlets is going to have a significant impact on the overall estimates. As stated above, this is also an area where there is limited data and research upon which to base the assumption, although the case study evidence suggests that local food and drink can account for as much as 60% of the turnover of food service outlets, so an assumed level of 25% does not seem to be unrealistic. Furthermore, it is considered highly unlikely that tourism expenditures would account for a lower share of local food and drink sales compared to overall food and drink sales. The other research tasks undertaken as part of this study have found that visitors are actually more likely than local residents, on average, to purchase local rather than non-local food and drink. Based on this evidence, it is highly unlikely that these assumptions would significantly underestimate the true scale of local food and drink activities in rural areas and the study team believes that it is more likely that these assumptions actually underestimate the overall GVA and employment impacts. However, it is important that the results of this analysis are interpreted with an understanding that they are highly sensitive to these two assumptions.
v1 July 2015 81
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Table A2.19 Sensitivity analysis of the key assumptions
Type of Assumption Assumption Alternative Effects on GVA / used in assumption employment impacts analysis (i.e. reduction (of local food and drink of 50%) sales to ‘rural’ visitors) Sales of local food and drink in rural areas estimated as a share of: - the turnover of supermarkets 2% 1% -0.2% - the turnover of specialist food retailers 25% 12.5% -0.3% - the turnover of food service outlets 25% 12.5% -49.6% Overnight visitors’ spend on retail purchases 20% 10% -0.1% of food & drink is proportionate to day visitors Share of nights and expenditures spent in 50% 25% -4.5% rural areas for overseas visitors that visited the ‘countryside / villages’ Overseas visitors’ spend on food and drink in rural areas is proportionate to domestic overnight visitors: - Retail purchases of food and drink 2% 1% 0% - Eating and drinking out 20% 10% -4.6% Tourism expenditures in rural areas account for the same share of local food and drink sales as total food and drink sales - Retail purchases of food and drink 5% 2.5% -0.4% - Eating and drinking out 63% 31.5% -49.6% Source: ICF analysis
v1 July 2015 82
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.4 Comparison of two rural destinations
A2.4.1 Introduction This section provides a comparative analysis of two rural destinations: one with a more developed local food offer and one with a less-developed offer. The following analysis compares the two local economies and includes comparisons of the scale and value of their respective food and drink, tourism and local food and drink activities. The two rural destinations were selected as they share a number of similar characteristics in terms of their location, local environment and the significant contribution of tourism to their local economies. Given the lack of economic and tourism data available for local rural areas, the destinations were also selected based on the availability of published evidence relating to their food and drink and tourism activities.
A2.4.2 The two rural destinations A2.4.2.1 Padstow Padstow was selected as an example of a rural destination with a well-developed local food offer. Padstow is a small, working fishing port located on the north Cornwall coast at the head of the Camel River. It has a population of approximately 4,40046 and is located within close proximity to many sandy beaches, coves and the South West Coastal Footpath, making it a popular destination for visitors. Padstow has developed a strong reputation as a ‘local food’ destination, specialising in good quality, fresh, locally produced food and drink, with a large number of specialist retailers and food service outlets located in the town. This reputation has been supported and enhanced by celebrity chefs, including Rick Stein and Paul Ainsworth, who have established a number of restaurants, takeaways and food retail outlets in the town. The town also has a strong food-related supply chain which includes its own fishing fleet, food manufacturers, a local brewery, and wholesalers of meat, fruit, vegetables and a wide range of food and drink products. Padstow is also surrounded by numerous farms and other food-related businesses within the local area. A2.4.2.2 Bude Bude was selected as an example of a rural destination with a local food offer that is less developed than Padstow. It provides a useful comparison with Padstow because it is also located on the north Cornwall coast (approximately 35 miles from Padstow) and has its own strong tourism offer, attracting large numbers of visitors each year. Bude was previously a busy commercial port, which became a popular tourist destination in the 19th century with the introduction of rail services to the town. The town has two sandy beaches and offers a wide range of watersports and other recreational activities and is a particularly popular destination for families. Bude is a larger town than Padstow with a population of 9,20047 (approximately twice the size of Padstow). The town centre provides a wide range of independent shops and food outlets, many of which provide local food and drink, albeit on a smaller overall scale than Padstow. The local food- related supply chain is smaller than Padstow but is growing over time with an increasing number of food-related producers, manufacturers and wholesalers in the town, supported by many farms and other food-related activities within the local area. Bude also has ambitions to develop its own local food offer and recently launched the first ‘Bude for Food’ festival in September 2014, which showcased the products and services of more than 60 local food and drink businesses.
46 Census 2011 47 Census 2011
v1 July 2015 83
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.4.3 The local tourism sectors Visit Cornwall commissioned research in 2012 to estimate the scale and value of tourism in 12 key towns in the county, including Padstow and Bude48. The findings of this research are presented in Table A2.20 and provide useful data on tourism activities in each location. As stated above, the local population of Bude is approximately twice the size of Pastow. However, tourism expenditures and impacts are more significant in Padstow, where tourism expenditures totalled more than £60 million in 2012, directly supporting 1,337 jobs (909 FTE jobs) and generating an overall impact of 1,597 jobs (1,137 FTE jobs) including indirect and induced effects. The equivalent expenditures and impacts were approximately 25% lower in Bude, where tourism expenditures totalled £43 million in 2012, directly supporting 927 jobs (632 FTE jobs) and generating an overall tourism impact of 1,217 jobs (886 FTE jobs). The two towns also attract different types of visitors. Bude attracts almost twice as many day visitors than Padstow and has a stronger family offer, while Padstow attracts more staying visitors, who spend almost twice as many nights in Padstow than in Bude. Overall, Padstow attracts more significant tourism expenditures because: ■ it receives a larger number of visitors (1.2 million day visits and visitor nights in 2012 compared to 1 million in Bude); and ■ it attracts more staying visitors (staying visitors accounted for 75% of the day visits and visitor nights in Padstow in 2012 compared to 46% in Bude). Expenditures on food and drink are significant in both towns, totalling £13 million in Bude and £15 million in Padstow, although it is unclear whether this includes purchases of food and drink from retailers as well as eating and drinking out. This suggests that the average food and drink expenditures are similar in both towns at around £13 per visitor day/night. These food and drink expenditures directly support 261 FTE jobs in Padstow and 223 FTE jobs in Bude. A further 95 FTE jobs in Padstow and 90 FTE jobs in Bude are supported by purchases from retailers, some of which may include purchases of food and drink. Table A2.20 Comparison of demographic and tourism characteristics
Padstow Bude Population (2011) 4,400 9,200
Staying visitor trips (2012) 154,900 91,000 Staying visitor nights (2012) 878,600 456,800 Staying visitor expenditure (2012) £51.5m £25.2m Average spend per visitor night £58.61 £55.14
Day visitors (2012) 289,300 542,700 Day visitor expenditure (2012) £8.8m £17.3m Average spend per day visit £30.35 £31.95
Total tourism expenditure £60.8m £43.4m Average spend per visitor day/night £52.03 £43.45 Food and drink expenditure £15.2m £13.0m Average food and drink spend £12.99 £12.98
Direct employment impact – total 909 FTEs / 1,337 jobs 632 FTEs / 927 jobs Direct employment impact – retailing 95 FTEs 90 FTEs Direct employment impact – catering 261 FTEs 223 FTEs
48 Visit Cornwall, 2012. Cornwall Towns 2012: Tourism Volume and Value Estimates
v1 July 2015 84
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Padstow Bude
Indirect employment impact – total 174 FTEs / 198 jobs 173 FTEs / 198 jobs Induced employment impact – total 54 FTEs / 62 jobs 81 FTEs / 92 jobs Total employment impact of tourism expenditures 1,137 FTEs / 1,597 jobs 886 FTEs / 1,217 jobs Source: 2011 Census, Visit Cornwall, 2012. Cornwall Towns 2012: Tourism Volume and Value Estimates
A2.4.4 Local food and drink activities It is not possible to disaggregate tourism expenditures into local and non-local food purchases using the tourism data, so the analysis must also consider supply-side estimates of the food chain. The BRES provides employment data for the towns of Padstow and Bude49 and enables comparisons with the wider Cornwall and England economies. Table A2.21 Food and drink employment, 2013
Padstow Bude Cornwall England Employment (2013) Food & drink retail50 230 (10%) 440 (12%) 14,080 (7%) 1.0m (4%) Food & drink food service51 590 (25%) 410 (11%) 17,700 (9%) 1.4m (6%) Total food & drink retail / catering 820 (35%) 850 (24%) 31,780 (15%) 2.4m (10%) Other food & drink production/ 100 (4%) 10 (0.3%) 10,300 (5%) 0.8m (3%) manufacturing/wholesale Total food chain52 53 920 (39%) 860 (24%) 42,080 (20%) 3.2m (13%) Total employment 2,360 (100%) 3,560 (100%) 206,260 (100%) 24.6m (100%) Employment growth (2009-2013) Total food & drink retail / catering 4.1% -6.9% -2.8% 0.1% Total food chain 10.9% -7.7% -2.5% 0.1% Total employment growth 2.8% -10.4% -1.9% 2.0% Source: BRES 2013 data
The data in Table A2.21 suggest that approximately 2,360 people were employed in Padstow in 2013, while 3,560 people were employed in Bude. However, there are contrasting trends in employment growth between 2009 and 2013: ■ At the national level overall employment has increased by 2% over this period, although there has been very little change in employment in the food chain; ■ Overall employment in Cornwall has fallen by 2% as a result of the economic downturn, and the food chain has experienced a similar decline; ■ Bude has experienced a more significant decrease in employment as a result of the economic downturn, both in terms of food and drink and overall employment in the town; and
49 Based on the 2011 wards of Padstow and ‘Bude South’ and ‘Bude North and Stratton’ for Bude. 50 Defined as: SIC 4711: Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating; SIC 472: Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores (excluding SIC 4726: Retail sale of tobacco products in specialised stores); and SIC 4781: Retail sale via stalls and markets of food, beverages and tobacco products 51 Defined as SIC 56: Food and beverage service activities 52 Defined as: SIC 01 (excl. SIC 01.15, 01.16, 01.3 01.43); SIC 03; SIC 10 (excl. SIC 10.9); SIC 11; SIC 28.93; SIC 46.11; SIC 46.17; SIC 46.21; SIC 46.23; SIC 46.3 (excl. SIC 46.35); SIC 47.11; SIC 47.2 (excl. SIC 47.26); SIC 47.81; and SIC 56. 53 Based on BRES employment data, which do not include all agricultural employment
v1 July 2015 85
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Padstow has experienced employment growth of almost 3% between 2009 and 2013, which is being driven by strong growth in food and drink activities. This is in contrast to the performance of the Bude and wider Cornwall economies. There are also differences in the structure of the food chain in these locations. Employment in food and drink activities in Bude has a stronger focus on retail activities, while Padstow has more significant levels of employment in food service outlets. Furthermore, the food retail activities in Bude appear to be more focused on supermarkets, while Padstow has relatively high employment in independent, specialist food retailers. Padstow also provides greater employment in the food and drink supply chain compared to Bude. In total there are estimated to be 920 people employed in the food chain in Padstow, compared to approximately 860 people in Bude. The difference is more marked when comparing food and drink employment as a share of total employment. The food chain directly accounts for 24% of all jobs in Bude and 39% of all jobs in Padstow. This demonstrates the greater significance of the food chain in Padstow, although food and drink employment is also relatively high in Bude compared to the Cornwall and national averages. There is a lack of other published economic data at the local level so turnover and GVA have been estimated for Padstow and Bude by calculating national estimates of turnover per employee and ratios of turnover to GVA for each sub-sector and applying these to the local employment data. The results are presented in Table A2.22 below. Table A2.22 Estimating scale and value of food and local food, 2013
Estimates of turnover and GVA (2013) Padstow Bude Turnover GVA Turnover GVA Total food chain Food & drink retail sales54 £27.7m £5.3m £58.4m £10.4m Supermarket sales (i.e. SIC 47.11) £21.8m £3.6m £52.7m £8.8m Independent / specialist food store sales £5.9m £1.7m £5.8m £1.6m (i.e. SIC 47.81 and SIC 47.2 – excl SIC 47.26) Food & drink food service sales55 £19.8m £9.7m £13.7m £6.7m Total food & drink retail / catering sales £47.5m £15.0m £72.2m £17.1m Other food & drink production/ manufacturing/ £30.4m £5.2m £2.4m £0.6m wholesale sales Total food chain £77.9m £20.2m £74.5m £17.7m Local food and drink Local food & drink retail sales £1.9m £0.5m £2.5m £0.6m Supermarket local food sales £0.4m £0.1m £1.1m £0.2m (2% of total food & drink turnover/GVA) Independent / specialist food stores £1.5m £0.4m £1.4m £0.4m (25% of total food & drink turnover/GVA) Local food & drink food service sales £5.0m £2.4m £3.4m £1.7m (25% of total food & drink turnover/GVA) Total sales of local food & drink £6.9m £2.9m £5.9m £2.3m Source: ICF estimates based on BRES employment data for Padstow, Bude and England, and ABS turnover and GVA data for England
54 Defined as: SIC 4711: Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating; SIC 472: Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores (excluding SIC 4726: Retail sale of tobacco products in specialised stores); and SIC 4781: Retail sale via stalls and markets of food, beverages and tobacco products 55 Defined as SIC 56: Food and beverage service activities
v1 July 2015 86
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
The data suggest that Bude has higher food sales from supermarkets as one would expect in order to cater for the larger resident population as well as the large numbers of visitors. In contrast, Padstow has relatively strong sales of food and drink through independent and specialist food retailers and particularly through food service outlets, which is consistent with a more developed local food offer. Padstow also generates more significant sales through other food related activities such as fishing, food manufacturing and food wholesaling, which also suggests that food and drink suppliers are more likely to be based locally. Overall, the food chain in Padstow is estimated to have generated sales of £78 million in 2013 and added more than £20 million of value to the local economy. This is slightly higher than the food chain in Bude, which is estimated to have generated sales of approximately £75 million in 2013 and added almost £18 million of value to the local economy. Sales of local food and drink have been estimated using a similar approach to the national analysis, which assumes: ■ 2% of the turnover of supermarkets relates to sales of local food and drink; ■ 25% of the turnover of independent and specialised food retailers relates to sales of local food and drink; and ■ 25% of the turnover of independent food service outlets relates to sales of local food and drink56. Based on these assumptions, it is estimated that local food and drink sales totalled £6.9 million in Padstow in 2013, comprising £5 million of sales through food service outlets and £1.9 million of sales from retailers and markets. It is estimated that these local food sales directly add £2.9 million in value to the local Padstow economy. Sales of local food and drink are estimated to be lower in Bude, totalling £5.9 million in 2013 and directly adding £2.3 million of value to the local economy.
A2.4.5 Tourism expenditures on local food and drink In the absence of more reliable estimates, this analysis has assumed that tourism expenditures on local food and drink are proportionate to tourism expenditures on all food and drink. For example, analysis of the local economic and tourism data suggests that tourism expenditures on food and drink in Padstow are equivalent to 32% of all food and drink sales in the town. It has therefore been assumed that tourism expenditures also account for 32% of the sales of local food and drink in Padstow, as shown in Table A2.23. This is likely to be a conservative assumption as the other research undertaken as part of this study has found that visitors are more likely, on average, to purchase local food and drink compared to local residents. In summary, the above analysis suggests that tourism expenditures account for 32% of all food and drink sales in Padstow and 18% of all food and drink sales in Bude. If tourism expenditures on local food and drink share similar characteristics then they would be expected to have totalled £2.2 million in Padstow and £1.1 million in Bude in 2013. Table A2.23 Estimating tourism expenditures on local food and drink, 2013
Padstow Bude Sales % Sales % Total food and drink Tourism expenditures on food and drink £15.2m 32% £13.0m 18% Total food & drink retail / catering sales £47.5m 100% £72.2m 100% Local food and drink Tourism expenditures on local food & drink £2.2m 32% £1.1m 18% Total sales of local food & drink £6.9m 100% £5.9m 100% Source: ICF estimates
56 Since most food service outlets in Padstow and Bude are independent outlets, it has been assumed that local food and drink sales account for 25% of all food service turnover in these locations.
v1 July 2015 87
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.4.6 Overall impacts of tourism expenditures on local food and drink As described above, tourism expenditures on local food and drink also generate multiplier effects for the local Padstow and Bude economies by supporting additional employment and incomes amongst local suppliers and as a result of the re-spending of wages and profits in the respective local economies. There will also be some displacement of tourism expenditures from other destinations and from suppliers of non-local produce and other products. However, as stated above, there is a lack of evidence to be able to produce robust estimates of these displacement effects. The direct employment and GVA impacts of tourism expenditures on local food and drink in Padstow and Bude can be estimated using the same metrics as before. This suggests that sales of local food and drink support: ■ £0.9 million of GVA57 and 47 jobs58 in food and drink retailers and food service outlets in Padstow; and ■ £0.4 million of GVA59 and 20 jobs60 in food and drink retailers and food service outlets in Bude. Padstow is likely to have a higher local multiplier because it has a particularly strong local supply chain. However, if the same local multiplier of 2.2 is applied to both areas, this suggests that tourism expenditures on local food and drink are estimated to support a total of: ■ £2 million of GVA and 103 jobs in the Padstow economy; and ■ £0.9 million of GVA and 44 jobs in the Bude economy. Table A2.24 Overall impacts of tourism expenditures on local food and drink, 2013
Padstow Bude Tourism expenditures on local food & drink £2.2m £1.1m Direct employment supported amongst local retailers & food service outlets 47 20 Direct GVA supported amongst local retailers & food service outlets £0.9m £0.4m Local multiplier 2.2 2.2 Overall employment impact in the local economy 103 44 Overall GVA impact in local the local economy £2.0m £0.9m Source: ICF estimates
A2.4.7 Data issues The above examples of Bude and Padstow were selected because additional data was available from Visit Cornwall relating to the volume and value of tourism in these particular destinations. However, there are no standard sources of tourism data available at such a local level. There is also a lack of economic data available for local rural areas in England. To define small rural areas accurately, data is required at a local level (i.e. for wards or super output areas) but very little data is available at these local levels. Employment data from the BRES is available at local levels, and was used in the above analysis, but most other sources are not published for areas smaller than local authorities. It has therefore been necessary to apply national metrics to the local employment data to produce estimates of other economic indicators in the above analysis. Local estimates can potentially be improved with access to the full IDBR data, although an analysis of
57 Assuming that every £1 of turnover in food and drink retailers in rural areas generates £0.18 of GVA 58 Assuming that £112,000 of turnover is required to support 1 job in rural food and drink retailers 59 Assuming that every £1 of turnover in food service outlets in rural areas generates £0.49 of GVA 60 Assuming that £38,200 of turnover is required to support 1 job in food service outlets in rural areas
v1 July 2015 88
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
IDBR data was not possible for Padstow and Bude because the data were too disclosive of activities of specific businesses. A2.5 Conclusions This section presents the key statistics and findings from the analysis. It also discusses the availability of data, what it does or does not tell us, and highlights the areas where it has been necessary to apply assumptions to generate these estimates.
A2.5.1 Food chain A2.5.1.1 Industry estimates The food chain is estimated to have directly contributed: ■ £103 billion to the UK economy in 2013, directly supporting 3.9 million jobs in 421,000 businesses and paying £53 billion in wages. The industry therefore directly supports approximately 7% of GVA and 13% of employment in the UK; and ■ £82 billion to the England economy in 2013, directly supporting 3.2 million jobs in 269,000 businesses and paying £42 billion in wages. The scale, value and productivity of the UK food chain has been growing over time. GVA growth in the industry has been growing at a faster rate than the UK economy as a whole. The industry has also been growing over time in England, but at a slightly slower rate than the UK as a whole. There are estimated to be more than 31,000 enterprises delivering food retail and food service activities through 37,000 outlets in rural areas of England. These outlets are estimated to generate gross sales of around £22 billion and directly contribute £6.8 billion of added value and support the employment of 350,000 people in rural areas. However, these expenditures will provide additional benefits for suppliers located in a variety of urban and rural locations, both within and beyond the local area. It is therefore necessary to apply multipliers to the direct impacts of consumer expenditures in rural areas to assess the overall impacts for the local economies. A2.5.1.2 Local food and drink Producing estimates of local food and drink activities is particularly difficult with the available data. SIC codes do not provide an appropriate means of differentiating local food and drink activities from wider food and drink activities as the data includes activities that are unrelated to local food and drink. For example, the outputs of the farming, fisheries and food processing sectors may be sold to national or international markets, while local retail outlets are likely to combine food produced locally with produce imported from further afield. The analysis in this report has combined the supply-side estimates of the overall food chain with the findings of research undertaken by the CPRE relating to the share of overall sales in retailers that are associated with local food and drink. Unfortunately, the CPRE results are more focused on retailers than food service providers and it has not been possible to identify any data relating to the sales of local food and drink through food service outlets. The case study interviews with food service businesses in rural areas suggested that local food and drink accounts for as much as 60% of the overall turnover for some businesses, although this sample was skewed towards those outlets serving local food and drink. This is a key gap in the data, which has required the use of assumptions to estimate sales of local food and drink through food service outlets in rural areas (25% of their overall turnover) and England as a whole (10% of turnover). Based on these assumptions, it is estimated that sales of local food and drink totalled: ■ £9.6 billion in England, comprising £5 billion of retail sales and £4.6 billion of sales through food service outlets; ■ £2.9 billion in rural areas of England, comprising £0.7 billion of retail sales and £2.2 billion of sales through food service outlets
v1 July 2015 89
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
The economic impact of these expenditures has been estimated using ratios calculated from turnover, GVA and employment data for the total food chain in rural areas. The results suggest that sales of local food and drink supported £1.2 billion of GVA and 64,000 jobs in rural areas of England in 2013. These expenditures on local food and drink will also generate multiplier effects for local economies by supporting additional employment and incomes amongst the supply chain for local food and drink and the additional employment and incomes supported by the re-spending of wages and profits in local economies. A review of local economic multipliers found that multipliers for local food and drink activities ranged from 1.8 to 2.8, with a mean average of 2.2. The analysis has applied the average local economic multiplier of 2.2, which suggests that sales of local food and drink in rural areas are estimated to support £2.65 billion of GVA and 140,000 jobs in local rural economies across England. A2.5.1.3 Data sources and issues The above supply-side estimates have been based on a range of published sources, particularly the Annual Business Survey (ABS), Business Register and Employment Survey (BRES) and Inter- Departmental Business Register (IDBR). The production of estimates for rural areas was more challenging than the national estimates given the lack of published data at the local level or for rural areas as a whole. However, these issues were overcome by accessing microdata on businesses through the IDBR, which were then scaled up to produce estimates for all rural areas. However, there is a common issue across all of the supply-side estimates relating to the classification of activities using SIC codes. These estimates are likely to produce overestimates of food and drink retail activities (by including retail sales of some non-food and drink products) and underestimates of food service activities (by excluding food service activities of businesses, such as hotels, theatres and sports centres, which will be included in alternative SIC codes according to the primary activity of their business).
A2.5.2 Tourism Total tourism expenditures have been estimated by aggregating the estimates for domestic overnight visitors, domestic day visitors and overseas visitors. The analysis has estimated that: ■ visitors spent £83 billion on trips in England in 2013, of which £18.5 billion was spent in rural areas; ■ visitors spent £27 billion on food and drink in England, including £6.2 billion in rural areas. ■ visitors spent £2.55 billion on local food and drink in England, including £1.44 billion in rural areas of England. The direct impacts of these expenditures on local food and drink are estimated to support £700 million of GVA and 37,400 jobs in rural areas of England, using the same ratios calculated from turnover, GVA and employment data for the total food chain in rural areas. As described above, these tourism expenditures on local food and drink will also generate multiplier effects for local economies. There are also likely to be issues relating to displacement and the extent to which increased visits and tourism expenditures on local food and drink are offset by reductions in expenditures elsewhere. Unfortunately, there is a lack of evidence relating to the displacement of tourism expenditures on local food and drink products and this could not be assessed in this analysis. However, displacement effects will be considered in more detail in the case studies that are due to be undertaken as part of this study. Applying the same local multiplier of 2.2, suggests that tourism expenditures on local food and drink in rural areas are estimated to support £1.5 billion of GVA and 81,000 jobs in local rural economies across England. A2.5.2.1 Data issues The analysis has used data from the GB Tourism Survey, GB Day Visits Survey and International Passenger Survey to produce estimates of visitor numbers and associated expenditures in England
v1 July 2015 90
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
and rural areas. Further analysis of the raw data from the GBTS and GBDVS has also enabled food and drink expenditures to be disaggregated from overall expenditures at the local authority level as well as at the national level. This has enabled the production of detailed estimates for rural areas and for England as a whole. However, there are a number of gaps in the tourism data which are listed below: ■ Tourism expenditures on local food and drink – this is not covered in the tourism surveys but has been estimated in this report by comparing tourism expenditures with the supply-side estimates of food and drink sales and assuming that tourism expenditures on local food and drink account for the same proportion of overall sales of local food and drink; ■ The extent to which visits were motivated by local food and drink – this is not covered in the tourism surveys so the analysis was not able to provide an assessment of trips that were motivated by local food and drink. However, there is evidence to suggest that trips involving activities associated with local food and drink (e.g. attending a food festival or farmers market, or eating and drinking out) are likely to be associated with higher expenditures and participation is relatively high amongst families with children and those in higher social grades; ■ Expenditures of overseas visitors in rural areas – this is not covered in the IPS so the analysis has assumed that 50% of the expenditures of those who visited rural areas during their trip, were actually spent in rural areas. However, this is an illustrative example and further study would be required to produce a more robust estimate; and ■ The IPS data does not provide estimates of food and drink related expenditures – the analysis has had to assume that expenditures of overseas visitors on food and drink represent the same share of overall expenditures as for domestic visitors on overnight trips.
A2.5.3 General data issues for local rural areas The report has also produced estimates of the economic value of local food and drink in two rural economies. To define rural areas accurately, data is required at a local level (i.e. for wards or super output areas). This analysis undertaken in this study has identified issues relating to a lack of economic and tourism data available for local rural areas in England: ■ There is very little economic data published for geographies at such a local level (except for employment data from the BRES). It was therefore necessary to apply national metrics to the local employment data to produce estimates of other economic indicators in the above analysis. Estimates can potentially be improved by accessing microdata from the IDBR, although this is not always possible if outputs are too sensitive or disclosive of activities of specific businesses at the local level; and ■ There are no standard sources of tourism data available at such a local level. The examples in this report had to use the findings of research studies to be able to estimate the volume and value of tourism in these particular destinations.
