An Anthropological Approach to Discourse of Natural Heritage and Rural Tourism

 
 
 
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • PDF
  • Abstract


    As a cultural subject, rural tourism is a novel concept which is the result of a dialogue between modernism and today's newfangled world; but the study of nature's social life and the relationship between human and nature is very old and its origins are far older than the knowledge of ethnography in a way that during centuries, different fields such as anthropogeography, cultural ecology and ethno-biology has been originated from this relationship. If we accept that one of the main incentives of rural tourists is the pleasure of seeing landscapes and natural heritage, studying the theoretical dimensions of the natural heritage can help the tourism policy makers to plan. As mentioned before, rural tourism is still young and its theoretical dimensions has not been studied very much.

     

     


  • Keywords


    anthropology, tourism, natural heritage, rural tourism.

  • References


      [1] Trusbee, D., 2003, economy and culture, translated by Kazem Farhadi, Tehran. Nay publication.

      [2] Durkheim, E. (1903/2004). Fundamental aspects of religious life, translated by Bagher Parham. Tehran: Markaz publication

      [3] Freezer, J. 2004. Golden branch: a research in magic and religion. Translated by Kazem Firozman. Tehran: Agah publication.

      [4] Nath, P., Nachiappan, S., & Ramanathan, R. (2010). “The impact of marketing capability, operations capability and diversification strategy on performance: A resource-based view”. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(2), 317–329.

      [5] Rainie, L., Purcell, K., & Smith, A. (2011). “The social side of the internet”. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project (Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/The-SocialSide-of-the-Internet.aspx).

      [6] McLuhan, M. (1964). “Understanding the media: The extension of man [Book]”. Retrieved from http://beforebefore.net/80f/s11/media/mcluhan.pdf

      [7] Eysenbach, G. Medicin 2.0: “Social Networking, Collaboration, Participation, Apomediation, and Openness”. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2008; 10(3): e22.

      [8] Bob Mathew Design Science, Inc.140 Pine Avenue 4th floor www.dessci.com

      [9] McDonald, M., & Mouncey, P. (2009). “Marketing accountability: How to measure marketing effectiveness”. London: Kogan.

      [10] Ambler, T. (2003). “Marketing and the bottom line: Creating the measures of success (2nd ed.)”. London: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.

      [11] Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). “Marketing in hypermedia computer mediated environments: Conceptual foundations”. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 50–68.

      [12] Borders, A. L., Johnston, W. J., & Rigdon, E. E. (2001). “Beyond the dyad: Electronic commerce and network perspectives in industrial marketing management”. 30, 199–205.

      [13] Hallahan, K. (2008). “Organizational-public relationships in cyberspace”. In T. L. Hansen-Horn, & B. D. Neff (Eds.), Public relations: From theory to practice (pp. 46–73). Boston, MA: Pearson.

      [14] Kanter, B. (2009, May). “4 ways social media is changing the non-profit world”. Accessed 15.08.09. http://mashable.com/2009/05/22/nonprofit-social-media/

      [15] Kent, M. L. (2008). “Critical analysis of blogging in public relations”. Public Relations Review, 34(1), 32–40.


 

View

Download

Article ID: 20377
 
DOI: 10.14419/ijet.v7i4.7.20377




Copyright © 2012-2015 Science Publishing Corporation Inc. All rights reserved.