Δευτέρα, 3 Σεπτεμβρίου 2007



World wide tourism tripled between 1970 & 1992, growing at nearly 5 per cent each year, whereas revenue from tourism increased almost sixteenfold, and it is the most important economic international earner in the world, surpassed only by oil and motor vehicles (WTO /UNKTAD data in WTO, 1993a)
Tourism and recreation are two of the most important social activities. Tourism brings income and jobs, increases understanding of other cultures, preserves cultural and national heritage and investment in infrastructure, which in turn brings social and cultural benefits. For many small states with favourable natural resources, tourism was regarded as an easy, low cost/profit earner (OECD, 1967.pp.11-15)
However, problems arise when development is rushed, with little consideration for the environment, May (1991). Thus, some forms of tourism –mass tourism—and some recreational activities can cause destruction of habitats, degradation of landscapes and competition for scarce resources and services, such as land, freshwater, energy and sewage treatment. Moreover, host populations may suffer the loss of their traditions and become over dependent on tourism incomes.
In order to sustain tourism in the long run strategic planing is necessary. Bramwell and Lane (1993) view sustainability as holistic planning and strategy formulation. Farrell (1992) justifies the holistic stance by defining sustainability as:
'essentially an exercise in the optimization and finer tuning of all elements and sub-elements of the development system so that in its operation, the system as a whole maintains direction and one or more of the elements does not surge or is not enhanced to the detriment and impairment of others'.(Farrell 1992: 123)
The World Tourism Organization, WTO (1993 b) attributes the tourism growth to a great extent to the following influences:
 socio- demographic- especially the aging of populations in the industrialized countries;
 electronic information /communication systems;
 A more knowledgeable and demanding customer;
 a deregulating market place;
 pressure for responsible tourism development;
 a polarization between global players and ‘niche’ businesses; and
 constraints upon growth related to labour, capital and infrastructure.

Greece, as other tourist destinations, should be in tune with the changing demand for tourism as consumers become more experienced, informed and discerning. Poon (1993) provides the following list of characteristics of the new tourist. They have

 more experience
 changing lifestyles
 changing values
 more flexibility

Primary objective of this study is to show the Greek tourist product and the new types of tourism that can enrich and diversify it. Agrotourism as an alternative type of tourism leading to regional and rural development is analyzed in more detail. Research based on interviews along with the administration of questionnaires give a view of agrotourism in Greece. Research was conducted in the following counties:

 Viotias
 Euritanias
 Karthitsa
 Larissa
 Evros-Samothraki
 Florina
 Lesvos
 Evoia
 Arkadia

1.1 EU Regime for Tourism Development

The Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) throughout its existence played significant role towards the development of rural tourism in EU. Reduction in support prices makes farmers turn to other alternatives in supplementing their income. Due to the above reasons tourism has been widely promoted in European Union, Pompl and Lavery (1993); Williams and Shaw (1991). Agritourism is increasingly regarded as a means of reversing economic and social decline in rural areas Hanngan (1994)
The EU Structural Funds- European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance Fund (EAGGF), European Social Fund (ESF), European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)—main purpose is to aid under-developed regions of the EU (objective 1),
Those affected by the decline of industry (objective 2), and those concerned with rural development (objective 5b), Youell R (1998p 84-92. In addition, many other EU programmes pertaining to regeneration that may have an indirectly impact on tourism eg. LEADER, REGIS, REGHAR, RESIDER, KONVER, PESCA as well as education and training programmes LEONARDO and SOCRATED.
LEADER I programme (Liaisons Entre Actions pour la Developpement des Economies Rurales) first established in (1991-1994) Nitch and van Straaten, (1995), and LEADER II programme (1994-1999) intended to promote an integrated approach to rural development, emphasizing local support and involvement Farm enterprises have been benefited to a great extend from EU funding.

On 3 December 2001, the European Commission approved a development programme for Greece under the Community Initiative LEADER+. over the 2001-06 period, the programme covers all rural areas in Greece, with particular emphasis on mountainous regions, disadvantaged areas and islands- file://A:/Agriculture-Rural development, Leader+.htm.
The objectives are the following: http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/index_enhtm

1. Development of the least favored regions and protecting natural and cultural heritage (Objective 1)
2. Conversion of regions facing difficulties (Objective 2)
3. Interregional cooperation (Interreg III)
4. Sustainable development of urban areas (Urban II)
5. Development of innovative strategies to make regions more competitive giving emphasis to quality ( Innovative actions)
6. Transport and the environment in ( The applicant countries)

1.2Greek Economy

Greece suffers from low productivity mainly due to :
a) underdeveloped or not up to date systems for science, technology and innovation
b) quality level of Human Resources and availability of specialized workforce
c) a low level of entreprenership.

The Greek Republic is divided into 13 regions--‘Peripheries’—central governmental regional antennas- and 54 counties ‘Nomi’. Agriculture and forestry accounts for 10% of the GDP and 19% of the jobs in 2000. Specifically, the distribution of the working population in the primary, secondary and tertiary sector in 1991 was:

 Primary sector:19%
 Secondary sector:23%
 Tertiary sector:58%

‘Rural population’ constitutes 41% of the total population.
“Tourism consists the heavy industry of Greece” Nikolaou N., (2001). Tourism contributes 18,4 to GDP with 720,000 direct jobs (18,3 of the active population)
The number of farms amount to 700,000 and the average size is 4 hectares compared to 16,4 hectares in European Union. Multi-activity is very common. Tourism and services have contributed towards job creation for women.. For instance, in Arachova, Petra Mytilinis, in St German in Florina Hios etc., women’s co-operatives carry out professional domestic activities—local culinary specialties, traditional arts and crafts, tourist reception, etc., Papagarouphali, Ε., (1985-86).From the research, which I carried out it seems that almost none of the young women wants to continue the arts and crafts( embroidery weaver etc) of their region. Even though, these cooperatives began with the purpose of continuing the tradition and our customs (programmes of EOMEX) almost all of them they have stopped it, and turn exclusively to tourism revenues. It was revealed that it was not profitable for one to deal with just these professional domestic activities.

1.3 Greek Tourism Policy and new forms of tourism

The Greek National Tourist Organization (GNTO--EOT) has formulated a strategy for the development of high quality and alternatives form of tourism. The strategy includes the construction of four and five-star hotels, together with golf courses, conference center (at the area of the old airport of Athens, Helleniko), marinas, spas, thalassotherapy centres, aquaparks and other theme parks etc. These proposed projects will be developed in select locations and will be combined with thematic tourism (e.g diving clubs, underwater sealife, mountain climbing, trekking, and such forms of tourism as agricultural, cultural, archaeological and religious.

After the re-engineering and the new Law frame of Greek National Tourist Organization (EOT) –N. 2636/98 in 1998,the GNTO has the main following tasks (ΕΞΠΡΕΣ, 2001).

• Research related to tourist development, information of investors in tourism sector

• Research and projection of measures regarding the development of alternative types of tourism and consultation of those organizations that will undertake the realization of new tourism products

• Quality programmes, control of the tourism market

• Marketing of the Greek tourist product in Greece and abroad

• Operation of foreign offices ,with new structure and activities to promote the Greek tourist product

• Market Research, gather of data and analysis of data, which have relation to the tourist demand on national and international level.

The aims of the Greek tourist policy are according to the Ministry of Development, (2001) :

a) New tourism products
b) Marine tourism infrastructure
c) Large tourism establishments
d) Renovation and modernization of the state casinos
e) Sustainability

The development of different types of alternative tourism consists priority for the GNTO-(EOT) due to the positive effects ,as it is conducive to the enrichment and upgrading of the tourist product, extension of tourism season, and development of rural areas. The Appendix A shows a plan for tourism development of all regions of Greece according to their potential (natural resources, history, geography) for developing alternatives types of tourism

1.4(SWOT) Analysis of the Greek Tourist Product

The tourism product in Greece operates in a mature market with increasing competition from neighbouring countries. It is a sharply seasonal economic activity, and as such the ¾ of the total tourists arrive between May and September OECD, (2000). More, specifically concerning the Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats, the table 1 is revealing.

Table 1

 Well- known tourist destination  Member of European Union, powerful economy, and support
 Rich natural beauty  Host of the Olympic Games 2004
 Powerful historic and cultural heritage  Safe destination
 Good Climate  Increase in professional travels
 Many choices of different type of tourist destinations  Developmental motives for tourism
 Important presence in the world tourist industry  Interest of foreign investors (international chains)
 European destination(common currency, infrastructure, security)  Improved hotel infrastructure
 Creation of new exhibition- conference centers
WEAKNESSES  Planning of infrastructure for recreational development (golf, piers, thematic parks etc.
 Expensive destination in comparison to other competitive countries  Improved road and other infrastructure
 Over-dependency on Tour –Operators(mass-tourism)  Privatization of GNTO (EOT) property
 Intense seasonality  New Structure (Organization Chart) of National Tourist Organization(EOT)
 Over-dependency on a few markets  Application of new technology
 Lack of international system of stars of hotels  Empowerment of domestic tourism
 Limited presence of International hotel chains
 Large number of lodges without permission of GNTO(EOT) –low quality THREATS
 Low level of services  Intense competition from other Mediterranean destination
 Insufficient utilization of conference tourism  Empowerment of competitive Countries in new types of tourism and infrastructure (golf, marine tourism, etc.)
 Insufficiency of supportive recreational infrastructure (golf, piers, thematic parks etc.)  Problems from the upheaval in the airline –companies
 Road access to Greece exclusively through the Balkans  Consciousness in the use of airplanes as a means of transport
 Lack of strategic tourist policy  Decrease of arrivals from U.S.A
 Bueauracratic procedures of public tourist sector  Demanding and discerning tourists
 Housing without environmental planning  European subsidies will stop in 2006
 Insufficient conservation and exploitation of archaeological areas and cultural interest  Limited absorbent of Funds
 Insufficient promotion of the total of Greek tourist product.  Over supply of rooms after the end of Olympic Games

Source: Kakos Th., (2002), Tourism Market.

