Republic of uzbekistan tashkent institute of irrigation engineers and agriculture mechanizations

Scheme 1. Determination the mutual location of agritourism, ecotourism and rural tourism
By overlapping zones of tolerance (areas within which the criteria of key parameters are fulfilled, identified as target functions, motives and results of tourism), we will determine the mutual location of agritourism, ecotourism and rural tourism in Scheme 1.
A schematic representation (the diagram does not reflect the total shares of rural, agricultural and ecological tourism, but only shows their ratio in the classification of types of tourism) shows the relative position of these types of tourism relative to each other. The diagram shows that agritourism is an integral part of rural tourism, because these types of tourism have many common elements: stay in rural areas (geographical location), use of natural, cultural, historical, social and other resources of rural areas (resources involved in the creation of a tourist product), where the goal is to rest and participation in agricultural work. However, agritourism has a narrower target function and motive. Ecotourism is less close to rural tourism than agritourism, but it has common elements with both agritourism and rural tourism.
The shaded areas on the diagram 2 and 3 show the mutual intersection of the zones of this or that type of tourism.

Agritourism
Tourism

Ecotourism

B



Area A (gray) indicates that ecotourism may contain elements of agaric and rural tourism. As such elements, one can single out the general natural resources that can be used in all three types of tourism, the countryside, which can be suitable at the same time for the implementation of these types of tourism. It is also true that the opposite conclusion is that there may be elements of ecotourism in agritourism. And in rural tourism there are functions in which this type of tourism can be considered, both as agrarian and as ecological.
Area B (blue field) shows the mutual penetration of ecotourism and rural tourism based on the generality of the elements that form these types of tourism: countryside (geographic location), the use of natural resources and the coincidence of one of the key functions - communication with nature, which does not cause damage to natural complexes.
This scheme is convenient in that, delimiting the concepts of types of tourism, it, on the basis of correlating common features and distinctive properties of tourism, shows the relationship of various types of tourism. Thus, if you take any kind of tourism and, based on the objective function, motives and results, define it as a separate type of tourism, then by drawing up a diagram, based on the analysis of common features and distinctive properties, you can see the mutual penetration of various types of tourism.
Wine tourism can serve as a good example of this scheme, which, according to the target function, motives and results of the trip, can be classified as a separate type of tourism, but at the same time, some of its elements can be attributed to rural tourism (living in vineyards, acquaintance with rural lifestyle), to agricultural tourism (participation in the harvest), to ecological (if the vineyards are located quite far from the city with minimal anthropogenic impact).
Thus, guided by the definition and understanding of the place of agritourism in the general classification of tourist services, we can easily separate agritourism enterprises from other offers on the market, which will be necessary for the practical part of our work.
The term attractiveness is widely used in various fields of knowledge: psychology, linguistics, biology, landscape design, etc. In the "Dictionary of tourist terminological" - "attractiveness (attractiveness) is the main systemic property of recreational resources, natural and cultural-historical objects, indicating their recreational value" (Zorin, 1999). In tourism, this concept has also found application. Unfortunately, at the moment there are no published works devoted to assessing the factors of attractiveness of agritourism, so we analyzed the use of this method in various studies in the tourism sector to compile a general understanding of the approach and the possibility of its application in our work.
During the analysis of articles on tourism topics, we came to the conclusion that most often the concept of attractiveness is used in research on the study of destinations. Many studies examine the attractiveness of destinations by describing the existing resources of the destination and its attractiveness (Backman, Uysal, & Backman, 1991; Ferrario, 1979); other scholars investigate the perception of tourists towards resources and attraction factors (Hu & Ritchie, 1993; Kim, 1998; Ritchie & Zins, 1978). There are also publications where both of these approaches are combined for empirical research that focuses on people who interact with tourists, rather than tourists as such (Formica & Uysal, 2006; Gearing, Swart, & Var, 1974). Some scholars have approached the study of attraction in a very comprehensive manner, considering also tourism resources, tourist motivations and their preferences (Piperoglou, in a study by Formica & Uysal, 2006).
In a number of cases, researchers have used an attributive approach to study the attractiveness of a destination (Gearing et al., 1974; Ritchie and Zins, 1978; Tang and Rochananond, 1990). While others have explored the destination image based on a gap analysis between expectations and visitor satisfaction across various attributes (Cho, 1998; Chaudhary, 2000). Other studies have used both approaches: the attributive and complex approaches of travel sites to find attraction factors (Baloglu and McCleary, 1999; Choi et.al., 1999; Beerli and Martin, 2004). The disadvantage of this approach is the incompleteness of the list of attractiveness factors.