v1 July 2015 91
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.6 State of the Market report – Annex 1 – Analysis of SIC codes
Relevant to food and Relevant to food and Likely to have drink (at least in part) drink (wholly) particular relevance to local food & drink Section A Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing 01 Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities 01.1 Growing of non-perennial crops 01.11 Growing of cereals (except rice), leguminous crops and oil seeds 01.12 Growing of rice 01.13 Growing of vegetables and melons, roots and tubers 01.14 Growing of sugar cane 01.15 Growing of tobacco 01.16 Growing of fibre crops 01.19 Growing of other non-perennial crops 01.2 Growing of perennial crops 01.21 Growing of grapes 01.22 Growing of tropical and subtropical fruits 01.23 Growing of citrus fruits 01.24 Growing of pome fruits and stone fruits 01.25 Growing of other tree and bush fruits and nuts 01.26 Growing of oleaginous fruits 01.27 Growing of beverage crops 01.28 Growing of spices, aromatic, drug and pharmaceutical crops 01.29 Growing of other perennial crops 01.3 Plant propagation 01.30 Plant propagation 01.4 Animal production 01.41 Raising of dairy cattle 01.42 Raising of other cattle and buffaloes 01.43 Raising of horses and other equines 01.44 Raising of camels and camelids 01.45 Raising of sheep and goats 01.46 Raising of swine/pigs 01.47 Raising of poultry 01.49 Raising of other animals 01.5 Mixed farming 01.50 Mixed farming 01.6 Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities 01.61 Support activities for crop production 01.62 Support activities for animal production
v1 July 2015 92
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
01.62/1 Farm animal boarding and care 01.62/9 Support activities for animal production (other than farm animal boarding and care) n.e.c. 01.63 Post-harvest crop activities 01.64 Seed processing for propagation 01.7 Hunting, trapping and related service activities 01.70 Hunting, trapping and related service activities 03 Fishing and aquaculture 03.1 Fishing 03.11 Marine fishing 03.12 Freshwater fishing 03.2 Aquaculture 03.21 Marine aquaculture 03.22 Freshwater aquaculture Section C Manufacturing 10 Manufacture of food products 10.1 Processing and preserving of meat and production of meat products 10.11 Processing and preserving of meat 10.12 Processing and preserving of poultry meat 10.13 Production of meat and poultry meat products 10.2 Processing and preserving of fish, crustaceans and molluscs 10.20 Processing and preserving of fish, crustaceans and molluscs 10.3 Processing and preserving of fruit and vegetables 10.31 Processing and preserving of potatoes 10.32 Manufacture of fruit and vegetable juice 10.39 Other processing and preserving of fruit and vegetables 10.4 Manufacture of vegetable and animal oils and fats 10.41 Manufacture of oils and fats 10.42 Manufacture of margarine and similar edible fats 10.5 Manufacture of dairy products 10.51 Operation of dairies and cheese making 10.51/1 Liquid milk and cream production 10.51/2 Butter and cheese production 10.51/9 Manufacture of milk products (other than liquid milk and cream, butter, cheese) n.e.c. 10.52 Manufacture of ice cream 10.6 Manufacture of grain mill products, starches and starch products 10.61 Manufacture of grain mill products 10.61/1 Grain milling 10.61/2 Manufacture of breakfast cereals and cereals-based
v1 July 2015 93
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
foods 10.62 Manufacture of starches and starch products 10.7 Manufacture of bakery and farinaceous products 10.71 Manufacture of bread; manufacture of fresh pastry goods and cakes 10.72 Manufacture of rusks and biscuits; manufacture of preserved pastry goods and cakes 10.73 Manufacture of macaroni, noodles, couscous and similar farinaceous products 10.8 Manufacture of other food products 10.81 Manufacture of sugar 10.82 Manufacture of cocoa, chocolate and sugar confectionery 10.82/1 Manufacture of cocoa, and chocolate confectionery 10.82/2 Manufacture of sugar confectionery 10.83 Processing of tea and coffee 10.83/1 Tea processing 10.83/2 Production of coffee and coffee substitutes 10.84 Manufacture of condiments and seasonings 10.85 Manufacture of prepared meals and dishes 10.86 Manufacture of homogenised food preparations and dietetic food 10.89 Manufacture of other food products n.e.c. 11 Manufacture of beverages 11.0 Manufacture of beverages 11.01 Distilling, rectifying and blending of spirits 11.02 Manufacture of wine from grape 11.03 Manufacture of cider and other fruit wines 11.04 Manufacture of other non-distilled fermented beverages 11.05 Manufacture of beer 11.06 Manufacture of malt 11.07 Manufacture of soft drinks; production of mineral waters and other bottled waters 28 Manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c. 28.9 Manufacture of other special-purpose machinery 28.93 Manufacture of machinery for food, beverage and tobacco processing Section G Wholesale and Retail Trade; Repair of Motor Vehicles and Motorcycles 46 Wholesale trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles 46.1 Wholesale on a fee or contract basis 46.11 Agents involved in the sale of agricultural raw materials, live animals, textile raw materials and semi- finished goods 46.17 Agents involved in the sale of food, beverages and
v1 July 2015 94
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
tobacco 46.2 Wholesale of agricultural raw materials and live animals 46.21 Wholesale of grain, unmanufactured tobacco, seeds and animal feeds 46.23 Wholesale of live animals 46.3 Wholesale of food, beverages and tobacco 46.31 Wholesale of fruit and vegetables 46.32 Wholesale of meat and meat products 46.33 Wholesale of dairy products, eggs and edible oils and fats 46.34 Wholesale of beverages 46.34/1 Wholesale of fruit and vegetable juices, mineral waters and soft drinks 46.34/2 Wholesale of wine, beer, spirits and other alcoholic beverages 46.35 Wholesale of tobacco products 46.36 Wholesale of sugar and chocolate and sugar confectionery 46.37 Wholesale of coffee, tea, cocoa and spices 46.38 Wholesale of other food, including fish, crustaceans and molluscs 46.39 Non-specialised wholesale of food, beverages and tobacco 47 Retail trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles 47.1 Retail sale in non-specialised stores 47.11 Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating 47.2 Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores 47.21 Retail sale of fruit and vegetables in specialised stores 47.22 Retail sale of meat and meat products in specialised stores 47.23 Retail sale of fish, crustaceans and molluscs in specialised stores 47.24 Retail sale of bread, cakes, flour confectionery and sugar confectionery in specialised stores 47.25 Retail sale of beverages in specialised stores 47.29 Other retail sale of food in specialised stores 47.81: Retail sale via stalls and markets of food, beverages and tobacco products 56 Food and beverage service activities 56.1 Restaurants and mobile food service activities 56.10 Restaurants and mobile food service activities 56.10/1 Licensed restaurants 56.10/2 Unlicensed restaurants and cafes
v1 July 2015 95
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
56.10/3 Take away food shops and mobile food stands 56.2 Event catering and other food service activities 56.21 Event catering activities 56.29 Other food service activities 56.3 Beverage serving activities 56.30 Beverage serving activities 56.30/1 Licensed clubs 56.30/2 Public houses and bars
v1 July 2015 96
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.7 State of the Market report – Annex 2 – References ■ Boyde, T. 2001. Cusgarne organics local money flows. http://www.i-r-e.org/docs/a001_cusgarne- organics-local-money-flows.pdf ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: The value of England’s local food webs, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2897-from-field-to-fork ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Birstall, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2045-from-field-to-fork-birstall ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Darlington, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3061-from-field-to-fork- darlington ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Ely, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3808-from-field-to-fork-ely ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Faversham, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2857-from-field-to-fork- faversham ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Haslemere Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2859-from-field-to-fork- haslemere ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Hastings, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2040-from-field-to-fork- hastings ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Hexham, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3062-from-field-to-fork- hexham ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Kenilworth, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2044-from-field-to-fork- kenilworth ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Knutsford, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2041-from-field-to-fork- knutsford ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Ledbury, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2739-from-field-to-fork-ledbury ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Newark, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3389-from-field-to-fork-newark ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Norwich, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3721-from-field-to-fork- norwich ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Otley, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2865-from-field-to-fork-otley ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Penrith, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3362-from-field-to-fork-penrith ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Sheffield, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2043-from-field-to-fork- sheffield
v1 July 2015 97
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Shrewbury, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2858-from-field-to-fork- shrewsbury ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Totnes, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2042-from-field-to-fork-totnes ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Yeovil, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3249-from-field-to-fork-yeovil ■ Defra, 2014. Agriculture in the UK 2013, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/315103/auk-2013- 29may14.pdf ■ Defra, 2010. Agriculture in the UK 2009, http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/general/auk/documents/AUK-2009.pdf ■ Defra, 2014. Structure of the agricultural industry in England and the UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/structure-of-the-agricultural-industry-in- england-and-the-uk-at-june ■ Defra, 2014. Statistical Digest of Rural England 2014, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388961/Statistical_ Digest_of_Rural_England_2014_December_FINAL.pdf ■ Defra, 2011. September 2011 Statistical Feature Report ‐Tourism https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/86109/Tourism_Fea ture_Report_Sep11.pdf ■ Defra, 2012. Rural Economy Growth Review, Rural Tourism Package – Main points, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/183287/regr- tourism-mainpoints.pdf ■ Defra, 2014. Food Statistics Pocketbook 2014, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/361759/foodpocketb ook-2014report-08oct14.pdf ■ Deloitte and Oxford Economics, 2013. Tourism: jobs and growth. The economic contribution of the tourism economy in the UK, http://www.visitbritain.org/Images/Final%20proof%2015%20Nov_tcm29-39296.pdf ■ Deloitte, 2008. The economic case for the Visitor Economy, http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom- UnitedKingdom/Local%20Assets/Documents/UK_THL_VisitorEconomy_Sept08.pdf ■ Foundation for Local Food Initiatives, 2002. FLAIR. The Local Food Sector. Its size and potential, http://localfood.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/flair-report-Apr-02.pdf ■ Mintel, 2008. Locally Sourced Foods - UK (Not publicly available) ■ New Economics Foundation, 2002. The Money Trail. Measuring your impact on the local economy using LM3, http://b.3cdn.net/nefoundation/7c0985cd522f66fb75_o0m6boezu.pdf ■ New Economics Foundation, 2011. The benefits of procuring school meals through the Food for Life Partnership, http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/entry/the-benefits-of-procuring-school- meals-through-the-food-for-life-partnershi ■ Northern Ireland Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, 2014. Census of Employment statistics, http://www.detini.gov.uk/stats-census-of-employment ■ OECD, 2013. Food and the tourism experience http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/industry-and- services/food-and-the-tourism-experience_9789264171923-en ■ ONS, 2014. Living costs and food survey - Expenditure on household and eating out food & drink by urban or rural location, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/family-food- datasets
v1 July 2015 98
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ ONS, 2014. UK Business: Activity, Size and Location, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/bus- register/uk-business/index.html ■ ONS, 2014. Annual Business Survey (2013 provisional results), http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/abs/annual-business-survey/2013-provisional-results/index.html ■ ONS, 2014. Supply and use tables, 1997 – 2012, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/input-output/input- output-supply-and-use-tables/2014-edition/rft-detailed-sut-1997-2012.xls ■ ONS, 2009. UK Standard Industrial Classification 2007 (SIC 2007), http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/classifications/current-standard-classifications/standard- industrial-classification/index.html ■ ONS, 2014. United Kingdom National Accounts, The Blue Book, 2014 Edition, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/naa1-rd/united-kingdom-national-accounts/the-blue-book--2014- edition/index.html ■ ONS, 2014. Business Register and Employment Survey (accessed via NOMIS), https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/ ■ ONS, Census 2011 data (accessed via NOMIS), http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/census/2011 ■ ONS, 2013. The Economic Importance of Tourism: UK Tourism Satellite Accounts 2010 and 2011, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_323167.pdf ■ ONS, 2013. The Rural – Urban Classification for England, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/248666/Rural- Urban_Classification_leaflet__Sept_2013_.pdf ■ Scott Wilson, 2009. East Riding Tourism Accommodation Study. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations, http://www.eastriding.gov.uk/corp- docs/forwardplanning/docs/tourism/ERTourismStudy.pdf ■ Sherwood, N., 2013. Herefordshire Economic Evaluation. Opportunities to grow our local food economy, http://www.reconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Herefordshire-Economic- Evaluation-TEEconomy-Food-report.pdf ■ South West Food & Drink, 2011. SW Food & Drink Sectors, http://www.southwestfoodanddrink.com/uploads/dsfcprojectdocuments/swfd_economic_profile_rep ort.pdf ■ Speciality Food Magazine, 2014. Local Food Worth £5.7 Billion, http://www.specialityfoodmagazine.com/content/news/local_food_worth_5.7_billion_says_mp ■ UN, 2010. International Recommendations for Tourism Statistics 2008, http://unstats.un.org/unsd/publication/Seriesm/SeriesM_83rev1e.pdf ■ VisitEngland, 2010. Sustainability – Consumer Research. Summary of Findings, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Sustainabilty%20consumer%20research%20- %20March%202010_Layout%201_tcm30-19334.pdf ■ VisitEngland, 2013a. England’s Countryside: What are the opportunities?, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Country%20report_FINAL_v2_without%20summary_tcm30- 39462.pdf ■ VisitEngland, 2013b. Local food & produce. Domestic Trip Tracker Additional Food Questions – August 2013. http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Domestic%20Trip%20Tracker%20Additional%20Food%20Que stions%20-%20August%202013_tcm30-38546.pdf ■ VisitEngland, 2013c. Understanding Visitor Satisfaction 2012-13, Debrief by TNS at VisitEngland 28th August 2013, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/VE%20Visitor%20Satisfaction%20Deep%20Dive%202012- 13%20FV_V2_tcm30-38999.pdf
v1 July 2015 99
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ VisitEngland, 2014. Great Britain Tourism Survey June 2014 Update, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/05-14-June_2014_Summary_Sheet%20VE_tcm30-42606.pdf ■ VisitEngland, n.d. England Domestic Overnight Holidays Summary – 2013, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/England%20Holidays%202013_REV_tcm30-42817.pdf
v1 July 2015 100
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.8 State of the Market report – Annex 3 – Technical Annex
A2.8.1 Introduction This report has used available data and statistics to produce estimates of the overall food and tourism sectors in England, before estimating the extent to which activities and expenditures in these sectors occur in rural economies and relate to local food and drink. This technical annex provides a description of the approach, sources and assumptions that have been used to produce the estimates in this report. It also provides caveats and an indication of the robustness of the estimates produced. The following sections follow the structure of the main report. The first section describes the production of estimates for the total food chain and the extent to which these can be used to produce estimates of the ‘local food and drink’ sector. The second section describes the approaches used to estimate tourism-related expenditures and the extent to which these can be used, in combination with the sector-based estimates, to produce estimates of tourism expenditures on local food and drink. The third section describes the process for estimating the economic impact generated by tourism-related expenditures of local food and drink produce. The final section describes the production of estimates of local food and drink activities, expenditures and impacts in two rural destinations with a strong tourism offer.
A2.8.2 The food chain The local food and drink sector is a relatively small sub-sector within the wider food chain. Given the lack of data relating to local food and drink activities, the report presents estimates for the wider food chain before exploring the likely scale of local food and drink activities. A2.8.2.1 Defining the food chain This study has defined the wider food chain as comprising the following sectors: ■ SIC 01: Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities – Excl. SIC 01.15: Growing of tobacco; – Excl. SIC 01.16: Growing of fibre crops – Excl. SIC 01.3: Plant propagation – Excl. SIC 01.43: Raising of horses and other equines ■ SIC 03: Fishing and aquaculture ■ SIC 10: Manufacture of food products – Excl. SIC 10.9: Manufacture of prepared animal feeds ■ SIC 11: Manufacture of beverages ■ SIC 28.93: Manufacture of machinery for food, beverage and tobacco processing ■ SIC 46.11 Agents involved in the sale of agricultural raw materials, live animals, textile raw materials and semi-finished goods ■ SIC 46.17: Agents involved in the sale of food, beverages and tobacco ■ SIC 46.21: Wholesale of grain, unmanufactured tobacco, seeds and animal feeds ■ SIC 46.23: Wholesale of live animals ■ SIC 46.3: Wholesale of food, beverages and tobacco – Excl. SIC 46.35: Wholesale of tobacco products ■ SIC 47.11 Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating ■ SIC 47.2: Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores
v1 July 2015 101
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
– Excl. SIC 47.26: Retail sale of tobacco products in specialised stores ■ SIC 47.81: Retail sale via stalls and markets of food, beverages and tobacco products ■ SIC 56: Food and beverage service activities However, there are also some issues with this definition caused by the availability and structure of the SIC codes: ■ The definition excludes the activities of businesses for which food and drink services are not their primary activity. Some other sectors, such as ‘SIC 52.1: warehousing and storage’, ‘SIC 55: accommodation’ and ‘Section R: Arts, Entertainment and Recreation’ are also closely associated with the food chain, although it is not possible to use SIC codes to establish how much of the activity in these sectors can be attributed to food and drink. The above definition of the industry therefore excludes certain food and drink related activities, such as the activities of hotel restaurants and cafés operated by theatres, swimming pools, other sports centres, etc. ■ The definition provides an overestimate of the activities of some businesses that have secondary activities that are unrelated to food and drink. This impact has been mitigated as much as possible by excluding irrelevant SIC codes such as those relating to tobacco. However, in some cases it is not possible to use SIC codes to exclude all unrelated activities. This is a particular issue for the food retail sector because ‘SIC 47.11: Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating’, also includes ‘non-food’ sales and activities of retailers such as supermarkets that also sell electronic goods, clothing, etc. and there is insufficient data available to enable the separation of these activities. Despite these issues, the above definition is still considered the most appropriate definition of the food chain in terms of SIC codes. Further, since one of these issues results in an over-estimate and the other causes an underestimate of food and drink activities, these issues will cancel themselves out to some extent. However, it is important to highlight the fact that the estimates of the food service sector are likely to underestimate food and drink related activities, while the estimates of food retail are likely to overestimate food and drink related activities. It should also be noted that SIC codes do not provide an appropriate means of differentiating local food and drink activities from wider food and drink activities. While some of these sectors are more likely to be closely associated with local food and drink than others, even these sectors will include activities that are unrelated to local food and drink. For example, the outputs of the farming, fisheries and food processing sectors may be sold to national or international markets, while local retail outlets are likely to combine food produced locally with produce imported from further afield. SIC codes do not therefore provide an effective means of estimating activities associated with local food and drink, without the use of additional information. A2.8.2.2 Data sources for the food chain The study has produced estimates of the scale and value of the wider food chain, based on the above SIC codes, using the following sources: ■ Annual Business Survey (ABS) data relating to turnover, GVA, purchases of goods and services, employment and wages; ■ Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR) data relating to numbers of business enterprises at a national level and data relating to turnover, employment and business enterprises at a local level; ■ Business Register and Employment Survey (BRES) data relating to employment in Great Britain; ■ Northern Ireland Census of Employment data relating to employment in Northern Ireland; and ■ HMRC data (accessed via uktradeinfo) relating to imports and exports. Published data from other sources has also been used including: ■ ONS Consumer Trends data relating to consumer expenditure on food and drink; ■ ONS mid-year population estimates; and
v1 July 2015 102
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Defra data relating to the agriculture sector61 62, which is not fully covered by the other sources. A2.8.2.3 Estimating the UK food chain The report presents estimates for the UK food chain as a whole, as well as breaking this down into individual sub-sectors (comprising agriculture, fishing and aquaculture; food and drink manufacturing; manufacturing of food processing machinery; food and drink wholesalers; food and drink retailers; and food and drink service activities – such as restaurants, cafés, pubs, etc.). The estimates cover a range of economic indicators including: numbers of enterprises; turnover; GVA; purchases of goods and services; employment; and wages. The analysis also provides estimates of consumer expenditure and imports/exports of food and drink for the whole of the UK. The estimates for the UK are based solely on data collected from the above sources and for the above SIC codes and are considered robust estimates of these activities at the UK level. A2.8.2.4 Estimating the food chain in England The report presents similar estimates for the food chain in England, although the availability of data differs slightly for England and the approach has been adjusted to compensate for this. Most of the sources provide the same data for England and the UK, using the same industrial classifications (i.e. up to 4 digit SIC codes, which are necessary to match the above definition of the food chain). For example, the BRES and IDBR sources provide data relating to employment and numbers of enterprises at the 4 digit level in England. The exception is the ABS, which only provides data for 4 digit SIC codes at the UK level. The estimates of turnover, GVA, purchases and wages in England have therefore been produced by aggregating regional ABS data for each of the English regions, which is only available for 2 digit SIC codes. The 2 digit SIC codes are sufficiently detailed to produce estimates for the ‘agriculture, fishing and aquaculture’, and ‘food and drink service’ sectors and therefore use the same approach, and are equally as robust, as the UK estimates. However, it has been necessary to apply a different approach to estimate manufacturing, wholesale and retail activities, which have been defined at the 4 digit level. In these cases, the ABS data have been used to calculate metrics for each relevant 4-digit sector at the UK level (i.e. turnover, GVA, purchases and wages per employee). These metrics have been applied to the relevant BRES employment data for each respective 4 digit sector in England to produce estimates of turnover, GVA, purchases and wages in each of these sub-sectors in England. While the estimates of turnover, GVA, purchases and wages in these sub-sectors are slightly less robust than the UK estimates, the UK metrics per employee are likely to provide a good approximation of the scale of activities in England, and are therefore expected to provide robust estimates at the total England level. A2.8.2.5 Estimating the food chain in rural areas of England Producing equivalent estimates for rural areas in England is difficult due to a lack of published data relating to economic activities in urban and rural areas. Further, we are ultimately trying to estimate tourism expenditures on local food and drink, purchased from retail and food service outlets in rural areas. However, the respective supply chains for these retailers and food service outlets include food and drink wholesalers, manufacturers and producers based in a variety of urban and rural locations both within and beyond the local area. This analysis therefore focused on estimating the scale and value of food and drink retailers and food service outlets located in rural areas of England, while the impacts for local suppliers have been estimated later using economic multipliers. The approach used to estimate the scale and value of food and drink retailers and food service outlets in the report has collated economic data at the most disaggregated level available and then aggregated these to match ONS definitions of rural areas in England. The BRES is the only data source (listed above) that provides publicly available data at both a local level and for 4 digit SIC codes. However, the study team also used the ONS Virtual Microdata Laboratory (VML) to gain
61 Defra, 2014. Agriculture in the UK 2013 62 Defra, 2014. Structure of the agricultural industry in England and the UK
v1 July 2015 103
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
access to IDBR data relating to business numbers, turnover and employment at the required geographical and sectoral levels. The analysis has used the IDBR data to generate estimates for urban and rural areas, which has provided robust estimates of food and drink related activities in rural areas of England in terms of business numbers, turnover and employment. The other economic indicators (i.e. GVA, purchases from suppliers and wages) have been estimated by calculating metrics from the England data, and applying these to the respective turnover estimates in rural areas. It has therefore been necessary to assume that GVA, purchases and wages account for the same proportion of turnover and GVA in urban and rural areas of England. The use business microdata has ensured the estimates of food and drink activities in rural areas are as robust as possible. However, the use of national metrics to estimate GVA, purchases and wages mean that the estimates of these indicators for rural areas are slightly less robust than those produced for England and the UK as a whole. A2.8.2.6 Estimating local food and drink sales It is not possible to use the above data sources to differentiate local food and drink activities from wider food and drink activities. It has therefore been necessary to look at other literature and research of local food and drink activities. The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) undertook an analysis of local food networks in England in 201263 and findings from this research have been applied to the above estimates of food and drink activities in order to estimate sales of local food and drink. The findings of the CPRE study were focused on the sale of local food and drink through retail outlets and were used to produce estimates of local food and drink sales in England based on conservative assumptions that local food and drink accounts for: ■ 2% of turnover in supermarkets (using the mid-point of the CPRE estimate of 0% to 4% of turnover), which was applied to the ABS estimate of turnover in ‘SIC 47.11: Retail sale in non- specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating’; and ■ 25% of turnover in independent stores (compared to the CPRE survey results, which suggest that local food sales account for more than 25% of turnover for two-thirds of independent stores), which was applied to the ABS estimate of turnover for ‘SIC 47.2: Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores’ (excluding ‘SIC 47.26: Retail sale of tobacco products in specialised stores’) and ‘SIC 47.81: Retail sale via stalls and markets of food, beverages and tobacco products’. However, there is a lack of evidence relating to sales of locally sourced food and drink through food service outlets. It was assumed that local food and drink sales account for 10% of total sales through all food service outlets in England based on the assumption that, on average, these outlets are likely to sell more locally sourced produce than supermarkets but less than specialist food retailers and markets. It is therefore important to note that this is an illustrative example and is not based on any robust data. A similar approach was used to estimate food and drink sales in rural areas. It used the same assumptions for the sales of local food as a proportion of the total turnover of retailers but modified the assumptions relating to food service outlets in rural areas to account for the increased prevalence of independent establishments in rural areas. Independent establishments in rural areas are considered much more likely to provide locally sourced food and drink compared to chains and other multiple outlets that are more likely to be located in urban areas and more likely to source products and supplies from further afield, through centralised procurement channels. The estimates for rural food service outlets are therefore based on the same assumption as independent retailers, that local food and drink sales account for 25% of their total turnover. However, it should again be noted that this estimate is based on an assumption and not on robust evidence. A small number of interviews were undertaken with food service businesses in rural areas to inform the wider research project, which suggested that local food and drink could account for as much as 60% of the overall turnover for some businesses. While this sample was skewed towards those outlets serving local food and drink, it does
63 CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: The value of England’s local food webs
v1 July 2015 104
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
suggest that an assumption that local food and drink accounts for an average of 25% of turnover is not unrealistic. A2.8.2.7 Estimating the economic contribution of local food and drink in rural areas The direct economic contribution of the above expenditures was estimated using ratios of GVA and jobs to turnover, which were taken from the total food chain in rural areas. These ratios were applied to the turnover estimates for local food and drink in rural areas to produce estimates of GVA and employment. The indirect impacts for the supply chain and induced effects from the re-spending of wages and profits in the local economy were estimated using a local economic multiplier of 2.2. This multiplier was selected based on a review of relevant studies, which found that the multiplier effect for local food and drink activities ranged from 1.8 to 2.8, and is considered a robust estimate for the purposes of this study.
A2.8.3 Defining the tourism industry A2.8.3.1 Defining the tourism industry Tourism is a multidimensional and multifaceted activity, which covers a variety of different economic activities, and is therefore difficult to define. The Tourism Satellite Account (TSA) is recognised as the ‘international standard’ for measuring tourism activities and their economic contribution. The TSA produces estimates of tourism based on: ■ Estimates of the demand side, based on estimates from the core UK surveys of tourism, which are described below; and ■ Estimates of the supply side using data from published estimates for each of the following industries that serve tourists: – Accommodation services; – Food and drink serving services; – Passenger transport services; – Transport rental services; – Travel agencies and other reservation services; – Cultural activities; – Sport and recreation activities; – Exhibitions and conferences; and – Other products consumed by visitors. This study focused on estimating tourism expenditures on food and drink in rural areas and therefore used a similar approach which compared supply-side evidence described in section A2.8.2, with demand-side evidence from the three core tourism surveys: ■ Great Britain Day Visits Survey (GBDVS); ■ Great Britain Tourism Survey (GBTS); and ■ International Passengers Survey (IPS). These sources provide robust estimates of visitor trips and expenditures, but again do not provide an appropriate means of disaggregating expenditures on local food and drink from the overall food and drink expenditures. A2.8.3.2 Estimating Domestic Day Trips and Expenditures in England The GBDVS provides estimates of volumes and values of day visits undertaken in the UK by residents of Great Britain. The estimates produced in this report are based on the ‘tourism day visits’ definition which comprises leisure day visits that: ■ last at least three hours including travel; ■ involve participation in one of 15 leisure activities;
v1 July 2015 105
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ do not include an activity which is undertaken "very regularly"; and ■ take place in a destination outside the respondent's place of residence (or place of work if this was the start point of the trip)64. The GBDVS provides estimates of leisure day visits and associated expenditures for: ■ England as a whole and disaggregated into ‘seaside’, ‘large city / large town’, ‘small town’ and ‘countryside / village’ locations; and ■ All local authorities in England (based on a three-year rolling average to provide robust samples). The analysis used a number of approaches to produce estimates for rural areas. The most basic approach simply used the VisitEngland category for ‘countryside / village’ locations, although this is likely to underestimate tourism activities in rural areas as it excludes activities associated with rural destinations in ‘seaside’ locations. The second approach used the latest ONS conversion tool to convert local authority estimates into ‘mainly rural’, ‘largely rural’, ‘urban with significant rural’, ‘urban with city and town’, ‘urban with minor conurbation’ and ‘urban with major conurbation’ areas. The ‘mainly rural’ and ‘largely rural’ categories were combined to create overall estimates for all rural areas in England. The final approach, and most robust estimates, were based on the ONS estimates of the share of the local population of each local authority that is classified as ‘rural’. These shares were applied to the tourism data for each local authority and combined to produce a total for all rural areas of England. Food and drink expenditures are captured in the GBDVS in the eating and drinking category, which disaggregates eating and drinking in cafés, restaurants, etc. from purchases of food in shops, takeaways, etc. The disaggregated expenditure data from the GBDVS is only published at the national level and is not available for sub-national areas. However, additional data was sourced from Visit England to provide disaggregated expenditures at the local authority level, which were used to create estimates for all rural areas using the approaches described above. Unfortunately the GBDVS does not collect information relating to motivations or purchases of local food and drink, so it has not been possible to use the GBTS data to estimate expenditures relating to local food and drink. A2.8.3.3 Estimating Domestic Overnight Trips, Bed-nights and Expenditures in England The GBTS provides estimates of volumes and values of domestic tourism that includes an overnight stay in Great Britain. It provides estimates of overnight tourism trips, bed-nights and expenditures for the same geographic locations as the GBDVS. However, the GBTS differs from the GBDVS in terms of expenditure data. In the GBTS, food and drink purchases are included in the ‘eating and drinking out’ category, but this is likely to exclude purchases of food and drink from retailers included in the ‘other shopping’ category. It is not possible to disaggregate the ‘other shopping’ category so retail purchases of food and drink have been estimated using evidence from the GBDVS (i.e. the GBDVS found that ‘Food bought in shops / takeaways and consumed on the trip’ accounted for 20% of all retail purchases and the same assumption has been applied to domestic overnight visitors). As with the GBDVS, the expenditure data from the GBTS is only published at a national level, although sub-national data was sourced separately from VisitEngland to enable the production of more robust estimates of tourism activities in rural areas of England. However, as with the GBDVS, it has not been possible to use GBTS data to estimate expenditures relating to local food and drink. A2.8.3.4 Estimating Trips, Bed-nights and Expenditures from Overseas Visitors in England The IPS provides data relating to trips, bed-nights and expenditures associated with overseas visitors. The data is available for England as a whole but the 2011 survey data can also be disaggregated to show visits that included a trip to the ‘countryside or villages’ in England. Unfortunately the data are
64 The exceptions to this are trips to special public events, live sporting events and visitor attractions.
v1 July 2015 106
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
only able to show the total number of visits, nights and expenditures for the entire trip, rather than those specifically undertaken in the countryside. It is assumed that many of these trips will have included significant time and expenditures in urban areas so, in the absence of alternative evidence, it was assumed that (of those who undertook a trip to the ‘countryside or villages’ in England) 50% of these nights and expenditures would have occurred in rural areas and 50% would have occurred in urban areas. However, this is an illustrative example and is not based on robust evidence. The IPS data does not separate expenditures into retail purchases of food and drink and eating and drinking out. Estimates have therefore been produced based on an assumption that overseas visitors spend the same proportion of their expenditure on food and drink as domestic overnight visitors. Again, this is considered the most realistic assumption in the absence of reliable evidence for overseas visitors. A2.8.3.5 Estimating Tourism Expenditures on Local and Drink in Rural England Total tourism expenditures on trips to England and rural areas of England have been estimated by aggregating the expenditure estimates for domestic overnight visitors, domestic day visitors and overseas visitors. This includes estimates of total food and drink expenditures, as well as specific estimates for eating and drinking out, and retail purchases of food and drink. As stated above, the tourism data does not disaggregate tourism expenditures into purchases of local and non-local food and drink. These have been estimated by assessing tourism expenditures alongside the supply-side estimates, based on an assumption that tourism expenditures account for the same proportion of sales of local food and drink as non-local food and drink. As visitors are considered more likely to purchase local food and drink than non-visitors, this assumption is likely to produce a conservative estimate of tourism expenditures on local food and drink. The estimates suggest that tourism expenditures on eating and drinking out account for 53% of overall sales in the food service sector in England and 63% in rural areas. Similarly, tourism expenditures are estimated to account for 2% of food and drink retail purchases in England and 5% of purchases in rural areas. These percentages appear high for expenditures in the food service sector and relatively low in the retail sector. As described above, this is primarily because the supply-side data are likely to overestimate sales from the retail sector and underestimate sales from the food service sector.
A2.8.4 Economic Impacts and Additionality Tourism expenditures on local food and drink will also generate multiplier effects for local economies by supporting additional employment and incomes amongst the supply chain for local food and drink and the additional employment and incomes supported by the re-spending of wages and profits in local economies. A2.8.4.1 Displacement Displacement effects are concerned with the extent to which increased tourism visits and expenditures on local food and drink are offset by reductions in expenditures elsewhere. Unfortunately there is a lack of evidence relating to the displacement of tourism expenditures on local food and drink products, although one study suggested that displacement effects are likely to be minimal, and that expenditure on local products tends to be additional to expenditure on other products. The case studies undertaken to inform this study were also unable to provide much evidence about the significance of displacement effects. The case study businesses described views about what might happen in the absence of a local food offer but these were somewhat speculative and varied between the case study locations. There is therefore insufficient evidence available to confirm whether displacement effects are likely to be an issue for local food and drink in rural areas and, if so, the potential scale of these displacement effects in rural areas of England.
v1 July 2015 107
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A2.8.4.2 Multipliers The same local economic multiplier of 2.2 has been applied to assess the impacts of tourism expenditures and is considered the best estimate based on a review of research evidence.
A2.8.5 Comparative analysis of two rural destinations The report also includes a comparative analysis of two rural destinations: one with a more developed local food offer and one with a less-developed offer. Given the lack of economic and tourism data available for local rural areas, the destinations of Padstow and Bude were selected, in part, because of the availability of published evidence relating to their food and drink and tourism activities. A2.8.5.1 Estimating local food and drink sales Supply-side estimates were produced using employment data from the BRES, which is available for the towns of Padstow and Bude, using the sectors defined in section A2.8.2.1. There is a lack of other published economic data at the local level so turnover and GVA have been estimated for Padstow and Bude by calculating national estimates of turnover per employee and ratios of turnover to GVA for each sub-sector and applying these to the local employment data. Sales of local food and drink were estimated using a similar approach to the national analysis, based on assumptions that: ■ 2% of the turnover of supermarkets relates to sales of local food and drink; ■ 25% of the turnover of independent and specialised food retailers relates to sales of local food and drink; and ■ 25% of the turnover of independent food service outlets relates to sales of local food and drink65. A2.8.5.2 Estimating tourism expenditures Visit Cornwall commissioned research in 2012 to estimate the scale and value of tourism in 12 key towns in the county, including Padstow and Bude66. The research provides estimates of visitor trips and expenditures, including expenditures on food and drink, and employment impacts for retail and catering sectors. A2.8.5.3 Estimating tourism expenditures on local food and drink In the absence of more reliable estimates, the analysis assumed that tourism expenditures of local food and drink were proportionate to tourism expenditures of all food and drink. As above, this is likely to provide a conservative estimate of tourism expenditures on local food and drink, as visitors are considered more likely to purchase local food and drink than non-visitors. A2.8.5.4 Overall impacts of tourism expenditures on local food and drink As before, these tourism expenditures on local food and drink will generate multiplier effects for the local Padstow and Bude economies by supporting additional employment and incomes amongst local suppliers and as a result of the re-spending of wages and profits in the respective local economies. These have again been estimated by applying a local economic multiplier of 2.2 in each location. There is also likely to be some displacement of tourism expenditures from other destinations and from suppliers of non-local produce and other products. However, there is a lack of evidence to be able to produce robust estimates of these displacement effects without additional primary research.
65 Since most food service outlets in Padstow and Bude are independent outlets, it has been assumed that local food and drink sales account for 25% of all food service turnover in these locations. 66 Visit Cornwall, 2012. Cornwall Towns 2012: Tourism Volume and Value Estimates
v1 July 2015 108
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Annex 3 Case studies
A3.1 Amble
A3.1.1 Overview of tourism and local food and drink sector A3.1.1.1 Market overview Northumberland was one of the top ranking locations in VisitEngland’s 2014 report on visitor satisfaction. As traditional industries have declined in the area (mining and manufacturing), tourism has grown in importance to the economy. Tourism is the biggest employer on the coast. In 2013, 8.9 million visitors came to Northumberland and spent £730 million (both directly and indirectly). Nearly 40 per cent of the expenditure (£261 million) was directly spent on food and drink. Northumberland Tourism has a target of increasing the economic value of tourism by 6 per cent year-on-year. Amble is Northumberland's most important fishing centre north of the River Tyne. There are three trawlers and a number of smaller day fishers. There is a small marine industry, concentrated on the construction and repair of yachts and other pleasure craft. Leisure sailing has also become important and in addition to the marina, the town has a yacht and boat club. Amble is a popular holiday resort and tourism forms an important sector of Amble’s economy. There are several caravan parks, guest houses and B&Bs catering for visitors to the Northumberland coast. The neighbouring towns of Warkworth, Alnwick and Alnmouth have historically had visitors from a higher income group compared to those visiting Amble. Further up the coast, Craster and Seahouses both have a distinct food offer that attracts visitors (e.g. Craster kippers, real ale and crab sandwiches). Seahouses is well known for its fish and chips. But in Amble town the number of food- related businesses has grown in the last five years and there are increasing numbers of people visiting Amble because of its food offer. New restaurants such as Zecca and The Old Boat House and the catering school have influenced this change. There are a growing number of food and drink producers in Northumberland. Generally dining and food buying decisions are driven by price for locals and visitors alike, however there is growing evidence that people are interested in food provenance and quality. A3.1.1.2 Coordination of the local food and drink sector Amble Development Trust is a social enterprise aimed at economic regeneration in Amble which supports a number of initiatives related to local food and drink. They own three retail units on the High Street. One is the ‘Pride of Northumberland’, a café and shop selling local foods as well as a hospitality and catering school. Sixty National Vocational Qualifications and eight apprentices are being funded in partnership with Northumberland College. The baked goods produced at the school are sold in the café. The Trust also owns Fourways Foods, which provides distribution for local food companies including Blagdon Farm Shop, Lindasfarne, Proof of the Pudding, and Cake Route. The Harbour in Amble is managed by the Warkworth Harbour Commissioners, an organisation made up of representatives from local business and decision makers. Northumberland County Council supports the local food and drink sector through several initiatives (see section A3.1.4). Northumberland Tourism plays an advocacy role.