2.1 New Forms of Tourism Development

Although the Mediterranean countries –Spain, Italy, Malta, Cyprus, Tunisia, Maroco, Turkey—combine vacations with rich cultural and historic past, Gazes G. (1989 p. 24-29) unfortunately, they have identified with as countries for holidays offering the three ‘S’ (Sand, Sun, Sea) and were a fourth is added S (Sex), Khader B. (1987 p.7-9). The image of Mediterranean is that of a region dominated by cheap mass tourism and environmental problems OECD, (1980 p. 84-85); Vaviathis N.,(1988 σ.64-67);Lozato –Giotart,J.P.(1990 p.173,196).Thus it is natural that high income tourists are deterred.
In addition to the above, Tour-Operators policies control demand and supply, Gazes, (1989 p. 133-271)
The Research and Development Department (KEΠΕ, 1994) under the hospices of the Greek National Organization (EOT) concluded the following: In the frame of mass tourism dominance, cultural resources either constitute the principal element of cultural movements (cultural tourism combined with agrotourism) or make up a subsection of mass tourism package. From this follows that special –new types of tourism such as cultural tourism, eco-tourism, agritourism, educational, conferences etc, do not replace the mass tourism but they complement, enrich, widen, and differentiate the tourist product, responding to the respective growing demand. Actually, the Development law (N. 2601/98, ΦΕΚ 81/A15-4-98) gives emphasis on the reinforcement of tourism investments aiming to the quality improvement of the Greek tourist product and also the utilization of alternative forms of tourism
According to Ayres (2000) the tourist product and the tourist market are expected to become increasingly segmented. New competing destinations are emerging and there is the growth of alternative forms of tourism. Prosser (1994) sees tourism as a fashion industry.
Τhe new types of tourism have as a common characteristic the decentralization and removal of tourist activities from the seashore to the mainland and therefore the development of poor regions. According to last study of the Bank of Greece the Agriculture in Greece has decreased ,significantly, 41% or ……433.000 farmers between 1983 and 2001.The Minister of Agriculture stressed in Mouthia, Spain that main aim of the European Union must be sustainable development( economic, social ,ecological) Σteryiou D.,(8/5/2002)

The new types of tourism have the following advantages:

 Reorganization of agriculture (primary sector) in remote regions
 Job creations
 Development of parallel economic activities
 Increase of the principal and supplementary income
 Better quality of life and education
 Decrease of seasonality
 Dynamic presence in international tourist market
 Increase in tourist capacity in beds
 Relief in terms of social and infrastructure side in peak season.
 Improvement of viability of tourist investments

The preservation and exhibition of cultural heritage, the utilization of existent hotel capacity and of the special tourist infrastructure with parallel improvement and upgrading of services, are necessary conditions for the support and promotion of new types of tourism.

The main alternatives types of tourism according to the following table 2 are


Source: Igoumenakis, Ν.(1997), Τourism Economy, 1, 2nd ed., Interbooks Publications, Αthens, p. 157.

2.2 Conference Tourism

Conference tourism a is an important section of tourism as it attracts high income tourists, who can combine it with other tourist activities---sport tourism, culture, thalassotherapy, religious, etc. Greece unfortunately lacks the suitable infrastructure.
The table 3 shows clearly the respective infrastructure as far as conference tourism is concerned.
The Greek magazine, Tourism and Economy, Phalirea, Λ., (2001) presents the following as regards conventions :

• The first Convention and Visitors Bureau TCVB---for many services and marketing --- in Thessaloniki is a product of private initiative.
• Non defined the total demand and supply
• Necessary the ‘national guidelines’ in the game of international competition

According to Minister of development (2001), today there are in the country or they are under construction the following conference and convention centers:
a. 5 conference centers, each with 2,400 people capacity
b. 453 conference rooms and meetings ranging from 10 to 1000 persons in 150 hotels with the special sign of GNTO.
c. 21 conference centers that have been under are under construction.

Dimitris Spanos head of the special department of Real Estate & Hospitality of Arthur Anderson in Greece, Kousouni Σ., (10/6/2001α) after research highlighted the fact that Greek competitors offer better margin profit to tour –operators. He also noticed that conference tourism could contribute to better occupancy rates for a city hotel.
In a recent article Kousouni Σ., (31/3/2002 β)main reason for Greece being last( 17th) in Europe, and (30th) in the World, regarding the organization of conferences is the indifference of the state to create proper conditions for the development of regions-cities of attraction. Athens is the only European City that lacks a large conference center. According to statistics of the International Conference and Convention Association, the participants spend 4 times more money from the simple visitors in a destination.
The table 3 shows the conference capacity in Greece.

Table 3
Conference capacity of Greece

Conference Rooms Total In Hotels Independent Rooms
Person Capacity
151-300 102 83 19
301-500 66 58 8
501-800 28 25 3
801-1,000 11 8 3
Over 1,001 12 9 3
Total 219 183 36
Source: Paulopoulos P , (2001),Winter tourism in Greece, ΙΤΕP, Eptalophos ΑΒΕΕ, p.74

2.3 Cultural Tourism

Culture tourism is not a novel type of tourism as aristocrats, adventurers, authors, artists, and men of letters, used to travel in the past. Greece’s cultural heritage consists a comparative advantage of the country by being one of its most important assets. Culture can contribute, to a great extent, to economic and social development. The minister of the National Economy, in The Economist "Conferences in Athens Tourism: Lever of development in Greece" (3-4 /12/1998) at the Divani Caravel hotel said that cultural tourism is a special type of tourism that is going to constitute the central axis of tourist policy.
The European Commission adopted this by approving the Operational Programme (…/details.cfm?gv_OBJ=ALL&gv_PAY=GR&gv_reg=ALL&gv_THE=ALL&gv_PgM=20027/4/2002) for Culture for the period 2000-2006 ,with a budget of nearly EUR 414,3 million (68% of the total ) which will be financed from the EU Structural Funds, with the remainder to be provided by the public and private sector (176 million and EUR 14,5 million respectively). This Community support involves all the Greek regions within the framework of “Objective 1” (regions that lagging behind in their development.

Priorities of the program are:

1) The protection and development of Greece’s cultural heritage( improving museum infrastructure and the services they offer, safeguard and promote archaeological monuments and sites)
2) The development of Greece’s modern culture( improving infrastructures and the relevant institutions)
3) Technical assistance ( administration, monitoring and control is provide for the implementation of the program)

Responsible for the Management is the Greek Ministry of Culture.

2.4 Ecotourism

The United Nations has designated the year 2002 as the International Year of Eco-tourism.( http:// www.gnto. gr/1/06/0606/ea0606001.html)
Ecotourism is a form of nature –based tourism that strives to be ecologically, socio-culturally, and economically sustainable for appreciating and learning about the natural environment or specific elements thereof, Weaver D. Br (2001). In detail, ecotorism is tourism to natural, unspoiled areas which actively promotes environmental conservation is directly beneficial to local societies and cultures and provides tourists with a positive, educative experience. In fact, it is a form of alternative, sustainable tourism, Cater & Lowman, (1994:3), and depends exclusively on a rural environment. In exhibition 1 seems the linkages between ecotourism, mass tourism, and protected areas.

Mutually beneficial linkages between ecotourism, mass tourism, and protected areas

A (mass tourism to ecotourism)
• Provides a large clientele (soft ecotourists)
and revenue flow
• Brings economies of scale amenable to A C
• Provides Lobbying clout in the face of B D
competing resource users
B (ecotourism to mass tourism)
• Contributes to diversification of a
mass –tourism product
• Attractive to an increasingly “green”
mass-tourism market
• Further exposure to sustainability principles and practices
C (protected areas to ecotourism)
• Provides an attractive, high-quality venue for ecotourism activities
• Insulates ecotourism from incompatible activities
D (ecotourism to protected areas
• Revenue flow provides funds for enhancement and expansion
• Broad exposure increases public support

Source: Weaver D. Br. (2001), ‘Ecotourism as a Mass Tourism: Contradiction or Reality?’ CORNELL, Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42(2), 109

Greece possesses abundant resources for the potential attraction of tourists interested in ecological issues. The richness and variety of ecological resources, both biotic and abiotic, constitute a specific comparative advantage. The Minister of Tourism, Dimitrios Georgakoploulos in a press conference (ΞΕΝΙΑ, 2002) he referred to the initiatives of the Ministry and the reported that the development of Ecotourism can contribute to:
• The extension of tourist period, given the problem of seasonality
• The attraction of “ quality” tourism
• Young people stay in their villages
• Protection , Management and sustainability of ecosystems
• The retention of coherence of the social web

