Food tourism subsegments: A data‐driven analysis

Abstract

The demand side food tourism literature is underdeveloped with gaps in knowledge regarding the particular characteristics of the “foodies” market. Shortcomings in previous approaches have inhibited determining whether the food tourism market is behaviourally homogeneous or whether it is more nuanced. The omnivore–univore theory frames this data‐driven analysis segmentation study. The 4 food‐related travel preference segments that emerge are interpreted as distinct. Our analysis focuses on 2 particular segments. This has practical implications, especially for food tourism stakeholders in marketing but also has implications for tourism researchers more broadly, to reconsider the previously assumed homogeneity of other travel markets.

Relevance of Gastronomy in the Tourism of a World Heritage Site: The Case of Sucre (Bolivia)

“…In accordance with scientific literature (Kivela and Crotts 2005;McKercher et al 2008;Björk and Kauppinen-Räisänen 2016;Robinson et al 2018), it has been observed that visitors with the highest gastronomic motivation have, generally, greater purchasing power. Therefore, these scientific studies confirm that this type of visitor, who is interested in gastronomy, has a higher level of demand in relation to aspects such as the authenticity of local gastronomy or the quality of the ingredients used.…”

“…The most relevant research recently conducted in this field is the research of Björk and Kauppinen-Räisänen (2016) and Robinson et al (2018). Björk and Kauppinen-Räisänen (2016) divide the tourists into three groups according to the degree of interest shown in the local gastronomy: First, experiencers, which is formed by those tourists whose knowledge of the local gastronomy is the main motivation to visit a destination; second, enjoyers, which includes visitors who declare a significant interest in the gastronomy and culinary experiences; and third, survivors, which includes those tourists who do not consider gastronomy to be an attractive element of a destination.…”

“…Björk and Kauppinen-Räisänen (2016) divide the tourists into three groups according to the degree of interest shown in the local gastronomy: First, experiencers, which is formed by those tourists whose knowledge of the local gastronomy is the main motivation to visit a destination; second, enjoyers, which includes visitors who declare a significant interest in the gastronomy and culinary experiences; and third, survivors, which includes those tourists who do not consider gastronomy to be an attractive element of a destination. For their part, Robinson et al (2018) gather tourists in terms of activities they do related to gastronomy at a destination, and in agreement with these activities, tourists are segmented into two groups: Experts and those who are unaware. These two groups differ from each other according to what travellers spend on the culinary activities offered in the place they visit.…”

“…In agreement with Park 2017and Robinson et al (2018), it would be necessary to complete a socio-demographic profile of the tourists who visit a specific location according to their interest in its gastronomy. Scientific literature has analysed the socio-demographic profile of the tourists by means of different research.…”

Market segmentation based on the environmentally responsible behaviors of community‐based tourists: Evidence from Taiwan's community‐based destinations

“…Market segmentation was proposed by Wendell Smith and is regarded as an effective way to identify customer groups with similar characteristics for marketing purposes (Ernst & Dolnicar, ). In the tourism context, the market can be segmented by travel motives (Dryglas & Salamaga, ; Robinson, Getz, & Dolnicar, ), recreation experience (Lee et al, ), host–tourist interaction (Kastenholz, Carneiro, & Eusébio, ), destination image (Stylidis, ), and ERB (Cvelbar et al, ; Dolnicar et al, ).…”