A3.1.2 Importance of local food and drink to tourism and the local economy A3.1.2.1 Local food and drink sales and turnover Following the closure of the factory site on Amble’s Coquet industrial estate, a consultation was held to decide how to utilise the site. The conclusion of independent research on the issue was to use the site as a food hub (Team, 2013). The research also identified that Amble has excellent mollusc beds and that Amble could support up to 12 food outlets. There are now six restaurants in Amble: Zecca’s (Italian), SeaSalt (modern European), the Old Boat House (fish), the Taj Mahal restaurant (Indian and Bangladeshi cuisine) and The Granary (traditional
v1 July 2015 109
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
British). Two of these restaurants source between 40 and 60 per cent of their products from local suppliers. They cite quality and marketing benefits as the main reasons for sourcing locally. Those that do not source locally cite the prohibitive costs of local products and supply chain issues as reasons for not sourcing locally. A shack-style fish eatery is expected to open later in 2015 at the east end of the harbour. A waterfront development of 17 apartments, Coble Quay, is currently under construction. As part of this development, there will be two retail units which will likely be food outlets (The Ambler, 2014). The Pride of Northumbria is a bakery/café and catering training centre. The bakery uses some flour from a local flour mill. The cafe stocks a range of food products all from local suppliers: Chain Bridge Honey, KenSpeckle chocolate and sweets, MadWoman jam and preserves, Northumberland Tea, Northumblerand Cheese Company cheese and Lindasfarne Mead. The Pride of Northumbria is a social enterprise and it sources locally for the positive economic benefits. There are several cafes and tea shops in Amble, as well as a fishmonger and two butchers (The Amble Butcher & RC Roland & Son). Spurelli’s is an artisan ice-cream maker with a parlour in Amble town. All the cream and milk used to produce the ice cream comes from a dairy farm in Northumberland near Hexham. Some of the other ingredients also come from the region, for example, Chain Bridge Honey and Alnwick rum. Spurelli’s actively markets the local provenance of the ice cream and ‘customers are prepared to pay more for’ its high quality. Spurelli’s is looking to expand their premises. A3.1.2.2 Impact of local food and drink on visitor numbers and spending Does local food and drink attract visitors? Tourists come to Northumberland for the landscape, countryside, wildlife, outdoor activities and natural beauty. Tourism in Amble is primarily centred on the harbour front. There has been a year-on- year growth in visitor numbers. Visitors are a mixture of UK nationals and overseas holiday-makers. There is a large caravan park which is popular for domestic visitors. Amble also has a marina with visitors sailing in from Scandinavia, the Netherlands and Germany. People visit Amble for the atmosphere, friendly people and wide range of recreational activities (walking, bird spotting, puffin cruises, water sports etc.). According to local businesses and the County Council, recent TV programmes such as ITV’s ‘Tales from Northumberland’ have had an invaluable impact on the area in terms of tourist numbers. There is an annual puffin festival at the end of May which attracts visitors. All stakeholders interviewed agreed that currently visitors do not specifically come to Amble for the food and drink offer. It is however adding to the tourist experience and people are keen to try new local and regional, good quality food. There is a targeted ongoing initiative to brand Amble as a “seafood town” to attract local visitors and tourists. The Harbour Village is expected to lead to an increase in visitor numbers. Visitor spending on local food and drink There is no quantitative evidence that visitors spend more for local products than they would otherwise for a non-local food offer, nor evidence that businesses sourcing locally benefit more from visitor spend. At the Old Boat House, prices of dishes are higher than other competing local outlets. A3.1.2.3 Employment and multiplier effects Following the closure of the factory site unemployment rose in Amble. Tesco received planning permission in 2009 to build a superstore and there were hopes in the community that the new store would create a lot of jobs, but Tesco announced earlier in 2015 that it would not follow through with its plans. Whilst tourism does not create a lot of permanent jobs instantly (in comparison, for example, to a new manufacturing site), one consultee noted that it ‘gradually adds jobs here and there, which all add up.’ All businesses interviewed employ staff that live within 10 miles of the site. The Old Boat House now has around 700 customers per week and employs between 12 and 20 staff. SeaSalt restaurant which
v1 July 2015 110
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
opened in 2014 employs 10 employees year-round. In peak season, additional casual staff are employed.
A3.1.3 Challenges to the development of local food and drink The geography of the county creates challenges for the development of a local food and drink offer. Food producers in Northumberland are typically micro-businesses producing high quality, low batches of niche products. A key challenge faced by these producers is the sheer size of the county and the fact that the population is dispersed. Distribution is a major barrier for suppliers who face very high delivery costs. Amble Development Trust set up Fourways Foods Distribution for local producers and suppliers to help overcome this issue, but it has not completely resolved the problem (see section A3.1.1.2). Around 98 per cent of the fish and seafood landed at Amble goes on the road train and is exported to continental Europe, mainly to France and Spain. The Amble Development Trust has appointed seabrokers to work with the local fishing industry to encourage them to sell directly to food outlets in Amble to help grow the identity of Amble as a seafood town. Two restaurants have secured licences to buy direct from fishermen (Zecca, 2015). The langoustines caught in the North Sea by Amble fisherman represent a significant share of the total EU catch. Several interviewees mentioned more needs to be done to grow the profile of the seafood and fish offer. The Northumberland County Council indicated that their discussions with buyers suggest a need for additional suppliers in the area. More milk and dairy products are needed. Support is needed to help farmers diversify. Large supplies of jams and preserves are needed for cooking/catering. Other barriers include lack of information. For example, buyers, restaurants and retailers do not know about all of the local suppliers. The Council runs engagement events and workshops to understand where the gaps are and connect people. There is a pronounced seasonality in visitor numbers which causes problems for micro-businesses who struggle to keep up with demand in high season. Seasonality also creates difficulties in staffing. Price is also a barrier. Chefs and B&Bs believe that locally sourced food carries a significant price premium. Consultees indicated that there is a need to help producers with pricing and then communicate to chefs/accommodation sectors that prices are not necessarily prohibitive.
A3.1.4 Existing initiatives and business approaches to developing the local food and drink offer Northumberland has lagged behind other areas in its local food and drink offering, for example, as compared to Lincolnshire. But in 2007-2008 there was a change of strategy in the county, and the Council helped to set up farmers markets across Northumberlsand. The Council had money from the LEADER programme to help producers buy equipment to increase capacity. The Harbour Village is due to open in May 2015 as part of Amble’s strategy to become a food hub (Amble Harbour Village, 2015; see section A3.1.2.1). This has been funded by the UK Government’s Coastal Communities Fund. The Village will include 15 new ‘pods’ (small sales outlets) and a seafood centre. The Harbour Village and pods which will be managed by ARCH. The Amble Development Trust has employed two seafood brokers to co-operate with the local fishing industry. The pods are available for new business start-ups. Five are already accounted for and will sell crafts, jewellery, artisan coffee and a traditional sweet shop. The Seafood Centre will help to grow Amble’s identity as focussed on seafood. Amble Development Trust is working with Newcastle University to explore the possibility of establishing a lobster hatchery in Amble, firstly to aid the sustainability of the fisheries and secondly as a visitor attraction. Northumberland County Council funded ‘Made in Northumberland’ which was subsequently dropped. Tourism is not seen as a priority. Northumberland County runs a ‘Meet the Maker’ networking event where 120 suppliers meet 180 regional buyers and distributors. A Tasty Food Trails and brochure was developed in conjunction with Defra as part of The Northern Lands Initiative (Visit Northumberland, 2015). One of the trails is focused on the south east Northumberland coast covering Amble. The brochure was produced for chefs to give them more
v1 July 2015 111
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
complete and up-to-date information about local Northumbrian food and drink suppliers. Defra supported the development of a ‘Food Tourism Business Toolkit’ to help the local food and drink sector. Northumberland County Council also supports the food markets which take place in Anwick, Morpeth, Berwick, Hexham and Ponteland. There is also two-day food festivals in Alnwick, Morpeth, Berwick and a chilli festival. The annual county show at Corbridge is very important for the local food and drink sector. In the past the government gave funding for Northumbria Larder which then became the Taste Club although this funding has expired. Northumberland Tourism prints 40,000 visitor guides every year to give to visitors on arrival. This includes a guide to local food and drink.
A3.1.5 Opportunities for the development of the local food and drink offer Opportunities identified by interviewees to develop the local food and drink offer include: ■ A distribution hub – physical and or virtual – to help reduce delivery costs (ideally near the A1(M)). At the same time, it would be helpful to expand existing distribution methods, including FourWays Foods. ■ Access to information / expertise / advice is required to help local food and drink producers and suppliers. Advice is needed to help understand legislation and regulations. A directory of Northumberland food and drink suppliers would enable buyers to know what products are available and where to find them (Northumberland County Council has started work on this). There is a need to encourage collaboration between small producers and suppliers. ■ Grow the profile and identity of Amble (and Northumberland) as a food destination. Interviewees mentioned other nearby tourist areas which have successfully capitalised on local food and drink such as Yorkshire.
A3.1.6 Conclusions The recent initiatives in Amble have helped to diversify the food and drink offer. These initiatives are helping to change the perception of Amble and leading to economic regeneration. The main benefit is the higher value of local produce. There are also benefits in terms of job creation for local residents and new business for distributers and suppliers. The opening of the Harbour Village, seafood centre and the lobster hatchery later in 2015 should help to solidify Amble’s reputation as a destination for good quality food. A3.2 Bude
A3.2.1 Overview of tourism and local food and drink sector A3.2.1.1 Market overview Bude is a popular tourist destination on the north Cornwall coast, close to the border with Devon. It is a rural town with a population of approximately 9,200 (UK Census, 2011). It was previously a busy commercial port, which became a popular tourist destination in the 19th century with the introduction of rail services to the town. The town has two sandy beaches and offers a wide range of watersports and other recreational activities and is a particularly popular destination for families. Tourism is a major contributor to the Cornish economy, supporting one in four jobs in the county (Visit Cornwall, 2011). Visit Cornwall estimated that Cornwall attracted more than 18 million visitors in 2011. These visitors stayed for a total of 23 million nights, made 14 million day trips and spent almost £1.9 billion in Cornwall in 2011, including approximately £500 million spent on food and drink (2011 prices) (Ibid.). Tourism is very important to the local economy in Bude. Visit Cornwall commissioned research in 2012 to estimate the scale and value of tourism in 12 key towns in the county including Bude. The research estimated total visitor expenditures of more than £43 million in Bude in 2012, including more than £13 million spent on food and drink. These tourism expenditures were estimated to support more
v1 July 2015 112
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
than 1,200 jobs, which represents around one in three of all jobs in Bude. The above figures are also likely to have increased significantly following two very strong years for tourism in Cornwall in 2013 and 2014. Cornwall also has a significant food and drink industry. The value of Cornwall’s agri-food sector was estimated to be £1.4 billion in 2011 (University of Exeter, 2011), while the Cornwall Food & Drink organisation estimates that this value has since increased to around £2 billion following two good summer seasons, increased industry investment, growth of exports and wider trade developments (Cornwall Food & Drink, 2015). The county has a long association with local food and drink. A survey of visitors to Cornwall, undertaken in 2002 (Cornwall Taste of the West, 2002), found that nearly all respondents had tried local foods during their visit and almost 70 per cent had selected places to eat or stay because they offered local produce. The survey also found that the local products most frequently purchased by visitors were Cornish pasties and clotted cream. Cornwall’s reputation for offering visitors good quality, locally produced food and drink has been developing and growing rapidly over time and has been expanding to cover a greater range of food and drink products. A recent survey, undertaken in 2014 (Cornwall Food & Drink, 2015), found that respondents described a much broader variety of produce associated with Cornwall including fish/seafood, pasties, clotted cream, beer/ales, cream teas, ice cream, cheese, wine, fruit and vegetables. Nearly all respondents ranked the quality of Cornish food and drink as good or exceptionally good (more than half of whom described it as being exceptionally good), while the most popular words used to describe Cornish produce were ‘fresh’, ‘tasty’, ‘local’ and a collection of positive descriptors such as ‘great’, ‘fabulous’ and ‘sublime’. The survey found very few negative associations, which were mainly associated with the price or richness of Cornish food and drink. The survey also found strong links between Cornish food and drink and tourism as more than 80 per cent of the respondents who were visitors to Cornwall stated that the food and drink offer had influenced their choice of destination, while it had either quite a lot of influence or a very heavy influence on the decisions of more than 40 per cent. The responses also suggested that three-quarters of Cornwall residents take holidays in Cornwall and, despite having year-round access to Cornish food and drink, this group suggested that food and drink was an even greater influence on their choice of destination. This finding suggests that the food and drink offer in Cornwall is likely to vary significantly between different local areas in the county. Bude has a developing offer for local food and drink. The town centre provides a wide range of independent shops and outlets serving food and drink, many of which provide at least some locally produced food and drink. Bude has a growing food-related supply chain, comprising a number of food- related producers, manufacturers and wholesalers in the town, supported by many farms and other food-related activities within the local area. Bude has ambitions to develop its own local food and drink offer and recently launched the first ‘Bude for Food’ festival in September 2014, which showcased the products and services of more than 60 local food and drink businesses, and the Bude for Food Assembly, which is developing additional routes to market for local producers. However, the local food and drink offer and these recent initiatives are currently being driven by the suppliers of local food and drink in Bude. The future development of the local food and drink offer in Bude would benefit from greater involvement of customer serving businesses, such as retailers, food service outlets and accommodation providers to make more local produce available to local residents and visitors, whilst also helping to increase the quality of the local tourism product. A3.2.1.2 Coordination of local food and drink sector There are a number of key stakeholders involved in promoting, developing and coordinating the local food and drink sector, alongside the wider food and drink and tourism sectors, in Bude and the rest of Cornwall. Some of the key organisations are listed below: ■ The Rural Delivery Team is part of the Cornwall Development Company. It was originally funded by the Objective One programme to facilitate applications from the agricultural, horticultural, food and land based industries of Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. Since 2008 it has secured funding
v1 July 2015 113
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
from Cornwall Council, the Rural Development Programme for England (RDPE) and Cornwall Development Company and is now responsible for: – working with the Cornwall Agri-food Council to further the strategic development of agriculture, horticulture, food and the land based sector in Cornwall; – working with potential RDPE applicants to develop quality submissions; and – informing and delivering other activities and initiatives to encourage the development and growth of the economy in rural areas across Cornwall. ■ Visit Cornwall is responsible for growing Cornwall’s visitor economy through marketing and PR activities, and aims to continually grow awareness of Cornwall to existing customers and new markets. It therefore plays a key role in promoting Cornwall as a destination for good quality, locally produced food and drink. Visit Cornwall also commissions research projects covering a range of themes such as visitor profiles, tourism / economic impacts, occupancy levels etc. Visit Cornwall became a community interest company on 1st April 2015 and received funding from Cornwall Council to support this transition, although it also generates income from partnerships, sponsorship, membership fees and advertising income. ■ Cornwall Food & Drink is responsible for promoting its members and the wider food and drink sector in Cornwall and supporting the role of food and drink in contributing towards Cornwall’s economy. It delivers events to promote the sector, provides support to members and also undertakes research to identify and maximise market opportunities for Cornish food and drink businesses. ■ Taste of the West is a membership organisation for more than 1,000 food and drink businesses in the South West. It promotes and supports local food and drink from Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire. It also delivers marketing and consultancy services to clients, including event management, marketing campaigns, business advice and project delivery, and offers the largest regional awards programme in the UK for food and drink products as well as retailers, restaurants, pubs, hotels and cafés. ■ Bude for Food is a not for profit organisation, which was recently established to raise Bude’s profile as a food destination regionally, nationally and internationally. It aims to promote the local food and drink offer and encourage year-round visitors to extend the tourism season through initiatives such as the Bude for Food festival, which took place for the first time in September 2014 and is expected to become an annual event. All profits from the events and initiatives are being invested in promoting further food and drink related activities that will encourage an extended tourist season, creating future employment and business opportunities for the area. Bude for Food also has wider plans involving training, developing links with local businesses, developing opportunities for start-up food businesses and supporting entrepreneurs to deliver positive benefits for local businesses, the local community and the local economy. ■ Bude for Food Assembly is a group of local producers of food and drink, which was established in 2014, and provides a distribution hub through which people buy directly from farmers and local food producers, using a ‘click and collect’ service. The group focuses on producers within a 20 mile radius of Bude and aims to support the local food and drink sector by developing additional routes to market and generating additional demand for local food and drink products.
A3.2.2 Importance of local food and drink to tourism and the local economy Food and drink has always been a significant contributor to the local Bude economy. There are many food and drink suppliers in the local area, which support local employment and incomes, while the large number of visitors to Bude creates significant additional demand for food and drink, particularly in the summer months. The local food and drink offer is less well-developed in Bude, compared to some other areas of Cornwall, but is now increasing in terms of its importance for tourism and the local economy.
v1 July 2015 114
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A3.2.2.1 Local food and drink sales and turnover This case study has been informed by interviews with representatives of three food producers/ processors, four food service outlets (restaurants, shops, accommodation providers), and five stakeholder organisations. These stakeholders and businesses typically defined local produce as being food and drink produced in Cornwall or north west Devon, although the interviews also discussed food and drink produced within the local Bude area (i.e. within a radius of around 10 miles). It is difficult to estimate the proportion of turnover that is typically attributable to sales of local food and drink because there is considerable variance, both between different types of establishment, but also between different establishments of the same type. For example: ■ Sales of local food and drink make up a relatively small proportion of the turnover of accommodation providers in Bude (e.g. around 10 to 20 per cent for one hotel), but can represent 100 per cent of turnover for local farmers and producers of food and drink; ■ There can be differences between the same types of business. Some restaurants in Padstow purchase the majority of their ingredients from local suppliers, while others use nationwide wholesalers and purchase very little local produce. However, the interviews did provide some insights into the likely scale of local food and drink sales in Bude. For example, a local fisherman was reported to sell all of his produce to local customers, although this was in contrast to the local farms and food processors, for whom local markets were much less significant. Two local farms were selling their produce to a combination of local and national customers (businesses and direct sales to individual consumers) with around half of their produce staying in Cornwall, while a local food processor reported that sales were split between retailers and direct sales to consumers, with only around 25 per cent of sales to customers in Cornwall. None of the interviewed farms or food processors were selling produce to local restaurants, pubs or cafés. Food and drink manufacturers and customer serving businesses such as retailers, food service outlets and accommodation providers were also asked about their purchases of local produce. The interviews found that: ■ A food processor was committed to sourcing as locally as possible. Almost all purchases of produce were from suppliers within Cornwall and most were from within the local Bude area. The processor was sourcing locally because of the quality of local produce but also because it fits with the business ethos of using local produce, which is also used to promote the products to customers. ■ A local wholesaler/retailer of fish and other food and drink was sourcing a mix of local and non- local products. Most fresh produce was being sourced locally from within Cornwall, while most other products were sourced from outside of Cornwall. It was estimated that 70 per cent of products were sourced from within Cornwall, including the fish, fruit and vegetables, bread, dairy products and pasties. Around 25 per cent of the products were sourced from within the local Bude area including fish, bread and pasties. The retailer had long-standing relationships with its suppliers, while its customers expected the fish and other fresh products to be sourced locally. ■ The interviews suggested a large variance in the extent to which cafés and restaurants in Bude (including hotel restaurants) source ingredients and products locally. While all three establishments stated that they prioritised local food and drink, only one had a comprehensive understanding of its suppliers of ingredients and products. This restaurant was using local produce as a marketing tool, stating that fresh produce was sourced locally from in and around Bude wherever possible, while they try to use Cornish produce for products that are not available locally. It reported that 40 per cent of products were sourced from the local Bude area, and another 40 per cent were sourced from elsewhere in Cornwall. The other two restaurants were sourcing products from local wholesalers but were less clear about the exact location of the food producers. They were aware that some produce was local, such as the meat and ice-cream, but were unaware of the origins of some of the other produce. Interestingly, some of the marketing at these establishments was focused on ‘locally sourced’ food and drink rather than ‘locally produced’ food
v1 July 2015 115
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
and drink. The interviews also suggested that there are many other restaurants in Bude that use nationwide wholesalers and are unlikely to source much, if any, local produce. A3.2.2.2 Impact of local food and drink on visitor numbers and spending Does local food and drink attract visitors? Local food and drink is not yet a significant motivation for people to choose to visit Bude. Visitors are much more likely to be motivated by the local beaches, the surfing and watersports opportunities, and other leisure activities such as walking along the South West Coast Path. One interviewee summarised visitor motivations relating to food and drink by saying that “while food and drink is not a key motivation for visiting Bude, it is becoming a pleasant surprise for increasing numbers of visitors”. Therefore, although local food and drink is not necessarily a motivating factor for the visit, visitors are starting to purchase more local food and drink during their time in Bude. Bude also lacks a flagship restaurant or famous chef that has been so key to the success of developing local food and drink offers in other areas such as Padstow, Fowey, Port Isaac and Newquay. These other examples show how much of a significant impact these types of establishment can have in terms of raising awareness of destinations and attracting large numbers of additional visitors. There are significant opportunities to increase visitor expenditures and attract additional visitors by developing the local food and drink offer in Bude. As stated above, a recent survey showed that Cornish food and drink was a major influence on decisions to visit Cornwall (Cornwall Food & Drink, 2015), which suggests there is already a market for ‘food and drink tourism’ in Cornwall that Bude could support and benefit from. This would enable Bude to attract greater numbers of visitors during the peak summer season but also, more importantly, could provide a valuable tool in helping to extend the tourism season throughout the year as has been the case in other Cornish destinations such as Padstow and St Ives. In fact, interviewees suggested that there was a potential role for Bude to complement the offer in these other towns and add another ‘foodie’ destination for visitors wanting to visit and travel to different destinations around Cornwall. A quality food and drink offer can also encourage increases in the overall quality of the local tourism offer in Bude. Bude has experienced a historic lack of investment in tourism infrastructure, products and services, relative to some other areas of Cornwall. However, the experiences of these other destinations suggest that the development of a local food and drink offer can encourage investment in other tourism businesses, such as accommodation, and provide momentum to increase the overall quality of the offer and attract higher value visitors. There have already been some recent examples of increasing investment in the stock of visitor accommodation in Bude and this would be likely to increase as more investors see greater opportunities from developing a quality tourism offer. Outlets serving local food and drink in Bude typically make their customers aware of the fact that they sell local produce and use local ingredients (or source locally), although there are likely to be opportunities to increase marketing efforts. This would deliver benefits for the local food and drink offer in terms of raising awareness amongst local residents and visitors of the local produce available, but would also benefit the businesses serving local produce as it provides a means with which they can differentiate themselves from other restaurants that do not source local produce. Since the local food and drink offer in Bude is at an early stage of development, there are unlikely to be any significant impacts on the town if the local food and drink offer was less well-developed. Visitors are not yet sufficiently aware of the range of local food and drink available from producers in Bude for it to motivate visits to the area, so a less developed offer would be unlikely to have a significant impact on the number of visitors coming to Bude. Visitor spending on local food and drink As stated above, visitors to Bude are starting to spend more on local food and drink and there are significant opportunities to increase these expenditures. The food and drink businesses and stakeholders in Bude agreed that visitors (and local residents) do spend more for local food and drink than they would for a non-local food and drink offer. This was because local food and drink is usually
v1 July 2015 116
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
of a higher quality than non-local products and is usually produced on a smaller scale so is unable to benefit from some of the economies of scale experienced by many of the larger, nationwide suppliers. Most interviewees agreed that there was increasing demand for local food and drink in Bude, although some local businesses were also conscious of the need to continue to satisfy their existing customer base, which included a relatively high proportion of families and lower value visitors and local residents on relatively low incomes. This was seen as a restriction to providing local food and drink for some establishments, which suggested that their customers are still more motivated by value for money than the availability of local produce. A recent survey, undertaken by Cornwall Food & Drink (2015), provides some more detailed insights into the motivations for buying Cornish produce: ■ The most common reasons for choosing to buy Cornish produce included taste, quality, the Cornish reputation and the availability of unique products, which were mentioned by more than half of all respondents. Price was much less likely to motivate purchases of Cornish food and drink and was only mentioned by around one in five respondents. The survey also found that price was the second most significant limiting factor, behind availability, which prevented almost half of respondents from buying as much Cornish produce as they would have liked. ■ Similarly, in terms of experiences of eating out, respondents rated the use of local ingredients and quality of food and drink particularly highly, alongside the location and surroundings. However, the survey identified slightly lower levels of satisfaction in terms of value for money, style and fashion, and opening times of establishments. The findings suggest that consumers in Cornwall generally accept having to pay more for good quality local produce in retailers and eating out, although the higher prices are likely to restrict the ability of many consumers to buy as much as they would like. This suggests that there is a balance between providing high quality, high value produce and providing value for money, particularly in a destination like Bude which does not currently attract large numbers of high value visitors. A3.2.2.3 Employment and multiplier effects The interviews undertaken to inform this study found that the majority of staff employed by food and drink businesses in Bude lived locally. All lived within Cornwall or north west Devon and more than 90 per cent lived within a ten mile radius of their respective employer. This means that most of the wages paid to staff will be retained in the local economy and will therefore generate relatively large induced effects from the re-spending of incomes in the local economy. However, much of the local food and drink produced in Bude is currently leaving the local area, while many local retailers and food service outlets continue to source a lot of produce from non-local sources. Most of the interviewed businesses also reported trying to source other goods and services from local suppliers wherever possible, but purchasing decisions were more likely to be driven by price. The economic multiplier effects in Bude are therefore likely to be higher than an average local economy in England, but lower than other rural destinations with a more developed local food and drink offer. This is because of the high proportion of wages paid to local residents and the increasing propensity for local businesses to source local food and non-food products. Yet there are significant opportunities to increase local purchases and retain more expenditures and incomes in the local economy.
A3.2.3 Challenges to the development of local food and drink Bude faces a number of challenges and barriers to the development of local food and drink. The key issues relate to: ■ A lack of awareness of local suppliers and producers of food and drink. For example, the food service outlets interviewed as part of this study said that the main challenge to using local produce was a lack of awareness of who the local producers were, what they were producing, when produce was available and how they could access it.
v1 July 2015 117
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
– The lack of awareness is caused, to some extent, by limited sales and marketing skills amongst producers and limited time for producers to engage in these activities. Producers of local food and drink are usually small businesses, who specialise in the production of quality food and drink and do not always have sufficient knowhow and time to promote their products effectively. ■ The availability of products and routes to market. This issue is linked to the lack of awareness issue described above, as there currently appears to be a disconnect between local suppliers and local customers (i.e. business customers and/or individual consumers). This issue is being addressed through initiatives such as the Bude for Food Festival and Food Assembly (described below) which aim to increase awareness of local producers and develop linkages with customers and routes to market. But these initiatives have only been running for a relatively short period of time. The Cornwall Food & Drink survey (2015) suggested that this is a broader issue across Cornwall. It found the most common reasons for not buying as much Cornwall food and drink as respondents would like were associated with availability of products, particularly amongst the retailers that respondents would normally use for food and drink. ■ The availability of supply. While Bude is able to offer a good range of food and drink producers and products, which continues to expand over time, there are some products that cannot be sourced locally, while other seasonal produce is only available at certain times of the year. These issues restrict the ability for retailers, food service outlets and consumers to purchase products locally. However, most products are available in Cornwall and businesses in Bude generally considered food and drink produced in the county to be classed as local produce and did not necessarily feel there was a need to prioritise food and drink produced in the immediate Bude area. ■ The cost of local produce. Local food and drink is an emerging market in Bude and many food service outlets are more concerned about providing value for money for their existing customer base, which can sometimes conflict with the cost of providing the best quality local produce. Several local producers and customer serving businesses commented that the cost of local produce can be a barrier to the retention and sale of more local food and drink in Bude. It was also suggested that local producers are unable to compete with the lower prices charged by large nationwide suppliers or foreign imports, which presents an insurmountable barrier to supply retailers and food service outlets that base purchasing decisions solely on price. ■ Competing with the flexibility of wholesalers. There are many reasons why businesses choose to use wholesalers rather than dealing directly with local producers. Interviewees reported that dealing with wholesalers is usually easier, as they are typically larger businesses, and it is easier to place a single order with one business rather than manage relationships and orders with multiple producers. Wholesalers were also reported to be more flexible in terms of their delivery times and their ability to deliver at short notice to meet customer needs. Concerns were also raised about smaller producers, who are often specialists in food and drink production rather than business operations, and do not always have the same business skills as a wholesaler, which can require greater investment of time and effort from the businesses purchasing from the producer. It was also suggested that products supplied by wholesalers are usually of a reasonable quality and are provided in a consistent, uniform size and shape, which can be particularly beneficial for restaurants offering set menus. ■ Building demand for local food and drink. While there is growing demand for local produce in Bude, Bude has not traditionally attracted large numbers of high value visitors. Developing a local food and drink offer provides an opportunity to attract more visitors, and particularly high value visitors, and thereby increase the value added by visitor expenditures. However, Bude’s ability to attract high value visitors is also restricted by a lack of investment in the local tourism infrastructure over time. High value visitors are only likely to visit Bude and spent time and money in the local economy if there are appropriate places to eat, drink and stay. If Bude is to maximise the potential benefits from a local food and drink offer, and associated increases in value added, it is important to deliver improvements in the quality of the whole tourism product, including cafés, restaurants, retailers, accommodation and other tourism and leisure services.
v1 July 2015 118
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A3.2.4 Existing initiatives and business approaches to developing the local food and drink offer There are existing initiatives and business approaches to develop the local food and drink offer in Bude. Examples of food and drink businesses and stakeholders working together to promote the local food and drink sector and develop opportunities include: ■ The ‘Bude for Food’ festival, which took place in September 2014 and is expected to become an annual event. The event provided an opportunity for more than 60 local exhibitors to display food and drink, in addition to demonstrations and master classes from a number of top local chefs, and two evenings of comedy and musical performances. The event attracted 7,000 visitors and helped to raise awareness of Bude as a destination for local food and drink, which provided a significant boost to local food and drink and tourism businesses. It has also helped extend the tourism season in Bude into September. – ‘Bude for Food’ also launched a restaurant trail in the weeks leading up to the 2014 festival. The restaurant trail aims to support Bude’s restaurants, cafés and pubs and raise awareness amongst local residents and visitors of the local food and drink available in the town. Some 40 local hospitality businesses participated in the trail, the aim of which was to encourage customers to collect stamps every time they purchased food and drink from a participating business. Those collecting eight different stamps could enter a prize draw. The restaurant trail proved to be popular with local establishments and customers and is expected to be repeated in 2015. ■ The ‘Bude for Food’ Assembly, which was established in 2014. The Food Assembly is a distribution hub through which customers can buy directly from farmers and local food producers. The group focuses on producers within a 20 mile radius of Bude and aims to support the local food and drink sector by developing additional routes to market and generating additional demand for local food and drink products. It offers a sustainable 'click and collect' farmer's market exclusively for local food, where customers view products and order on-line, before picking up their purchases from Bude on Wednesdays. Alternatively, customers can pay to have shopping delivered or join a group of members from the same area to share weekly collections. The Food Assembly already has more than 400 members (i.e. producers and customers) and has been listed as a finalist in the ‘Best Food Initiative’ at the BBC Food Awards. ■ Norton Barton Artisan Food Village and Farm Shop Deli. Richard and Fionagh Harding, part of the ‘Bude for Food’ team, moved to Norton Barton farm approximately six years ago and have since invested in farming and food production facilities. They launched Cornish Charcuterie in November 2011, a business producing high quality British Charcuterie using home produced ingredients in an environmentally friendly and sustainable manner, and have since won a number of awards for their products. The Norton Barton site also provides a deli offering food and drink products from a number of local suppliers, is also used to deliver a range of charcuterie training courses, accommodates two other local food businesses (Whalesborough Cheese and Popti Cornish Bakehouse), while there are also plans to add cider production, a distillery and a bakery at the site. The Norton Barton site also plans to share resources (i.e. distribution, sales, marketing and financial resources) across the resident food businesses, so that they benefit from economies of scale and have more time to concentrate on producing local food and drink products. There are other examples of local businesses in Bude investing in business ventures, to further increase the quality of the local food and drink and tourism offer. Examples include: ■ The Weir Bistro, which provides a good example of a high quality eatery that promotes local produce and uses the local landscape and wildlife to create a unique and distinctive offer to both residents and visitors. The site is located at a lake just outside Bude and incorporates an interactive wildlife centre, that uses exciting and informative displays and interactive computers. The bistro was in part funded through a farm diversification grant from the RDPE. The menu is focused on quality food and drink sourced from local suppliers. ■ Recent investments in hotel infrastructure by the Hebasca Group. The Hebasca and Tommy Jacks hotels have recently undergone significant investment and redevelopment, which has helped to raise the quality of accommodation in Bude. The Tommy Jacks hotel recently won an award as
v1 July 2015 119
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
part of the Sunday Times: Ultimate 100 British Hotels awards. The hotel restaurants and bars also provide local food and drink to hotel residents and visitors.