Priority will be given to ecotourist development of networks of 4 Olympic cities ( eg. Volos, network Pilio, Allonissos, Lake Nikolaou Plastira, Meteora, Olympos) in order to attract visitors in view of the Olympic Games in 2004 and the promotion of these 4 ecotourist networks. For the realization of the above project exists already cooperation with the General Committee of Olympic Games, the Ministry of Culture, in order the necessary funding to be ensured.
The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in Greece, in a study on the development of ecotourism (ΞΕΝΙΑ, 2001) indicated the following 10 proposal.
1) Consultative service for ecourism, which will utilize the available Human Resources with specialized education and evaluation of the efforts that are made
2) The establishment by the GNTO (EOT) of data collection for tourist demand in sensitive ecological areas on national level. These data will consist the base for the mapping and continuous assessment of ecotourism strategy.
3) Promotion of exchanges and cooperation with foreign ecotourism model destinations.
4) Promotion of education of professionals in tourism sector on ecotourism issues. In this way, in the existing facilities of tourism studies, seminars and lectures would be added for the meaning and the application of ecotourism.
5) The “agenda 21” guiding principles for tourism in the European Union to be adopted as principles that they should be followed by public and private sector as well as cooperatives sector involving in ecotourism
6) The establishment by GNTO of awards for perfect practice, in order to define the way that ecotourism is perceived.
7) In protected areas, administrative services to be founded to control the ecotourist activities. At the same time, the participation of GNTO-EOT must be ensured in these services in protected areas.
8) The establishment of institution to dispose of revenues from ecotourism for the protection of nature in regions where administration services will be initiated
9) Celebration of the International Year (2002) of Ecotourim with the study and its publication including successful examples from all the sectors of ecotourism
10) Research to be promoted.

2.5 Health Tourism
Health tourism includes also the preventive medicine, rejuvenation, dietique aesthetic and the tourism of disabled and handicapped. The public bathhouse –hot baths- (it is the loutron, thermae, onsen, sauna, bania, or hamam) was an important part of the ancient Greek daily life; sweat bathing was considered central to well being.
The health tourism is underdeveloped in Greece although there is the potential due to good Mediterranean climate and the existence of Mineral Water Sources of curative quality. There is a large number of natural health springs from Macedonia to Crete. What is needed is the upgrading of infrastructure and giving motives to private sector (hotels) for introducing health tourism (spa center, thalassotherapy centers, etc) as a means of enrichment and diversification of the hotel product.
Greece’s functioning public baths can be found mainly at resort areas where hot springs are located.
The table 4 and table 5 show the current infrastructure in Greece concerning the thalassotherapy and hydrotherapy installations.

Table 4
Thalassotherapy centers

Greece(1) 3(2 in Crete,1 in Athens)
France 40(12 in Channel, 22 in Atlantic,19 in Mediterranean)
Spain(2) 15
Italy 3
Portugal 4
Turkey 1
Cyprus 4
(1) There are 6 under construction
(2) There are 15 Thalassotherapy centers in Andaloussia alone according to newspaper EL PAIS
Source: Paulopoulos P , (2001),Winter tourism in Greece, ΙΤΕP, Eptalophos ΑΒΕΕ, p.78

Table 5
Hydrotherapy centers

GREECE 17(1 modern)
France 104
Spain 81
Italy 200
Portugal 53
Turkey 19
Cyprus In all the luxury (5*) hotels
Source Source: Source: Paulopoulos P ,(2001),Winter tourism in Greece, ΙΤΕP, Eptalophos ΑΒΕΕ, p 80

Map.1 http: www.elke.gr/elkeweb/static/tourism.htm

2.6 Sport Tourism

Domestic tourism has been attracted by winter sports and there has been and effort to attract foreign tourism. At present there are 38 ski centers and 65 mountain shelters. This has contributed towards keeping Greeks from travelling abroad.
Sport tourism could be connected with other types of tourism such as agritourism, ecotourism (tennis, swimming, cycling, rafting, etc.)
Hotels should provide special sport facilities with trainers, etc. as sports can offer value to the guest given the competitiveness in the hospitality industry.
The table 6 that follows shows the current golf infrastructure.

Table 6
Golf courses in competitive countries

Golf courses
(1998) 18 holes Clubs %Winter Tourism
(1999 Number of golf courses per 1,000,000
Citizens Tourists
GREECE 4 3 4 8,9 0,4 0,3
France 523 400 523 24,2 8,6 7,2
Spain 207 143 169 23,8 5,3 4,0
Italy 232 101 182 29,7 4,0 6,4
Portugal 50 38 33 28,2 5,0 4,3
Turkey 8 5 8 21,2 0,1 0,9
Cyprus --
Source: Source: Paulopoulos P, (2001), Winter tourism in Greece, ΙΤΕP, Eptalophos ΑΒΕΕ, p 68

Map 2 http: www.elke.gr/elkeweb/static/tourism.htm .

2.7 Marine Tourism

Sailing and cruising are the most popular activities in Greece as there are more than 3,000 islands. In 1996, forty-nine thousand approaches were registered in the Greek marinas. At present, 16 organized marinas exist and 35 are under construction.

This year, foreign cruises have decreased in 60% since American tourists (the major market for Greece) have turned to the Atlantic. This decrease is a phenomenon of the last two years. Papanikolaou N., (2002). The following table 7 shows the marine infrastructure in Greece.

Table 7
Marinas: Number and Capacity
Countries Marinas Capacity(boats)
Greece(1) 19 6,500
France 165
Spain 270 66.495
Italy 45 24,000
Portugal 26 5,700
Turkey(2) 16 9,000
Cyprus 2 700
(1) There are under construction 25 new marinas
(2) 13 satisfy the International standards
Source: Paulopoulos P ,(2001),Winter tourism in Greece, ΙΤΕP, Eptalophos ΑΒΕΕ, p.76

Map 3 http: www.elke.gr/elkeweb/static/tourism.htm .

2.8 Educational Tourism

Greece has not managed yet to take advantage of the potential that there is in the area of educational tourism. This kind of tourism can be combined with other types such as cultural, sports, green tourism. The climate of Greece is favorable for initiatives such as “ green lectures” or “lessons nearby the sea”, for all for students from primary school up to secondary school. These classes combine travelling and learning. Learning also about the host country that students will visit.
Educational tourism can contribute to the decrease of seasonality since students come in spring, autumn, and at the beginning of summer time. From Australia there is the chance to visit Greece during winter, that is when they are on summer holidays.
Students can become our ambassadors and when they will become adults will revisit our country where they have beautiful educational and tourist experiences.
Besides, various seminars—philosophy, psychology, sociology, linguistic etc –as well visits to theatre, museums, galleries, concerts would be included in educational visits (Igoumenakis N., Kravaritis K., Litras P., 1998)

3.1 Definition and existing Literature
Agritourism as also an alternative type of tourism. Prior to define what is agritourism and the literature that there is on the subject it should be noted that agritourism set out in Greece in Petra –Mytilinis—Lesvos- in 1984-1985 by the women’s agritourism cooperative, (Kassimati K, Thanopoulou M., Tsartas P., 1995). A study by Gousiou A. Spilanis I. Kizos T (.2001) regarding farm tourism in Lesvos-Mytilini showed that most agrotourism holdings in Lesvos operate in margin of mass tourism Rural agritourism in Greece is conceived differently than in other countries where it has flourished. Agritourism in Greece has nothing to do with offering the experience of farm life to tourists, as it is in other countries (France, UK, Canada, etc.). It is simply the diversification of farm incomes by offering accommodation in rented rooms Katsaros D.( 1998). Furthermore, there is no national strategy, law framework, quality guidelines for agrotourism and the GNTO (EOT) has no any involvement in agritourism. (Antoniou- Layiou Crysanthi, 01/08/99). She also adds that the government has all the necessary elements to plan national policy marketing of new forms of tourism.

Agritourism or farm tourism is a “new form of tourism” development Poon, (1993). In Greece, as in most countries, farm tourism is still in its infancy, although in some parts of Europe—e.g Austria Tacquard F., (1986), France Mascha A., (1984)-- it is an activity that exists for more than hundred years (Frater, 1983; Hummelbrunner & Miglbaner, 1994, p.42). In Sweden and Switzerland agri-tourism sector reaches 20% and in Austria exceeds 10%. A study, by Iakovidou O., et all (2001) reached to the conclusion that agritourism is not defined as simply offering bed & breakfast but also includes leisure activities as well as cultural events and activities connected to environment and high income.
Analysis, of guests of agritourism Main reason for the development of agritourism was the decline in farm income which led farmers to diversify from the agricultural base (Richard,1983; Fleisher& Pizan,1997) and adopt pluriactivity. Elson Steenberg and Wilkinson (1995) note that the main concerns of farmers are twofold: First to generate a supplementary income and second, to contribute to the local development. In some countries agritourism refers to as rural tourism. Lane (1994) suggests, ‘tourism which takes place in the countryside’. Oppermann, (1995) argues that farm tourism lacks a comprehensive body of knowledge and a theoretical framework mainly because of problems of definition. The term ‘rural tourism’ is frequently used interchangeably with other terms, such as ecotourism, green tourism or nature tourism (Deegan & Dineen, 1997; Whelan 1991). In 1986, the European communities defined rural tourism as including ‘not only farm tourism or agritourism….. but all tourist activities in rural areas’. In table 8 we see a list of leisure activities in the countryside suggested by the council of Europe