Laws (1995) in his work divided the attributes of the destination into two groups: primary (climate, ecology, natural resources, culture, etc.) and secondary (hotels, food, transport, entertainment). In his understanding, the primary attributes are aimed at making the tourist enjoy the rest, while the secondary ones act as attractions for the tourist when choosing a destination. Similarly, Van Raaij (1986) gives a similar division in his work, calling these groups "natural" and "man-made." He believes that the second group just influences the choice of the place of rest by tourists and the planning of the trip budget (it is attractive). The attractiveness of a destination has a huge impact on traveller's choice of destination, expected satisfaction, return rate and motivation, as well as cost and length of stay (Henkel, Henkel, Agrusa, Agrusa, & Tanner, 2006).
Despite the fact that the destination is a complex tourism product that includes natural resources, infrastructure, cultural attributes and much more (McIntosh and Goeldner, 1990; Inskeep, 1991; Kim, 1998), it primarily acts as a tourist destination. product and therefore attractiveness analysis can be applied to it (McIntosh and Goeldner, 1990; Jha, 1995). Based on this inference, we can say that agritourism and its objects can also be analyzed by the methods used to analyze the attractiveness of destinations.
Despite the fact that there are no publications on the topic of agritourism and its attractiveness, we nevertheless found a large-scale study of rural tourism in Europe. Recall that agritourism is one of the types of rural tourism, therefore, this study partially covers our topic. Consider it in more detail. The study was carried out in 2009-2010 within the framework of the Transfer of Quality Ensurance Tools for European Rural Tourism Sector project. 3487 respondents from 55 countries were interviewed, most of them are Europeans. The following blocks of questions were asked: what is associated with rural tourism, do you have experience of living in rural accommodation, how do you prefer to book, brand awareness of rural tourism, which is important for you when planning your vacation, which affects the first impression, what is important during the stay, what is important after the stay. The full report on the results of the study can be found on the EuroGites website. This research is of very great theoretical significance for us, since some of the factors used for the online survey can be transferred to our research and tested on the Russian consumer.
This research is of very great theoretical significance for us, since some of the factors used for the online survey can be transferred to our research and tested on Russian consumers. Further in our work, we will once again return to this study in order to identify a posteriori factors.
In the domestic literature, there are not many studies that have been carried out on the topic of attractiveness in tourism. One of the most ambitious can be called a study conducted in August 2003 in the Republic of Crimea on the theme "The attractiveness of the recreational environment of the Crimea in the views of vacationers." This work is inherently very close to our research, so we will consider it in more detail. The work pays great attention to the concept of the image of the region, which, according to the authors, has a very strong influence on the attractiveness (attractiveness) of the subject. For this study, the authors developed a methodology tested in the course of a sociological survey. The questionnaire for the survey was compiled taking into account expert opinion and tested during the pilot study. The questions about the factors of attraction were asked to the experts, who identified the maximum number of them, and then this list was reduced by polling the respondents and setting the coefficients according to the degree of importance.
Another important study, which we would like to pay special attention to, is "Rural tourism in Crimea - development prospects". The collection of data for it was carried out in the fall of 2009 and, based on the results, a voluminous report was compiled, the purpose of which is to analyze the supply and demand of rural tourism in the territory of Crimea, in areas without access to the sea. As in previous studies, experts have compiled questionnaires to survey consumers and producers of rural tourism services. As a result of the study, a portrait of the consumer was compiled, the tourist's preferences in choosing a place to stay, his activity during his vacation, requirements for various types of recreation, and much more were compiled. The full report can be found at http://www.undp.crimea.ua/. Further in our work we will refer to and use separate blocks of information from this study.
Despite the fact that there are a great many approaches to the study of attractiveness in tourism, as a rule, the methods used to identify and verify them are limited to expert analyzes and quantitative surveys. Depending on the object of research, different scientists distinguish various factors, but a certain regularity can be traced. In all works, there are primary factors (natural, cultural, etc.) and secondary factors (hotel, food, transport, entertainment) called by some scientists.
Summing up, we can say that we have formed a definition of agritourism, definitely its position in the general classification of types of tourism and identified its distinctive features. We also considered approaches to the study of attractiveness in tourism and came to the conclusion that in our work the use of the analysis of factors of attractiveness in relation to agritourism is fully applicable. Despite the fact that in some works the concepts of attractiveness and attractiveness may differ, in our study they will be considered synonymous.