A3.2.5 Opportunities for the development of the local food and drink offer There are opportunities to continue to develop the local food and drink offer in Bude, and build on the existing initiatives described above. The Bude stakeholders and businesses identified a number of opportunities which included: ■ Using local food and drink to reduce seasonality issues and provide year-round employment opportunities. Increasing the local food and drink offer is likely to deliver benefits in terms of attracting visitors outside of the peak season and reducing seasonality issues for the local economy. And other approaches could be used to further reduce the impacts of seasonality. The Norton Barton Food Village suggested that, as well as sharing resources for finance, sales, marketing and distribution, there are likely to be opportunities to share under-utilised resources between businesses during the quieter, winter months. For example, local food and drink businesses could become smarter and use spare capacity in the winter to undertake jobs that can be done at any time of the year (e.g. salting and hanging meat, apple crushing/ cider making, etc.) or use underutilised kitchens to deliver alternative products such as ready-meals for customers to reheat at home. It was suggested that there are also opportunities to provide courses in food production, foraging, etc. over the winter. – The Bude for Food organisation suggested that there would also be opportunities to deliver additional events, such as a ‘Bude for Food’ beer/drink festival, that could be used to increase visitors to Bude outside of the peak season. ■ Increase the profile of Bude as a destination for local food and drink. There are opportunities to build on the existing initiatives and continue to raise awareness of Bude as a food destination. Interviewees suggested that there was a potential role for Bude to complement other Cornish destinations for food and drink such as Padstow, St Ives and Fowey, and provide another option for visitors wanting to travel around Cornwall. It was therefore suggested that collective promotion with places like Padstow could provide significant benefits to Bude’s reputation as a destination for local food and drink. – It was also suggested that destination marketing for Bude would need to be updated to present images of a quality, food destination, as well as a destination for surfing and beach holidays. ■ Continue to develop linkages between producers and consumers. There are significant opportunities to develop the local food and drink offer by developing new routes to market. The Bude for Food Assembly is a good example of an initiative to develop linkages between local food producers and local consumers but is likely to be of limited benefit to visitors, since orders need to be placed in advance for collection on a Wednesday. There are opportunities to develop the Food Assembly to provide services tailored to the needs of visitors, or by providing alternative initiatives to support purchases of local food amongst visitors, such as encouraging more retailers and food service outlets to source local produce, and increasing the profile and awareness of, and attendance at the farmers’ market. Another option would be to consider the use of a local currency, like the schemes used in Totnes, Bristol and Brixton, to encourage local purchases. ■ Improve the overall tourism offer in Bude. As stated above, the development of the local food and drink offer can help to drive improvements in the overall tourism offer. However, this process needs to be supported by additional investments in accommodation, restaurants, pubs, leisure activities, etc. Several interviewees also mentioned that the local food and drink and tourism offer could be improved by attracting a famous chef to Bude. Experiences of other locations suggest that a local restaurant with a Michelin star or AA rosette can deliver significant benefits in terms of raising the profile of areas and attracting additional high value visitors. ■ Encourage greater use of some of the resources available to food and drink businesses in Cornwall. For example, it was reported that Duchy College in Cornwall has equipment at its Centre for Food Manufacturing Excellence that is currently underutilised. One interviewee suggested that local food and drink businesses in Bude and elsewhere in Cornwall would benefit from greater
v1 July 2015 120
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
access to the food manufacturing and processing facilities in order to test ideas and develop new products. – The proposed Food Enterprise Zone (FEZ) for Cornwall is likely to support the development of food and drink in Cornwall, although there were concerns that Bude’s peripheral location might restrict benefits for the town. It was suggested that Cornwall is too big for a single FEZ and impacts could be maximised if the FEZ could be separated into smaller zones. ■ Developing a scheme to display food miles on packaging. One local producer expressed interest in a scheme that displayed food miles on food and drink packaging as a means of informing customers where products were produced and thereby encouraging greater sales of local produce. It was suggested that a traffic light system might be the easiest to differentiate between local products, regional and/or national products, and international products. ■ New ventures to integrate local food and drink and tourism activities. The survey, undertaken by Cornwall Food & Drink (2015) suggested that food and drink has a strong influence on visitor ‘loyalty’ and ‘repeat visits’ and recommended that food and drink and tourism businesses forge even stronger links to maximise opportunities for the Cornish economy. There are already examples, such as the Weir Bistro and Life’s a Beach restaurant where food and drink is combined with leisure and tourism activities, and Bude should seek to identify and deliver more similar developments. ■ Additional funding and simplified application processes. It was suggested that small producers of food and drink feel daunted by the application processes for funding programmes and uptake could be improved if there was additional support to assist with the application processes.
A3.2.6 Conclusions Bude has a developing offer for local food and drink. The local area accommodates a strong and growing food-related supply chain, comprising a number of food-related producers, manufacturers and wholesalers in and around the town, supported by many farms and other food-related activities. These suppliers are driving the development of the local food and drink offer in Bude through existing initiatives including the ‘Bude for Food’ festival and the Bude for Food Assembly, which are increasing awareness of Bude as a destination for local food and drink and developing additional routes to market for local producers. The future development of the local food and drink offer in Bude would benefit from greater involvement of customer serving businesses, such as retailers, food service outlets and accommodation providers to increase the availability of local produce to residents and visitors, whilst also helping to increase the quality of the local tourism product. Some local restaurants are already committed to sourcing produce from local suppliers but others are operating successful businesses by serving non-local produce. One of the challenges is that Bude attracts fewer of the high value visitors that are associated with other Cornish food destinations such as Padstow, Fowey or St Ives. Customer serving businesses are concerned about the potential conflict between the higher cost of using local produce to attract new visitors to Bude and the need to satisfy existing customers. Other barriers to the development of a local food and drink offer include a lack of awareness and availability and relatively high prices of local food and drink products, which have to compete with the flexibility and lower cost of larger wholesalers. There are significant opportunities to continue to develop the local food and drink offer in Bude, and build on existing initiatives, by both encouraging greater supply chain linkages, and increasing awareness and the profile of Bude as a quality tourism destination with a strong local food and drink offer. This has the potential to provide significant benefits to local food and drink businesses and the Bude economy, particularly as a result of increasing the value of tourism and reducing the effects of seasonal unemployment by encouraging year-round visitors to come to Bude.
v1 July 2015 121
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A3.3 Dersingham and Hunstanton
A3.3.1 Overview of tourism and local food and drink sector A3.3.1.1 Market overview West Norfolk benefits from a strong tourist economy, largely focused on its scenic coastline, stately homes and nature reserves. Local food and drink contributes to the tourist offer, although it is not as prominent or well-marketed as in other parts of the county such as North Norfolk. The Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk highlighted Dersingham and Hunstanton as examples of popular tourist destinations in the area where there is potential to develop the local food and drink offer further. Dersingham is one of the largest villages in West Norfolk. The village is a short drive from the North Norfolk beaches and is also a popular stop off for visitors to the nearby Sandringham Estate and birdwatching sites. The town has a small number of food retail and service establishments: two pubs (The Feathers and the Coach and Horses Inn, which also runs its own B&B guesthouse), small supermarket (Spar), coffee shop (Thaxters), retail butcher (WH Prior & Sons), B&B (Ashdene House), and a fast food takeaway (Tropics). The majority of these source at least some of their produce locally, though there is scope to increase this further. Hunstanton is located on the edge of the North Norfolk heritage coast and overlooks The Wash estuary. The town is well known as a budget seaside resort popular with young families. Day trippers make up most of the tourist market. It also caters for a tourist demographic that includes elderly and affluent tourists visiting the North Norfolk heritage coast and surrounds. These visitors tend to stay in the older quarter of the town (Old Hunstanton), and have also helped extend the tourist season outside of peak summer months, due to growing popularity of activities such as birdwatching in winter. Old Hunstanton is more reflective of the villages on the North Norfolk coast which have seen a local food revival over the years. There are many eateries and food retail outlets in Hunstanton, including a deli, supermarket, cheap pub restaurants and family diners, and a smaller selection of mid-range and high-end hotel and gourmet restaurants located around Old Hunstanton. There is significant variation in the extent to which these businesses source locally. A3.3.1.2 Coordination of local food and drink sector There is no formal coordination of the local food and drink sector in the West Norfolk area, although the following organisations are involved: ■ Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk co-ordinates tourism initiatives in the area including the marketing of local food businesses in the area. ■ West Norfolk Local Action Group (LAG) is involved in strategic planning and delivery and brings together local public, private and civil society stakeholders to address local priorities including the development of the food and drink sector. Its representatives include local businesses (including food producers and the hospitality sector) and local authorities at town, district and county level. The LAG was developed with the support of Norfolk County Council and is responsible for the delivery of RDPE grants through the LEADER programme. Activities of the LAG and relevant organisations are discussed in section A3.3.5.
A3.3.2 Importance of local food and drink to tourism and the local economy A3.3.2.1 Local food and drink sales and turnover The study found significant variation in the proportion of turnover attributable to local food and drink in the businesses surveyed in Dersingham and Hunstanton. This ranged from around 10 percent of food service turnover in cheap hotel restaurants (largely in Hunstanton) sourcing only one or two items locally, to nearly the entire turnover in higher-end eateries. Most businesses interviewed in Dersingham sourced the majority of their produce through local retail outlets, processors and wholesalers rather than national distributors. This included local butchers,
v1 July 2015 122
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
bakeries, fish wholesalers and fruit and veg wholesalers based within a 30 mile radius of the town. In Hunstanton, businesses relied on local distributors but also national distributors and supermarkets. Food service businesses were unable to identify where these suppliers were in turn sourcing from. This highlights some lack of awareness among local food service establishments with regards to local food production. There were very few examples of businesses sourcing directly from farms and primary producers, which are mostly the high end restaurants in Old Hunstanton and the local butchers in Dersingham which dealt directly with livestock farmers. Some micro-businesses were also able to source from farmers’ markets and farm shops further afield (though well within a 30 mile radius). Most businesses cited quality as a major reason for sourcing locally, particularly in the case of meat, where a significant difference was noted between cuts from local butchers and those from national distributors. Businesses were in many cases willing to pay a marginal price premium (around 10-20 per cent more) for the added quality. One business mentioned that it would be prepared to purchase items slightly further afield if it perceived them to be of a higher quality. Customers also increasingly place value on the provenance and traceability of meat, particularly in the aftermath of the horsemeat incident. Local butchers benefitted significantly from the incident, and saw a notable increase in sales of local meat. Businesses also valued the personal contact and flexibility offered by local suppliers. Orders and deliveries could be adjusted easily, and problems resolved quickly due to proximity of businesses. Although most businesses mentioned that they would like to support local producers, their choices were in practice not driven by values or ethical commitments, but by costs and quality. On balance, local wholesalers were not deemed significantly more expensive than national distributors, and were preferred given the higher quality and other benefits received. Some pubs noted the increasing popularity of local ales and other alcoholic beverages with tourists. One pub observed that tourists often enquired about the provenance of ales, much more so than for food. Ale was also the only product that was cheaper to source locally than from national distributors. Some local varieties were over a third cheaper than national brands. This difference was due to the fact that they were supplied directly by local microbreweries, cutting out the need for an intermediary. There were also a few examples of businesses being able to source more cheaply at specific times of the year, when certain seasonal products were more widely available locally. Food service businesses with the flexibility to adapt their menus to the seasonal offer were also able to capitalise on this. A3.3.2.2 Impact of local food and drink on visitor numbers and spending Does local food and drink attract visitors? Local and food drink is a not a primary driver of tourism to West Norfolk, but rather a complementary factor that contributes to the appeal of the area. The Borough Council highlighted that in an online visitor survey of motivations for visiting the area, food and drink ranked third behind natural environment and heritage. The majority of visitors to destinations such as Dersingham and Hunstanton are not actively seeking out local food and drink. This is particularly true of Hunstanton, where a large proportion of visitors are young families looking for quick, affordable meals. Local sourcing and food quality is not a priority for this segment of the market. Nevertheless consultations suggest that all locations in the area may be benefitting to a small degree from the association of Norfolk with distinctive local produce. Visitors may assume that the food and drink on offer is locally sourced by virtue of the county’s reputation. Visitor spending on local food and drink Consultations suggest that over a third of all tourism spend in Norfolk is on food and drink. The proportion of spending attributable to local food and drink is not known. Interviews indicate that local food and drink does not have much impact on visitor numbers to West Norfolk. There is evidence that businesses which source some of their produce locally are able to charge a higher price for these items, although this is more to do with businesses passing on the higher costs of sourcing locally to consumers than any significant profit mark-up. Visitors are generally
v1 July 2015 123
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
able to pay the small premium for these foods. Food businesses do not offer comparable local and non-local options together. It is not possible therefore to ascertain whether decisions to purchase local food and drink reflect a preference for these foods or simply a lack of non-local alternatives on offer. Local stakeholders also did not believe that visitor numbers would increase significantly if West Norfolk had a better developed local food offer. Most consultees indicated that there were enough attractions on offer in the area to make it sufficiently appealing to tourists, although there was a possibility this could make a difference to the most affluent segments of the tourist market who expected high quality food. There was nevertheless some consensus that a more developed local food and drink offer could help to increase visitor spend. More demand could be generated from visitors on self-catered vacations who may be tempted to spend more on local food and drink if there were a better offer available. It is also possible that a better local food offer could encourage the large numbers of day trippers and visitors on short breaks to stay longer. Based on the numbers and types of visitors to West Norfolk, the Borough Council was looking to develop approaches to help increase tourist spend rather than numbers of visitors per se. This preference also reflects the significant pressures on West Norfolk’s road infrastructure during summer months due to the numbers of day trippers travelling to the coast. A3.3.2.3 Employment and multiplier effects Local food service and retail outlets support local employment. The businesses interviewed varied considerably in size. The smallest businesses were typically family run B&Bs which were staffed by the owners (1-2 individuals). The largest businesses in employment terms were hotels: one hotel pub in Hunstanton employed between 50-60 part time and full time staff. Businesses also recruited staff for the peak summer months. Some businesses increased their workforce by two or threefold during this season. In almost all cases, employees working in food and hospitality businesses lived locally, within 10 miles of the business. The family butchers in Dersingham also took on a full time apprentice and was committed to reviving and passing down traditional skills. Consultations did not reveal significant evidence of local multiplier effects. Businesses largely purchased non-consumables from supermarkets and national providers. It is not clear whether businesses relied on other local services such as accountants, plumbers and decorators. Some food service outlets were sourcing from retail outlets in the village, for example the pub in Dersingham sourced meat from the local butchers.
A3.3.3 Challenges to the development of local food and drink Businesses and local decision-makers cited the following barriers to the development of local food and drink in Dersingham and Hunstanton: ■ Inconvenience of dealing with multiple local businesses: many food service businesses felt that it would be too inconvenient and administratively burdensome to source from lots of small local suppliers. Businesses valued having a single drop off service and the convenience of being able to order a large range of food items in one go, (which was not typically possible through individual producers). This preference was reflected in the popularity of local and regional wholesalers such as Barsby Produce and South Lincs Foodservice. Businesses such as Barsby are long-standing businesses with considerable local knowledge. These businesses served as a single source for local food service outlets and were large enough to deliver multiple times a week. Whilst this business model is effective in providing relatively affordable local produce the required quantities, consultations suggest that very successful regional wholesale businesses around the country have tended to be bought out by national distributors and have become less focussed on local sourcing with the change of ownership. Suppliers also face challenges in dealing with lots of small outlets. Consultations with local stakeholders suggest that it is generally easier for producers if given the chance to take on large contracts, for example, with supermarkets than to deal with lots of smaller business customers. Although some consultees expressed concerns about supermarkets not paying suppliers on time, the risks of them not paying at all or facing bankruptcy were thought to be considerably less than for smaller business customers.
v1 July 2015 124
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Costs: local food and drink (with the exception of local ales) was, on average, more expensive than products sourced from large national distributors and supermarkets. For example, businesses noted that meat from local butchers was between 10-20 per cent more expensive than national distributors and supermarkets. Although businesses were aware of local food outlets such as farm shops around the area that they could potentially source from, these were significantly more expensive and not well-suited to bulk retail orders (except for microbusinesses such as for example B&Bs buying small quantities and not serving meals throughout the day). Cost is a critical issue for businesses depending on tourists from less affluent socio-economic groups. Some pub and hotel chains in Hunstanton catered almost entirely to this market, and relied on cheap standard menus that could be replicated across their franchises. One business mentioned that even seemingly small increases to the cost of each meal added up for price conscious families on vacation: “fifty pence or a pound more on the price of each meal could later on mean the difference between an ice cream by the beach for everyone or not”. Businesses in Dersingham also felt that whilst customers valued quality they would be unwilling to pay significantly more for local food and drink. ■ Availability: some businesses mentioned that were not enough suppliers in the immediate area for specific types of produce such as fruits and vegetables. Whilst there is no shortage of horticultural production in Norfolk (the county accounts for around 40 per cent of fruits and vegetables produced in the UK), it is dominated by large scale producers focussing on supply to national distribution chains. The majority of the businesses consulted were sourcing from local fruit and vegetable wholesalers, who in turn claimed to be supplied by local producers. There were also no fishmongers in either Dersingham or Hunstanton, despite fish and seafood being widely available from the Wash and the North Norfolk coast. Businesses were mostly purchasing seafood slightly further afield from established retail and wholesale vendors in King’s Lynn such as Coles and a few individual suppliers. ■ Awareness: many businesses did not deal directly with producers and awareness of individual farms and producers was low. Some businesses assumed that wholesalers in the wider area were sourcing from local producers. Food outlets suggested the need for better promotion of local suppliers. There were some examples provided of businesses having only recently discovered certain local products (e.g. locally produced ice cream), despite these products having been available for some time. ■ Local demand: consultations with local decision-makers suggested that local food outlets and suppliers required sufficient demand for local produce in order to continue sourcing locally. This can be difficult to maintain outside of peak tourist seasons, if there is insufficient demand from local residents. Decision-makers indicated that both Dersingham and Hunstanton lacked this demand, particularly given that the resident populations were not as affluent as in some other parts of Norfolk. Other towns in West Norfolk such as Downham Market were more likely to be able to maintain demand outside of the tourist season, given the growing popularity of the town with young professionals who have settled in the area and have the disposable incomes to sustain demand for local produce.
A3.3.4 Existing initiatives and business approaches to developing the local food and drink offer A3.3.4.1 Business initiatives Most food service outlets promoted their local food and drink offers individually rather than collectively through promotional bodies. This mostly involved specifying on their menus and websites whether produce was locally sourced. Businesses had not typically considered other ways to promote their local food and drink such as by using flyers and special displays. Produce that was more distinctly associated with the local area, such as seafood and meat, was typically advertised more visibly on menus than other foods that were also locally sourced. Higher end eateries also based their food and drink choices on seasonal produce. One business had never considered specifically advertising its local produce as it was “always the way it had done things”, but was considering doing so in the future.
v1 July 2015 125
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
More progressive food retail businesses in the West Norfolk area were looking to increase tourist sales further by enabling customers to purchase their products online when they returned home. This was viewed as an effective way to strengthen tourist connections with the area and increase repeat custom. A notable example is Walsingham Farm Shops Partnership, which was set up by a group of farmers, and now includes two farm shops, two restaurants, and most recently an online shop. The business has seen rapid growth. It has developed a more diversified tourist offer, and now sells route maps for specially designed walks around the countryside surrounding its shops. A few of the businesses consulted had sought to diversify their local food offer, to varying degrees of success. The local butcher in Dersingham, for example, briefly sold fish from a local supplier (although he has since stopped due to a lack of demand). He also has a well-established deli and selection of baked goods, alongside the traditional meat offer. The coffee shop in Dersingham had started to sell cakes for functions. This has been very successful and increased interest in the business more generally. A3.3.4.2 Wider initiatives Businesses consulted for this study noted that there were no local food and drink events in West Norfolk which they could use to network with suppliers and promote their business. Only one of the business interviewed mentioned having attended a food related event. This was in Lincolnshire, but had been very useful in helping the business to find suppliers and learn skills to help market and prepare foods from scratch using fresh ingredients. Businesses felt they would benefit from similar local food events. At county level, there is an annual business led local food event called Flavours. This is organised by a business with a food marketing background, which uses the event to promote its own services, but also provides a forum to discuss how to better market local food and drink and network with other businesses. There are no promotional bodies actively helping market local food businesses in West Norfolk, other than the council’s official tourism website, Visit West Norfolk, which lists a small number of popular eateries and outlets selling food and drink in the area. There is very little activity undertaken by trade and food membership organisations in West Norfolk. Dersingham has no trade association; Hunstanton’s Chamber of Commerce only recently reopened after closing due to lack of engagement from local businesses. Consultations indicated that trade associations in West Norfolk are not active enough to drive initiatives to promote local food and drink. There are some marketing consortiums at county and regional level, such as Taste of Anglia and Produced in Norfolk. Membership in these organisations has stagnated in recent years and for the most part has been concentrated in certain areas of Norfolk, in particular the Norwich and Broads areas. The benefits and involvement of businesses in West Norfolk has been limited.
A3.3.5 Opportunities for the development of the local food and drink offer Consultations indicated a notable lack of coordination in the local food and drink sector in the West Norfolk area. There are emerging opportunities to develop the local food offer, but this is thought by consultees to require both government intervention and the cooperation of businesses. The West Norfolk Local Action Group has steered the Local Development Strategy. The strategy identifies the food and drink sector as one of five priority areas to develop, with the potential to make a significant contribution to sustainable local economic development. The strategy will provide direction to the development of the local food and drink sector in West Norfolk which had been lacking in the past. The LAG also comprises a number of local food businesses and producers which will help reflect the interests of the sector in strategic planning. The council recognises that RDPE funding through the LEADER programme has provided the opportunity to expand its focus from large players in the food and drink sector which have traditionally been the focus of development (and offer more significant growth and employment opportunities) to the smaller local food sub-sector. There is potential to support local food and tourist businesses through LEADER, including business training programmes and marketing initiatives. Consultations with local decision-makers suggested that the development of the local food and drink offer will depend on the proactive engagement of a few businesses in the local decision-making process and business forums. The Borough Council suggested that it could be possible to revive the
v1 July 2015 126
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
area’s flailing chambers of commerce by identifying and encouraging a handful of local food and tourist businesses to champion initiatives. This will likely require support and initial coordination of the local council, but can become self-sustaining if enough businesses become engaged. One consultee suggested that because West Norfolk is located on the edge of the county jurisdiction and is relatively far away from administrative centres such as Norwich, the district has not been engaged in many of the initiatives led by local government, trade associations and tourist promotion bodies which have tended to focus on areas near the seat of local government. The Borough Council is looking at ways to better promote local food businesses. For example, it is starting to develop a mobile phone application which will provide information on establishments selling and serving food in West Norfolk, as well as an online food directory on its website. There is also scope within this to include food producers and highlight outlets sourcing produce locally. The council recognises that there is potential to better coordinate information on local food businesses and identify opportunities for promotion, although this will also depend on active participation and interest from local businesses. It could also provide a platform for businesses to identify potential business customers and suppliers. Local wholesalers in West Norfolk have been very successful in selling to a broad spectrum of local food outlets including those catering to low and high-end tourist markets. They provide a professional service that is comparable in price to larger national providers, whilst maintaining a more personal service that larger competitors did not offer. There are opportunities to build on this. Wholesalers could better advertise to customers the producers they are sourcing from, and do more to reach other smaller producers. Smaller businesses can also work together to set up buyers’ cooperatives to increase purchasing power.
A3.3.6 Conclusions Local food and drink presently makes a small contribution to the tourist offer in West Norfolk. Businesses in Hunstanton, and to a lesser extent, Dersingham, cater for a relatively price conscious tourist market, dominated by day trippers who place less focus on the eating experience. Whilst food quality remains important, price is more critical in some of these areas. As such businesses face the challenge of sourcing at low cost whilst maintaining a minimum quality. Local and regional wholesalers are popular among businesses as they provide a middle ground between quality and price, as well as the convenience of being able to provide and deliver a range of products. There is potential to develop the local wholesale sector further to serve as local food distribution hubs. Buyers’ cooperatives can also help reduce costs. The food and drink sector in Norfolk has lacked coordination at council and business level. This should improve, following the implementation of the Local Development Strategy and involvement of the LAG. There is a need to find local businesses to champion local food and drink initiatives and raise the profile of the sector in trade associations. A3.4 Exmoor
A3.4.1 Overview of tourism and local food and drink sector A3.4.1.1 Market overview According to the eight interviewees consulted for this case study (2 decision-makers, 3 local food businesses, 3 producers), tourism is very important for the local economy of Exmoor. Tourism makes up the single largest component of the Exmoor economy bringing a number of indirect and direct economic effects. Tourism generates £ 90 million/year for Exmoor National Park (the second largest component of the Exmoor economy is farming, generating £45 million/year) and results in 2,500 direct jobs. Indirectly, local businesses depend on sales to tourists and a number of secondary service businesses (i.e. launderettes) benefit as well. A survey conducted by the National Park Authority in 2014 identified the factors motivating tourists to visit Exmoor, shown in descending importance in Table A3.1. The local food and drink offer did not rank amongst the top five motivating factors.
v1 July 2015 127
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Table A3.1 Motivating factors for visitors to Exmoor
Rank Factor 1 Landscape/ scenery 2 Coastline 3 Tranquillity 4 Designation as National Park 5 The Outdoors The trend of tourists visiting Exmoor is stable, with around two million visiting per year. Most of these visitors stay overnight; few are day visitors. Overall, interviewees felt that the number of people visiting the area because of the food and drink offer has been slightly increasing in recent years. Seven out of the eight interviewees stressed that visitors thought local food and drink offer was very important and while not in itself a primary reason for visiting Exmoor, contributed to visitor satisfaction and was as a reason for why visitors return to Exmoor (85 per cent of visitors return for a holiday in the park). The reasons for this were firstly that local food and drink offer a distinctive and special experience that visitors cannot get elsewhere, for example a local farmhouse lunch. One local decision-maker stated that the general perception is that local food is of higher quality and that “if it’s local, you can pay a premium”. This is contrary to the experience of local businesses and producers interviewed, however, who mostly do not charge a premium for local produce, with the exception of one restaurant which charges up to a 30 per cent premium on some items. The stakeholders interviewed for this case study represent a range of business types. These included: ■ a deli, offering home-baked cakes and pasties, take away sandwiches, and many other products of which 70 per cent were sourced from within the county; ■ a café/ restaurant which offers cakes, breakfasts, lunch plates, coffee, hot chocolate and smoothies during the day and beer in the evening; 80 per cent of their menu either comes from the same village or the West Country; and ■ a restaurant serving high-end customers which offers a menu of fish and meat from the area (the meat is sourced locally from Exmoor, the fish comes from Cornwall, dairy and vegetables come from Bristol). In addition, a number of pubs across Exmoor offer local produce, especially locally produced ale, cider and meat (e.g. beef, lamb and mutton raised in Exmoor). The Tantivy shop and café in Dulverton also specialises in a local food and drink offer. A number of places offer ice-cream produced in Exmoor (e.g. Stiles Ice-cream). The Farthing Farmshop in Dulverton also exclusively offers local food and drink and is a popular stop for take-away lunches for locals as well as visitors. This case study also involved consultations with producers including: ■ a flour mill; ■ a farm that rears pigs, poultry, sheep and cattle; makes its own sausages; and offers its products to guests at their B&B; and ■ a cattle farmer who rears beef cattle and sells them to a non-local supplier. Some farmers in Exmoor also keep bees and sell the honey to visitors (including local residents and tourists). There is a jam and chutney producer (albeit some of their ingredients come from overseas). An organic dairy producer, Yeo Valley, is located close to Exmoor National Park. A3.4.1.2 Coordination of local food and drink sector The following organisations operate in Exmoor and are involved in coordinating the local food and drink sector:
v1 July 2015 128
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ The Exmoor National Park Authority helps to ensure that the money earned from the local food and drink sector stays in the area. They support local farmers and ensure that they have a local market to supply to. ■ The Exmoor Tourism Board includes farmers and stakeholders from the hospitality sector in Exmoor. The board deals with all issues regarding tourism, including transport and accessibility of the area and the local farms. ■ The Exmoor Producer Association was set up following the outbreak of foot and mouth disease and helps to support local farmers and other producers. They support producers with an additional outlet to offer their produce. ■ The Exmoor Hillfarm Network brings together farmers that had not worked together previously. ■ The Breeder’s Society promotes a mail-order scheme which enabled individuals to buy half a lamb which comes with its own recipes. The society actively advertises Exmoor Horn Sheep products.
A3.4.2 Importance of local food and drink to tourism and the local economy A3.4.2.1 Local food and drink sales and turnover The businesses consulted for this study generally offer a high percentage of local food and drink in their product range. Nevertheless, one cattle farmer used to generate his entire turnover from selling his beef and beef products locally but he now sells all of his animals to a non-local processor. Similarly, another farm now only generates two per cent of its revenue from selling to local outlets or businesses within 30 miles of their farm. They previously sold most of their produce in the local area including through catering services, participation in farmer’s markets, operating a box/ mail-ordering scheme, and selling animals to a local slaughter house for several years. Rising labour, electricity and delivery costs lowered their margins and ultimately they downsized the business. An interviewee for the business observed that “hand-made burgers is [sic] not a way to get rich”. The businesses net profits have never exceeded 30 per cent. The operators of this business now only produce for themselves and their B&B guests. The food outlets interviewed offered a different perspective to the producers who were consulted for this case study. For one restaurant serving high-end customers, 70 per cent of their turnover comes from their local food and drink offer, which for this business means products sourced beyond 30 miles because dairy and vegetables come from Brighton and the fish comes from Brixon which is on the border to Cornwall. Their beef is sourced from within 10 miles of the restaurant. Similarly, the Village Deli in Dunster indicated that 0-20 per cent of its turnover relates to sales of food and drink produced or processed within 30 miles of the shop. But most of their products are produced in the same county. A representative from a local café, however, indicated that around 80 per cent of their turnover relates to the sales of local food and drink. All of their produce is sourced locally and if it does not come immediately from the same village, it comes from the West County. These businesses support between three and 40 local suppliers. The reasons cited for sourcing or producing locally range from business models to personal conviction. The restaurant serving high-end customers mentions that offering local produce is a way to offer something special catering to the demand of their customers and to distinguish themselves from other restaurants in the area. The Flour Mill interviewee stated that local sourcing keeps transport costs low which is critical for the Mill. Reasons mentioned from the other businesses and producers include: supporting the local community; supporting producers and their families; encouraging local business; supporting people who may return to spend money in the area; good quality produce; healthy, traceable produce; a reduction in food miles; reducing the carbon footprint; and because offering local produce is part of their founding principles.
v1 July 2015 129
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A3.4.2.2 Impact of local food and drink on visitor numbers and spending Does local food and drink attract visitors? Local food and drink is an important factor in contributing to a satisfactory visitor stay in Exmoor and forms a core part of the tourist experience. Visitors expect to see local food and drink on offer. Local food and drink are not a primary reason why people visit Exmoor but interviewees detected an increasing trend in people being more aware about the food and drink they consume, putting more emphasis on local food and drink and asking questions about where the food is sourced from. A few interviewees also distinguished between different target audiences saying that for certain people (one said generally the older generation) food was extremely important. Another interviewee indicated that the people purchasing local food and drink were usually the elderly, families with children and middle aged consumers. Three out of seven interviewees said that the impact of a less developed food and drink offer would be high. One interviewee reasoned that because local food and drink is important and 85 per cent of visitors to Exmoor return for another visit, if the local food and drink offer were less developed people might be less inclined to come back. Another interviewee reasoned that visitors with food-related (‘foodie’) interests would go to another area which was known for its food, such as Cornwall. An interviewee at the Dunster Castle flour mill said that people visit because of Dunster Castle. When they go to the gift shop, however, and see that the flour is produced at the premises they buy it. On days where the mill is operating and people witness the process, people buy more flour than on non- milling days. The majority of interviewees (five out of seven who responded to the question) thought that people would still come to Exmoor if the local food and drink offer were less developed, but would also spend less. Two interviewees thought people would go elsewhere, beyond 30 miles. Visitor spending on local food and drink At the farmer’s market in Minehead, an interviewee indicated that people were willing to pay a premium for local food and drink, and that price generally seemed to be less of a factor when the produce is locally sourced because visitors spend extensively on local food and drink. The producers interviewed, however, stated that they either do not charge any premium or only charge a small premium of up to five per cent. One of the farmers mentioned that when they previously offered their own pork sausages at the farmer’s market, people would state that their price was too expensive and would not purchase the products. It is unclear if they were visitors or locals. Local businesses, on the other hand, seemed to be able to attract visitors because of their local food and drink offer. One of the cafés stated that they advertised the local aspect of their food and drink and that people come to them because of that. They did not charge a premium for the local food and drink they offered, however, stating that people are price-sensitive and “shop around”. As previously mentioned, the restaurant serving high-end customers charged 30 per cent more for some of their local food and drink products. For example, they stated that their steaks (which come from a local cattle farmer) were about 30 per cent more expensive than those of the pubs in the area. Nevertheless, the restaurant is well-frequented. Moreover, it positions itself as a place where high- quality, local produce is served to attract a clientele that is looking for something special. In summary, there is divergent evidence on visitor’s willingness to spend more on local food. Evidence suggests that tourists visiting local businesses such as cafés and restaurant are willing to spend more on local food and drink. With regards to the produce itself it seems that visitors are less willing to spend more, unless the product can be brought home as a gift. Actively marketing the offer as locally sourced was identified as a way to attract visitors to restaurants and cafés. A3.4.2.3 Employment and multiplier effects The amount businesses spend on non-food supplies and services varies. One restaurant indicated that they have high costs related to electricity and gas services as well council tax. A café spends 20 per cent of their annual turnover (i.e. £40,000) on goods and services other than food; most of this
v1 July 2015 130
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
comes from within 10-30 miles of the café or from within the region. The remaining 80 per cent was spent on local food and drink. A deli spent 30 per cent of turnover on other goods and services in the previous financial year (i.e. £45,000). Most of this was spent on household products etc. which they also sell. About 30 per cent of these other purchases came from within the UK. Seven out of eight businesses consulted only employed staff from within 10 miles of the establishment. Another employed people from within 10-30 miles. The number of staff ranged from two to 12 full time staff; three businesses employed only one full time staff member, and two employed two full time staff members. Most businesses hired additional workers during the high-season although all of these seasonal workers live in the region. Even when seasonal workers are required, most live within 10 miles of the establishment. These businesses therefore create jobs which stay in the region. The wages paid out to staff members are thus likely to be re-spent in the region. In addition, farmers maintain the landscape of Exmoor. According to the Exmoor National Park authority, many farmers spend time and effort to manage the moorland and preserve the wildlife in return for free grazing areas. One farmer consulted for this study explained that he spent the previous weekend cutting down beech trees on a part of 3000 acres which he is responsible for maintaining. Sheep also help to maintain the gorse (a spiny, evergreen shrub). Farmers thus play an important role in helping the Park Authority to maintain the land and to help attract visitors in maintaining the nature of the park.