Table 8 Range of tourist leisure activities in the countryside

1. Touring
• hiking(footpaths, fitness trails, nature parks);
• horse riding;
• touring in gypsy caravans, wagons;
• motorized touring( trail riding, all –terrain vehicles, motoring); cycling;
• donkey riding;
• cross-country activities.
Water-related activities
• fishing;
• swimming;
• river tourism(Houseboats, narrow boats, barges);
• windsurfing;
• speedboat racing;
• sailing;
• facilities of the ‘aqualand’ type.
3. Aerial activities
• light aircraft;
• hang-gliding and microlight aircraft;
• hot air balloons.
4. Activities on dry land
• tennis;
• golf.
5. Sporting activities
• pot-holing;
• rock climbing.
6. Discovery-type activities
• local industrial, agricultural or craft enterprises.
7. Cultural activities
• archaeology;
• restoration sites;
• coursed in crafts;
• artistic expression workshops;
• folk groups;
• cultural, gastronomic and other routes.
8. Health-related activities
• fitness training;
• health resorts,

Source: Thibal 1988

The above lists of the range of activities make, therefore, difficult for one to distinguish between all these activities that take place in the countryside---agritourism, green tourism, ecotourism, etc. However, agri-tourism is directly linked to agriculture. Agritourism is made up of tourism products which are ‘directly connected with the agrarian environment, agrarian products or agrarian stays’ (Jansen- Verbeke and Nijmegen, 1990) including stays on a farm, either in rooms or camping, educational visits, meals, recreational activities, and the sale of farm produce or handicrafts.
With respect to farm tourism research, this is characterized as of “spasmodic interest” (Pigram, 1993) and studies have tended to focus on “Bed and Breakfast” lodgings (Warnick & Klar, 1991; Lanier & Berman, 1993; Emerick & E Emerick, 1994) whereas (Maude and van Rest, 1985) and Blaine, Golan and Van (1993) examined the wider context of farm tourism.

3.2 Types of agritourism

The types of agritourism Tsartas( 1991), can falls in the following categories:

1) Agritourism in farm property with board and lodging in the house of the farmer.
This is the classical type of agritourism, where the tourist stays in the farmhouse. Usually, this type of tourism is more suitable for budget tourists and those that want to participate in farm activities (eg. In wine making in Belgium and Italy) and to know the life in the countryside. The farm property usually offers sports activities or chances for swimming, trekking, climbing, horse-riding etc.

2) Agritourism with accommodation –related activities- and “non accommodation”. Some farms abroad participate in both (Shaw & Williams, 1994). (Ilbery et all, 1998) distinguish between accommodation and recreation enterprises. In (table 9) a simple list of agritourism elements, many of which are used for tourism purposes, is provided by (Clarke 1996 a b). Willing Workers on Organic Farms (WWOOF) for instance in New Zealand provide to the traveler board and lodging, with the host family, while learning organic methods of agriculture or horticulture in exchange for, typically four hours work a day (Strange & Strange, 1999; Smith, 1994;Rural Tours,1999)

3) Agritourism in self catering independent accommodation.
This type of agrotourism is very common in Greece, as it requires less work from the part of the farmer while it retains the privacy of guest and the farmer as well.

4) All types of camping inside the farmers’ property.
This is common in England and Ireland, and it is directed in families that are in a budget. The farmer apart from the place usually provides water, food etc.

5) Agritourism in protected areas that are created for this purpose, (National Parks)
Law protects these areas while they are imposed limitations in building permission. The communities of these regions –operate usually on cooperative basis- build pension or areas for camping and accept visitors that are keen on sports, natural life, on farm etc. Usually these communities that take part in these programs they play significant role on the management of these areas. This type of tourism is over commercialized and combined with “green tourism”

6) Cooperative agritourism
There are two types: Either they are in lodging in agritourist region or on farm or many agritourism farms together. In Greece, women cooperatives try to give the feeling of a friendly environment while they protect the cultural elements of the region- host. At the same time, It is promoted the consumption of local produce (Greek cheeses, weaver, pottery,) that women of cooperatives make. However, the stay of the tourist is not necessary.
7) Agritourism in houses that are built in traditional materials in order to be like old, “Staged authenticity” or tourism “retro” (Cisse M. T., 1984; McKannel D., 1973,1976)
This type of agritourism is of growing interest the last years. An infrastructure of gifts shops, tavernas, etc is developed respecting the local environment. These complexes are enterprises and no farmers. Tourists do not participate in farm life of the region. McKannel named this “Staged authenticity” as a whole village is created.
As it become evident there are many types of agritourism depending exclusively on the tradition of a country. Specifically:

• Agritourism in region of a product e.g wine
• Agritourism high-class e.g Towers, and castles of Tuscany
• Extensive sports infrastructure e.g tennis courts, swimming pools etc
• Organize in local or state unions the possibility the tourism to select according to advertised prices and promotion.
• Creation of farm museums ( farm tools ) so that the tourism will learn about the farm life.
• Training of farmers for better services

In a study farm houses in France Francois Tacquard (1986) concluded: Tourism in order to have positive results in agriculture activity on the tourism income it should not be enough to live on it. If that is not happening then “the future is unknown and the continuity depends on the farmer’s personality.”
Farm tourism elements--- according to Clarke (1996 a, b)
Attraction---permanent Attractions—events

Farm visitor centers Farm o
pen days
Self-guided farm trails Guided walks
Farm museums Educational visits
Conservation areas Demonstrations
Country parks

Access ( rural) Activities

Stile/gate maintenance Horse-riding/trekking
Footpaths / bridleways /tracks Fishing

Accommodation Amenities

Bed & Breakfast Restaurants
Self –catering Cafes/ cream /teas
Camping and caravanning Farm shops/ roadside stalls
Dunkhouse barns Pick your own
Picnic sites
Source: Clarke, J. (1996 b), Farm accommodation and the communication max, Tourism Management, 17 (8), 611-616

4.1 Aim of the Research-Hypothesis

H1: There is a statistically difference in satisfaction between females and females.

Ho: There is not statistically significant difference in satisfaction between females and females.

H2: There is statistically significant difference in satisfaction between farmers hosts in relation to their level of education(primary, secondary, tertiary).

Ho: There is not statistically significant difference in satisfaction between farmers hosts in relation to their level of education(primary, secondary, tertiary

H3: There is a statistically difference in satisfaction between location, by gender, location by education, gender by education.

Ho: There is not a statistically difference in satisfaction between location, by gender, location by education, gender by education

4.2 Methodology--Description of the sample

The (table 10) shows the between –subjects factors. This study was to gain insight into agritourism in Greece and the level of satisfaction of hosts in relation to education, gender and location. Specifically, the counties of Euritania, Lesvos, Florina, Evia, Viotia, Arkadia, Karthitsa, Larissa, Evros-Samothraki were conducted

Table 10
Between-Subjects Factors
LOCATION 1,00 Eyrytania 21
2,00 Lesvos 207
3,00 Samothraki 32
4,00 Thessalia 93
5,00 Voiotia 72
6,00 Eyvoia 35
7,00 Arkadia 26
8,00 Florina 120
GENDER 1,00 Males 122
2,00 Females 484
EDUCATIOi 1,00 Primary 391
2,00 Secondary 194
3,00 University 21

4.3 Description of Questionnaires

The questionnaires and interviews include the following variables:
1. Gender
2. Age (18-30,31-40 ,41-50,51-60, over 60)
3. Education level (primary, secondary, tertiary)
4. National status ( single, married, divorced, widow)
5. Private farm property (yes, no)
6. Monthly personal/family income
7. Run the lodge( husband, wife, children, all the family)
8. High season of demand( winter, spring, summer)
9. Reason for visiting(to see the way that farm activities are carried out, to participate in farm activities, to live in the slow rhythm of rural life, to enjoy the nature, because agritourism lodging is cheaper in comparison to hotels)
10. What leisure activities offer the region (horse riding, fishing, skiing, mountaineering, something else?)
11. Nationality of guests( Greeks, Foreigners, both, exact nationality
12. Does the farmer produce or make something special (nothing, embroidery/ weave, traditional Greek sweets/ jams, wine or other drink, other).
13. Does the farmer know the expectations and need of their guests (yes, no, in case of yes, what is it?
14. Classification of the farm property ( pulses/ cotton/potatoes/vegetables No of hectares, conservatories No of hectares, vineyards/orchards /fruit-bearing trees No of hectares, raising of livestock No of animals, family consumption farming
15. No of hectares
16. Year of starting agritourism
17. Would it have been better off without tourism? (yes, no)
18. Training on agritourism(yes, no, if yes from whom )
19. Does agritourism income is referred to tax as income from agriculture?(yes, no)
20. The type of lodging ( agritourism in farmers’ house offering board and lodge, agritourism in separate house, self –service facilities/ studios, cooperative lodge
21. Agritourism product ( only lodge, board and lodge, provision of agriculture activities, such as horse-riding etc)
22. Knowledge about the development of agritourism abroad (yes, no, if yes from where)
23. What the future of agritourism in Greece?
24. How satisfied are you from agritourism/ ( not at all, little, moderate, a lot, very much)
25. How profitable is agritourism? ( not at all, little, moderate, a lot, very much)
26. Do you believe that the prospects of agritourism are favorable? ( not at all, little, moderate, a lot, very much)
27. Do you believe that the cooperation with the public sector, your colleagues and guest are satisfied? ( not at all, little, moderate, a lot, very much)
28. Does agritourism provides you enough job security? ( not at all, little, moderate, a lot, very much)
29. What kind of help has the state provided to you? (nothing, tax relieve, subsidies, advertising, training, combination )
30. What do you want from the state? ? (nothing, tax relieve, subsidies, advertising, training, combination )
31. What is the impact of visitors to the area? –choose as many answers as you like-(local economic development, lack of respect on behalf of youngsters, drugs, guests spend money, freedom of youngsters, atomism)
32. Percentage of income that comes from agrtourism ( up to 25%,up to 50%, up to 75%, over 75%)
33. What benefits brings agritourism to agriculture? (Selling their produce to visitors, additional income for purchase of agriculture machinery or extra hectares purchase, change of more profitable cultivation, more young people stay at their village).
34. The agritourism lodgings is ( old restored house, build to look old. modern, other)
35. The tourism development has contributed towards the development of cultural activities (building of folklore museum, theatre, traditional dance school, revival of customs, other what?)
4.4 Procedure