A3.4.3 Challenges to the development of local food and drink The barriers faced by businesses and local authorities and other organisations which try to develop the local food sector in Exmoor can be broadly categorised into physical and non-physical infrastructure challenges, lack of expertise, human and financial resources and fragmented supply chains. A producers who also participates on the Exmoor Tourism Board stressed the lack of accessibility and poor road and rail infrastructure as a major barrier to developing the local food and drink offer. Exmoor is difficult to access by train, with only a steam train reaching the outskirts of the park, and only irregularly, with poor links to London. In addition, the roads through the park are difficult to drive on. One of the major links between the bigger villages is a road too narrow for two vehicles to pass each other. A restaurant owner consulted for this study also indicated that there used to be a regular bus route that passed their establishment, but the service had been cancelled and now only one bus passes every two hours during the high season. The interviewee said that re-instating that bus service would help the business. Another producer said the lack of infrastructure included a lack of local butchers and abattoirs. The consultee also mentioned that increased bureaucracy restricted his time. Supermarkets were unwilling to stock locally sourced produce. The Exmoor Park authority stressed that a cross-cutting challenge was that the success of their initiatives was very hard to measure. Because it is difficult to establish a causal relationship between the support they give and the resulting outcomes, they are unsure as to what works and what to support in the future. Due to their lack in resources, they would like to be sure that their support results in desired outcomes. Only when an applicant for funding can show that the proposed initiative can have a tangible impact will they give support. They now apply this position to all funding applications. They had previously supported various initiatives that required grant funding, but none of these have been self-sustaining. The Exmoor Park authority supported the “Somerset in Exmoor food links” which functioned as a one-stop shop for produce. The hospitality industry was able to obtain the produce they needed. By pooling produce, the often small capacity of local farmers was extended and the variety of produce to choose from was increased. This initiative lasted for a couple of years, but is no longer operating. The reasons for the failure of the initiatives described above are unclear. But the local authority and several producers noted problems with a lack or irregularity of supply. Many local farmers do not have the capacity to supply during periods of high demand and are less flexible in what they can produce and when. The organiser of the Minehead farmer’s market explained that farmers who are
v1 July 2015 131
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
new to the business are most affected. Land is expensive, and borrowing is difficult; therefore there are an insufficient number of producers in the area. The local authority also mentioned that farmers might not know what their customers need. Lack of expertise also included lack of knowledge about how to approach restaurants to increase demand. Farmers lack the time to attend training. Several producers indicated that they could not afford to spend a day away from the farm in order to attend the farmer’s market. They also explained that they were often left with large quantities of unsold product at the end of the day or that the farmer’s market itself only offered access to a small segment of the market. The Exmoor Park authority stressed that lack of funding meant that they lacked staff. This in turn meant that they found it hard to keep track of initiatives going on in the park by local businesses or producers or to simply find the time to speak to them to find out what they needed. Another farmer mentioned that they were unable to mobilise the required match-funding for the grants they applied to.
A3.4.4 Existing initiatives and business approaches to developing the local food and drink offer Almost all producers and businesses actively promote their local food and drink offer online, on their menus or outside their locations on signs. Producers would often go to fairs and farmer’s markets, even outside the region, to promote their produce. Both producers interviewed, however, stated that they stopped doing this because it was not financially rewarding. In order to offer produce at the farmer’s market in Minehead, the organisers of the market require that all food on offer has to be produced within 30 miles. Primary producers (i.e. a farmer offering their own pork) have priority over secondary producers. The market is listed in the Minehead shopper’s guide and they use Facebook and twitter to promote the market. In addition, individual traders also promote their products individually. There is a food week every year in October which is hosted by a village in Exmoor, and very well frequented by both visitors and locals.
A3.4.5 Opportunities for the development of the local food and drink offer Most interviewees indicated that they needed more support, both financial and non-financial. Two local decision-makers indicated that grants for rural development would improve the local food and drink offer. A producer mentioned better access to funding and a better support system would help small farmers trying to produce and supply locally. Funding for advertising and branding was also mentioned as important and needed by decision-makers and several producers interviewed. For the farmers market this would mean money to renew the marquis and banners. The organiser of the farmer’s market mentioned that a good relationship with the council and collaboration for nine years has helped her in ensuring benefits for the farmer’s market, for example, by being able to lobby successfully against a rent increase for the market pursued by the local council. A few restaurants offered a local menu with two courses available for £10 during the quieter months (February etc.). The restaurants had to pay £50 per year to be part of the scheme. In return, they received public relations support and were listed on the dedicated website for the scheme. The restaurants did not make much profit from this scheme, but it provided income during the quieter season. This could be replicated more widely.
A3.4.6 Conclusions Overall, the results indicate that local food and drink play an important part in the tourist experience in Exmoor and if the local food and drink sector were less well-developed, it would have a negative impact on the tourist spend in the region overall. In terms of employment benefits, local business and producers employ all of their staff from the region. And the businesses interviewed source a high percentage of their offer locally, within 10-30 miles. This includes locally produced ale and cider, flour, meat and dairy and cakes baked by village residents.
v1 July 2015 132
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Consultees indicated that local businesses, and particularly local producers would benefit from more support. Producers consulted for this case study had in the past attempted to supply their products locally, but these initiatives were largely unsuccessful. The Exmoor Park authority would benefit from more funding in order to keep track of the developments and initiatives emerging in the region, and being able to assess the needs and success of those initiatives. The trend of tourists visiting Exmoor because of its food and drink offer was said to be slowly increasing, with greater emphasis being placed on products coming from Exmoor. While most producers and businesses did not charge a premium for their local products, tourists were generally perceived to be willing to spend more money on food and drink if it was locally sourced from the organiser of the farmer’s market. The restaurant which charges a premium on its locally produced meals also had high demand for those products. Although the evidence is mixed, it appears that there is increasing awareness and demand from tourists to Exmoor for local food and drink. A3.5 Padstow
A3.5.1 Overview of tourism and local food and drink sector A3.5.1.1 Market overview Padstow is a small, working fishing port located on the north Cornwall coast at the head of the Camel River. It has a population of approximately 4,400 (UK Census, 2011) and is located within close proximity to many sandy beaches, coves and the South West Coastal Footpath, making it a popular destination for visitors. Tourism is a major contributor to the Cornish economy, supporting one in four jobs in the county (Visit Cornwall, 2011). Visit Cornwall estimated that Cornwall attracted more than 18 million visitors in 2011. These visitors stayed for a total of 23 million nights, made 14 million day trips and spent almost £1.9 billion in Cornwall in 2011, including approximately £500 million spent on food and drink (2011 prices) (Ibid.). Tourism is of even greater importance to the local economy in Padstow. Visit Cornwall commissioned research in 2012 to estimate the scale and value of tourism in 12 key towns in the county including Padstow. The research estimated total visitor expenditures of more than £60 million in Padstow in 2012, including more than £15 million spent on food and drink. These tourism expenditures were estimated to support approximately 1,600 jobs, which represents more than half of all jobs in Padstow. The above figures are also likely to have increased significantly following two very strong years for tourism in Cornwall in 2013 and 2014. Cornwall also has a significant food and drink industry. The value of Cornwall’s agri-food sector was estimated to be £1.4 billion in 2011 (University of Exeter, 2011), while the Cornwall Food & Drink organisation estimates that this value has since increased to around £2 billion following two good summer seasons, increased industry investment, growth of exports and wider trade developments (Cornwall Food & Drink, 2015). The county has a long association with local food and drink. A survey of visitors to Cornwall, undertaken in 2002 (Cornwall Taste of the West, 2002), found that nearly all respondents had tried local foods during their visit and almost 70 per cent had selected places to eat or stay because they offered local produce. The survey also found that the local products most frequently purchased by visitors were Cornish pasties and clotted cream. Cornwall’s reputation for offering visitors good quality, locally produced food and drink has been developing and growing rapidly over time and has been expanding to cover a greater range of food and drink products. A survey undertaken in 2014 (Cornwall Food & Drink, 2015), found that respondents described a much broader variety of produce associated with Cornwall including fish/seafood, pasties, clotted cream, beer/ales, cream teas, ice cream, cheese, wine, fruit and vegetables. Nearly all respondents ranked the quality of Cornish food and drink as good or exceptionally good (more than half of whom described it as being exceptionally good), while the most popular words used to describe Cornish produce were ‘fresh’, ‘tasty’, ‘local’ and a collection of positive descriptors such as ‘great’, ‘fabulous’ and ‘sublime’. The survey found very few negative associations, which were mainly associated with the price or richness of Cornish food and drink. The survey also found strong links between Cornish food and drink and tourism as more than 80 per cent of the respondents who were visitors to Cornwall stated that the food and drink offer had influenced their
v1 July 2015 133
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
choice of destination, while it had either quite a lot of influence or a very heavy influence on the decisions of more than 40 per cent. The responses also suggested that three-quarters of Cornwall residents take holidays in Cornwall and, despite having year-round access to Cornish food and drink, this group suggested that food and drink was an even greater influence on their choice of destination. This finding suggests that the food and drink offer in Cornwall is likely to vary significantly between different local areas in the county. Padstow has developed a particularly strong reputation as a ‘local food’ destination, and is a major contributor to the overall strength of the local food and drink offer for Cornwall as a whole. The Padstow economy has grown significantly in recent years,67 which has been driven, to a large extent, by the performance of the food and drink sector. Padstow specialises in good quality, fresh, locally produced food and drink, and a large number of specialist retailers and food service outlets are located in the town. This reputation has been supported and enhanced by celebrity chefs, including Rick Stein, Paul Ainsworth and Nathan Outlaw, who have established a number of restaurants, takeaways and food retail outlets in the town. The town also has a strong food-related supply chain which includes its own fishing fleet, food manufacturers, a local brewery, and wholesalers of meat, fruit, vegetables and a wide range of food and drink products. Padstow is also surrounded by numerous farms and other food-related businesses within the local area. There are many providers of visitor accommodation in the town who are also committed to providing local food and drink, and helping to increase the overall quality and value of the local food and drink and tourism offer in Padstow. A3.5.1.2 Coordination of local food and drink sector The key stakeholders involved in promoting, developing and coordinating the local food and drink sector, alongside the wider food and drink and tourism sectors in Padstow and the rest of Cornwall include: ■ The Rural Delivery Team, which is part of the Cornwall Development Company. It was originally funded by the Objective One programme to facilitate applications from the agricultural, horticultural, food and land based industries of Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. Since 2008 it has secured funding from Cornwall Council, the Rural Development Programme for England (RDPE) and Cornwall Development Company and is now responsible for: – working with the Cornwall Agri-food Council to further the strategic development of agriculture, horticulture, food and the land based sector in Cornwall; – working with potential RDPE applicants to develop quality submissions; and – informing and delivering other activities and initiatives to encourage the development and growth of the economy in rural areas across Cornwall. ■ Visit Cornwall is responsible for growing Cornwall’s visitor economy through marketing and PR activities, and aims to continually grow awareness of Cornwall to existing customers and new markets. It therefore plays a key role in promoting Cornwall as a destination for good quality, locally produced food and drink. Visit Cornwall also commissions research projects covering a range of themes such as visitor profiles, tourism / economic impacts, occupancy levels etc. Visit Cornwall became a community interest company on 1 April 2015 and received funding from Cornwall Council to support this transition, although it also generates income from partnerships, sponsorship, membership fees and advertising income. ■ Cornwall Food & Drink is responsible for promoting its members and the wider food and drink sector in Cornwall and supporting the role of food and drink in contributing towards Cornwall’s economy. It delivers events to promote the sector, provides support to members and also undertakes research to identify and maximise market opportunities for Cornish food and drink businesses.
67 For example, employment growth in Padstow has exceeded the county and national averages between 2009 and 2013.
v1 July 2015 134
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Taste of the West is a membership organisation for more than 1,000 food and drink businesses in the South West. It promotes and supports local food and drink from Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire. It also delivers a range of marketing and consultancy services to clients (including event management, marketing campaigns, business advice and project delivery) and offers the largest regional awards programme in the UK for food and drink products as well as retailers, restaurants, pubs, hotels and cafés. ■ The Padstow Area Tourism and Business Forum (PATBF) is a member organisation aimed at promoting tourism in Padstow and the surrounding area. It was formed in 2009 with the amalgamation of the Padstow Area Tourism Association (PATA) and Padstow Chamber of Commerce. It represents the interests of all tourism-related businesses in the area including hotels, B&Bs, restaurants, shops, tourist attractions and taxi firms. The main roles and responsibilities of the PATBF include: – running Padstow’s Tourist Information Centre (TIC); and – promoting the Padstow area and its members’ businesses through events, websites and publications such as the Padstow Guide.
A3.5.2 Importance of local food and drink to tourism and the local economy Local food and drink is of critical importance for tourism and the local economy of Padstow. Many of the businesses in Padstow have been committed to increasing the scale and quality of the local food and drink offer over many years and the scale of change has continued to gain momentum over time. The local food and drink offer has been an important driver in developing the local tourism offer, and increasing the quality and value of tourism, by enabling Padstow to attract increased numbers of visitors and visitor expenditures. A3.5.2.1 Local food and drink sales and turnover This case study has been informed by interviews with representatives of five food producers/ processors, five food service outlets (restaurants, shops, accommodation providers), and four stakeholder organisations. These stakeholders and businesses typically defined local produce as being food and drink produced in Cornwall (i.e. within a radius of some 40-50 miles), although the interviews also discussed food and drink produced within the Padstow area (i.e. within a radius of around 10 miles). It is difficult to estimate the proportion of turnover that is typically attributable to sales of local food and drink because there is considerable variance, both between different types of establishment, but also between different establishments of the same type. For example: ■ Sales of local food and drink make up a relatively small proportion of the turnover of accommodation providers in Padstow (e.g. around 10 per cent for one B&B), but can represent 100 per cent of turnover for local farmers and producers. ■ There can be differences between the same types of business. Some restaurants in Padstow purchase the large majority of their ingredients from local suppliers, while others use nationwide wholesalers and purchase very little local produce. However, the interviews did identify some trends among local businesses in the Padstow area. Two local farms were selling most of their produce to local businesses, with around 90 per cent of produce staying within Cornwall, although the interviews identified other local farms that were exclusively supplying supermarkets. There were also conflicting views amongst Padstow fishermen. One said that his whole catch would typically go to local pubs and restaurants in the Padstow area, while the other said that his catch went to a wholesaler and most ended up being exported to Spain, and less than ten per cent was likely to stay in Padstow. These examples suggest that, despite the increasing demand for local food and drink, the supply of some local produce still exceeds local demand and some producers are therefore continuing to supply produce to non-local markets. Interviewees suggested that these producers tend to supply in higher quantities because of the lower prices charged in these markets.
v1 July 2015 135
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
The interviews with food processors and manufacturers in Padstow suggested that most sales were to other businesses in Cornwall, including some in Padstow, although both businesses were actively developing sales channels outside of Cornwall to grow their turnover and become less reliant upon the seasonal demand in Cornwall. Food and drink manufacturers and customer serving businesses such as retailers, food service outlets and accommodation providers were also asked about their purchases of local produce. The interviews found that: ■ The two manufacturers were committed to using local produce from Cornwall wherever possible, and more than 80 per cent of their ingredients were sourced from within Cornwall. One manufacturer was sourcing locally because they felt this was important to the consumer and helped them to maximise sales, while the other was more committed to purchasing the best quality ingredients, rather than prioritising local produce, although the consultee noted that most of the best quality products were available from local suppliers in Cornwall. ■ The retailers were also sourcing locally wherever possible and again, more than 80 per cent of their products were sourced from local suppliers. One retailer was a farm shop and around half of the products were sourced from within ten miles of Padstow, while the other was an outlet for a local manufacturer and sourced most products from the Padstow area. However, the average retailer in Padstow is likely to source a lower proportion of products locally as they will not all have close associations with local farms and food processors. ■ The interviews suggested that there was large variance in the extent to which food service outlets in Padstow source ingredients and products locally. It was suggested that there are likely to be a similar number of restaurants purchasing most of their ingredients from local suppliers compared to those using nationwide wholesalers and purchasing very little local produce. Their motivations typically depend on whether they were targeting higher value customers, willing to pay a premium for good quality, local produce, or targeting customers with smaller budgets, for whom local produce is a lower priority. ■ The accommodation providers interviewed to inform this study were committed to local produce and were purchasing most of their ingredients and food products from local sources. Both accommodation providers said they were sourcing local produce because their visitors expected to be served local produce by establishments in Padstow. The interviews suggested that the quality of accommodation in Padstow has increased significantly and most establishments are likely to serve local produce to visitors. A3.5.2.2 Impact of local food and drink on visitor numbers and spending Does local food and drink attract visitors? The strength of the local food and drink offer has definitely enabled Padstow to attract additional visitors. As stated above, a recent survey suggested that Cornish food and drink was a major influence on decisions to visit Cornwall (2015), and this is likely to be even more significant for Padstow in particular, given the strength of the local food and drink offer. Padstow is very busy between April and October and some stakeholders suggested that it is already approaching saturation point in the peak season when the car parks, quayside, shops, restaurants, cafes, and pubs are operating at full capacity and it is necessary to book in advance to eat in the best restaurants. Padstow and Cornwall have both benefited from considerable growth in the ‘staycation’ market in the last few years, which has been supported by good summer weather. The local food and drink offer has supported the growth in visitors in the peak summer months but, more importantly, has motivated a significant increase in visits outside of the peak season and has therefore been a valuable tool in helping to extend the tourism season. Many businesses in Padstow used to close in the winter, as many tourism businesses in Cornwall still do, but the large majority now stay open for most or all of the year as a result of the increase in year round trade from visitors. For example, one accommodation provider interviewed as part of this study used to close in the winter but, since 2008, has remained open year round and is now booked for 48 weeks of the year.
v1 July 2015 136
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
The local food and drink offer has also helped Padstow to raise the quality of its overall tourism offer and Padstow now attracts a relatively large proportion of visitors from AB socio-economic groups and has become a popular destination for people from London and elsewhere in the country who want a long weekend in the UK. Interviewees suggested that Padstow now benefits from having a critical mass of good quality restaurants, which means that visitors can spend longer in Padstow and eat in a different restaurant every night of the week. This is considered a unique selling point as there are very few other rural locations that can offer such a wide choice of quality restaurants. Outlets serving local food and drink typically make their customers aware of the fact that they sell local produce and use local ingredients, and many also go into detail about how and where the products were produced and prepared and use this as a marketing tool. Some outlets go further and write blogs and update websites to inform potential customers about the local produce they serve and availability at different times of the year (e.g. what customers can expect in March). One interviewee felt that some Padstow businesses are ‘overselling’ their use of local produce, which is unnecessary as visitors already expect and assume that establishments in Padstow will serve local produce. Businesses also reported that despite prioritising local produce they also needed to be pragmatic as there are times when businesses need to look further afield to source particular products, or produce at particular times of the year. It can therefore be overly restrictive for a business to claim that they only use local produce. The fact that Padstow has such a specialised offer would mean that, in theory, there would be a significant impact on the town if the local food and drink offer was less well-developed. In this scenario, Padstow would be likely to lose visitors, particularly high value / high spending visitors to other strong ‘food’ destinations in Cornwall such as St Ives, Fowey, Truro, Falmouth, St Mawes and other such areas outside of Cornwall. It was suggested that the biggest impact would be outside of the peak season, which is where Padstow has benefited most in recent years. If the local food and drink offer in Padstow was less well-developed it is expected that the greatest impacts would be fewer visitors outside the peak season and reduced visitor expenditures in the peak season. However, it is important to note that this is highly unlikely given the critical mass of local producers, manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers and food service outlets, which means that the local food and drink offer in Padstow is no longer dependent on the presence of any particular individual or business. Visitor spending on local food and drink There was consensus among the food and drink businesses and stakeholders in Padstow that visitors (and local residents) do spend more for local food and drink than they would for a non-local food and drink offer. This was generally considered to be because local food and drink is usually of a higher quality than non-local products and is usually produced on a smaller scale so is unable to benefit from some of the economies of scale experienced by many of the larger, nationwide suppliers. However, local consumers are also important to many of these businesses and one retailer stated that they were conscious of the relatively low incomes of many Cornwall residents and the need to remain competitive with retailers of non-local produce in order to maintain healthy sales to local residents throughout the year. The interviews also suggested that the customer serving businesses (e.g. retailers, restaurants, pubs, cafés, accommodation providers, etc.) that source local food and drink also benefit from increased numbers of visitors/customers and associated expenditures compared to establishments that do not. These views concur with the recent survey, undertaken by Cornwall Food & Drink (2015), which provided the following insights into the motivations for buying Cornish produce: ■ The most common reasons for choosing to buy Cornish produce included taste, quality, the Cornish reputation and the availability of unique products, which were mentioned by more than half of all respondents. Price was much less likely to motivate purchases of Cornish food and drink and was only mentioned by around one in five respondents. However, the survey also found that price was the second most significant limiting factor, behind availability, which prevented almost half of respondents from buying as much Cornish produce as they would have liked. ■ Similarly, in terms of experiences of eating out, respondents rated the use of local ingredients and quality of food and drink particularly highly, alongside the location and surroundings. However, the
v1 July 2015 137
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
survey identified slightly lower levels of satisfaction in terms of value for money, style and fashion, and opening times of establishments. These findings suggest that consumers generally accept having to pay more for good quality local produce in retailers and eating out, although the higher prices are likely to restrict the ability of many consumers to buy as much as they would like. This is likely to be true in Padstow, and many of the interviews undertaken as part of this study highlighted the importance of Padstow being able to offer food and drink to meet different budgets to appeal to a broad range of visitors and not alienate any consumer groups. Interviews also identified some frustrations amongst local businesses. The stakeholders and businesses reported that the local food and drink offer in Padstow is so well known that visitors now assume that the food and drink that they consume in Padstow is local produce. This means that all food outlets in Padstow are benefiting from Padstow’s reputation for local food and drink, including those that do not actually serve local produce but are still able to charge premium prices because of their ‘Padstow’ location. It was also suggested that some businesses are actually misleading customers (e.g. it was reported that some establishments have been known to advertise ‘local seafood’, when they are selling species that are not available around Cornwall). A3.5.2.3 Employment and multiplier effects The interviews undertaken to inform this study found that the large majority of staff employed by Padstow businesses lived locally. All lived within Cornwall and more than 90 per cent lived within a ten mile radius of their respective employer. This means that most of the wages paid to staff will be retained in the local economy and will therefore generate relatively large induced effects from the re- spending of incomes in the local economy. As stated above, the local food and drink and tourism businesses in Padstow were also found to purchase a large proportion of their food and drink from local producers and suppliers. It was more difficult to determine the extent to which these businesses purchase other goods and services from local sources. This varied from business to business, although most businesses reported trying to source as many goods and services locally as possible / feasible. Local businesses in Padstow are therefore likely to source a relatively high proportion of food and non-food goods and services from other local businesses. The economic multiplier effects in Padstow are therefore likely to be relatively high given the high propensity to purchase goods and services from local suppliers and the high proportion of wages paid to local residents.
A3.5.3 Challenges to the development of local food and drink Despite the strong local food and drink offer, there are still barriers which restrict the supply of local food and drink in Padstow. First, the cost of local produce, which can be prohibitively expensive in some cases. Several local producers and customer serving businesses commented that the cost of local produce can be a barrier to the retention and sale of more local food and drink in Padstow. Businesses were typically committed to using local (i.e. Cornish) produce in their products (for manufacturers) and dishes (for restaurants) but would not prioritise purchases from the immediate Padstow area if it was more expensive. Therefore, while many businesses prioritised Cornish produce and ingredients, price was still an important factor and many businesses said they would shop around for the best value within Cornwall. Similarly, Padstow businesses would also prioritise food and drink from elsewhere in Cornwall over produce from the immediate Padstow area for reasons of quality. For example, one B&B in Padstow stated that their business was committed to buying the best produce, rather than the most local produce, in order to meet customer demands. Therefore, while ‘local’ food and drink is important, other factors such as price and quality are often more important. Furthermore, other retailers and food service outlets are completely driven by price and it is not possible for local producers to compete with the lower prices associated with large nationwide suppliers or foreign imports in these cases.
v1 July 2015 138
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
While the Padstow area has developed a good range of food and drink producers and products, which continues to expand over time, there are some products that cannot be sourced locally (e.g. avocados), and some other seasonal produce is only available at certain times of the year. These issues restrict the ability to rely solely on local produce, without having to source some products from outside the local area. One specialist retailer described a particular challenge at times when it is difficult to source particular products and having to decide whether to stick to their ‘local’ principles, and maintain their reputation as a local supplier, or source from outside the local area to satisfy demand for particular products. It can also be difficult to compete with the flexibility of wholesalers. There are many reasons why businesses would choose to use wholesalers rather than dealing directly with local producers. Interviewees reported that dealing with wholesalers is usually easier, as they are typically larger businesses, and it is easier to place a single order with one business rather than manage relationships and orders with multiple producers. Wholesalers were also reported to be more flexible in terms of their delivery times and their ability to deliver at short notice to meet customer needs. Some interviewees also raised concerns about smaller producers, who are often specialists in food and drink production rather than business operations, and do not always have the same business skills as a wholesaler, which can require greater investment of time and effort from the businesses purchasing from the producer. It was also suggested that products supplied by wholesalers are usually of a reasonable quality and are provided in a consistent, uniform size and shape, which can be beneficial for restaurants. For example, one Padstow fisherman stated that even for the top restaurants in Padstow, they were unable to compete with larger fish wholesalers that are able to offer fresh fish that has already been filleted and provided in uniform sizes/portions to meet the needs of the restaurants. While the restaurants may use good quality, Cornish wholesalers of fresh fish (such as Matthew Stevens from St Ives, who uses fish caught and landed in Newlyn), it is frustrating for the local Padstow fishermen that more of the Padstow catch is not retained within Padstow for sale in Padstow shops and restaurants. The availability of products can be a barrier to the increasing the local food and drink offer. The recent Cornwall Food & Drink survey (2015) found the most common reasons for not buying as much Cornwall food and drink as respondents would like were associated with availability of products, particularly amongst the retailers that respondents would normally use for food and drink. This suggests that the sale of local food and drink is restricted by supermarkets continuing to source most of their products through national rather than local supply chains. Finally, local issues such as rurality, poor road infrastructure and congestion in the summer months are a barrier. For example, one local business described how it had previously operated a vegetable box scheme in the Padstow area but the traffic congestion in the summer months had made the business unviable. A fisherman in Padstow also raised concerns about the Defra proposals to reduce unused licences (latent capacity) in the English 10 metre and under fishing sector. It was suggested that the existing quota system already favours the larger fishing operators and the Defra proposals will make it more difficult for the smaller operators in the Padstow fishing fleet, which need to be able to offer a mix of different fishing methods including trawling, netting, line fishing and potting, to catch a variety of species and meet the demand from local restaurants. The fisherman was concerned that a cap on the smaller boats could potentially put some of the Padstow fleet out of business.
A3.5.4 Existing initiatives and business approaches to developing the local food and drink offer The growth of the local food and drink offer and the increased quality of the tourism offer in Padstow has been driven, to a large extent, by Rick Stein’s investments and projects in the town and surrounding area over many years. More recently, the growth has been supported by additional investments and projects associated with other famous chefs, such as Paul Ainsworth and Nathan Outlaw, and a general increase in quality and greater focus on local produce throughout the local food and drink and tourism businesses. These projects have together created a significant step-change in the local food and drink and tourism offer in Padstow.
v1 July 2015 139
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Rick Stein alone has built up a range of businesses in Padstow, which currently comprise: ■ The Seafood Restaurant, Rick Stein’s flagship restaurant, which opened in 1975 and marks its 40th anniversary in 2015. The Seafood Restaurant has established an international reputation for serving good quality, fresh fish and shellfish (landed in Padstow and elsewhere in Cornwall). There are also 16 guest rooms above the restaurant, which is located in the centre of Padstow. ■ St Petroc's Hotel and Bistro, which is based in the centre of Padstow and opened in 1988. It is a 10 room hotel above a rustic bistro offering dishes based on a mix of local and non-local produce. ■ Rick Stein's Café, which opened in 1994 and provides a variety of dishes on a menu that changes on a daily basis. It has a strong seafood focus and many of the ingredients are sourced locally. It also offers three bedrooms for visitors. ■ Stein's Fish & Chips, which opened in 2004 and comprises a restaurant and takeaway. The menu includes cod and haddock as well as a large range of local fish including hake, monkfish, John Dory and bass which are often landed in Padstow and elsewhere in Cornwall. ■ Retail outlets offering a range of local food and drink products including: Stein’s Deli (which opened in 2000 and offers homemade jams, fresh bread, local meats, olives, cheeses, beers, recipe books, etc.); Stein’s Patisserie (which opened in 2003 and offers patisserie, cakes, truffles, homemade bread, pasties, freshly brewed coffee, etc.); Stein’s Fisheries (which opened in 2012 and offers fresh fish, shellfish and pre-prepared seafood dishes, salads and sandwiches); and Stein’s Gift Shop (which opened in 2000 and offers a range of kitchenware, souvenirs and gifts). ■ The Padstow Seafood School, which opened in 2000 and offers a range of cookery courses and attracts visitors to Padstow throughout the year; ■ Additional visitor accommodation at: St Edmund’s House (six luxury hotel rooms, situated behind The Seafood Restaurant, which opened in 2001); Prospect House (a small B&B in Padstow with four rooms, which opened in 2007); and Bryn Cottage (a one-bedroom serviced cottage located in the heart of Padstow, which also opened in 2007). Rick Stein also owns a pub at St Merryn, self-catering properties at Trevone and another holiday property at Martindale (all of which are located within a few miles of Padstow) as well as three other restaurants in Cornwall (in Falmouth, Porthleven and Newquay. Paul Ainsworth became established as a chef in London, working with Gary Rhodes, Gordon Ramsay and Marcus Wareing, before moving to Padstow in 2006 and opening the ‘Number 6’ restaurant. Number 6 has won numerous accolades and was awarded a Michelin star in 2013. The restaurant has a strong focus on local produce and its website states that “our cooking is all about making the most of what’s on our doorstep. Our menus are based around brilliant local, seasonal ingredients, cooked in a simple modern style with a Cornish influence” (Paul Ainsworth, 2015). He also owns a second restaurant in Padstow, Rojano’s in the Square. Rojano’s was established in Padstow more than 30 years ago, but was taken over by Paul in 2010. It serves Italian food prepared using a mixture of local and Italian ingredients and products: “Fresh produce comes from our allotment just steps from our back door; our fish is landed daily from sustainably sourced Cornish day boats; and we’ve sourced authentic Italian wines, pizza flour and pasta.” (Ibid.) Paul Ainsworth also has plans to open Padstow Townhouse in 2015. This will be a luxury six bedroom townhouse hotel catering for high value visitors. Nathan Outlaw is also a Michelin-starred, celebrity chef, who currently owns restaurants in Rock (located opposite Padstow on the other side of the Camel Estuary), Port Isaac (within ten miles of Padstow) and London. He has previously worked in London and the South East before moving to Cornwall to work with Rick Stein at The Seafood Restaurant. He then owned and worked at a number of restaurants across Cornwall and the wider South West, including ‘The Black Pig’ in Rock and ‘St Ervan Manor’ near Padstow, both of which earned Michelin stars between 2003 and 2006. Nathan moved to Fowey in Cornwall and opened ‘Restaurant Nathan Outlaw’ in 2006, which earned two Michelin stars within a year, before also opening a second restaurant ‘Outlaw’s’ in Rock. In 2010, he also moved the flagship ‘Restaurant Nathan Outlaw’ from Fowey to Rock, and regained two Michelin stars, before moving it again in 2014 to new premises a few miles away in Port Isaac. He also opened ‘Outlaw’s Fish Kitchen’ in Port Isaac in 2013, which recently earned a Michelin star, and ‘The Mariners
v1 July 2015 140
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Public House’ in Rock in 2014. All four of the Cornwall establishments use local food and drink from around Cornwall and have a particular focus on Cornish seafood. The business ventures and investments made by Rick Stein, Paul Ainsworth and Nathan Outlaw have helped to drive a significant change in the overall quality of the local food and drink and tourism offer in Padstow, the surrounding area, and across Cornwall as a whole. Other local businesses in Padstow have also been developing over time, and are continuing to invest in business ventures, to further increase the quality of the local food and drink and tourism offer. Example of existing initiatives and business approaches include: ■ The Padstow Farm Shop, which produces and sells the UK’s first homegrown pasta, under the ‘Padstow Pasta’ brand, using durum wheat grown on the owners’ farm which is also based in Padstow. Padstow Pasta offers seven different types of pasta (i.e. spaghetti, linguine, fusilli, lasagne, tagliatelle, rigatoni and conchiglie). This is an example of a good quality, niche product that also helps to develop the wider ‘Padstow’ brand and the owners are currently trying to negotiate listings with exclusive retailers in London. The durum wheat flour also makes good pizza bases and is supplied to Jamie Oliver's Fifteen Cornwall restaurant at Watergate Bay (approximately ten miles from Padstow). ■ The Woodlands Country House B&B guesthouse has recently started to produce and sell its own brand of breakfast cereals, ‘Hugo’s Breakfast’. The business developed from initially providing parcels of mueslis and granolas for guests to enjoy at home, and now produces a range of granola, muesli and porridge products in the kitchens at the Woodlands Country House in Padstow. Products are sold directly to consumers through the B&B and the ‘Hugo’s Breakfast’ website, and are also stocked in various shops throughout Padstow and the rest of Cornwall and in Devon. This is a relatively new business venture and is still relatively small in scale although there are plans for significant future growth. ■ The Chough Bakery manufactures pasties in Padstow and has retail outlets on the quayside in Padstow and another a few miles away in Mother Ivey’s Bay. The pasties use local ingredients from Cornwall, while the meat is sourced from within ten miles, and this information is used to market the products to customers. The large majority of Chough pasties are sold to visitors, which creates significant challenges for the business due to seasonality effects. The business is now trying to reduce the seasonality effects by developing its wholesale business and increasing sales to outlets and customers based outside of its traditional Padstow and Cornwall markets. Examples of other initiatives involving collaborations of groups of businesses and organisations in Padstow, working together to develop business opportunities, increase the local food and drink offer and raise awareness of the Padstow offer amongst visitors and local residents include: ■ The Padstow Christmas Festival, which is organised by the PATBF and has become an established event in the Padstow calendar. The festival has been running for a total of seven years and attendances at the four day event have grown to more than 40,000. The event combines top chefs providing cookery demonstrations, with more than 100 local producers selling a range of local food and drink and arts and crafts, as well as music, fireworks, carols and a lantern display. The 2014 festival attracted many famous chefs including Rick Stein, Phil Vickery, Angela Hartnett, Michael Caines, Mitch Tonks, Paul Ainsworth, Nathan Outlaw, and Brian Turner. The event helps to raise awareness and confirm Padstow’s status as a key destination for local food and drink and has provided a significant boost to local businesses. It has also helped extend the tourism season in Padstow as December is now a key month for local food and drink and tourism businesses. ■ ‘The Cornwall Project’, which is a project to develop new sales channels for Cornish producers of local food and drink, by developing links with chefs in some of London’s best restaurants (Birkett, 2015). The project aims to drive sales of Cornish produce and create full-time, year-round jobs in Cornwall, to help address issues of seasonal unemployment. The project has been operating for around five years and currently supplies a number of London restaurants. Padstow fishermen have recently joined the scheme and are beginning to deliver fish and shellfish to restaurants in London. Historically, much of the shellfish caught by the Padstow fleet has been exported to Spain, while many restaurants in Padstow tend to use Cornish wholesalers who can satisfy larger
v1 July 2015 141
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
orders and provide more consistent products. However, the Cornish Project has found a market that demands product quality and freshness above specific requirements for sizes/species of fish and is less concerned about price. Interviewees reported that the London restaurants place greater importance on the way fish are caught (i.e. line caught rather than net caught) and are more willing to say they would take whatever the fishermen catch and would change their ‘daily specials’ accordingly. The catch is loaded onto a lorry at 4pm on the day it is caught and arrives in London in time for the next day. ■ The ‘Cornish Foodie Mile’ was an event held in 2014, where the Padstow Seafood School set a challenge for executive chef Jack Stein and Ross Geach of Padstow Kitchen Garden to create three dishes where all the ingredients come from within a ‘Cornish Mile’ of Padstow. The event was used to raise awareness of the quality of produce available and the different suppliers operating in the Padstow area. Several of the interviewees had also benefited from public funding from Objective One and the RDPE programmes, which had been used to support farm diversification, development of rural businesses, and support with sales and marketing activities.
A3.5.5 Opportunities for the development of the local food and drink offer Padstow already has a well-developed local food and drink offer and accommodates a growing, critical mass of producers, manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers and food service outlets that are committed to the supply of local produce to local residents and visitors. The local businesses and stakeholders are also working effectively to develop and promote Padstow as a location with a strong food and drink offer. Future opportunities are therefore likely to focus on enhancing the existing food and drink offer. However, Padstow stakeholders and businesses identified some potential opportunities, which included: ■ Introducing a farmers’ market in Padstow. This was the most common suggestion from local stakeholders and businesses to enhance the food and drink offer in Padstow. There is currently no farmers’ market in Padstow and this was generally seen as an opportunity to raise awareness of local food and drink producers and offer an opportunity for these businesses to sell directly to consumers. Similarly, consultees suggested that Padstow could benefit from a fish market or additional fishmongers as there is currently only one fish shop in Padstow. This could provide an opportunity to retain more of the Padstow catch in the town and develop linkages between the fishing fleet and the local restaurants, food processors, local residents and visitors. It was also suggested that there was a particular opportunity for a fish processor to prepare crabmeat from the Padstow fleet and supply local restaurants and sell directly to consumers. ■ Several interviewees would like to have a facility on the quayside for fishermen to use to store fish and particularly shellfish. The Padstow fishing fleet includes a number of sole traders operating day boats, which are more vulnerable to the weather than the larger vessels and businesses. This creates a significant disadvantage for the smaller vessels and single fishermen, who lose many fishing days each year to bad weather. This issue could be overcome by providing tanks to store live shellfish and fridges/chillers for fish. This would offer greater flexibility for fishermen to work around the weather to support their businesses (i.e. by increasing effort before bad weather arrives and restricts their fishing activities) and enable them to compete on more of a level playing field with the larger fishing vessels that are less vulnerable to the weather. ■ Developing supply chains and opportunities to sell outside of Cornwall. The Cornwall Food & Drink survey (2015) found that visitors to Cornwall would like more opportunities to buy Cornish food and drink outside of Cornwall, when they have returned home. As stated above, the Cornwall Project is already helping some small producers to access new markets in London, while many local producers and manufacturers, such as the Chough Bakery, are also developing online businesses in addition to their local sales channels in Cornwall. However, there may be opportunities for additional or more coordinated approaches to support local food and drink businesses to identify and supply new markets.
v1 July 2015 142
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Encouraging greater sales of local food and drink through supermarkets. The Cornwall Food & Drink survey (Ibid.) found that the availability of local Cornish produce in supermarkets has increased in recent years but highlights the importance of encouraging a greater variety of sales channels to increase sales opportunities, competition and the availability of local food and drink. ■ Operating a scheme to reward businesses for using local food and drink. Interviewees in Padstow suggested that a Defra-run scheme, similar to the food hygiene ratings, would be useful for informing consumers of outlets that are using local produce and supporting local producers, whilst also encouraging the outlets to want to use more local produce. While Taste of the West offer similar schemes for members, it was suggested that an independent scheme for all outlets would offer greater benefits. ■ Additional funding to establish new opportunities to integrate local food and drink and tourism activities. The survey undertaken by Cornwall Food & Drink (2015) suggested that food and drink has a strong influence on visitor ‘loyalty’ and ‘repeat visits’ and recommended that food and drink and tourism businesses forge even stronger links to maximise opportunities for the Cornish economy. Some of the businesses interviewed as part of this study also described ideas for new business opportunities that would increase linkages between food and drink and tourism and could be developed if appropriate funding was available. One example was to diversify and regenerate a farm business to combine food production, a restaurant and accommodation on a site outside Padstow. The project would show diners and other visitors where the food has come from and educate them about how it was produced and prepared. The plans also incorporate renewable energy and environmental aspects such as windmills, restoring Cornish hedging, planting orchards, etc. and the delivery of educational tours and courses in addition to food service. ■ Other opportunities included the availability of funding to help existing businesses to grow and address local issues, such as those associated with seasonal employment. One example included the need to invest in new freezers at Chough Bakery to help the wholesale business to grow, which would thereby help to reduce the seasonal activity of the business and employment of local residents.
A3.5.6 Conclusions Padstow has a reputation for providing good quality, fresh, locally produced food and drink, and accommodates a large number of specialist retailers and food service outlets. This reputation has been supported and enhanced by celebrity chefs, including Rick Stein, Paul Ainsworth and Nathan Outlaw, who have established a number of restaurants, takeaways and food retail outlets in the town. The town also has a strong food-related supply chain which includes its own fishing fleet, local farms, food manufacturers, a local brewery, and wholesalers of meat, fruit, vegetables and a wide range of food and drink products. The local food and drink and tourism businesses have worked individually and collaboratively to build Padstow’s reputation as a destination for local food and drink, which has helped the town to enhance the quality of its tourism product, increase the value derived from visitors, and extend the tourism season beyond the peak summer months. There is a relatively high propensity for local businesses to source food and drink from local suppliers, while most staff live locally, which means that more of the benefits of visitor expenditures are retained in the local economy and the overall economic impacts of these expenditures are significant. Barriers remain which restrict the supply of local food and drink in Padstow, including the cost and the availability of local produce, the ability to compete with wholesalers and the availability of products in retailers and food service outlets. These challenges suggest there are opportunities to further enhance the local food and drink offer, although it is also important to be able to offer consumers a choice of different food and drink products at a range of price points, which also include lower value alternatives to local food and drink. It is also important to note that the developments in Padstow have occurred over many years, and have been driven, to a large extent, by some significant investments by famous chefs that have built
v1 July 2015 143
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
on existing strengths and specialisms. It may therefore be difficult to replicate the Padstow model in other areas. A3.6 Tebay and Gloucester Services
A3.6.1 Overview of tourism and local food and drink sector A3.6.1.1 Market overview The Tebay service station is a family-owned business on the eastern edge of the Lake District on the M6, consisting of two services. Tebay Services Northbound opened in 1972 and the southbound services opened 20 years later in 1993. In 2003, the Westmorland farm shops were officially opened at Tebay North and Southbound services by HRH Prince of Wales. These farm shops were the first of their kind for the British motorway network. In 2007, a butcher’s counter was opened selling meat directly from the Dunning Family Farm. Sarah Dunning (Director of the Westmorland Group) described the services as a “farm-diversified business”. The Dunning Family are traditional upland hill farmers with herds of sheep and beef cattle. All the lamb and beef sold at the services is from the Dunning’s own farm. In 2014 the Westmorland Group purchased a site on the M5 in Gloucestershire. This site is in a strategic location with both a busy motorway and a strong food producer network. The Northbound section opened in May 2014 and the southbound part is due to open in May 2015. This case study focuses on Tebay services and the rural tourism economy in Cumbria, and also draws on information about Gloucester services as it links to a specialist local food and drink offer for the British motorway network. Tourism in Cumbria is worth an estimated £2.2bn each year and supports over 56,000 jobs (Taste Cumbria, 2011). In 2011 Cumbria had 40.1 million visitors, made up of 35 million day trippers and 5.1 million overnight visitors. In 2011 food tourism was estimate to be worth £429m, roughly a fifth of all revenue from the visitor economy. There are around two million customers a year at Tebay Services. Most of these customers are travelling long-distances of over 100 miles. There is no regular trade from local customers due to low, sparse population density in the region. The projected numbers of customers for Gloucester services is higher. The latest figures for February 2015 indicated 20,000 vehicles per week and Gloucester has a much higher proportion of local customers. A3.6.1.2 Coordination of local food and drink sector Cumbria Tourism runs the Taste Cumbria initiative (see section A3.1.4). Eden District Council is responsible for the Eden Valley in which Tebay Services is located. The Council covers the Tebay area. The Gloucester Gateway Trust is a registered charity made up of local business people and social entrepreneurs. The Trust works in partnership with the service station to ensure that a proportion of the revenue goes to promoting local employment and training opportunities and supporting community networks (Gloucestershire Gateway Trust, 2014).
A3.6.2 Importance of local food and drink to tourism and the local economy A3.6.2.1 Local food and drink sales and turnover The total turnover accounting for both the Gloucester and Tebay services is projected to be £40 million per year (following the opening of the southbound section later in 2015). At Tebay, fuel accounts for approximately 40 per cent of turnover; the remaining 60 per cent is due to sales of food and drink in the café, butcher’s counter and farm shop. The farm shop stocks products from 70 local suppliers (all located within approximately 30 miles of the service station). According to Sarah Dunning, CEO of Westmorland Family Ltd, “There is a strong producer community in Tebay,
v1 July 2015 144
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
although less than Gloucestershire. People value the high quality food produced in Cumbria. The livestock farmed here is some of the best in the country.” Compared to Tebay, Gloucester has a more diverse population of food and drink suppliers and more affluent local population. Gloucester Services has a network of 130 local suppliers: 25-30 suppliers are located within 10 miles, 40-50 within 10-30 miles, and 50-75 are 30+ miles away. Between 40-60 per cent of all food and drink stocked is “local”. Passing customers also expect major brands, such as Coca Cola, to be stocked in a motorway services. When the northbound section opened in 2014, Gloucester Services held a supplier picnic for suppliers and staff to meet. The suppliers were able to discuss common issues such as delivery, distribution, and food hygiene. The service station has an exclusive partnership with Jess’ Ladies Organic Milk, which comes from a herd of 60 dairy cattle in Hardwicke (2-3 miles away). Godsell’s Cheese is a cheesemaker seven miles from the service station who makes a single Gloucester cheese (for which there are only five producers in the county) and a double Gloucester cheese. Waitrose are Godsell’s biggest customer, followed by Gloucester Services who now account for 20 per cent of their business (currently north-bound only). Beef comes from a neighbouring farmer who sold land for the service station. Pound Farm provides turkey and cockerels at Christmas. A3.6.2.2 Impact of local food and drink on visitor numbers and spending Does local food and drink attract visitors? Tourists visit Cumbria for the natural beauty and landscape of the Lake District. Interviewees largely agreed that tourists do not visit the area specifically for local food and drink; instead they come for what Cumbria as a whole has to offer. But the quality of local food and drink adds to the tourist experience. A research project funded by Cumbria Tourism in 2011 found that when asked to rank their association with Cumbria as a destination, quality food and drink ranked seventh. Watts et al., (2011) ranked Cumbria 14 out of 93 in an index of local food activity. Interviewees in the Gloucester region note that tourists associate Gloucestershire more strongly with local food and drink than Cumbria. Visitor spending on local food and drink At Tebay services, customers likely spend more than they would in a typical motorway service station (e.g. Welcome Break services). They may, for example, purchase goods from the farm shop as a memento or a treat. For instance, the burgers, which are hand made on site using beef from the Dunnings’ farm, are more expensive than a typical burger in a motorway service station. In Gloucester, the average spend per customer (as end February 2015) was £10.30 (excluding fuel) and 20,000 vehicles came through the northbound service station in the last week of February 2015. A3.6.2.3 Employment and multiplier effects In Tebay, there are 500-550 employees, most of whom live within 30 miles of the site. A local shuttle service collects and drops off staff from their home to work. The Gloucester Services northbound section has created 150 permanent local jobs. It works with the Gateway Trust to offer jobs preferentially to local residents in disadvantaged areas who are out of work. Another 150 jobs are available for the southbound section due to open in summer 2015. People living in Stonehouse in Stroud (GL10 postcode) or in Matson, White City, Podsmead or Tuffley in Gloucester City are being offered free pre-employment training course and if completed will be guaranteed a job interview. There are clear benefits for local food and drink producers. For example, Cinder Hill Farm became a supplier to Gloucester Services in May 2014. This pig and sheep farm supplies sausage rolls and “foggies” to the service station and they buy beef from other local farms. Their turnover has increased from £13k in 2013, to £120k in 2014. It is projected to further increase to just under £500k in 2015. The service station accounts for 80 per cent of their sales and sales are projected to double when the southbound section opens. This new business stream has allowed the farm to hire four staff (1 FTE and 3 part-time). They are currently recruiting for one additional FTE. All staff members lives within 10
v1 July 2015 145
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
miles of the farm. The butcher they use for processing has also had to employ more people. They intend to open a shop in the local village in the future. A representative of the farm said that “the services have had a huge impact on our business; they have been a shop window for us and have helped to grow out profile”. The farm has now featured on the BBC’s One Show and Countryfile. The feature on Countryfile had a huge positive impact on the business. In a typical week Gloucester Services was selling about 300 units/week from Cinder Hill Farm (sausage rolls and “foggy”/pasties) but after the programme was aired they sold 3,000 units in one week. Beau’s Bakery in Frampton (6-7 miles away) bake cakes for the Gloucester farm shop. As a result of the new business stream, they have moved to new, larger premises and taken on two additional FTEs. A number of the producers mentioned that the services focus on local foods and understand the challenges faced by small businesses and are very supportive of them. One producer mentioned that the services pay much earlier than a typical buyer which helps with cash flow – often a major challenge for micro/SMEs.
A3.6.3 Challenges to the development of local food and drink In Cumbria, the geography of the county creates challenges for a local food and drink offer. Most producers in the region are either SMEs or micro businesses. Businesses are very isolated and do not have the opportunity to network and meet each other. A key challenge faced by the producers is the sheer size of the county and the fact that the population is highly dispersed. Distribution is a key barrier for suppliers who face very high delivery costs. Tebay Services provides an important framework for those businesses. There is currently no sector-specific trade association. The 2012 research on the Cumbria local food offer found that the biggest barriers for development were lack of funds, legislation/red tape and problems with distribution/logistics. These same barriers were mentioned by interviewees. Small suppliers do not have the flexibility to cope with the changing level of demand and they struggle to meet demand during peak periods. Many companies are very small – just one individual or a husband and wife team for example. For companies wanting to expand, access to finance is a barrier. Whilst Eden District Council has opened access to funding specific for SMEs, the minimum grant size is £1m which is too big for many SMEs. In Gloucester, producers mentioned the following barriers: ■ Cash flow is a major problem for SMEs/ micro business. ■ There is a lack of coordination amongst suppliers: “It would be great to have a group to bring together producers and share problems”. ■ Administrative burdens are challenging: “Audits are fairly rigorous and for a small company this is a big burden. We need training to help with paperwork.” ■ Producers face difficulties with expanding capacity without funding.
A3.6.4 Existing initiatives and business approaches to developing the local food and drink offer Taste Cumbria is a food tourism initiative run by Cumbria Tourism, devised to boost the local economy and attract visitors to Cumbria in the pursuit of a high quality food and drink offer. Funded for its first three years (2009-2012) by the Rural Development Programme for England, Taste Cumbria is run by Cumbria Tourism and features a series of successful food festivals across the county, workforce training initiatives and Cumbrian food and drink marketing and public relations. Since the end of the funded period, Taste Cumbria has become a self-sustaining, not-for-profit initiative, and continues to attract external funding from the public and private sectors, which focus on the responsible promotion of the county’s food and drink offer. In Gloucester there are two regional food groups that will be launched: “Taste of the West” and “Cotswold Choice”.
v1 July 2015 146
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A3.6.5 Opportunities for the development of the local food and drink offer A number of opportunities were mentioned by interviewees that are common to both Gloucester and Cumbria: ■ Big supermarkets could do more to stock local food and drink. ■ A network for local food and drink producers and suppliers could help bring them together. ■ Branding and profile of local produce could be developed through better marketing. ■ More could be done to promote local food and drink to visitors. ■ Better coordination across initiatives would be beneficial.
A3.6.6 Conclusions The business model of the Westmorland Group (who run the Tebay and Gloucester service stations) is built on creating a strong network of local food and drink suppliers. The business focuses on nurturing and developing relationships with local artisan producers who make high quality products. Both service stations employ large numbers of local people. There are clear economic benefits to the local food and drink suppliers in partnership with the service stations. Many of the suppliers are SMEs or micro businesses for whom the service station accounts for over 50 per cent of their turnover.
v1 July 2015 147
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Annex 4 Write-ups of the stakeholder workshops
A4.1 Introduction This report presents the write-ups of the stakeholder workshops undertaken as part of a project on Rural Tourism and Local Food and Drink. The project is being delivered by a team led by ICF for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). ICF is working with the support of Rick Minter.
A4.1.1 Aims and objectives The main aim of the workshops was to build on the results of the other research tasks (i.e. the rapid evidence assessment, the state of the market report, and the case studies) to further explore the linkages between local food and tourism economies and identify steps to develop and enhance them further. The specific objectives of the events were to: ■ discuss the findings of the research undertaken to date, including the local food and drink models identified in the case studies; ■ consider the barriers supressing the development of a local food offer linked to the tourism economy; ■ consider the opportunities to enhance links between local tourism economies and local food networks; and ■ identify steps to strengthen the links between local food networks and the tourism economy.
A4.1.2 Methodology Five stakeholder workshops were undertaken in the case study locations of Padstow, Bude, Exmoor, Amble and Tebay. They involved case study participants and individuals from their wider networks, representing producers, food outlets, delivery bodies and policymakers. Rick Minter led the preparation and delivery of the workshops, supported by ICF staff. The ICF case study lead for each location also participated in the workshop, with the exception of the Exmoor workshop, which was attended by Andy White (who also led on the case studies in Padstow and Bude). This approach ensured that there was consistency between the case studies and the workshops. Defra representatives were also invited to participate in the workshops. The workshops took place in the first two weeks of June, with each running for approximately 4.5 hours, including a 45 minute break for lunch (which comprised local food and drink). Each workshop began with an introduction to the study and the purpose of the event, followed by a presentation on the findings of the research undertaken to date, focusing on the relevant case study findings from the location where the workshop was held. This was followed by: ■ a small group session in which the participants considered the study findings and discussed and provided feedback on the benefits, barriers and opportunities for better linking local food and drink with rural tourism. ■ a second small group session, which focused on ways to strengthen the links between local food and drink and rural tourism. 0 shows an example of the planned activities, the time allocated to each and who was expected to be involved in each activity, although the specific start, lunch and finish times varied between locations.
v1 July 2015 148
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Table A4.1 Typical workshop format
TIME ACTIVITY WHO 10.00 ARRIVAL & DRINKS 10.15 Welcome & Introduction Rick Minter + ICF + Defra Clarification of event format 10.20 Briefing on the study and the findings to date ICF 10.50 SESSION ONE Small Groups Small group discussion on: ■ Benefits from local food & drink ■ Barriers ■ Opportunities 11.45 Small groups report their conclusions on: Small Groups & Rick Minter Benefits, Barriers & Opportunities 12.00 Whole group discusses the conclusions Rick Minter facilitates and scribes Whole group suggests prioritises and actions extra points 12.30 LUNCH (including briefing on local food & drink on the menu) 13.15 SESSION TWO Small Groups. Especially relevant to Small group discussion on: delivery bodies, decision makers and Strengthening links between tourism and local food & drink membership bodies. ■ Coordination activity ■ Current activities ■ Opportunities ■ Policy needs 14:00 Small groups report their conclusions on: Small Groups Coordination, Current activities, Opportunities & Policy needs 14.20 Clarify action points from the event Rick Minter & ICF 14.30 CLOSE Note: The above structure was used for all workshops although start times differed by location.
A4.1.3 Structure of this report The remainder of the report is structured as follows: ■ Sections Error! Reference source not found. to 0 present the write-ups of the workshops that were undertaken in Padstow, Bude, Exmoor, Amble and Tebay respectively; ■ Section 0 summarises the generic messages that were raised by participants in all workshops; and ■ A4.8 provides a selection of photographs taken by Rick Minter and ICF at the workshops and the workshop locations.
v1 July 2015 149
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.2 Padstow workshop
Key findings from the Padstow workshop ■ Known brand: Padstow has established its own identity, closely linked with quality local food and drink, at higher end values. This gives the area its own destination-brand with pulling power. ■ Dominant name: The Stein business is a leading and influential force in the town. It has been pivotal in establishing the area’s food and drink reputation, but there are now many more food ventures in the area which contribute to its local food offer. ■ Media interest: Padstow’s food ventures are regularly featured in both general media and specific food and drink publications. Businesses and individuals in Padstow have become experienced in using the media to good effect. ■ Capacity and congestion: Padstow’s success has led to congestion of people and vehicles in the town. This has become a management issue with park and ride schemes required, and the congestion can create real difficulties for small businesses. ■ Consequences of being a flagship: It was felt that Padstow may actually lose out from being seen as a flagship, with some funds and support systems not applying to the area. ■ Padstow markets still less developed: Despite long experience, Padstow has still to establish a flourishing local market. ■ Fisheries sector: The different institutional and funding arrangements for fish present their own challenges, especially for small scale funds being difficult to tap, even though there is a desire to innovate with local, small scale and sustainable fishing methods in the area.
A4.2.1 Introduction Date: 2 June 2015 Location: National Lobster Hatchery, Padstow Table A4.2 Participants in Padstow
Name Organisation Ross Geach Padstow Kitchen Garden Johnny Murt North Cornish Catch Rick Toogood Prawn on the Lawn Clare Stanley National Lobster Hatchery Carly Daniels National Lobster Hatchery
A4.2.2 Benefits of a localised food and drink offer ■ Length of tourist season: Local food has helped create a much longer tourism season in Padstow, providing benefits for all tourism businesses. The season has gone from just six (summer) weeks on, to just six (winter) weeks off, within living memory. ■ Higher value visitors: Padstow benefits from the presence of higher value visitors who have relatively large expenditures per head. ■ Marketing momentum: Various marketing initiatives are pulled to the area and help reinforce the momentum in local food and drink (e.g. pasty promotions). ■ Displacement or complementary activities? When considering potential displacement affects, there may be complementary rather than (or as well as) conflicting projects being established. For example, it was suggested that developing the food and drink offer in Bude and elsewhere in Cornwall would have a positive impact on the total number of visitors to Cornwall.
v1 July 2015 150
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Spin-off economies: Logistics is an example of a sector which has gained more income as a result of recent economic gains in the local food and drink sector.
A4.2.3 Barriers to developing a localised food and drink offer ■ False claims on local food. Weak criteria allow scope for weak claims about a product’s apparent localness. This encompasses completely false claims as well as the use of ‘token’ quantities of local produce (alongside bulk quantities of non-local produce) in order to be able to market outlets as serving local produce. ■ Good marketing of poor product: There are issues of effective marketing helping produce which actually has weak integrity. ■ Stringency of trading standards needs to be tightened when tracing authenticity of produce and the claims behind it. ■ Poor use and presentation of local produce by outlets can be damaging for producers. An example included outlets making bulk purchases of ‘perishable’ local produce to minimise costs and then serving it to customers when it has passed its best, which can have negative impacts on the local businesses listed on menus, etc. as providing the local produce. ■ Expense of advertising on the web and in food magazines is prohibitive for most small food and drink businesses. ■ Beyond the marketing: It is relatively easy to develop a profile from marketing but much more challenging to achieve business deals and negotiate prices and logistics. ■ Optimum scale of business: too small and you cannot break in, too big and you risk crowding out important smaller businesses. Is everyone fighting for the same markets or are their niche markets in the local food and drink sector? ■ Transport costs: Costs of transport to main markets such as London are significant, especially when dealing in small quantities. This issue is already being addressed to some extent by the ‘Cornwall Project’ (http://cornwallproject.com/), which offers daily delivery of Cornish produce to London restaurants. Workshop participants also mentioned plans for a similar scheme involving ‘Padstow Produce’ (see below).
A4.2.4 Opportunities to develop a localised food and drink offer ■ Longer tourist season can be further harnessed for sales if producers and growers were better able invest and capitalise on the opportunities (e.g. install more poly-tunnels, provide quay-side cold storage for fishermen). ■ Producer collaboration: Local producers could collaborate more to achieve joint approaches on shared transport and logistics and avoid exploitative middle men. For example, workshop participants described plans to set up a distribution hub involving ‘Padstow Produce’. This might start as a shared logistics van and store to serve local markets (potentially providing food boxes for visitors) as well as serving other markets such as London. It was suggested that the European Maritime and Fisheries Funding could potentially provide support for such a venture. ■ Local and national markets: Local markets create limited opportunities for many suppliers despite the perception of the strong focus on local food and drink in Padstow. London markets are attractive as they offer premium prices. There is room for local suppliers to target both types of market. ■ Raising awareness of seasonal, weekly or even daily availability of local produce: It was suggested that an ‘availability app’ could provide a means of raising awareness of the ‘real-time’ availability of local produce. It would enable producers to send messages to buyers about the daily or weekly availability of vegetables, fish and other produce. For example, it was suggested that fishermen could update local buyers about their catch before they have even landed their catch back in Padstow.
v1 July 2015 151
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.2.5 Strengthening links between local food & drink and tourism ■ A ‘Padstow Pound’ could provide another means of helping prevent money leaking from the local area. ■ Padstow festivals are important to keep momentum through the year to attract visitors. It was suggested that there could be space for a Spring or (lobster) festival, given the huge success and increasing momentum of the Christmas festival. ■ Quality counts: It is important to keep the emphasis on quality produce and local provenance despite economic pressures on consumers and the outlets serving local produce. ■ Producer- buyer communication is crucial to convey availability and seasonality issues.
A4.2.6 Other local discussion points ■ Padstow branding is ‘big’ in London. Cornwall branding also has an impact but Padstow is considered to be even more influential. ■ Links with sustainable fisheries are important to Padstow’s food integrity. Padstow’s food economy helps to maintain the local fishing industry and offers tourism benefits by having a working quay in the town. The alternative would be for much of the Padstow waterside environment to turn into a marina but the working fishing industry helps to enhance the perceived integrity local food and drink offer. ■ Existing and surviving fruit and veg shops are now doing well in the area, in contrast to the struggles experienced by such shops in recent decades. ■ Local catchment definition of fish: There was debate about when fish should be considered to be ‘local’. The issue is complicated due to the large distances travelled by some fishing boats, despite landing the catch in Padstow. ■ Padstow markets: Padstow surprisingly lacks a flourishing farmer’s market, despite its reputation as a food hub. ■ Cumbersome grants in the fish sector: Grants to establish local food projects are a real challenge for the fisheries sector. Potential applicants are directed to the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund which is disproportionately big and administratively heavy for the aims of a modest local project. For example, grants for cold stores are desirable but available grants are not flexible enough to help. Thus a more light-footed ‘primer’ grant for local fisheries would be desirable. ■ Homogeneity: Many local restaurants want homogenous size and shape of food products, which leads them to purchase from wholesalers rather than local suppliers. ■ Blunt criteria for local food and drink: The criteria for food and drink procurement used by organisations are often too general and aimed at price factors to help nurture local supplies. ■ Marketing style v substance: Cornwall is prone to good marketing over-riding the integrity of produce and business. ■ Threats to future purchases of local produce: It was suggested that even some of the top local restaurants are increasingly driven by price in their procurement of ingredients, which could affect the income and margins for the food supply chain and offers a threat to future purchases of local produce. ■ Problems of being a flagship: There is a risk that Padstow is viewed too much as a flagship. This can mean that Padstow doesn’t fit many criteria for funding for local projects in any sector. A4.2.6.1 Fisheries issues ■ Environmental effects: Catching fish by standard methods and in a formula way has environmental consequences.
v1 July 2015 152
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Diverse catch: Fishermen can earn premium prices for some alternative species but it is challenging to source a diverse range of fish species without investing in innovative fishing equipment (e.g. fish traps can help source fish and have a lower impact). ■ Aiming for quality: It was suggested that there is an opportunity for a world-class, centralised fish market in Cornwall, with a focus on sustainability, which could be served by fishermen in Padstow and around Cornwall. ■ Creating local supply: It is desirable to ensure genuine local fisheries are supported, at least in part, by local buyers to help maintain the local fishing fleet. A4.2.6.2 Branding issues ■ Social media helps to reinforce the Padstow brand. ■ Linking Padstow to a food & drink product puts it on the map, whatever the product. (e.g. having Padstow in the name of a product or company delivers significant benefits). However, there are also risks of producers jumping on the bandwagon. ■ Consumer awareness: Consumers are becoming more aware of brand integrity and whether or not claims made for a product have substance. ■ Seasonality and menu choice: A donation to the lobster hatchery is made by customers choosing lobster at a number of local and non-local restaurants under the ‘buy one set one free’ scheme (http://www.nationallobsterhatchery.co.uk/support-us/buyonesetonefree/). Restaurants, such as Prawn on the Lawn in London, explain the scheme to their customers on the menu, alongside an explanation of the origin and seasonal availability of fish and other ingredients. A4.2.6.3 Local priorities ■ Support for innovation: including new production methods, funds, training, support systems, information on support systems. ■ New ways to harness sustainable fish: especially fishing facilities and equipment to go with new and sustainable methods. ■ Support for more environmentally friendly growing methods and equipment. ■ Specialist advice: There is a requirement for more tailored advice, especially advice on marketing and on new markets for sustainable and local produce. ■ Transport links: There is a need to optimise transport movements to avoid empty vehicles making long journeys. An example was provided of the transportation of fish and shellfish to Spain as the ‘fish lorry’ always turns up empty from Spain, which increases distribution costs and restricts the prices that buyers are willing to pay. ■ Superfast broadband and 4G coverage has been improving and offers benefits for local businesses. ■ Supermarkets are beginning to stock more local produce but how can this trend be consolidated and opportunities maximised?
v1 July 2015 153
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.3 Bude workshop
Key findings from the Bude workshop ■ Local regeneration: There was a strong belief amongst local producers and associated businesses that Bude is starting to feel the benefits of regeneration, and that local food and drink is a key component of the area’s economic upturn. ■ Bude for Food Assembly gives a strong focus for producers and businesses to offer mutual support. ■ Food cluster: The new food cluster at Norton Barton is generating momentum in itself. The newly announced Food Enterprise Zone offers a recognition and further boost to local food and drink activity. ■ Food quality, local resilience and healthy eating were all seen as important drivers for the area’s momentum in food and drink. ■ Identity and confidence: The Bude area is aware of its distinctly different catchment and visitor base from other parts of Cornwall, such as Padstow. ■ Supermarket dynamics: Local businesses are aware of the influence of the main local supermarket. Consequently they are considering how to work with it or at least complement it. ■ Market place: There is no historic covered market place in Bude, and the town is still trying to find an optimal location for a market. ■ Producer outreach is seen as important as the area does more to establish activity in local food and drink. A producers’ directory is seen as a priority, coupled with creative events such as producer trails or open events.