The study was undertaken in the following prefectures:

1. Evros( Samothraki)
2. Florinas
3. Larissas
4. Euritanias
5. Karthitsas
6. Viotias
7. Evias
8. Arkadias
9. Lesvos (Mytilini)

The regions were selected in random, having in mind to cover places from mainland as well as islands.
During March 2002, I personally conducted all the population of agritourism in Viotia, Euritania, Larissa, Karthitsa, and Evia. In South of Evia, Karystos , most of agritourism hosts—rent rooms--- were not there. I have been told that they have tourists only during summer and they were come to Karystos in summer time for the vacationers. The rest counties were conducted by telephone. Addresses were taken from the booklet that I got from the Ministry of Agriculture: (Agritourism lodgings, 1997). The Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for the realization of agritourism grant programs in Greece.
Each person in the household most responsible for the agriculture experience was asked to fill out the questionnaire and answer the interview questions. To provide a basis for comparison, the questionnaire comprised both closed and opened-ended questions. In particular, the agriculture hosts were asked questions relating to demographics, size and type of farm property, contribution of locals to the local economy, reasons for visiting the area, degree of satisfaction or dissatisfaction, cultural development, percentage of income from agriculture, leisure activities, perception of visitors expectations and needs, women’s role in agritourism. An example, a five point Likert scale, respondents were asked to indicate the degree of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of agritourism.
In total 125 questionnaire were filled out. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS)

4. 5 Results

In the following tables we have recorded the frequencies and percentages of the sample characteristics: The locations of subjects, their gender, educational level, age group, marital status, management of the lodge, demand, agricultural activities, lodge type, governmental help, expectations from the state, percentage of income from agritourism, benefits for the agricultural activities, and services offered.

Prior to referring to the issue of satisfaction it would be wise to see the demographics of the research as it is examined the relation of 3 independent variables of age, gender and location with the dependent variable of satisfaction. According to Table C, 21,7% were over 60 years, 37,5% were between 51-60,20,0% between 41-50, 14,0% between 31-40 and 6,7% between 18-30.Regarding the marital status,86,2% were married, 2,3% divorced, 3,1 single and 8,5 widowed. From the respondents, table F, 83,7% were females and 16,3 were males. With respect to education, table E, 63,3% have finished primary school,32, 7% secondary school and 4,0% university. Those that have finished secondary school, (table 14) (mean13,903) seem to be more satisfied by those who have finished the primary school.
Tables A-M : Frequencies and percentages of independent variables

A Location
Valid Eyrytania 5 1,0
Lesvos 88 16,9
Samothraki 18 3,5
thessalia 92 17,7
voiotia 70 13,5
eyvoia 36 6,9
arkadia 35 6,7
florina 176 33,8
Total 520 100,0

B Gender
Valid males 85 16,3
Females 435 83,7
Total 520 100,0

C Age
Valid 18-30 35 6,7
31-40 73 14,0
41-50 104 20,0
51-60 195 37,5
Over 60 113 21,7
Total 520 100,0

D Marital status
Valid single 16 3,1
married 448 86,2
Divorced 12 2,3
Widowed 44 8,5
Total 520 100,0

E Education
Valid primary 329 63,3
Secondary 170 32,7
University 21 4,0
Total 520 100,0

F Manage the lodge
Valid husband 13 2,5
wife 427 82,1
children 23 4,4
All the family 57 11,0
Total 520 100,0
G Demand
Valid Winter 39 7,5
Spring 12 2,3
Summer 323 62,1
winter spring 38 7,3
autumn summer 20 3,8
winter summer 19 3,7
Winter spring autumn 28 5,4
all year 41 7,9
Total 520 100,0

H Agricultural activities
Valid fields 56 10,8
groceries 8 1,5
orchards 64 12,3
animal raising 20 3,8
Agriactivity for own consumption 110 21,2
Orchards animal raising 262 50,4
Total 520 100,0

I Lodge type
Valid separate lodge 24 4,6
studios 470 90,4
Cooperative lodge 26 5,0
Total 520 100,0

J Governmental help
Valid tax reductions 4 ,8
Subsidies 174 33,5
Education 10 1,9
Combination of the above 332 63,8
Total 520 100,0

K Expectations from the state
Valid Nothing 7 1,3
tax reductions 41 7,9
Subsidies 112 21,5
Advertising 4 ,8
combination of the above 324 62,3
Sima 26 5,0
Infrastructure 6 1,2
Total 520 100,0

L Percentage of income from agritourism
Valid 25% 428 82,3
50% 70 13,5
75& 22 4,2
Total 520 100,0

M Benefits for the agricultural activity
Valid selling their products to visitors 237 45,6
new farmers stay in the countryside 73 14,0
not at all 210 40,4
Total 520 100,0

N Services offered
Valid Only lodge 500 96,2
Fully board 6 1,2
combination of the above 10 1,9
11,00 4 ,8
Total 520 100,0

We will perform chi-square tests in order to examine whether there is a statistically significant difference between locations and attitudes about the benefits of agritourism and the expectations from the state. However, since a large proportion of cells has frequencies lower than 5, the chi square test was not valid and the phi value and Cramer's v were calculated.
In terms of benefits of agritourism, 45% of hosts answer that the development of agritourism has helped them to sell their products to visitors. A large percentage, 40% of hosts believe that agritourism do not offer them any benefits. As far as the perspective of new people staying in the countryside is concerned the percentage is 14%.

The differences by locations are reflected by the significance of the phi- value which is 0,719 (Sig=0,000<0,05), which means that different counties have a variety of opinions about the benefits of agritourism. The same applies for the expectations from state. The
-value is 0,897, Sig=0,000<0,05. Indeed, 1,3% have no any expectations

From the state,7,9% desire tax reductions, 21,5 % want subsidies, 0,8% desire advertising,62,3,another 5%want a special certification from the Greek National Tourist Organization (GNTO) and finally, 1,2% want from the state to take care for building special infrastructure.

Tables 11 show the descriptive statistics (means) for the independent variables: gender, location and education level followed by the appropriate graphs. We observe that with regard to location the highest satisfaction score is in the county of Eyritania and the lowest is in the county of Samothraki. There are no obvious differences between females and males, whilst educational levels do not differ much. The 3- way anova table will reveal whether these mean differences are statistically significant.
Table 11 Means by location
Dependent Variable: satisfaction
Eyrytania 15,611
Lesvos 10,989
Samothraki 10,875
Thessalia 13,739
Voiotia 14,206
Eyvoia 12,410
Arkadia 17,500
Florina 14,856

Table 12 Means by gender
Dependent Variable: satisfaction
Males 13,492
Females 13,412

Table 13 Means by educational level
Dependent Variable: satisfaction
Primary 13,069
Secondary 13,903
University 13,000
a Based on modified population marginal mean.

Table 14 Means by Location * Gender * Education
Dependent Variable: satisfaction
Eyrytania Males Primary 16,333
Secondary 19,000
University ,
Females Primary 11,500
Secondary ,
University ,
Lesvos Males Primary 8,000
Secondary 10,000
University 10,000
Females Primary 13,992
Secondary 12,953
University ,
Samothraki Males Primary 9,500
Secondary ,
University ,
Females Primary 10,000
Secondary 11,000
University 13,000
Thessalia Males Primary ,
Secondary 14,000
University ,
Females Primary 14,150
Secondary 13,808
University 13,000
Voiotia Males Primary 15,000
Secondary 14,571
University ,
Females Primary 13,909
Secondary 13,345
University ,
Eyvoia Males Primary ,
Secondary 11,000
University ,
Females Primary ,
Secondary 10,231
University 16,000
Arkadia Males Primary 17,000
Secondary 17,500
University ,
Females Primary ,
Secondary 18,000
University ,
Florina Males Primary ,
Secondary ,
University ,
Females Primary 14,378
Secondary 15,333
University ,

Graph 1 Mean Satisfaction by Location and Education level

Graph 2 Mean Satisfaction Gender by Education
Graph 3 Mean Satisfaction Gender by County

Table 15 3-way anova table

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: satisfaction
LOCATION 998,967 7 32,909 ,000
GENDER 2,955E-02 1 ,007 ,934
EDUCATIO 33,995 2 3,920 ,020
LOCATION * GENDER 472,440 6 18,158 ,000
LOCATION * EDUCATIO 86,638 8 2,497 ,011
GENDER * EDUCATIO 21,709 1 5,006 ,026
LOCATION * GENDER * EDUCATIO 18,156 1 4,187 ,041
a R Squared = ,469 (Adjusted R Squared = ,444)