A4.3.1 Introduction Date: 3 June 2015 Location: Norton Barton Artisan Food Village, Bude Table A4.3 Participants in Bude
Name Organisation Paul Sousek Bude for Food Assembly / Cottage Farm Organics Richard Harding Bude For Food Ltd / Norton Barton Farm / Cornish Charcuterie Fionagh Harding Bude For Food Ltd / Norton Barton Farm / Cornish Charcuterie Jeremy Olive Tree Jamie Stevenson Elements Sally Birt Red Dog Bakery Beth Lewitt The Beach House Hotel Dan Beach House Wet Fish Emma Sabin Sabins Coffee Ali Beech Popti Cornish Bakehouse
A4.3.2 Benefits of a localised food and drink offer ■ Raising quality of the local food and drink and tourism offers ■ Increased range of food and drink offer ■ Increased visitor spend per head
v1 July 2015 154
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Extended tourist season and spend ■ Economic opportunities and vibrancy: Job creation; tackling (seasonal) unemployment, upskilling, training, education, professional development, personal development, community vitality ■ Healthy eating: local food and drink comprises organic, nutritious, preservative-free and real food (which helps to reduce ailments from poor nutrition). ■ The Bude for Food Initiative, Bude for Food Festival and Bude for Food Assembly are driven by the local community and help to facilitate many of these benefits and address some of the barriers described below. ■ Sustainable and resilient communities: The local food and drink offer increases the environmental sustainability and resilience of the local community. There are also additional benefits for the community as, for example, the Bude for Food Initiative uses profits to educate school-children in the benefits of local produce such as healthy eating.
A4.3.3 Barriers to developing a localised food and drink offer ■ Communication and awareness: There is a significant issue in Bude of consumers and outlets not being aware of the availability of local produce. For example, a restaurant in Bude has only recently started purchasing free-range eggs from a local farm because it was not aware that it could source eggs locally in the required quantities. ■ Perception that local food and drink is more expensive: It was reported that there is a general perception that local food and drink costs more than non-local alternative. However, this is not always the case and customers need to be better educated. For example, a local fishmonger in Bude said that his fish is cheaper and significantly fresher than the equivalent fish available in the local supermarket (it was suggested that the supermarket fish is usually caught some 2-3 weeks before it reaches the supermarket). ■ Lack of time and resources amongst producers to engage in marketing activities. ■ Accessibility (transport and distribution) issues, which create difficulties for customers to get to producers and for suppliers to making deliveries to customers. ■ Supermarkets’ influence on consumers, who can be resistant to change, and are seen more as competition to local suppliers rather than a route to market. ■ Local produce can be a more uncertain and risky purchase for some consumers who prefer to purchase from familiar, household outlets such as McDonalds, Costa Coffee, Morrisons, etc. ■ Threats to integrity and quality: such as counterfeiting, misrepresentation lack of quality, and a lack of skilled staff. ■ Disproportionate regulation and bureaucracy: which can stifle innovation, and hits smaller producers disproportionally. It was suggested that there are too many policy changes and there are inconsistencies relating to regulation and policy. Local examples of the barriers to developing a localised food and drink offer included: ■ Supermarkets: Morrisons in Bude, which takes a large proportion of the town’s food and drink spend from both visitors and local residents. ■ Efficiency of transport logistics: Need to work together to collect rural produce and distribute more regularly eg restaurants cannot have produce once a week - they need a daily/regular link with producers. ■ Transport to wider markets: Perhaps combine effort and funds to create Bude based local food transport carrier to London and other distant markets, instead of cost-prohibitive parcel force.
v1 July 2015 155
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.3.4 Opportunities to develop a localised food and drink offer ■ Raise awareness of Bude as a destination for local food and drink and get Bude on the national food map. Effective branding is key. There are significant opportunities by making visitors more aware of the local food and drink offer before they come to Bude. ■ Extend the tourist season (through food and drink initiatives). ■ Harness increased employment opportunities from local food and drink. ■ Collaborative distribution: Local distribution of local food. The Bude for Food Assembly is a recent example of working collaboratively to address distribution issues, although there are likely to be opportunities to extend its coverage to target food and drink outlets and visitors to Bude as well as the current focus on local residents. Another example is a local cheese-monger (Thomas Hanson) who collects from cheese producers in rural communities and delivers direct to consumers’ door (https://www.hansonfinefoods.co.uk/products/?category=3). ■ Collective action: Bring everyone together to raise awareness, fill gaps in required action, educate, promote, market collectively. For example, the Norton Barton Artisan Food Village is developing a hub of producers that can share staff and resources through a centralised sales, marketing and finance function. ■ Local food parcels: There is an opportunity to supply visitors with food parcels and hampers, etc. at the start or end of their stay. This would help to showcase the area’s local food as well as develop new customers for online sales. ■ Tourist Information Centre should allocate space for local food and drink, to promote relevant hostelries, restaurants and producers. ■ Bude Food Van: It was reported that there is an opportunity for a refrigerated food van to work in collaboration with local producers to offer collections and deliveries on their behalf and rationalise distribution and transport costs and resources. ■ Continue to grow the Bude for Food Initiative including further development of the restaurant trail to encourage consumers and outlets to source local produce. ■ Greater use of social media to raise awareness of local food and drink. ■ Assistance with training, mentoring and business support tailored to the food and drink sector, particularly to help develop marketing skills amongst local food and drink businesses.
A4.3.5 Strengthening links between local food & drink and tourism ■ The Food Enterprise Zone at Norton Barton has significant potential for the area to address the above barriers and opportunities. ■ Potential of the Restaurant Trail needs to be further exploited to make consumers aware of the local produce available in Bude and encourage restaurants to support the development of the local food and drink offer (which has been largely driven by producers to date). ■ Redistribute surplus and waste food: including to Food Banks, Community Kitchen and other such hubs with NHS and local council. This would further demonstrate and enhance the strong sustainability and community benefits delivered by local food and drink. ■ Brown road signs: Tourism-related brown road signs can help direct people to a local food and drink destination. However, the price of brown road signs serves to restrict their use amongst local food and drink enterprises. A4.3.5.1 Policy Needs ■ Supermarket waste needs an improved system to redistribute waste food as described above. ■ Level playing field needed on regulation and bureaucracy for small producers and small food and drink businesses. Lesser costs on small businesses would allow them to prosper and their economic benefits to disperse.
v1 July 2015 156
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Product regulation reviews are needed for raw milk and for fish meat (Defra fisheries). ■ Funding for small enterprises: There is a need for more funding to be made available to small food and drink businesses, where proposed projects are often too small to meet minimum funding criteria. ■ Advice and workshops relating to new laws and changes in policy should be funded by the Government. Food and drink businesses did not think they should have to pay to learn about changes in policy. A4.3.5.2 Coordination needs ■ Enterprise and business support: advice, training, mentoring, especially for small food and drink businesses trying to grow. ■ Public-Private closer working: Closer working between local producers, tourist board and tourism bodies, and Town Council. There was a general feeling amongst food and drink businesses that they lack support from the public sector and tourism bodies. ■ Higher profile for producers: there is a need to raise the profile of local producers. This could be achieved through a producer directory, open weekends, a mini-bus tour of local producers, marketing support.
A4.3.6 Other local discussion points ■ Sticks and carrots for supermarket effects: It was reported that there is currently a lack of engagement between local supermarkets and local producers. It was suggested that there should be: an agreed percentage of space in supermarkets to support local producers; a percentage of supermarket profits allocated to community assets; and a need to levy supermarkets for their community impacts. ■ Trading Standards’ definition of ‘local’ may be too stringent and restrictive from experiences in Bude (which were reported to be well within the more general ‘30 mile rule’). ■ Food miles is an important component of local food and drink, given the low food miles associated with local produce being offered to consumers. It is a concept which relates to both the environment and the economy. ■ Displacement issues: While Padstow may have gained visitors at the expense of other areas, Padstow is congested as a consequence of its success, which detracts from the visitor experience. Bude as a location still has significant capacity for growth in shopping and tourism associated with local food and drink. ■ Price-sensitive consumers: The Bude area is an example of the challenge of offering local food and drink to consumers, including tourists, who are sensitive to higher prices. ■ Value for Money for local food and drink products: Customers are aware of value for money as well as price. This issue will vary across different items with some produce being more price- sensitive than others. ■ Affordability of local food and drink is a complex issue, and includes the following factors: – Perception issues, including views of what food and drink items should cost, and people’s price-saving outlook; – Time allowance for shopping – supermarket and ‘one roof’ shopping is easier for people. ■ Consumer awareness: Many consumers are becoming more aware of quality and integrity (including labelling) of food and drink. ■ Cornish ‘community’ supermarket: There could be an opportunity for a collective approach, perhaps county-wide for Cornwall, to help brand and successfully promote local food and drink to residents and tourists through a community supermarket (i.e. similar to the ‘people’s supermarket’ in London.
v1 July 2015 157
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Market place focus: Bude suffers from the lack of an accessible covered market space which can act as a hub for market trading and food and drink sales and distribution. ■ Local benefits to local people: Benefits from local food and drink should be felt by local residents as well as visitors, and perhaps as a priority over visitors, for local food and drink to achieve its potential and establish momentum. ■ Getting the local food message to consumers: Offering local food and drink to consumers has to compete with their understanding of supermarket produce, so communication and branding is an important part of promoting local food and drink successfully. ■ Level playing field: A local wildlife centre attracted a grant for its visitor centre, yet this visitor centre is partly promoted as a café. The café effectively is a subsidised venture competing with other unsubsidised cafes. ■ Chefs must help promote the message: Consumers should be helped to be aware of local food and drink by effective communication in menu and produce offers and explanations. There is a key role for chefs in this process, so consumers understand the origins of all or part of the menu. ■ Quality of produce for local food and drink embraces a range of factors, including healthy produce, taste, local ingredients, and local benefits. It should be a holistic issue.
v1 July 2015 158
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.4 Exmoor workshop
Key findings from the Exmoor workshop ■ Existing brands in Exmoor create activity to build upon. Local food and drink is already established as part of the visitor’s experience, but there is more to do to raise its profile, and explain and harness the benefits. ■ Loyalty Card: Various suggestions were made on how to consolidate the branding of Exmoor produce. A Loyalty Card system for visitors was thought to be one creative measure which would incentivise people to seek out local food and drink. ■ Extended season: Food and drink is seen as an important part of the extended season and can still play a larger role here. More initiatives and more promotion involving local food and drink, especially through the Autumn, was felt to be needed and would pay dividends. ■ Supportive local authorities: The food and drink sector benefits from strong support from both West Somerset Council and from Exmoor National Park. Although these bodies are stretched for resources they understand the role they can play in facilitating further activity. ■ Chef recruitment is seen as a priority in the area, with chefs needing to be trained to embrace and promote local food and drink. ■ Improved organisational arrangements: Participants expressed a strong desire to keep up momentum in local food and drink and to establish improved networking, promotion and organisational arrangements in the area. Key bodies were identified for possible roles here.
A4.4.1 Introduction Date: 4 June 2015 Location: Tithe Barn, Dunster Table A4.4 Participants in Exmoor
Name Organisation Dan James Exmoor National Park Authority Robert Downes West Somerset Council Cllr Karen Mills West Somerset Council Sally Parish West Country Farm and Food Tours Shaun Bryant West Country Farm and Food Tours Cliff Nicholson Spears Cross Hotel Malcolm Wild Southcott, Exford (farmhouse accommodation) Jennie Wild Southcott, Exford (farmhouse accommodation) Charles Ashton Millstream B&B Sharlie Hosegood Paradise Catering Nick Ritchens Defra
A4.4.2 Benefits of a localised food and drink offer ■ Landscape link: Supporting local produce from local farms helps to maintain the associated landscape (i.e. fields containing crops and animals are more aesthetically pleasing than set-aside land, or other land uses). ■ Supports farm diversification by adding or enhancing customer serving aspects to traditional farming businesses.
v1 July 2015 159
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Visitor satisfaction: Visitor satisfaction and repeat visits are high. The local food and drink offer is considered a key contributor to this, and is also likely to result in word of mouth recommendations to ‘new’ Exmoor visitors. ■ Community pride can be associated with offering local food and drink, which can also help to develop and enhance the identity of the local area. ■ Increased local employment can be associated with offering local food and drink. ■ Economic benefits across the whole of the area, especially given that, 30%+ visitor spend is on food and drink. ■ Extending the tourist season: The ‘shoulder’ seasons are already growing (driven by walkers and more mature visitors without children as well as the local food and drink offer) but further development of the local food and drink offer would encourage additional visits outside of the peak season. Local examples of the benefits of a localised food and drink offer included: ■ Porlock Oysters http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-27220366. This is a new brand, distinct to the area, and an attraction in itself which has the potential to deliver considerable economic benefits for Exmoor. ■ Farm and Food Tours (http://www.westcountry-farmandfood-tours.co.uk/) benefits from the local food and drink sector but also helps to raise awareness of local producers across Exmoor. ■ Exmoor Food Festival attracts visitors but also raises awareness of local food and drink and promotes local restaurants.
A4.4.3 Barriers to developing a localised food and drink offer ■ Disproportionate regulation: Regulations for food relate to larger commercial enterprises and often seem too stringent and burdensome for small businesses. ■ Quality of chefs can affect demand for local food and drink as lower quality chefs are less likely to be aware of and make use of local produce. ■ Lack of awareness: Many businesses lack an awareness and understanding of the local food and drink market. There needs to be something to ignite the spark of businesses to want to learn and deliver in the local food and drink sector. The lack of awareness also relates to local accommodation providers who do not always know which restaurants, etc. they can recommend to their guests. ■ Communicating the offer well and effectively needs resources and marketing expertise. ■ Accessibility and thus difficulty of sourcing local produce for businesses in remote rural locations, such as parts of Exmoor. ■ Geography and road access: The A39 is a main link road to the M5. It is a long and winding road which creates actual and perceptual barriers for visitors considering travelling to Exmoor. ■ Limited catchment for food sales: Exmoor food and drink producers are disadvantaged and their growth is restricted by not having any large nearby conurbations for ready sales of food and drink. ■ Small business fragmentation: Small scale supply can limit the potential of local food and drink businesses. Some are also frightened by competition and find it difficult to spare any time for collaboration with others. ■ Financial limitations: Local finance can be limited in parts of Exmoor, and little funding appears to be available for food, drink and tourism projects. Minimum bid sizes can also be too large for small food and drink businesses. ■ County split: Exmoor straddles the Devon and Somerset border. This can complicate funding applications and can add administrative complexity for enterprises.
v1 July 2015 160
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ VAT: VAT can be a disincentive to business growth and a transitional VAT threshold for food businesses would help the sector to growth. Local examples of the barriers to developing a localised food and drink offer included: ■ Chef suitability: The area has suffered from a lack of suitable chefs, hence the ‘Train the Chef’ programme, which included training in using local products. ■ Late bookings are a feature of tourism but can be difficult to manage, especially for small businesses, which has knock-on effects for the local food and drink sector. ■ Exmoor Producers Association Shop has much potential but currently has limited impact.
A4.4.4 Opportunities to develop a localised food and drink offer ■ Producer-retailer-hospitality networking: Simple communication systems between producers, retailers and hospitality businesses could help a more enterprising use of local food and drink in the tourism sector. ■ Exmoor branding is already strong: The Exmoor brand has a good profile and the North Devon brand is also strong. ■ Developing a strong brand is an absolute priority for local food and drink in Exmoor. Coordinated marketing and branding of Exmoor’s food and drink products would enhance their identity. ■ Community pride and awareness has a key role to play in establishing and embedding the branding for local food and drink. ■ Loyalty card scheme: a loyalty card could be issued to consumers to use at pubs, restaurants and guesthouses participating in an Exmoor Brand scheme for local food and drink. These establishments could display a plaque which promoted the local food and drink initiative. This might have a long-term influence to help embed the branding of local food and drink on Exmoor. ■ Minehead Farmer’s Market creates a sound base to build upon for local markets and the associated market traders. ■ Cross selling: Coordination of local food producers could help support cross-selling, both to other businesses and to consumers. ■ Business support: Business grants; funding; and support may be available and a little more such support would achieve much for local food and drink and tourism. ■ Training and support for local chefs to use and promote local food and drink will generate more benefits for the whole sector and the wider economy. ■ Local Chef awards could raise awareness of local produce and incentivise the use of local food and drink. Action on this is already underway for young chefs at West Somerset College’s Catering School. ■ Training, support and mentoring is a priority need for all businesses engaged in local food and drink. However, it needs to be marketed effectively to ensure all relevant businesses are aware of it, rather than being another scheme targeted at the ‘usual suspects’. ■ Food Festivals have potential to be used more across Exmoor and could help further extend the tourism season. ■ Galvanising the stakeholders: Key stakeholders could be primed to give momentum to local food and drink and tourism. Prime candidates for developing their facilitating role here are Exmoor National Park Authority in the public sector and Exmoor Producers’ Association in the private sector. Local examples of the opportunities to develop a localised food and drink offer included: ■ The Exmoor National Park Partners scheme, which ‘recognises and rewards those businesses & organisations that put the National Park at the heart of all they do, contributing in a positive way
v1 July 2015 161
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
to the special qualities of the area and developing a distinctive sustainable tourism destination’ (http://www.exmoor-nationalpark.gov.uk/enjoying/park-partners). The scheme could be extended to recognise and reward businesses specialising in local food and drink. Alternatively there could be a national scheme to recognise local food and drink businesses, although this would need to be very simple for the businesses and for those responsible for delivering the scheme. ■ Exmoor Producers Association Shop has greater potential, especially for local food and drink. ■ Younger chef training is underway through the ‘Eat Exmoor’ initiative at West Somerset College (http://districtcouncils.info/casestudies/eat-exmoor/).
A4.4.5 Strengthening links between local food & drink and tourism A4.4.5.1 Current activity and linkages The main organisations currently active in supporting local food and drink in Exmoor were identified as: ■ Visit England; ■ Exmoor National park Authority; ■ West Somerset Council; ■ North Devon District Council; ■ Exmoor producers’ Association; ■ Exmoor Tourism; ■ Visit Somerset; and ■ Business groups (e.g. Food & Beverage Forum). However, workshop participants identified the following requirements to further develop the linkages between local food and drink and tourism: ■ Tourism bodies in Exmoor must play a lead role in promoting local food and drink. ■ Businesses need to collaborate to drive forward the actions on local food and drink. There could be a role for Business Exmoor to coordinate. A4.4.5.2 Coordination issues ■ Lack of capacity and funding for the key stakeholders pursuing this agenda. ■ Public – private partnerships: Local authorities and other public bodies can prompt and offer support for local food and drink but, ultimately, it must be sustained by the businesses themselves. ■ There is a desire to create a strong agenda in the area to pursue local food and drink and tourism, which was agreed by all stakeholders. A4.4.5.3 Policy needs ■ Longer term grants: Even if there was no increase in budgets, it would help to spread out grants over a longer timescale to help steer progress in same direction, rather than have shorter bursts of activity. It was felt that this would support greater effectiveness and sustainability of funding. ■ More tailored licensing is needed on local food and drink for all hospitality businesses. This would reinforce the message that local food and drink as a core part of the agenda. Coverage would need to include legal factors and marketing of local food and drink.
A4.4.6 Other local discussion points ■ Disproportionate regulation: which can stifle enterprise and curb potential new ventures in local food and drink.
v1 July 2015 162
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Food and drink is an integral part of a visitor’s experience of Exmoor, even though it is not perceived as the primary motivation for visiting. High quality local produce is appreciated by consumers and provenance of food and drink is a talking point for many Exmoor visitors. ■ There is demand to visit local producers as part of the experience of visiting Exmoor. ■ Distinguish the local factors: There is need for clarity on which parts of the produce offered by an enterprise are genuinely local. ■ Quality as a driving force: Achieving high quality produce and raising hospitality standards should be an integral part of producing local food and drink. All enterprises involved in this agenda, and the bodies supporting it, should maintain the drive to increase standards and the quality of experiences offered to visitors. ■ Affordability: Visitors may be more flexible on the price of produce if they are aware of its local authenticity and quality. Information and communication is important in this context, to help consumers make informed choices. ■ Extended season: The extended visitor season into Autumn is now a reality and food and drink contributes significantly to this. Businesses would benefit greatly from increased trade in winter months as well, which increases the need for further development of the local food and drink offer. ■ Capacity of public bodies: The limited capacity of public bodies needs to be recognised. They have a role to help facilitate and stimulate action but restricted resources limit their capabilities. ■ Public – private roles: Public bodies can offer support and facilitating roles but businesses should drive the agenda for local food and drink, and promote the income potential and local economic benefits. The Exmoor Producers Association may have a leading role here. ■ Coordination plays a vital role: Even modest coordination activity can achieve much, and ensure momentum and a focus is maintained amongst all stakeholders striving to develop the local food and drink sector.
v1 July 2015 163
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.5 Amble workshop
Key findings from the Amble workshop ■ Local regeneration: Local food and drink is playing an integral part of the regeneration of Amble. There are tangible examples which people can relate to, including more and better quality restaurants in town, more producers, farms and retailers supporting each other, and new mixed-use developments which include food and drink ventures. ■ Direct selling of locally caught fish and seafood is being demonstrated in Amble, providing a new attraction for consumers. The Seafood Brokers, supported by the Amble Development Trust, have played a key role in the new initiative. ■ Chef training is occurring in both Amble and Northumberland and is recognised as an essential part of building the culinary expertise required to develop the local food sector. ■ Wider county links: Although Amble has its own distinct identity and catchment for its local food and drink offer, there are many links to much other activity across Northumberland. ■ Supportive County Council input benefits the local produce sector, with a range of pro-active work underway to help and promote local food and drink. The County Council’s regulation role is seen as positive rather than overtly restrictive: enabling and encouraging good practice. ■ Branding and accreditation were seen as vital processes to get right in Amble and across Northumberland, to better promote and assist good-practice enterprises.
A4.5.1 Introduction Date: 10 June 2015 Location: The Sun Hotel, 6 Castle Terrace, Warkworth Table A4.5 Participants in Amble Name Organisation Dawn Goodwill-Evans Northumberland County Council Sarah Ray Northumberland County Council Mark Roberts Northumberland County Council Ken Henderson Northumberland County Council Kate Morrison Amble Town Council Natalie Wood Northumberland Tourism Alison Donkin Capital 4 Training Barbara Huddart Glendale PR & Marketing Karen McBride Woodhorn Museum Andrew Smith Bread and Roses Susan Green The Proof of the Pudding Mike Botha KJM Foods Andrew Gooding Ken Speckle Northumberland Confectionary Richard Prytherch The Old Post Office B&B and Bistro April Atkinson Restaurant and bar consultant Carol Rowley Bar staff/ waitress Matthew Taylor Credence Brewing (microbrewery) Michael Graham Credence Brewing (microbrewery) Sarah Redhead Heslawy Manor B&B
v1 July 2015 164
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.5.2 Benefits of a localised food and drink offer ■ Increased value to local economy. ■ Stronger local economy ■ Employment opportunities ■ Regeneration of the area, including enhanced reputation. ■ A story to engage people ■ A selling point for the area. ■ Provenance of the product is crucial to customer confidence in local produce. ■ Repeat visitors are a feature of tourism in Amble. Local food and drink has a role to play here. ■ Linkage of compatible businesses: including pooling resources and pairing activity. ■ Diversification opportunities for businesses and producers. Local examples of the benefits of a localised food and drink offer included: ■ Stories: Craster kippers, Lindisfarne oysters. Visitors can learn about these products at the locations. ■ Other localities such as Doddington, Morwick, Spurrell have local produce stories ■ Cheese production nearby in Northumberland has associated employment, local marketing and supply. ■ Amble has a stronger local economy due to local food and drink. ■ Supply networks: The Amble Butcher supplies local restaurant with local meat. ■ Northumberland Sausage Company has higher demand due to rise of the local food sector.
A4.5.3 Barriers to developing a localised food and drink offer ■ Geography: road access, distribution and distance factors. ■ Consumer preconceptions on price of local produce and convenience of supermarket produce. ■ Pricing: The price of quality local produce can restrict sales opportunities because of limited consumer flexibility on price. ■ False claims, misleading claims, and marketing spin about local produce from some suppliers and producers. ■ Cost of distribution can restrict the potential of local produce. The cost-efficiency of small orders is restrictive and can create higher prices for the associated goods. ■ Distribution arrangements and costs are more of a challenge for local producers can affect ■ Shelf life may be shorter for local products, and this may be compounded by less frequent delivery options ■ Development and change to facilitate local food and drink may be resisted by some local people. ■ Regulations including planning costs may have a disproportionate affect on small businesses and small-scale producers. ■ Low representation of local food and drink voices in business and trade groups.
A4.5.4 Opportunities to develop a localised food and drink offer ■ Collaborative working, for example on cross marketing and collective buying.
v1 July 2015 165
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Reciprocal promotion of local food and drink businesses can readily occur on social media, web sites and event listings. ■ Social media can be a strong promotional tool for local produce, and current hashtags can be used to good effect. ■ Availability of local goods and can help prompt action on local food and drink. ■ Good distribution can help achieve producers achieve reliability and consistency. ■ Food hubs can help promote local produce and link producers and retailers. Virtual hubs, and physical hubs with a wholesale focus may have roles to play. ■ Existing distribution systems should be harnessed, such as Fourways in Amble. ■ Accreditation scheme for Northumberland food needs to be established. This will help add value to products, as long as the scheme has status and recognition. ■ Development of branding and the ability to help promote local produce. ■ Festivals and markets provide more opportunities to develop local food and drink, including Food festivals, Beer festivals and Sunday markets. ■ Amble festivals: Amble may have potential for further food and drink festivals, building upon the existing annual Puffin Festival in May which has a food dimension, and could help to extend the tourist season during Autumn. ■ Hub for food and drink events? A register and focused promotion for food and drink events could be established as a promotional campaign on the subject. For example Northumberland County Council’s High Tea initiative used promotional materials which could be adapted to promote other such events. Local examples of opportunities to develop a localised food and drink offer included: ■ Northumbrian Meats Ltd has established sales and reputation based on quality local produce. ■ Fourways Foods, in Amble, a food hub offering delivery and collection for producers.
A4.5.5 Strengthening links between local food & drink and tourism ■ Producer and supplier directories: Visit Northumberland hosts a web directory of local food and drink businesses. A separate distinct list of producers and suppliers could be created for the county based on criteria for local food and drink and not based on whether a business will pay for a web listing. ■ Brown road signs: The county highways Dept could be engaged to discuss criteria for brown tourist promotion signs and the potential to promote more local food and drink ventures. ■ Market intelligence on tourism and visitor trends would help inform businesses that promote food and drink. They could tailor their efforts according to latest information on visitor types and visit patterns. The proportional value of local food and drink within the area’s overall visitor-spend income needs to be identified and understood. ■ Wedding sector: wedding caterers and wedding venues may be a key target for awareness of local produce, given the potential for local food and drink to enhance wedding events. ■ Accommodation sector: hotels and B&Bs could do a lot more to support the local food and drink sector.
A4.5.6 Other local discussion points ■ Seasonality is a major issue for local producers – presenting a challenge and an opportunity. ■ Branding is a priority action for Northumberland local food and drink. The branding needs to demonstrate the integrity and authenticity of local products.
v1 July 2015 166
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Branding and accreditation is a key action point in Northumberland, and funding may b required to promote a branding scheme. ■ Quality assurance should complement to branding, with a quality assurance system investigating false claims and helping encourage high standards local produce. Certificates held by businesses could be pro-actively used to promote their high standards and established quality. ■ Integrity of local produce is important to define: For some products, especially in brewing and in baking, the raw ingredients cannot always be sources locally, hence the localness factors need careful explanation. ■ Product information is important to identify and communicate to consumers, distributors and to the media. ■ Promotion of local food and drink, including through branding and quality assurance, is seen as the priority by the producers themselves. ■ Traditional produce and new produce in an area may contribute to local food and drink. It is not a case of either-or. ■ Procurement from large bodies could help create markets for local produce. So decisions on food and drink procurement by major businesses and public bodies will influence the market. ■ Role and influence of chefs needs recognising. Chefs can help stimulate markets for local produce and chefs can help explain and promote the local strands of the menu. ■ Surplus food and food waste in the local produce sector should be used progressively, such as allocated to food banks or used in a productive way within the area. Systems need establishing to ensure this can happen. ■ Slaughterhouse facilities are absent from Northumberland so there are food miles and animal welfare issues associated with meat products in the county. Is there demand for a mobile slaughterhouse in Northumberland? ■ Bespoke premises may help some local producers which may need updated and more specialised buildings, facilities and equipment. Is there demand and scope for a food and drink technology park in the area? ■ Training needs are important to identify across the local produce sector. Northumberland County Council can provide tailored training on regulation and on food hygiene. The county’s existing training academy for catering staff could be used as a conduit for specialist advice and promotion of local produce. ■ Business support, including advice and mentoring is important for early starters in the local food and drink sector.
v1 July 2015 167
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.6 Tebay workshop
Key findings from the Tebay workshop ■ Tebay and its context: There is much flourishing activity in the area resulting from the significant procurement offered by Tebay Services. The area has developed a wider range of food and drink activity which is linked to and complements the strong driving force provided by Westmoorland. ■ Learning from neighbours: It was noted that there is good practice elsewhere and nearby in Cumbria which can provide lessons. For example the village of Cartmel has created much vitality from its local food and drink initiatives and businesses. ■ Business networking and mutual support was identified as a priority action in the local area and in Cumbria. There was a strong desire for effective networking and allowing small businesses in the sector to support and learn from each other. ■ Chef recruitment is seen as priority for the area. Chef shortages have affected Cumbria recently. Use of agency chefs does not help to provide a tailored approach with local food and drink. ■ Branding and accreditation were seen as priority actions in the area, especially to acknowledge and support food and drink businesses striving for quality. ■ Skilled work force: It was noted that producing artisan food and drink requires a skilled work force which needs training and supporting, and apprenticeships in some situations such as brewing, baking and butchery. Business support systems will need to recognise this precise need of the local produce sector.
A4.6.1 Introduction Date: 11 June 2015 Location: The Westmorland Hotel, Near Orton, Penrith Table A4.6 Participants in Tebay
Name Organisation Alex Evans Westmorland Limited Alan Houghton Cumbria Local Enterprise Partnership Emily Bond Eden District Council Patrick Moore More? The Artisan Bakery Ann Wedgwood Hardknott Brewery Dave Hardknott Brewery Shelley Ridell Bessy Beck Trout Fishery Marian Law Bessy Beck Trout Fishery Jean Morsman Saints Preserves Us Jane Wilkinson Lakes Free Range Eggs Tracey Errington Market Sense Oliver Barratt Cowmire Hall Damson Gin Victoria Barratt Cowmire Hall Damson Gin Jane Wild and Fruitful Leonie Thornby Moor Dairy James Mansergh Hall Farm
v1 July 2015 168
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.6.2 Benefits of a localised food and drink offer ■ Being local is a USP ■ High quality and freshness are desirable factors for food and drink. ■ Tradition and history: Many local food and drink products are associated with history and tradition. ■ Creation of jobs for local people ■ Creation of new enterprises ■ Help revitalise local communities ■ Enhance the area’s reputation e.g. Cartmel ■ Opportunities for collaboration between food and drink companies can create multiple benefits. ■ Honesty and integrity of the product is sought by many consumers. ■ Quality, provenance and authenticity of the product is fundamental. ■ Foodie visitors: A segment of tourists are informed on food and seek local produce ■ Loyal locals: Many local people are loyal to local produce ■ Local distinction: Businesses and locations can use local produce as a point of difference ■ Online sales and promotions can help boost businesses and localities specialising in local produce Local examples of the benefits of a localised food and drink offer included: ■ Shap (nearby small town) fish and chips are a draw to people – the product has a reputation for quality; ■ Hardknott Brewery employs three local people; ■ Cartmel Village Shop has added much vitality to area; ■ Grasmere Gingerbread has added value to the area; and ■ L’enclume in Cartmel specialises in fine dining using local produce.
A4.6.3 Barriers to developing a localised food and drink offer ■ Transport costs and distances for distribution and selling. ■ Poor road quality and road maintenance costs small businesses time and money. ■ Distribution costs are relatively high for small businesses due to the geography of Cumbria. ■ Stock levels are a challenge for small businesses, especially being suitably reactive to demand. ■ Marketing is vital but difficult for small businesses in the local food and drink sector to prioritise amongst other demands. ■ Funding is limited and a challenge to source for small businesses of local produce. ■ Dependency on key personnel: Small businesses in the food and drink sector are often based on skills, expertise and knowledge of one or a small number of people, so they are vulnerable as a consequence and may have less tangible value. ■ Consumers’ perception of price and thus expense of local produce can be a limiting factor. ■ Broadband in parts of Cumbria needs to improve! ■ Misdirected funding is frustrating to see. Funding has gone to bigger higher profile projects and not always dispersed amongst smaller ventures needing it.
v1 July 2015 169
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Reinventing approaches that previously worked is a major distraction for small businesses when new schemes and initiatives are launched. ■ The CREA food hub (Cumbria Rural Enterprise Agency) has helped provide coordination and advice to overcome barriers.
A4.6.4 Opportunities to develop a localised food and drink offer ■ Growing consumer interest: Many consumers are becoming more interested in where food and drink comes from and are prepared to be less price conscious as a result. ■ Healthy eating: many consumers are more health conscious and local products are often less processed. ■ Valuing local entrepreneurs: Entrepreneurs of local produce businesses need to be helped to flourish to help generate ideas and ventures. ■ New markets are being developed for local produce in Cumbria including fresh farm eggs and apple juice. ■ Food Towns and Food Weeks concept may create a marketing and promotional drive for local produce as an additional measure to food festivals. ■ Online sales and marketing offer another main outlet for local food and drink and associated tourism enterprises. For example Deer & Dexter in Cumbria sells Venison and Dexter Beef online and at farmers markets. ■ Angel Food Network mentoring and investment for early-stage food and beverage companies.
A4.6.5 Strengthening links between local food & drink and tourism ■ Communication and networking amongst local food and drink sector businesses is beneficial, especially when demand led and addressing key needs such as marketing, training, and product sourcing. Networking needs to be well targeted to be effective and should be demand-led. The Rural Women’s Network Group is an example of a well-used network in the county. ■ Mutual support and networking: Support for networking and for small businesses to support each other is a priority need for local businesses in the food and drink sector. ■ Training, mentoring and apprenticeships: Cumbria needs to build the skills base for brewing, baking, butchery, and other artisan food production. Priority support systems required include training, mentoring and apprenticeships. ■ Producer outreach has a role to play in promoting local food and drink eg. producer open days, and ‘meet the producer’ events. ■ Producer directories need to be tailored to be useful for local food and drink. They need to be focused, regularly updated, and include quality assessment criteria for each product.
A4.6.6 Other local discussion points ■ Community resilience: Local food and drink production helps create local resilience and local identity. ■ Broadband limitations in Cumbria especially hit local small businesses and people working from home in the local produce sector. ■ Geographical and accessibility problems are an enduring issue in Cumbria, especially further west of the M6 corridor, but businesses have to adapt to work around these factors. ■ Quality standards and accreditation: Many local food and drink products are associated with high quality and this is part of their distinction and appeal. As a consequence other companies are prone to invade the sector with their products, often unfounded claims on quality. Quality
v1 July 2015 170
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
standards and criteria and systems for produce recognition and accreditation may help to inform consumers. ■ Innovation and keeping ahead: is an important attitude for successful local producers to adopt. Key facets of this approach include: – Intelligent marketing; – Mentoring; – Constantly challenging the business approach; and – Harnessing support measures. ■ Constant adaptation: is used by some businesses and families to hone their produce for local markets. This helps provide ongoing viability, longevity, generational stability, and local resilience amongst farms and businesses. ■ Finding routes to market is a priority need for local producers. A4.6.6.1 Feedback on study findings ■ Demonstrate the multiplier: Examples and evidence of multiplier effects from local food and drink would be influential. This is a priority need for the local food and drink sector to help their influence when negotiating and when seeking support ■ Avoid confusion in grant schemes: Grant schemes can appear complex to small producers and small businesses, especially when the grants get replaced or when criteria change, many of whom cannot afford advisers. ■ Power of big suppliers: Recognise that big suppliers of mass food and drink, to restaurants, pubs and supermarkets have aggressive sales tactics and can be a challenge to compete with and to break through. ■ Consumers are conditioned: Consumers tend to stick with brands, shops and supermarkets which they know. These habits of consumers can be difficult to break when something new and different is offered such as in the local food and drink sector. ■ Producers need early stage support: Small producers need help especially with marketing and mentoring and especially in the first baby steps of establishing their business. ■ Power of networking: Networking amongst businesses in the local food and drink sectors can help provide mutual support, mentoring, product awareness, signposting to advice and examples.
v1 July 2015 171
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.7 Common themes The above write-ups include a range of benefits, barriers and opportunities relating to the development of a localised food and drink offer and linkages to rural tourism. The points raised at each workshop include both generic issues as well as those that are specific to each local area. This section presents the common, generic messages that were consistently raised by participants at each of the five workshops.
A4.7.1 Branding The issue of area-branding of local food and drink was raised in all locations. Many participants felt that having a distinct recognisable brand (with a name and logo, such as the example of Cotswold Choice http://www.cotswoldsaonb.org.uk/explore-and-enjoy/local-produce/) could be an influential marketing tool and a way for consumers to be steered towards quality local produce. Setting up, devising the criteria, and managing area brands requires resources and commitments amongst participating companies and organisations of a scheme, and thus presents a challenge in itself. However, it was felt that area branding could help consolidate local activity on food and drink, and could be a galvanising force. This topic relates closely to the issue of quality standards and accreditation addressed below.
A4.7.2 Accreditation for quality and for localness Participants in all workshops were keen to emphasise that they strive for quality on many levels in the provision of local food and drink. Many artisan food and drink products are, by their nature, carefully produced and presented. Across the workshops there was a consistent plea for the quality and care of produce to be officially recognised, both to promote and communicate the high standards invested in the produce, and to deter those who try to cash in on the momentum associated with local food and drink, but who do not offer such a high standard of product. The need for accreditation also applied to ‘localness’, so that those making dubious claims on the local nature of their food and drink, but unable to back up the claims, would receive a low score in any such system in order to prevent businesses and individuals from trying to exploit the situation. Amongst the participating bodies Northumberland County Council mentioned accreditation as a high priority to help incentivise and support high standards in local food and drink, but pointed to the funding and resources required as barriers to establishing and managing an effective system.
A4.7.3 Business support systems Participants representing small businesses and producers consistently raised the matter of support systems for small enterprises. In many areas business support is available through existing advice systems but the workshop participants stressed the need for tailored advice to small ventures, and especially those in early stages of development. A wide range of support measures were identified through the workshops including training, ongoing advice, marketing support, funding advice, mentoring, and focused networking. It was recognised that there is a role for both public bodies to help facilitate such measures and adapt existing support, and for current business advice, training and mentoring systems which may need to identify specific requirements of small businesses in this important emerging sector.
A4.7.4 Chef training and development Chefs were widely regarded by workshop participants as a lynch pin in the system of producing and promoting local food and drink. It was suggested that chefs could often do more to promote and to explain the local food and drink which they were providing, so consumers were fully aware of the local produce itself and the originating producers and farms. This was seen as an important part of the consumer and visitor experience which chefs could help with, even with simple labelling of the origins of local food and drink when it is served. In most locations there was also a concern about recruiting and nurturing chefs who embraced local food and drink. Catering-training schools in each respective area were seen as having an important role in tailoring their teaching to promote local produce and
v1 July 2015 172
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
ensure chefs developed a full awareness of the potential uses and benefits of local produce and of ways to explain it.
A4.7.5 Transport and distribution efficiencies In all locations there was frustration about transport logistics, and especially the high cost of transporting small amounts of produce to markets, shops, suppliers and restaurants. The matter was compounded by the remote situations, poor road systems and traffic congestion in some of the locations. In addition, in many situations vans or vehicles are returning from deliveries empty, and therefore making underused journeys. It was recognised that this is a difficult matter to resolve. Detailed organisational planning is required to offer a service for a wide range of small business which could potentially use such a system. It was mentioned that, where the potential for such services had been explored, the business opportunity had looked to be of marginal viability. The potential for such coordinated delivery systems may lie in situations where there are business clusters in a close geographic area, where a certain produce sector has similar demands for journey patterns, and where food hub arrangements create a focus for some of the local distribution and collection needs.
A4.7.6 Disproportionate regulation for small businesses Producers, small businesses and hospitality representatives all raised the matter of the impact of regulations on their activity. This was not a grumble about bureaucracy, but a recognition that small businesses in the local food and drink sector often have to deal with regulations, licensing and financial rules, which are aimed at larger enterprises and are not tailored or scaled down for small scale businesses. This was reported to have significant time and cost implications for small producers and small businesses. The licensing of alcohol is an example, where small businesses handling just a limited amount of alcohol have the same license payment and training requirements as a pub landlord. Many such examples were given throughout the events, and there was a strong desire for a review of key regulations so these could be applied to small enterprises with better proportionality.
A4.7.7 Demonstrating evidence for multiplier effects Participants readily recognised that local food and drink brought economic benefits to an area, helping to generate income, much of which should circulate in the locality, providing direct and indirect employment and income benefits for local residents. There was a desire to have some firm quotable evidence of these benefits, and especially the multiplier effect, with some clear examples and some substantiated figures. It was felt that this would help back the case for promoting local food and drink in specific areas, and help when local producers or farmers’ market are negotiating with other interests and need to demonstrate the economic benefits of this sector.
v1 July 2015 173
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.8 Photographs from the workshop locations
A4.8.1 Padstow
A4.8.2 Bude
v1 July 2015 174
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
v1 July 2015 175
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.8.2.1 Bude for Food Assembly
v1 July 2015 176
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
v1 July 2015 177
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.8.3 Exmoor
v1 July 2015 178
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.8.3.1 Minehead Farmers’ Market
v1 July 2015 179
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.8.4 Amble
v1 July 2015 180
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
v1 July 2015 181
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.8.5 Tebay
v1 July 2015 182
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.8.5.1 Tebay services
v1 July 2015 183
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
v1 July 2015 184
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
v1 July 2015 185
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
A4.8.5.2 Gloucester services
v1 July 2015 186
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
Annex 5 References
The following is a consolidated list of references from the final report, the Rapid Evidence Assessment and the State of the Market report: ■ Abatekassa, G. and Peterson, H. C., 2011. Market Access for Local Food through the Conventional Food Supply Chain, http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/download/pdf/6429813.pdf. ■ Alonso, A.D. and O'Neill, M. 2010. Small hospitality enterprises and local produce: a case study, British Food Journal, Vol. 112 Iss: 11, pp.1175 – 1189. ■ Alonso, A.D. 2010. Farmers' relationship with hospitality businesses: a preliminary study, British Food Journal, Vol. 112 Iss: 11, pp.1163 – 1174. ■ Amble Harbour Village. 2015. Amble Harbour Village Overview. http://www.ambleharbourvillage.co.uk/. ■ The Ambler. 2014. Coble Quay: housing and retail plans. 28 February. http://www.theambler.co.uk/2014/02/28/coble-quay-housing-and-retail-plans/. ■ AMIBA, 2012. Ten New Studies of the "Local Economic Premium", http://www.amiba.net/resources/studies-recommended-reading/local-premium. ■ Arnold, Dr. T., et al. 2013. Fresh City: Impacts of local food – Social, environmental, economic dimensions. Food system assessment report, Grey Bruce Centre for Agroecology, Ontario, November 2013, http://gbcae.com/GBCAEdownloads/FreshCityImpacts_Main.pdf. ■ Balázs, B. 2009. Comparative analysis of the context of AAFNs at the local, national and European level. FAAN Report, http://www.faanweb.eu/sites/faanweb.eu/files/FAAN_D3_Comparative_analysis_AAFNs.pdf. ■ Bird, A. 2011, Wine + food = record year: Event’s economic impact highest ever, analysis finds, Post and Courier, 21 October. http://www.crda.org/news/local_news/wine___food___record_year__event_s_economic_impact_h ighest_ever__analysis_finds-1582. ■ Birkett, Rosie. 2015. From farm to fork: Meet the Cornish fishermen, vegetable-growers and butchers causing a stir in London’s top restaurants. 29 March. The Independent. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/features/from-farm-to-fork-meet-the-cornish- fishermen-vegetablegrowers-and-butchers-causing-a-stir-in-londons-top-restaurants- 10135792.html. ■ Blichfeldt, B. S. and Halkier, H., 2012. Mussels, Tourism and Community Development: A Case Study of Place Branding Through Food Festivals in Rural North Jutland, Denmark, http://www.marbio.sdu.dk/uploads/MarBioShell/Blichfeldt%20and%20Halkier%202013.%20Mussel s,%20Tourism%20and%20Community%20Development,%20A%20Case%20Study%20Of%20Bra nding%20Through%20Food%20Festivals%20in%20Rural%20North%20Jutland,%20Denmark.pdf. ■ Boyde, T. 2001. Cusgarne organics local money flows. http://www.i-r-e.org/docs/a001_cusgarne- organics-local-money-flows.pdf. ■ Boyne, S., Hall, D. & Williams, F. (2003). Policy, support and promotion for food-related tourism initiatives. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 14, 131-154. ■ Brighton & Hove Food Partnership, 2012. Spade to Spoon: Digging Deeper. A food strategy and action plan for Brighton & Hove, http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/sites/brighton- hove.gov.uk/files/downloads/sustainability/Final_2012_Spade_to_spoon_Food_Strategy_low_res. pdf. ■ Cabinet Office, 2011. The Magenta Book, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/220542/magenta_b ook_combined.pdf.
v1 July 2015 187
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Cabinet Office, 2012. Quality in qualitative evaluation, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/190986/Magenta_B ook_quality_in_qualitative_evaluation__QQE_.pdf. ■ Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2009) Systematic Reviews CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care, CRD, University of York, January 2009. ■ Chang Mazza, G. M.-A., 2013. Gastronomic Tourism: Implications for Singapore, http://laudergastronomy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Gastronomic-Tourism-Implications-for- Singapore_Grace-Chang-Mazza.pdf. ■ Civil Service, n.d. Rapid Evidence Assessment toolkit, http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/networks/gsr/resources-and-guidance/rapid-evidence- assessment/how-to-do-a-rea. ■ Cornwall Food & Drink. 2015. Consumer Perceptions of Cornish Food and Drink (March). ■ Cornwall Taste of the West. 2002. Consumer attitudes to Cornish Produce - A report on Cornwall Taste of the West consumer surveys. ■ County Durham Food Partnership, 2014. 2014 – 2020 Sustainable Local Food Strategy, http://fooddurham.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/SLFS-2014.pdf. ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: The value of England’s local food webs, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2897-from-field-to-fork. ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Birstall, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2045-from-field-to-fork-birstall ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Darlington, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3061-from-field-to-fork- darlington ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Ely, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3808-from-field-to-fork-ely ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Faversham, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2857-from-field-to-fork- faversham ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Haslemere Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2859-from-field-to-fork- haslemere ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Hastings, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2040-from-field-to-fork- hastings ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Hexham, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3062-from-field-to-fork- hexham ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Kenilworth, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2044-from-field-to-fork- kenilworth ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Knutsford, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2041-from-field-to-fork- knutsford ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Ledbury, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2739-from-field-to-fork-ledbury ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Newark, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3389-from-field-to-fork-newark
v1 July 2015 188
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Norwich, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3721-from-field-to-fork- norwich ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Otley, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2865-from-field-to-fork-otley ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Penrith, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3362-from-field-to-fork-penrith ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Sheffield, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2043-from-field-to-fork- sheffield ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Shrewbury, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2858-from-field-to-fork- shrewsbury ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Totnes, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/2042-from-field-to-fork-totnes ■ CPRE, 2012. From field to fork: Yeovil, Mapping the local food web, http://www.cpre.org.uk/resources/farming-and-food/local-foods/item/3249-from-field-to-fork-yeovil ■ Day-Farnsworth, L. et al., 2009. Scaling Up: Meeting the Demand for Local Food, http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5091489. ■ Defra, 2014a. Agriculture in the UK 2013, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/315103/auk-2013- 29may14.pdf ■ Defra, 2014b. Food Statistics Pocketbook 2014, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/361759/foodpocketb ook-2014report-08oct14.pdf ■ Defra, 2014c. Statistical Digest of Rural England 2014, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388961/Statistical_ Digest_of_Rural_England_2014_December_FINAL.pdf ■ Defra, 2014d. Structure of the agricultural industry in England and the UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/structure-of-the-agricultural-industry-in- england-and-the-uk-at-june ■ Defra, 2012. Rural Economy Growth Review, Rural Tourism Package – Main points, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/183287/regr- tourism-mainpoints.pdf. ■ Defra, 2011. September 2011 Statistical Feature Report ‐Tourism https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/86109/Tourism_Fea ture_Report_Sep11.pdf. ■ Defra, 2010. Agriculture in the UK 2009, http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/general/auk/documents/AUK-2009.pdf ■ Deloitte and Oxford Economics, 2013. Tourism: jobs and growth. The economic contribution of the tourism economy in the UK, http://www.visitbritain.org/Images/Final%20proof%2015%20Nov_tcm29-39296.pdf. ■ Deloitte, 2008. The economic case for the Visitor Economy, http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom- UnitedKingdom/Local%20Assets/Documents/UK_THL_VisitorEconomy_Sept08.pdf. ■ Dougherty, M. L, Brown, L. E. and Green, G. P., 2013. The social architecture of local food tourism: challenges and opportunities for community economic development, http://www.ag.auburn.edu/auxiliary/srsa/pages/Articles/JRSS%202013%2028%202%201-27.pdf.
v1 July 2015 189
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Enteleca Research and Consultancy. (2001). Tourist attitudes towards regional and local food. Richmond upon Thames, Enteleca Research and Consultancy. ■ Eriksen, S. N., 2014. Meanings of Local Food in Danish Print Media: From Marginal to Mainstream, http://www.ijsaf.org/archive/21/2/eriksen.pdf. ■ Everett, S. and Aitchison, C., 2008. The Role of Food Tourism in Sustaining Regional Identity: A Case Study of Cornwall, South West England, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2167/jost696.0#.VGJEujSsXTo. ■ Everett, S. and Slocum, S.L. (2013). Food and Tourism, an Effective Partnership? A UK based review. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp. 789-809. ■ FAAN, 2010. Local food systems in Europe. Case studies from five countries and what they imply for policy and practice, http://www.faanweb.eu/sites/faanweb.eu/files/FAAN_Booklet_PRINT.pdf. ■ Foundation for Local Food Initiatives, 2002. FLAIR. The Local Food Sector. Its size and potential. http://localfood.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/flair-report-Apr-02.pdf. ■ FSA, 2012. Guidance for local authority authorised officers on the approval of establishments, http://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/multimedia/pdfs/enforcement/approvalsguidance.pdf. ■ Gloucestershire Gateway Trust. 2014. About Us, http://www.gloucestershiregatewaytrust.org.uk/index.php/about-us. ■ Groves, A. 2005. The Local and Regional Food Opportunity. March 2005, http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/food/industry/regional/pdf/localregfoodopps.pdf. ■ Halkier, H. 2012. Local Food for International Tourists, http://vbn.aau.dk/files/71041596/fremtidensferiehus_delrapport_3.pdf. ■ Hall, M. 2005. Rural wine and food tourism cluster and network development. Chapter 9, Rural Tourism and Sustainable Business. ■ Hall, M.C. and Sharples, L. (Eds.) 2008. Food and Wine Festivals and Events Around the World: Development, Management and Markets. Elsevier Ltd. file:///C:/Users/30267/Downloads/__Food_and_Wine_Festivals_and_Events_Around_the_World__ Development__management_and_markets%20(1).pdf. ■ Haven-Tang, C. (2005). Using Local Food and Drink to Differentiate Tourism Destinations Through a Sense of Place: A Story from Wales-Dining at Monmouthshire's Great Table. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 4 (4), 69-86. ■ Haven‐Tang, C. and Jones, E. 2012. Local leadership for rural tourism development: A case study of Adventa, Monmouthshire, UK. ■ Hjalager, A.-M. and Johansen, P. H. Food tourism in protected areas – sustainability for producers, the environment and tourism? http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09669582.2012.708041#.VGpB5TSsXTo. ■ Irshad, H. 2010. Local Food – A Rural Opportunity, http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$Department/deptdocs.nsf/ba3468a2a8681f69872569d60073fde1/59 3337cbd907813a8725782c0058ae97/$FILE/Local-Food-A-Rural-Opp.pdf. ■ Joubert, E., 2012 The economic impact of the Wacky Wine Festival, http://dspace.nwu.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10394/7598/Joubert_E.pdf?sequence=2. ■ JRC, 2013. Short Food Supply Chains and Local Food Systems in the EU. A State of Play of their Socio-Economic Characteristics, http://agrilife.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/SFSChainFinaleditedreport_000.pdf. ■ Little, R., Maye, D. and Ilbery, B., 2010. Collective purchase: moving local and organic foods beyond the niche market, http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/download/pdf/6332344.pdf.
v1 July 2015 190
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Lobley, M. et al, 2009. Analysis of socio-economic aspects of local and national organic farming markets, Centre for Rural Policy Research, University of Exeter, http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/90374/2/CRPR29.pdf. ■ Mason, M. and Paggiaro, A. (2012) Investigating the role of festivalscape in culinary tourism: The case of food and wine events Tourism management 33.6 (2012) 1329-1336. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.12.016. ■ Marine Environmental Research. 2013. Understanding the Market and Supply Chain for Fish Caught and Landed in Northern Devon. http://mediafiles.thedms.co.uk/Publication/CW- NDevT/cms/pdf/ND%20Fish%20- %20Understanding%20the%20Local%20Market%20%26%20Supply%20Chain%20(2013).pdf. ■ Marsden, T., Banks, J. and Bristow, G., 2002. Food Supply Chain Approaches:Exploring their Role in Rural Development. Sociologia Ruralis. Volume 40, Issue 4. ■ Mintel, 2008. Locally Sourced Foods - UK (Not publicly available) ■ N.A. Melton Mowbray Events Review. 2013. file:///C:/Users/30267/Downloads/ITEM_6__HR__Events_Review_App_1.pdf. ■ North Devon. N.d. Northern Devon FLAG's 'Seafood & Festivals' Project. http://www.northdevonplus.com/what-we-do/seafood-festivals-support-fund.aspx. ■ New Economics Foundation, 2002. The Money Trail. Measuring your impact on the local economy using LM3, http://b.3cdn.net/nefoundation/7c0985cd522f66fb75_o0m6boezu.pdf. ■ New Economics Foundation, 2005. Public spending for public benefit. http://b.3cdn.net/nefoundation/bafccecadede5da071_okm6b68y1.pdf. ■ New Economics Foundation, 2011. The benefits of procuring school meals through the Food for Life Partnership, http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/entry/the-benefits-of-procuring-school- meals-through-the-food-for-life-partnershi. ■ Northern Ireland Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, 2014. Census of Employment statistics, http://www.detini.gov.uk/stats-census-of-employment ■ OECD, 2013. Food and the tourism experience http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/industry-and- services/food-and-the-tourism-experience_9789264171923-en. ■ ONS, 2014a. Living costs and food survey - Expenditure on household and eating out food & drink by urban or rural location, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/family-food- datasets ■ ONS, 2014b. UK Business: Activity, Size and Location, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/bus- register/uk-business/index.html ■ ONS, 2014c. Annual Business Survey (2013 provisional results), http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/abs/annual-business-survey/2013-provisional-results/index.html ■ ONS, 2014d. Supply and use tables, 1997 – 2012, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/input- output/input-output-supply-and-use-tables/2014-edition/rft-detailed-sut-1997-2012.xls ■ ONS, 2014e. United Kingdom National Accounts, The Blue Book, 2014 Edition, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/naa1-rd/united-kingdom-national-accounts/the-blue-book--2014- edition/index.html ■ ONS, 2014f. Business Register and Employment Survey (accessed via NOMIS), https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/ ■ ONS, 2013. The Rural – Urban Classification for England, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/248666/Rural- Urban_Classification_leaflet__Sept_2013_.pdf.
v1 July 2015 191
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ ONS, 2013. The Economic Importance of Tourism: UK Tourism Satellite Accounts 2010 and 2011, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_323167.pdf ■ ONS, 2011. Census 2011 data (accessed via NOMIS), http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/census/2011 ■ ONS, 2009. UK Standard Industrial Classification 2007 (SIC 2007), http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/classifications/current-standard-classifications/standard- industrial-classification/index.html ■ Organ, K., Koenig-Lewis, N., Palmer, A., Probert, J. (2015). Festivals as agents for behaviour change: A study of food festival engagement and subsequent food choices. Tourism Management, Volume 48. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2014.10.021. ■ Paul Ainsworth (2015) Our Restaurants. http://www.paul-ainsworth.co.uk/restaurants/. ■ Pirog, R. and O’Hara, J.K. (2013). Economic Analysis of Local and Regional Food Systems: Taking Stock and Looking ahead. Michigan State University Centre for Regional Food Systems. http://foodsystems.msu.edu/uploads/files/econ-analysis-brief.pdf. ■ Scott Wilson, 2009. East Riding Tourism Accommodation Study. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations, http://www.eastriding.gov.uk/corp- docs/forwardplanning/docs/tourism/ERTourismStudy.pdf. ■ SERI and Ecosgen. 2014. South Hams Area Profile Produced for Devon County Council. http://www.devonomics.info/sites/default/files/documents/South%20Hams%20Area%20Profile.pdf. ■ Shackleton, Holly. 2014. Local Food Worth £5.7 Billion, Says MP. Specialty Food. http://www.specialityfoodmagazine.com/content/news/local_food_worth_5.7_billion_says_mp. ■ Sharples, Ann Elizabeth. 2003. Cider and the Marketing of the Tourism Experience in Somerset, England: Three Case Studies. In Wine, Food, and Tourism Marketing, Hall, M. file:///C:/Users/30267/Downloads/Wine,%20Food%20&%20Tourism%20Marketing.pdf. ■ Sherwood, N., 2013. Herefordshire Economic Evaluation. Opportunities to grow our local food economy, http://www.reconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Herefordshire-Economic- Evaluation-TEEconomy-Food-report.pdf. ■ Sims, R. 2009. Food, place and authenticity: local food and the sustainable tourism experience.
■ Skuras D., Dimara E. and Petrou A (2006) Rural tourism and visitors' expenditures for local food products,Regional Studies 40, 769–779. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00343400600660771#.VI2KhyusVpt. ■ Soil Association, n.d. Local Food Routes. A summary report of Food futures, http://www.soilassociation.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=oIO9YbFBqpo%3D&tabid. ■ South West Food & Drink, 2011. SW Food & Drink Sectors, http://www.southwestfoodanddrink.com/uploads/dsfcprojectdocuments/swfd_economic_profile_rep ort.pdf ■ Speciality Food Magazine, 2014. Local Food Worth £5.7 Billion, http://www.specialityfoodmagazine.com/content/news/local_food_worth_5.7_billion_says_mp ■ Steinmetz, R., 2010. Food, Tourism and Destination Differentiation: The Case of Rotorua, New Zealand, http://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10292/1090/SteinmetzR.pdf?sequence=3. ■ Taste Cumbria. 2011. The future of food tourism in Cumbria - the Lake District. ■ Tate, H. 2014. Taste Cumbria Food Festival 2013: Evaluation http://www.cockermouthbusiness.org/sites/default/files/documents/taste_cumbria_festival_evaluati on_2013.pdf. ■ Tellstrom, Gustafsson, I., Mossberg, L. (2005). Local food cultures in the Swedish rural economy Sociologia Ruralis, 45 (4), pp. 346–359.
v1 July 2015 192
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
■ Thatcher, J. and Sharp, L. 2008. Measuring the local economic impact of National Health Service procurement in the UK: an evaluation of the Cornwall Food Programme and LM3. ■ Team. 2013. Made in Northumberland Amble: The Seafood Town. ■ The Isle of Anglesey County Council and the Tourism Comppany. 2013. Anglesey Food Tourism Strategy and Action Plan. http://www.anglesey.gov.uk/Journals/2014/10/09/a/l/x/Anglesey-Food- Tourism-Strategy-and-Action-Plan.pdf. ■ Thomas, Ian (2012). The economic impact of tourism in Northumberland in 2011. Newcastle Gateshead Initiative. file:///C:/Users/30267/Downloads/Northumberland%20Steam%20report%202011%20(1).pdf. ■ TXP, Inc. 2013 The Economic Impact of Austin’s Food Sector. http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Redevelopment/Economic_Development/TXP_A ustin_Food_Sector_Report_03282013_FINALv1.pdf.
■ Pinchot, Ariel. 2014. The Economics of Local Food Systems: A Literature Review of the Production, Distribution and Consumption of Local Food Systems. University of Minnesota. http://www.extension.umn.edu/community/research/docs/2014-Economics-of-Local-Food- Systems.pdf. ■ The Plunkett Foundation, 2014a Co-operative pubs 2014. A better form of business, http://www.plunkett.co.uk/resources/publications.cfm. ■ The Plunkett Foundation, 2014b. Community shops 2014. A better form of business, http://www.plunkett.co.uk/resources/publications.cfm. ■ UK Census. 2011. ■ United Nations (UN). 2010. International Recommendations for Tourism Statistics 2008, http://unstats.un.org/unsd/publication/Seriesm/SeriesM_83rev1e.pdf. ■ UNWTO, n.d. Understanding Tourism: Basic Glossary, http://media.unwto.org/en/content/understanding-tourism-basic-glossary ■ University of Exeter. 2011. A Review of Cornwall’s Agri-Food Industry. ■ University of Plymouth. 2008. Understanding of Consumer Attitudes and Actual Purchasing Behaviour, with Reference to Local and Regional Foods, http://www.serio.ac.uk/resources/files/Understanding%20of%20Consumer%20Attitudes%20and% 20Actual%20Purchasing%20Behaviour.pdf. ■ Visit Cornwall. 2011. Value of tourism 2011 - Cornwall ■ Visit County Durham. n.d. Taste Durham fact sheet, http://www.vcd-marketing.co.uk/forms/taste- durham-fact-sheet.pdf. ■ VisitEngland. 2015. Visitor Satisfaction 2014. http://www.visitengland.org/insight-statistics/market- research/visitor_satisfaction/. ■ VisitEngland. 2014a. Great Britain Tourism Survey June 2014 Update, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/05-14-June_2014_Summary_Sheet%20VE_tcm30-42606.pdf. ■ VisitEngland. 2014b. The GB Day Visitor Statistics 2013, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/GBDVS%20Annual%20Report%202013_Redesigned%20versi on%20v1%2016%2009%2014_tcm30-42547.pdf. ■ VisitEngland. 2013a. England’s Countryside: What are the opportunities?, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Country%20report_FINAL_v2_without%20summary_tcm30- 39462.pdf. ■ VisitEngland. 2013b. Local food & produce. Domestic Trip Tracker Additional Food Questions – August 2013.
v1 July 2015 193
Rural tourism and local food and drink - draft final report
http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Domestic%20Trip%20Tracker%20Additional%20Food%20Que stions%20-%20August%202013_tcm30-38546.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2013c. The GB Tourist. Statistics 2013. http://www.visitengland.org/Images/GB%20Tourist%202013_240914_tcm30-42628.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2013d. Understanding Visitor Satisfaction 2012-13, Debrief by TNS at VisitEngland 28th August 2013, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/VE%20Visitor%20Satisfaction%20Deep%20Dive%202012- 13%20FV_V2_tcm30-38999.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2010. Sustainability – Consumer Research. Summary of Findings, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Sustainabilty%20consumer%20research%20- %20March%202010_Layout%201_tcm30-19334.pdf. ■ VisitEngland, 2008. Determining the Local Economic Impact of Tourism, http://www.visitengland.org/england-tourism- industry/DestinationManagerToolkit/destinationmonitoring/3CDeterminingtheLocalEconomicImpact ofTourism.aspx?title=3C:%20Determining%20the%20Local%20Economic%20Impact%20of%20T ourism. ■ VisitEngland, n.d. England Domestic Overnight Holidays Summary – 2013, http://www.visitengland.org/Images/England%20Holidays%202013_REV_tcm30-42817.pdf. ■ Visit Northumberland. 2015. Northumberland Food Trails. http://www.visitnorthumberland.com/eat/food-trails. ■ Visser, J., Trienekens, J. and van Beek, P., 2013. Opportunities for local for local food production: a case in the Dutch fruit and vegetables, http://centmapress.ilb.uni- bonn.de/ojs/index.php/fsd/article/viewArticle/295. ■ Ward, F. 2012. Totnes & District Economic Blueprint - Food - detail section, final version, http://www.transitiontowntotnes.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/TD-Economic-Blueprint-Food- detail-section-final-version1.pdf. ■ Ward, F., Tompt, J. and Northrop, F. 2013. Totnes & District Local Economic Blueprint, file:///C:/Users/30214/Downloads/TD-Local-Economic-Blueprint-final_high_res.pdf. ■ Watts D., Leat P., Revoredo-Giha, C. Local Food Activity in Scotland: Empirical Evidence and Research Agenda. 2011. Regional Studies Volume 45, Issue 9. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00343400903380416#.VIscrTGsVps. ■ Webber, D., Curry, N., Plumridge, A. (2009) Business Productivity and Area Productivity in Rural England, Regional Studies, 43:5, 661-675, DOI: 10.1080/00343400701874156. ■ Welsh Assembly Government, 2009. Local Sourcing Action Plan. ‘Food and Drink for Wales’, http://wales.gov.uk/docs/drah/publications/090601localsourcingactionplanen.pdf. ■ Welsh Assembly Government, 2010. Food for Wales, Food from Wales 2010 | 2020, Food Strategy for Wales, http://www.physicalactivityandnutritionwales.org.uk/documents/740/Food%20Strategy%202010- 2020-eng.pdf. ■ Welsh Government – FMDD, 2011. Monitoring and Evaluation of Food Festivals. Supported by the Welsh Assembly Government, http://wales.gov.uk/docs/drah/publications/110719millerresearchevaluationoffoodfestivalsen.pdf. ■ Zecca. 2015. Zecca News. http://www.eatzecca.co.uk/news/7/boost-for-ambles-commercial- fishermen.
v1 July 2015 194