Table (15) contains the f values, the degrees of freedom and the probability of error for variables, location gender, education.
As we can observe in the above table there are statistical significant main effects of the variables location (0,01 level), education (0,05 level). Additionally, there are statistically significant interactions: location by gender (0,01 level), location by education (0,05 level), gender by education (0,05 level), and a significant 3- way interaction location by gender by education (0,05 level). (Research hypothesis accepted in these cases)
On the contrary the main effect of gender is not significant. Therefore we accept the null hypothesis.
Post hoc tests (tuckey hsd) were performed for the variables, location, education, as well. The following tables show the statistically significant differences between different locations and educational levels. The significant effect is due to the job satisfaction difference between primary and secondary educational levels. Also different areas in Greece exhibit significant differences in satisfaction:
Eyrytania with samothraki, eyvoia and arkadia
Lesvos with samothraki , thessalia, voiotia, arkadia and florina
Samothraki with Euritania, Lesvos,Thessalia,Florina,Voiotia,Arkadia
Thessalia with Samothraki,Lesvos,Arkadia,Evoia
Voiotia with Lesvos, Samothraki,Evoia,Arkadia
Evoia with Euritania,Thessalia,Voiotia,Arkadia,Florina
Arkadia with Samothraki, Evoia, Euritania, Lesvos,Thessalia, Florina,Voiotia
Florina with Lesvos, Samothraki, Evoia, Arkadia

Table 16 Tuckey HSD post hoc tests by location
Multiple Comparisons
Dependent Variable: satisfaction
Tukey HSD
Eyrytania lesvos 1,4251 ,057
samothraki 3,7083 ,000
thessalia ,3011 ,999
voiotia ,4167 ,993
eyvoia 2,4762 ,000
arkadia -2,9744 ,000
florina -,1167 1,000
lesvos eyrytania -1,4251 ,057
samothraki 2,2832 ,000
thessalia -1,1240 ,000
voiotia -1,0085 ,010
eyvoia 1,0511 ,105
arkadia -4,3995 ,000
florina -1,5418 ,000
samothraki eyrytania -3,7083 ,000
lesvos -2,2832 ,000
thessalia -3,4073 ,000
voiotia -3,2917 ,000
eyvoia -1,2321 ,232
arkadia -6,6827 ,000
florina -3,8250 ,000
thessalia eyrytania -,3011 ,999
lesvos 1,1240 ,000
samothraki 3,4073 ,000
voiotia ,1156 1,000
eyvoia 2,1751 ,000
arkadia -3,2754 ,000
florina -,4177 ,833
voiotia eyrytania -,4167 ,993
lesvos 1,0085 ,010
samothraki 3,2917 ,000
thessalia -,1156 1,000
eyvoia 2,0595 ,000
arkadia -3,3910 ,000
florina -,5333 ,675
eyvoia eyrytania -2,4762 ,000
lesvos -1,0511 ,105
samothraki 1,2321 ,232
thessalia -2,1751 ,000
voiotia -2,0595 ,000
arkadia -5,4505 ,000
florina -2,5929 ,000
arkadia eyrytania 2,9744 ,000
lesvos 4,3995 ,000
samothraki 6,6827 ,000
thessalia 3,2754 ,000
voiotia 3,3910 ,000
eyvoia 5,4505 ,000
florina 2,8577 ,000
florina eyrytania ,1167 1,000
lesvos 1,5418 ,000
samothraki 3,8250 ,000
thessalia ,4177 ,833
voiotia ,5333 ,675
eyvoia 2,5929 ,000
arkadia -2,8577 ,000
Based on observed means.
• The mean difference is significant at the ,05 level.
Table 17 Tuckey HSD post hoc tests by education
Pairwise Comparisons
Dependent Variable: satisfaction
(I) education (J) education
Primary secondary -,834 ,003
university 6,936E-02 ,916
Secondary primary ,834 ,003
university ,903 ,171
University primary -6,936E-02 ,916
secondary -,903 ,171

The Greek agritourism product

The findings of the study showed that agritourism in Greece is not made up of tourism products which are ‘directly connected with the agrarian environment, agrarian products or agrarian stays’ (Jansen- Verbeke and Nijmegen, 1990) including stays on a farm, either in rooms or camping, educational visits, meals, recreational activities. However the sale of farm produce or handicrafts is possible. According to Clarke, J., (1996 b) farm accommodation falls into four categories: Bed and Breakfast, self catering, camping and caravanning and dunkhouse farms. The study showed that the Greek farm tourism business is characterized as of “spasmodic interest” due to its fragmented nature “Bed and Breakfast” lodgings (Warnick & Klar, 1991; Lanier & Berman, 1993; Emerick & E Emerick, 1994) as well as self-catering (rent appartments) are also in Greece predominant. Tsartas (1991) ascribe the development of self –catering accommodation to the fact that it requires less work from the part of the farmer while it retain the privacy of the quest and the farmer as well.
From the interview became evident that the main reason for visiting an agritourism lodging is the quietness and the scenery and not the farming activities themselves. As it become manifested, visitors go to a rural area for a host of different reasons—summer holidays, visits to archaeological sites, visits to monasteries, skiing etc –but not for agritourism, that is to share experiences with the hosts and participate in agriculture activities. Clough (1977), says that a large number of visitors are happy not to see the farm but choose one for its image, scenery and tranquility. Some years ago, Hoylland (1982) noted that “livestock have a greatest visual appeal”. Research studies in the U.K, as well as Germany, Italy, Denmark, (Countryside Commission 1987) have shown that visitors are attracted to countryside due to freedom and opportunity it offers for relaxation and peace. Over 80 per cent visiting the countryside because it is quite and peaceful.

5.2 Satisfaction and rural development

Satisfaction refers to the contentment experienced when a need or want is satisfied and motivation refers to the drive and effort to satisfy a goal or want Koontz, Weihrich (1990). However, satisfying one need may lead to a desire to satisfy more needs. For instance, a farmer who has already got subsidies for building an agritourism lodge now expects additional subsidies, advertising, tax reduction etc
According to results (table 16) the areas (e.g Lesvos, Samothraki) are less satisfied than those areas that are close to Athens. This fact reflects that the lack of infrastructure, advertising, and other factors contribute to the under –development of agritourism. It is striking the fact that even within the same county there are significant differences concerning the level of satisfaction. This is dependent on the prior tourism development, for instance, in Petra –Lesvos- the farmers hosts are more satisfied from those that live in places that are more isolated and with no governmental support.
No gender differences were noticed and this was due to the fact that agritourism philosophy in Greece is a family issue.
On the contrary, satisfaction differences due to educational background can be attributed to the differences in self-image of university graduates who are occupied in agritourism business as a supplementary occupation.
Taking into account the Utilitarian theory (utility means a person’s subjectively experienced well-being or happiness), in the case of persons with similar preferences and expressive reactions we are fully entitled to assume that they derive the same utilities from similar situations, Harsanyi (1955).
Economists and managers Bernstein, Pollock(1985) place money high on the scale of motivators. Martin Luther observed that “everything is done in the world is done in hope”. Naturally, it is no good in generalizing as for some people money is not so important while for others it is indispensable. As far as the financial benefits are concerned, table L shows that a small percentage less than 25% is derived by agritourism business. The latter it may be a cause if dissatisfaction in case that hosts hoped to gain more money from agritourism. At this point, is worth mentioning that according to Francois Tacquard (1986) agritourism philosophy is this that tourism have positive results in agriculture activity without being enough to live on it. After all, the European subsidies (eg. LEADER) has as a purpose to help the farmer supplement his agriculture income and not substitute it. The state, also, view agritourism as a precious tool to implement a balanced sustainable regional development.
Furthermore, some hosts do not produce anything so they lack the chance to get additional income from visitors. The latter is owing to the fact that visitors in some areas come when the farmer has no any production to sell at that season. Certainly, this can be also a reason of dissatisfaction. Other hosts can be satisfied with the prospect of young people staying in the farm. It is also worth mentioning that income from farm tourism business is considered to be income from agritourism.
Finally, satisfaction derives from the economic and social revitalization of rural areas, Dernoi(1991). The infrastructure of the area along with the history, geography and natural resources can play instrumental role in the general satisfaction-well-being of people. Some of these areas, such as Arachova , Viotia, accommodates agritourism (actually Bed and Breakfast and self catering rooms) all year- round. Arachova is called “the Mykonos of winter” because during winter it is packed with skiers. Arachova is a traditional village at the food of Mountain Parnassos. Moreover, it is close to Delphi (Archaeological site and close to Athens) and boasts a good infrastructure. Therefore, natural resources and history can be combined towards the development of comparative advantage of an area.. Of course there are villages in Mytilini—North Aegean- that they host tourists only during high season, that is to say in August, when all central hotels are full.

With respect to location, satisfaction can be attributed to the development of an area and it is mirrored in per capita real GNP. This is a most widely use measure of the economic well being of people, Singh K., (1986). Specifically, according to European Commission (1999) (appendix A) the GNP of Greece and of each county of Greece falls to the following:
First of all, Arkadia (Peloponnissos) amount to 58,6% in 1996 from 60,7 in 1986.Mytilini (Lesvos) GNP reached 51,7% in 1996 from 44,0% in1986. Larissa and Karthitsa (Thessaly) from 55,2 in 1986 reached 62,7 %in 1996. Florina (West Macedonia) from 58,7% in 1986 amounted to 67,4 % in 1996.And Viotia, Euritania and Evia (Central of Greece) decreased from 73,5% in 1986 to 65,5% in 1996. of that of the average EU members GNP is statistical differences about the degree of satisfaction, this is attributed, to a great extent, to the degree of development of the area.
Finally, satisfaction derives from the economic and social revitalization of rural areas, Dernoi(1991). Thus, statistical measurement of the progress of rural development is important. Qualitative measures of development are needed to indicate the extent of economic and social well being. Moreover, to serve as a bench –mark for future planning monitoring evaluation and control of on-going programmes. Also, to facilitate spatial and temporal comparisons of development and to serve as a criterion for granting European subsidies.

5.3 Women’s agritourism cooperatives

With regard to gender issues, men seem more satisfied than women Women are responsible for running the lodging business. Previous studies of farm tourism hosts, have founded that women are more likely to be the household member responsible for the farm tourism business, Moran et all., (1993); Taylor & Little, (1997); Warren & Taylor (1999). First time the woman farmer due to agritourism business become independent of their family and contribute to the local development. The president of the cooperative of Petra, Mytilini, told me that when they began agritourism there were only 5 restaurants and today there are more than 55. Thus it follows that agritourism generates income in the local community. The development of the role of women in more traditional or isolated regions (revitalization of local customs, crafts, and cultural identity, increased social content in more isolated communities and opportunities for cultural exchange), is analyzed by Shaw and Williams, A. (1994).

Women’s agri-tourism cooperatives have enjoyed special care---advertising by the GNTO, education in managerial issues, help from Agriculture Bank, Ministry of Agriculture, Hellenic Organization for Small and Medium Enterprises, Secretary of Equality. When these cooperatives set out they had as an additionally purpose to continue local crafts—silk embroidery, weaving, wood engraving etc—(Vaviathis, G, Kondoyiorgos, Chr., Papakosntndinithis, L., 1992). Today, nothing of the above happens. Women are too busy and as I have been told there is no interest in young people who live in villages for learning. However, other farmers bring their products to cooperatives who undertake to sell them to guests. Thus, the local community is benefited. The cooperative acts as a market channel for farmer’s products.

From the above it follows that agritourism business is not the only factor of satisfaction for hosts. Additional factors, such as education, geography, infrastructure, history, natural resources are conducive to host’s level of satisfaction. Farm hosts satisfaction will be further enhanced provided that they will receive additional subsidies for renovation for lodging, advertising, tax relieves and special infrastructure.

Restriction of the research was the fact that there were no measures of validity and reliability of the satisfaction questionnaire, which was not standardized in Greece. Furthermore, interviews were much more effective in assessing variables, but due to the large sample, they were impossible to conduct.
Further research can be done regarding the satisfaction of visitors of farm tourism accommodation with independent variables, the age, their personal income, education, nationality.

5. 4 Proposals

First and foremost, given that satisfaction can derive from the economic and social revitalization of rural areas, Dernoi(1991), statistical measurement of the progress of rural development is important. Measures of development are needed to indicate the extent of economic and social well being. Moreover, to serve as a bench–mark for future planning, monitoring evaluation and control of on-going programmes. Also, to facilitate spatial and temporal comparisons of development and to serve as a criterion for granting European subsidies.
The GNTO should have the authority to control and monitor the operation of agritourism business. Besides, advertising and collection of statistics concerning each county separately on rural tourism should begin . Local development agencies that were created during LEADER programme should undertake the promotion of real rural areas that need development.
Second, farmers should be informed of what agritourism means. Farm tourism product can be enriched by connecting it with agricultural production, or environmental and cultural landscape conservation.
Third the local communities could develop additional income by offering agritourism support such as horses for horseriding, rural sport activities such as gliding, cycling, etc.
Last, agritourism can consist a comparative advantage for Greece, as there is the potential. Farmers hosts are very optimistic seeing the future of agritourism very favorable. The thing that must be done is a close cooperation of governmental and non-governmental organizations along with the local community.


Αyres, R (2000), Tourism as a passport to development in small states: reflections on Cyprus, International Journal of Social Economics, Volume, 27, 2 pp 114-133

Bernstein and Pollock A., Michael (May,5 1985), Executive Pay: Who made the most, Business Week, pp.78-103

Blaine, T. W., Golam, M., & Var, T. (1993), Demand for rural tourism: an explorator study, Annals of Tourism Research, 20, 770-773

Cater, E. and Lowman, G ( eds 1994), Ecotourism: Asustainable Option?, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Cisse M. T., (1984), ‘Le development du tourisme rural integre au Senegal’ in conference Le tourisme en milieu rural , Madrid p. 119-124

Clarke, J. (1996 a), Farm tourism, Insights, January D 19-24.

Clarke, J. (1996 b), Farm accommodation and the communication mix, Tourism Management, 17 (8), 611-616

Clough, M. (1997), Profiting from farm tourism, Western Morning News, 11 June.

Countryside Commission, (1987), A Compendium of Research Statistics 1984-1986, CCD 16, Chettenham: Countryside Commission.

Bramwell, W. and Lane, B., (1993), Sustainable tourism: and evolving global approach, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1 (1): 1-5.

Deegan, J.,& Dineen, D. A.,(1997), Tourism policy and performance-the Irish experience, London: International Thomson Business Press
Dernoi,L., (1991), About Rural and Farn Tourism , Tourism Recreation Research , 16,1 :3-6

Emerick, R, E., Emerick, C.A., (1994,) Profiting American Bed and Breakfast Accommodation, Journal of Travel Research, 32(4), 20-25

European Commission, (1999), The Greek Regions in European Union, 2nd ed. Belgium.

Farrell, B.(1992), Tourism as an element in sustainable development: Hana, Maui, in V. L. Smith and W. R. Eadington (eds.)Tourism Alternatives, Philadelphia: University of Pensylvania Press, 115 –32

Fleischer, A., & Pizan, A., (1997), Rural tourism in Israel. Tourism Management, 18,(6),367-372

Elson, M., Steenberg, C., & Wilkinson, J., (1995), Planning for rural diversification: A good practice guide, London: Oxford Brookes University and Department of the Environment.

Hannigan, K., (1994), A Regional Analysis of Tourism Growth in Ireland, Regional Studies 28, 2: 208-214

Harsanyi, J., (1955), Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics and interpersonal comparisons of utility, Journal of Political Economy 63, 309-321.

Hoyland, I. (1982), The development of farm tourism n the UK and Europe: Some management and economic aspects, Farm Management 4(10), 383-389

Hummelbrunner, R.,m & Miglbaner, E., (1994), Tourism promotion and potential in peripheral areas: The Austrian case, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1 and 2 ), 41-50.

Iakovidou, O., Emanouilidou, M., Staurakas,Th.,Simeonidou, P., Chrisostomidis G.-D., (2001), Trends of Tourism Market for Agro-tourism, Anatolia, International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 12,(2)

Ilbery, B., Boweler, I., Clark, G., Crockett, A., & Shaw, A., (1998), Farm- based tourism as an altermative farm enterprise: A case study from the Northern Pennines, England, Regional Studies, 32(4), 355-364.

Jansen-Verbeke, M and Nijmegen, K., (1990), The Potentials of Rural Tourism and Agritourism, Problemy Turystiki 13,1-2:35-47

Gazes, G, (1989): Les nouvelles colonies de vacances, L’Harmattan, Paris

Gousiou A., Spilaris, I., Kizos Th., (2001), Is Agrotourism “Agro” or “Tourism”? Evidence from Agrotourist holdings in Lesvos, Greece, Anatolia, International journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research,12(1)
http://www.anatoliajournal.com/previous/summer 01/6.htm

Katsaros D., (1998 Dec), The process of change in the livestock systems on small family farms in response to new development programs at a local level: The example of mountainous region of Evritania-Greece, 2nd LSIRD Conference on Livestock production in the European LFAs, Fray, Ireland.

Khader, B., (1987), Pour une sociologie du tourisme mediterraneen, Texte presente au 1er Congress Mediterranee de Sociologie Tourisme, Bologna.

Koontz Harold, Weihrich Heinz., (1990), Essentials of Management, Mc Craw –Hill, 5th ed. Singapore.

Lane, B., (1994), What is Rural Tourism ? in B Bramwell and B. Lane (eds) Rural Tourism and Sustainable Rural Development, Clevedon: Channel Review Publications: 7-21

Lanier, P., & Berman, J., (1993), Bed and Breakfast inns come of age, Cornell Hotel Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 34 (2), 15-23

Lozato-Giotart,J. P., (1990),Mediterranee et tourisme, Masson

McKannel D., (1973), Staged Authenticity: arrangements of Social Space in Touritst Setting, American Journal of Sociology, 79,p.589-603

McKannel D., (1976), A New Theory of the Leisure Class, Macmillan Press, New York p.1-16,39,56,92, 161-187

Mascha A., (1984), Vacances a la ferme en Autrich, Tourisme en milieu rural, Madrid, p.97.

Maude, A. J. S., & van Rest. D. J., (1985), The social and economic effects of farm tourism in the United Kindom, Agricultural Administration, 20, 85-98

May, V., (1991), Tourism, environment and development, Values, sustainability and stewardship, Tourism Management, 2,2 pp 112-18

Moran, W., Blunden, G.,and Greenwood, J., (1993, The role of family farming in agrarian change, Process in Human Geography 17, (1), 22-42.

Nitch, B. and van Staaten, J. (1995), Rural Tourism Development:Using a Sustainable Tourism Development Approach, in H. Coccosssis and P. Nijkamp(eds), Sustainable Tourism Development, Aldershot: Avebury:169-185.

Oppermann, M., (1995), Holidays on the farm: A case study of German hosts and guests, Journal of Travel Research, 34 (1), 63-67.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, (1967),Tourism Development and Economic Growth, OECD, Paris

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, (1980), L’impact du Tourisn sur l’environment, OECD, Paris

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, (2000), Environmental Performance Reviews—Greece’s Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development. OECD, Paris

Pigram, J. J.,(1993), Planning for tourism in rural area: Bridging the policy implementation gap. In D. Pearce, & R. W. Butler (Eds.), Tourism Research---critique and challenge (pp. 156-174), London: Routledge.

Pompl, W., and Lavery, P. (1993), Tourism in Europe: Structures and Developments, Wallingford: CAB International

Poon, A., (1993), Tourism, Technology and Competitive Strategies, Oxford: CAB

Prosser, R., (1994), Societal change and the growth of alternative tourism, Cater, E, Lowman, G Ecotourism: A Sustainable Option, Wiley, Chishester.

Rural Tours, (1999) Farm Stays: Experience New Zealand with New Zealanders.

Richard, R.C., (1983), The role o farm tourism in the less favoured areas of England and Wales. Exeter: University of Exeter Agricultural Economics Unit.

Shaw, G., & Williams, A. M. ,(1994), Critical issues in tourism: A geographical perspective, Oxford, Blackwell.

Singh Katar, (1986), Rural Development: principles, policies, and management”, Sage Publications, London.

Smith,V(1994), Privatization in the Third World: Small-scale tourism enterprises, in W. Theobald (ed) Global Tourism: The Next Decade (pp. 163-73), Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Strange, A. and Strange, J. (1999) WWOOF New Zealand: Living and Learning the Organic Way! Nelson: WWOOF New Zealand.

Tacquard F., (1986), ‘Les relations agriculture-tourism: Les fermes- auberges du Haut-Rhin’, Les relations agricultere-tourism, CEMAGREF, Grenoble p.118-119,136-147.

Taylor,C. N., and Little, H. M., (1997), Entreprenereuship in New Zealand Farming: A Study of Alternative Enterprises on Farms—Summary of Findings and Policy Implications, MAF Policy and Technical Paper 97/7a. Wellington: Ministry of Agriculture.

Thibal, S. (1988) Rural Tourism in Europe, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

Youell, R., (1998) Tourism: An introduction, Addison Wesley, Longman.

Warren, J. A.N and Taylor, C. N., (1999).Developing Rural Tourism in New Zealand, Centre for Research ,Evaluation and Social Assessment (CRESA) Wellington: CRESA

Weaver D. Br., (2001), ‘Ecotourism as Mass Tourism: Contradiction or Reality?’ Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42,(2) 104-112

Williams, A., and Shaw, G (991) Tourism and Economic Development:Western European Experiences, 2nd edition, London: Bellhaven Press

Whelan, T. (ed) (1991) Nature tourism: Managing for the Environment, Washington DC: Island Press.

World Tourism Organization (1993a), Yearbook of tourism statistics, 45th edition., Madrid: WTO

World Tourism Organization (1993b) Sustainable Tourism Development , Lessons for
Planners, Madrid: WTO.


E-mail: axuu012@minagr.gr

E-mail: med@leader.gr


file://A:/Agriculture-Rural development Leader+.htm.


.( http:// www.gnto. gr/1/06/0606/ea0606001.html)

http: www.elke.gr/elkeweb/static/tourism.htm maps of golf , marinas,etc.


Aντωνίου --Λαι¨ου Χρυσάνθη, (01/08/99)., “Το μέλλον του τουρισμού: Οι ήπιεςμορφές τουρισμού και ιδιαίτερα ο αγροτουρισμός θα μπορούσαν να συμβάλουν στην καλύτερη γνωριμία και επικοινωνία των κατοίκων της Ευρώπης”, ΤΟ ΒΗΝΑ ΤΗΣ ΚΥΡΙΑΚΗΣ.
http:// www.agrotourism.gr/ARU2.HTM

Βαβειαδής Ν., (1988) Εικόνα, Ανταγωνιστικότητα- Παραγωγηκότητα-Προοπτική του Ελληνικού τουρισμού στην Ευρωπαική Αγορά, ΕΟΤ

Βαφειάδης Γ. Κοντογεώργος Χρ. Παπακωνσταντινίδης Λ.Α, (1992), Αγροτουρισμός και Ισόροπη Ανάπτυξη : Μελέτες για την Αγροτική Οικονομία 45, ΑΓΡΟΤΙΚΗ ΤΡΑΠΕΖΑ, ΑΘΗΝΑ.

Ελληνικός Οργανισμός Τουρισμού (ΕΟΤ-ΚΕΠΕ), (Ιανουάριος 1994), Ομαδική Μελέτη του Τουρισμού, «Βασικό Εθνικό Χωροταξικο Σχέδιο του Τουρισμού» Φάση Πρώτη, Τεύχος 2

Αγγελής Γ., (2001), Ειδικό ένθετο Απριλίου, ‘Νέο σύγχρονο μοντέλο διοίκησης και οργάνωσής που προωθεί ο υπ. Ανάπτυξης Νίκος Χριστοδουλάκης ¨Μοχλός τουριστικής ανάπτυξης ο ΕΟΤ’, Αθήνα, σελ.4-5

Ηγουμενάκης Ν., Κραβαρίτης Κ.,Λυτρας Π.(1998), Εισαγωγή στον Τουρισμό, Εκδόσεις Inerbooks, Αθήνα, σελ.114.

Ηγουμενάκης, Ν., (1997), Τουριστική Οικονομία, Τομος Α’, Εκδοση Β, Εκδόσεις Interbooks, Αθήνα, σελ. 157.

Kακος θ., (2002) ‘Στρατηγική Ανάπτυξης Ελληνικού Τουρισμού’, Τουριστική Αγορά, 146,σ.74-91

Κασσιμάτη,Κ.,Θανοπούλου Μ.,Τσάρτας Π., (1995), “ Η Γυναικεία απασχόληση στον Τουρισμό”, Αθήνα.

ΚΕΠΕ, Υπουργείο Εθνικής Οικονομίας, Διάφορα Προγράμματα Οικονομικής Αναπτύξεως.

Κουσούνη Σ., (10/6/2001 α), ‘Η ελλειψη διοργανώσεων και υποδομών συνεδριακού τουρισμού και η μείωση των επαγγελματικών ταξιδιών’, Καθημερινή, Αθήνα.

Κουσούνη Σ., (31/3/2002 β), “Ουραγός” στο συνεδριακό τουρισμό η Ελλάδα’, Καθημερινή-Οικονομική, σελ. 3

Νικολάου Ν., (17/6/2001), ‘Προτεραιότητα ο Τουρισμός’, Το Βήμα. Σελ. Β6
ΞΕΝΙΑ, (2002), ‘Πρωτοβουλίες του Υφυπουργού Τουρισμού για το Παγκόσμιο
¨Ετος Οικοτουρισμού 2002’,ΞΕΝΙΑ, Μηνιαίο Ενημερωτικό Δελτίο, Αρ. Τεύχους 199,σελ.45

ΞΕΝΙΑ, (2001), ‘ Προπαρασκευτικό Συνέδριο του ΕΟΤ για το Παγκόσμιο Ετος Οικοτουρισμού 2002’, ,ΞΕΝΙΑ, Μηνιαίο Ενημερωτικό Δελτίο, Αρ. Τεύχους198, σελ. 47-52

Παπαγαρουφάλη Ε., (1985 –86), Η Ελληνίδα Αγρότισσα και Γυναικείοι Συνεταιρισμοί,Κέντρο Ερευνών για τις γυναίκες της Μεσογείου, Αθήνα, σελ.5-64

Παπανικολάου Ν., (17/3/2002), Μωσαικό κρίσης στον τουρισμό, ΕΘΝΟΣ ΤΗΣ ΚΥΡΙΑΚΗΣ.

Παυλόπουλος Παναγιώτης,(2001), Ο Χειμερινός τουρισμός στην Ελλάδα, ΙΤΕΠ,Επτάλοφος ΑΒΕΕ, σελ.68

Πάχτα Χρ. (3-4/12/1998), ‘Τουρισμός¨Ο Μοχλός Ανάπτυξης της Ελλαδας’, The Economist Conferences at Divani Caravel Hotel, Αθήνα.

Στεργίου Δ., (8/5/2002), ‘Φθίνουσα γεωργική ανάπτυξη’, Ελεύθερος Τύπος.

Τσάρτας Π.,(1991) Ερευνα για τα Κοινωνικά Χαρακτηριστικά της Απασχόλησης¨Μελέτη ΙΙΙ ,Τουρισμός και αγροτική πολυδραστηριότητα,ΚΕΠ, Αθήνα, σελ.45-50

Υπουργείο Ανάπτυξης (Ιανουαριος,2001), ‘Τουριστική Πολιτική 2000—2004¨Στόχοι και Προοπτικές’, Αθήνα σελ.22-26.

Φαληρέα Λ., (Μάρτιος, 2001) Ανάλυση για τον συνέδριακο τουρισμό, Τουρισμός & Οικονομία, 261, σελ. 22-28 .

Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια: