Beyond mistrust and competition—the role of social and personal bonding processes in sustaining livelihoods of rural tourism businesses: a case of the Peak District National Park

ABSTRACT

This paper theorises the significance ofsocial and personal bonding processes inpromoting sustainable resource-use andequitable tourism development usingresearch on personal and social bondingprocess and relationship marketing. Bylooking at small, rural tourism businessesin the Peak District National Park (PDNP) itdiscusses how in intricate ways, individualbusiness owners/managers are utilisingsocial and kinship ties to increase theirvisual presence and competitive position incontemporary markets. The paper describesthe significance of social and personalbonds as the respondents discuss how theirinformal affiliations have enabled them totap into additional resources and developproducts embedded in locally specificconventions that are more attractive tovisitors, and are also assisting them tomonitor each others’ progress throughinformal forms of regulation. Copyright ©2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Accepted April 2006

Keywords: relationship marketing; social andpersonal bonds; Peak District National Park.

INTRODUCTION

This exploratory research focuses on thekey interpersonal relationship constructsof social bonding, mutual trust and

honest, open communication, and the rolethese notions play in establishing relationshipcommitment among the owners/managers ofsmall tourism enterprises in the Peak DistrictNational Park (PDNP). The paper demon-strates how such relational commitment hasassisted owners/managers in mobilising com-munity networks, socio-economic resourcesand the informal enterprise through their ‘per-sonal communities’ of friends, family andassociates in creatively developing and sus-taining their businesses in spatially concen-trated clusters of socio-economic activity in aremote rural region of the PDNP. It also revealshow personal and social bonding processeshave helped them in assuming greater controlof tourism development by reorienting growtharound native resources and by setting upstructures to sustain the momentum of tourismexpansion locally after the initial ‘agency intervention’.

Previous research argues that the true proofof sustainably developing tourism lies increas-ingly in the reasonable progress of local com-munities in tourist destinations, with a focus on

Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCHInt. J. Tourism Res. 8, 263–277 (2006)Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/jtr.574

Beyond Mistrust and Competition —the Role of Social and Personal BondingProcesses in Sustaining Livelihoods ofRural Tourism Businesses: a Case of thePeak District National ParkGunjan Saxena*Scarborough Management Centre, The University of Hull, Scarborough Campus, Filey Road, ScarboroughYO11 3AZ, UK

*Correspondence to: G. Saxena, Scarborough Manage-ment Centre, The University of Hull, ScarboroughCampus, Filey Road, Scarborough YO11 3AZ, UK.E-mail: [email protected]

reducing tourism’s negative impacts and aug-menting the positive contribution of tourismbusinesses and residents (Stokowski, 1991;Butler, 1999; Jamieson and Noble, 2000; Ioannides, 2001). It is suggested that account-ing for the distinctive character of a destinationand the culture–nature dialectic that emanatesfrom the local sense of place can ensure its socialintegrity, the effectiveness of the marketingmediums used and the quality of the informa-tion itself (Norton and Hannon, 1997; Ashworth and Vood, 1994; Ioannides, 2001).This is significant as the business activity of thetourism industry depends on the promotion ofthe ‘saleable’ or appealing aspects of economic,social, cultural, natural and human structuresof the localities in which it takes place, manag-ing the hospitality for and guiding the activitiesof the visitors, providing them with goods and services to purchase during their stay.However, a great paradox in tourism develop-ment in rural regions is that its success mayactually lead to their demise. A destination’spopularity drawing increasing external interestand a correspondingly higher number oftourists can detrimentally affect the social andcultural fabric of local communities throughcommodification of culture, wherein peopleand their cultures become marketable com-modities. Given this scenario, the role of personal and social bonding processes is significant in shaping context-sensitive tourismdevelopment that is sustainable as well associally equitable, as social bonds are interwo-ven with the capacity to adapt to an ever chang-ing and challenging environment (Carter, 1998;2003). Thus they can enable owners/managersto assess their own strengths and weaknesses inthe face of shifting and exigent market condi-tions and accordingly adapt their marketingand promotional strategies.

EXPLORING SOCIAL AND PERSONALBONDING PROCESSES

Social bonds are a subset of affiliative or positive social behaviours, which in turn aremost simply defined by approach, rather thanavoidance or withdrawal. Positive sociality issometimes identified by the absence of defen-sive or aggressive behaviour (Witkowski and

Thibodeau, 1999). However, social behaviours,including social bonds, are active processes thatinvolve more than simply a failure to avoidanother individual (Carter, 1998). Several fea-tures are common to most definitions of socialbonds. Social engagement and individualrecognition are the first steps in social bonding.Greater degree of trust and emotional attach-ment to the partner contributes to the socialbonding process. Although the term ‘pair bond’implies only two partners, the tendency or will-ingness to form social bonds may extend to more than one partner (Witkowski and Thibodeau, 1999). Hirschi (1969), while exam-ining delinquent and criminal behaviours, putforth four social bonds that promote socialisa-tion and conformity. These include attachment,commitment, involvement and belief. The firstbond, attachment, refers to one’s interest inothers. One’s acceptance of social norms andthe development of social consciousnessdepends on attachment for other humanbeings. The second bond is that of commitmentand it involves time, energy and effort placedon conventional lines of action. In other words,the support of and equal partaking in socialactivities tie an individual to the moral andethical code of society. The third bond is involve-ment. This addresses a preoccupation in activi-ties that stress the conventional interests ofsociety. The final bond is that of belief and itdeals with conformity to a society’s valuesystem, which entails respect for laws, and thepeople and institutions that enforce such laws.For the purposes of understanding personaland social bonding processes, Kirchmajer andPatterson (2003) posited trust as instrumental infostering relationships based upon open com-munication, social bonds and commitment.Bejou and Palmer (1998) argue that empathy iscentral in forming and enhancing relationships.They expand on Altman and Taylor’s (1973)social penetration theory, which argues that‘relationships become deeper and more per-sonal as interactions proceed and time passes’(p. 236). Social penetration theory drawsheavily on the social exchange theory ofThibaut and Kelley (1959), which stipulates thatif perceived mutual benefits outweigh the costsof greater vulnerability, the process of socialpenetration will proceed. In other words, thehigher actors index a relational outcome, the

264 G. Saxena

Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 8, 263–277 (2006)DOI: 10.1002/jtr

more attractive the behaviour that might makeit happen ensues.

Wilson (1995, p. 339) defines social bondingas ‘the degree of mutual personal friendshipand liking’. Mummalaneni and Wilson (1991),in examining the impact of social bonding,found a positive correlation between depth ofrelational exchange in social bonds and actors’commitment to the relationship. Bejou andPalmer (1998) argue that social bonds aredeveloped at an emotional level that makes therelationship more resistant to intermittent fail-ures, and thus present a psychological exitbarrier. Generally, long-term associates will notdissolve the relationship unless there is aserious breakdown of service and communica-tions. Thus social and personal bondingprocesses offer individuals resources andadded advantage when doing business andconstitute an important transaction mode.They not only refer to the status and intensityof an ongoing relationship between two partiesbut also the network of social and businessconnections and include:

(i) the personal system of meanings that orig-inate in participants’ personality, values,opinions and attitudes;

(ii) the notion of continuing reciprocal oblig-ation over an indefinite period of time;

(iii) the favours that are banked, to be repaidwhen the time is right;

(iv) timely sharing of information betweenpartners involving mutual disclosure ofplans, programmes, expectations, goals,motives and evaluation criteria;

(v) the personal network or contacts andbonds with specific individuals and thecultural component in which the individ-ual actors are embedded;

(vi) social networks built on interactions andconsisting mainly of social exchanges and‘influence acceptance’, which is the degreeto which exchange partners voluntarilychange their strategies or behaviours toaccommodate the desires of the other(Blau, 1964; Anderson and Weitz, 1989;Bjorkman and Kock, 1995; Arias, 1998; Siuand Kirby, 1998; Witkowski and Thi-bodeau, 1999).

The literature on relationship marketing isquite relevant to this research because it

includes a detailed discussion and a prominentfocus on variables identified as crucial in socialand personal bonding processes (e.g. trust,commitment, attachment, empathy, socialexchange and friendliness). Although address-ing social exchange, the European IMP (Indus-trial Marketing and Research) Groupextensively mentions the importance of per-sonal contacts, the role of trust, commitmentand relational investments in business-to-business exchanges (Wilson and Mummala-neni, 1986; Hakansson and Henders, 1995;Ford, 1997). Gummesson (1996) describes socialand personal bonding processes as a ‘mega’relationship existing above purely economictransactions. Witkowski and Thibodeau (1999)contend that personal bonding entails the cre-ation of a ‘microculture’ shared by the partici-pants and facilitates information exchange,which can help businesses to respond better tonew opportunities and threats. The NorthAmerican researchers’ perspective on relation-ship marketing also emphasises that economicdealings are embedded within personal rela-tions and structures or networks of such rela-tions. Their studies have produced compellingevidence on the importance of ‘dependable’relationships in information sharing, trust andcommitment to the perceived satisfaction andother performance aspects of the business rela-tionships (Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Grundlachet al., 1995). Since the 1990s the Chinese termguanxi (meaning personal relationships or con-nections) has gained currency in relationshipmarketing. Although guanxi ties are not asstrong as familial and friendship bonds, theyare crucial in transmitting capital and informa-tion, governed by the thinking: ‘someday theremight be some benefit’ (Schoenberger, 1994;Arias, 1998). Social psychology and relatedfields outside relationship marketing have alsoaddressed the importance of trust and personalmeanings in interpersonal dyads, stressing thatrelationships are never a ‘done deal’ but con-tinually unfold and need constant action andreconstruction from the participants (Duck,1994). Collectively, these perspectives suggestthat social and personal bonding processes willbe most effective when:

(i) mutual fulfilment of promises goesbeyond the economic content to include

Rural Tourism Businesses 265


reciprocal personal favours and mutualprotection and enhancement of reputationand social status;

(ii) repetitiveness of interaction or exchangetends to foster and maintain ‘micro socio-economic’ orders, which produce ‘jointgoods’ that are profitable to exchangepartners;

(iii) the market environment is dynamic anduncertain in ways that affect future needs(demands) and offerings (supply) andbusiness owners/managers need toreview their own performance and theircompetitors’ performance, requiring themto close the gaps between what they offerand what customers expect.

There is a strategic rationale for personaland social bonding processes, which play animportant role in markets for social exchangesthat are notably ‘sticky’ — meaning thatpeople tend towards exchanging with thosethey have done business with in the past. As aresult, they involve rethinking the wholeprocess for delivering the service from an inte-grated process management perspective,taking into account market intelligence sharedwith partners. Closeness develops only if indi-viduals proceed in a gradual and orderlyfashion from superficial to intimate levels ofexchange as a function of both immediate andforecast outcomes.

Authors have argued the importance oflocally constituted social relationships such ascommunity ties, cultural traditions and powerrelationships in determining competitiveadvantage of a tourist destination in globalmarkets (Teo and Li, 2003). Bramwell andSharman (1999) listed the importance of con-sensus building as the key to reduce powerimbalances between stakeholders, when exam-ining the ‘collaborative approaches’ between1993 and 1995 initiated by the Peak TourismPartnership to establish a visitor managementplan for the Hope Valley in the PDNP. A closeexamination of tourism collaboration and part-nership case studies (Jamal and Getz 1995;Bramwell and Lane, 2000) and research specificto partnership networks (Selin and Beason1991; Waddock 1991; Selin and Chavez 1994;Stokowski 1994; Selin and Myers 1998) revealsseveral factors thought to expedite the forma-

tion of tourism partnerships and contribute totheir effectiveness. These include the role ofbetter communication networks, developingforums for cooperative planning, goal similar-ity, community spirit, shared vision, domainconsensus and interdependence, that are significant predictors of partnerships. Severalempirical studies on sustainable developmentof tourism have associated the use of depend-able relationships with partnership success(Selin and Chavez, 1993; Selin and Schuett,2000). Watkins and Bell (2002) when discussingthe different dimensions of business relation-ships in tourism describe them to consist of elements of competition, co-ordination andcollaboration depending on distinctly diverseand individual experiences of business ownersand managers.

Although previous research on tourism iden-tifies characteristics of successful partnerships,and different dimensions of business relation-ships among tourism business owners/man-agers, much of the work has ignored some ofthe preconditions and the in-depth nature ofsocial and personal bonding processes in part-nership building. This research explores differ-ent facets of personal and social bondingprocesses that enable the establishment of ‘net-works of trust’ and a positive impact on thelevel of co-operation among small-scaletourism businesses. Research results from anexploratory case study in the PDNP are pre-sented in the following sections. The attempt isto identify how personal and social bondingprocesses are assisting the owners/managers oftourism businesses in the PDNP to successfullyparticipate, be up to date with local andregional tourism initiatives, utilise advice andrelevant services through other enterprises,access market research and other providers’expertise, and play an active part in deliveringthe objectives of the ‘Peak District SustainableTourism Marketing Strategy’ (2002).

There are more than 1000 businessesengaged in tourism, ranging from pubs, hotelsand B&Bs to cafes, restaurants, visitor attrac-tions, outdoor pursuits providers, galleriesand shops. These provide thousands of localjobs and generate more than £500 million forthe local economy (Peak District National ParkAuthority, 2004). More recently, local tourismenterprises are being urged to boost their

266 G. Saxena


business by taking advantage of the strongtourism brand of the Peak District and activelyparticipate in the £1.5 million marketing cam-paign aimed at encouraging visitors to staylonger and increase their spending in the localeconomy. The campaign is spearheaded by thePeak District Marketing Initiative (2003), apartnership between the PDNP authority andlocal authorities — Derbyshire Dales, HighPeak and Staffordshire Moorlands councils.The partnership also works closely with thePeak District Sustainable Tourism Forum(2000), which represents both private andpublic sector tourism interests in the area tomonitor visitor needs (Peak District NationalPark Authority, 2005).

THE CASE STUDY AND THE SAMPLING METHODS

The PDNP is a protected landscape (WorldConservation Union Category 4), designatedin 1951 and covers an area of 555 square miles(143 800 ha) (State of the Park Report, 2000).The three case-study areas — Castleton,Bakewell and Tideswell — were chosen toreflect the peculiarities of the social and per-sonal bonding processes, and how they havebeen shaped by the structure of local projectstackling the most important economic, social,business support and training needs of thecommunity and giving rise to sustainableaction plans (see Figure 1).

The village of Castleton, a ‘honey-pot’ arealies in one of the more populated parts of thePDNP and is much visited in the summers.This village is renowned for its ancient castleand some of Europe’s most spectacularcaverns, which are open to the public through-out the year. The tourism product comprisesthe Caverns: the Blue John Cavern, Treak CliffCavern, Speedwell Cavern and the PeakCavern, marketed jointly by the local cavernowners. As opposed to Castleton, which isdependent on tourism, Bakewell, the largestmarket town in the centre of the PDNP hasmaintained its good mix of trade and com-merce, industry and agriculture which has sofar prevented it from becoming merely atourist town. There are over 70 shops includ-ing gift/retail shops, pubs, restaurants, bed-and-breakfasts and hotels, which cater for both

local shoppers and visitors alike (InformationFact Sheet 15, 1997). Tideswell, as opposed toboth Bakewell and Castleton, has a low-keytourism base, is a small market-town, andmakes an ideal base for walking and climbing.

A qualitative first stage was used to collectdata, which consisted of 29 semi-structuredinterviews designed to uncover the range ofreasons underlying personal and social bondingprocesses. The selection of the participants forthe interviews rested on purposeful sampling ofbusinesses to single out information-rich casesfor in-depth study (Patton, 1990). The purpose-ful selection of participants for the interviewsmainly relied on snowballing: identifying casesof interest from people who know people whoknow which cases are information-rich (Milesand Huberman, 1994). Three principles guidedthe selection of participants for semi-structuredinterviews. First, the emphasis was on the businesses, which although mainly family businesses are growth-oriented and driven byentrepreneurship. These microfirms, althoughsituated in a rural area, essentially aim to stay inthe market and are copiously using their socialand personal bonds to improve their commer-cial viability by jointly devising their marketingstrategies. Second, the focus was on the impactof the owners/managers’ previous experienceof bonding with other businesses on theircurrent relationships and networking links.Third, the sample included a range of busi-nesses across different time-scales to ensure thatthere was a balanced representation of both theolder and the newer businesses as well as toestablish if the temporal dimension did have animpact on the integration of business owners/managers into the local community (i.e. thenewer businesses feeling excluded from pre-established bonds and social networks in thearea).

The questionnaire was designed to consoli-date the research findings from the semi-structured interviews and to explore theawareness about the key issues emerging inthe interviews among a wider range of the par-ticipants. The questionnaire further helped tofocus upon the scale of the business activityand the level of the spatial distribution ofsocial networks and personal bonds in andaround the case-study areas. Out of a total of300 questionnaires administered in the three



268 G. Saxena


Figure 1. Location map of the three case-study areas in the Peak District National Park (based on OS mapping© Crown Copyright Ordnance Survey. All rights reserved).

case-study areas, 121 could be used in the finalanalysis, with 26 responses from Castleton, 71from Bakewell and 24 from Tideswell. The self-completion survey approach adopted in thequestionnaire indirectly helped in providing acost-effective means to construct local net-working patterns. For the purposes of thequestionnaire, a stratified sampling approachwas adopted to ensure an even representationof the local businesses from different sectors.To achieve this, the tourism related businesseswere divided into sector-based strata andrandom samples were taken from each stratum(see Figure 2).

Thus 121 business owners/managersincluded in the survey belong to these differentsectors. Together, they are initiating and sustain-ing widely varying links with each other in a bidto jointly market the PDNP as a competitivetourism destination. This sample ensured repre-sentation of business owners/mangers living inclose geographical proximity, but not necessarilyfunctioning in the same social cluster.

RESEARCH FINDINGS ON PERSONALAND SOCIAL BONDING PROCESSES INTHE PEAK DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK

Preconditions for personal and social bonding

Common goals, family and ethnic ties havecreated a social context in the case-study areas

in which further bonding can occur. Forinstance, family and ethnic ties have formed thepre-conditions for dependable ties in Castleton.Social relationships based on kinship ties addfurther value to the assessment of the commu-nity and are a contributing factor to networkingaimed at collectively marketing the area, espe-cially in preserving its heritage and sustain-ability. However, this effort to jointly promotethe heritage is relatively recent:

. . . mostly they are private companies.The caverns (namely Speedwell, Peak andTreak Cliff) . . . were at each other’s throatyears ago because they didn’t care muchabout their heritage. All they cared aboutwas filthy commerce, and they neglectedto tell people the heritage of the placebecause they weren’t educated them-selves . . . were mostly aggressive againsteach other. It is co-operation now. Theyare still the same families but it is two gen-erations down the line now. The youngerfolk are much more open-minded, liber-ated and educated and they are jointlymaking use of their heritage . . . instead ofmaking tourism in Castleton a cheapBlackpool sort of experience . . . and goodluck to them (Local Business Owner,Castleton).

Further, the scale economies, synergies,wider social benefits, prospects of additional



Accommodation

Hospitality

Transportation

Events and Attractions

Retail Trade

TravelServices

Outdoor recreation

Business andConferences

Figure 2. Tourism sectors included in the survey of local businesses.

income and threats from other attractions havealso strengthened personal and social bondingprocesses and led businesses to combine ser-vices. Faced with a disadvantageous marketposition because of low demand, and havinglimited scope to individually combat competi-tion from other destinations and attractions,many participants reported a growth insupport for local institutions such as theChamber of Trade in mitigating negative,external impacts:

. . . we are facing problems in terms ofdeclining visitor numbers . . . this isbecause of . . . all these big shoppingmalls in Manchester and other themeparks that have come up. You see yearsago, thirty or forty years ago, before theadvent of all these new attractions . . .other than going to the coasts, Blackpooland Skegness . . . the visitors used tocome out to Derbyshire. It remained asource of a holiday but now all thesefancy theme parks have come up andthere are only so many people to goaround. So the percentage of visitors isgoing to decline naturally. You have toaddress that and make this place moreinviting (e.g. cost wise, and also you havegot to provide parking), and all thismakes the chamber very essential . . . it issurvival . . . right down survival . . . it is avery, very important word (Local Busi-ness Owner, Tideswell).

More generally, this illustrates that asopposed to using active support from the localauthorities, or other public-sector bodies formarketing and promotion, local businesses fallback on ‘dependable relationships’ charac-terised by informal ties and social norms per-ceived to provide essential safety nets:

It is not what you know, it is who youknow that counts. In truth, who youknow has a great deal to do with whatyou know and when you know it. Yournetwork of colleagues, friends, mentorsand advisors can provide information,advice and feedback essential to max-imise business profits. You just can’t

progress as far or fast on your own (LocalBusiness Owner, Bakewell).

The emphasis is on exchange of shared values,beliefs, traditional knowledge, skills, culturalresources and practices that are a part of thelives of business owners/managers, and forma basis for social engagement and enterprisedevelopment. Thus personal and social bondshave not only consolidated traditional interac-tion patterns but enhanced local capabilities toparticipate in, negotiate with, and influencedevelopment thinking and practice throughlocal bodies such as Community Association,as is evident here:

. . . it (the Community Association) has beenaround in various forms for a long time.But every so often it disappears. Becauseyou can’t get enough local support con-tinuously over a period of time. It tendsto come back when something needs tobe done. It was revived last time with theaim of providing a village hall . . . it maygo flat for a little while. It tends to tickalong. And when something comes alongthat needs to be done, it goes up a gear(Local Business Owner and Member ofCommunity Association, Tideswell).

Further, new approaches to strengtheninglocal capabilities, such as efforts of businessassociations to provide training and technicalassistance to existing businesses and the pro-vision of start-up advice to help new busi-nesses have not only strengthened personaland social bonds amongst them but alsocreated vibrant and innovative market solu-tions to challenges facing them. For instance,business associations such as the RATS(Regional Attractions) and the PDP (Peak Dis-trict Products) based in Bakewell, local Cham-bers of Trade, in both Castleton and Tideswell,are providing a strategic toolbox to local busi-nesses in expanding their assets, sustainingnew patterns of tourism provision throughinnovative techniques to lobbying, and creat-ing new goods and services. Their marketingactivities are essentially aimed at linking localfood with place, events and specific agri-tourism initiatives. This is contributing to collective learning around specific issues such

270 G. Saxena


as (re)valorising local resources for tourismand reconfiguring marketing strategies toincrease their efficiency and creativity in targeting consumers. Some of the differentaspects of social and personal bondingprocesses among local business associationsand groups are summarised in Table 1.

These local groups are providing a sharedcontext comprising of social symbols, commonvalues and understanding, which reinforcesocial and emotional exchanges and sustainlocal commitment to a sharing of technical andcommercial experiences between the partiesinvolved. Thus it is the information and socialexchanges rather than the financial exchangethat are the critical aspects of the personalbonding process. What is valued most rests onseveral factors — on the trade-off betweenimmediate outcome and the relationshipfuture, the trade-off between relationshipfuture and the network position, plus thetrade-off between different ways of perceptionof value at each level (i.e. social as opposed tofinancial plus the risk involved in exchangeand also an actor’s willingness to take the risk).Based on the participants’ responses in thequestionnaire, frequency of mentions of keyattributes in strengthening social and personalbonding processes are identified in Table 2.

Table 2 clearly illustrates the importance thatrespondents attached to social bonds, trust andcommitment, which were identified as key intransfer of, exchange, and diffusion of marketintelligence and knowledge and also in creat-ing newer forms of knowledge essential forrebranding and repositioning to target differ-ent visitor segments. Thus social bonds arecharacterised by empathy, kinship, friendli-ness, attachment and belief in each other andpersonal involvement in local socio-economicactivity. Respondents stressed upon trustacquired as a result of previous history ofworking together to indicate honesty, accessi-bility to each others’ resources (e.g. time andskills) and open communication. They also putvalue on integrity, reliable support system,mutual concern for each other’s needs, com-mitment to quality, and joint contribution inimproving the image of the area as beingessential preconditions in personal and socialbonding (Table 2).

However, this embeddedness in traditionalinteraction patterns is not without conflicts.Relationships between the actors may be any-where on a spectrum from confrontational atone extreme to collaborative at the other asthey are continuously unfolding and undergo-ing the process of reconstruction. For instance,



Table 1. Different aspects of social and personal bonding

NetworkingActors Activities resources Personal bonds

RATS (Regional Marketing Strong networks Evolving amongst membersAttractions) Business and at the national, based on common marketingAssociation based in promotion regional and local and promotion visionBakewell levelPDP (Peak District Marketing Strong networks Very strong amongst membersProducts) amongst based on comfort level,Business Association members, support friendliness, informationbased in Bakewell from the PDNP exchange, shared expectations

authority, eligible and common marketing goalsfor grants at theregional level

Local Chambers of Lobbying Dependent on Very strong amongst membersTrade in Castleton membership based on comfort level,and Tideswell subscription and friendliness, trust, family ties

foster strong (in some cases)networks locallyamongstbusinesses

272 G. Saxena


friction amongst businesses is evident both inCastleton and Tideswell where businessowners who have recently moved in the areaare treated as ‘pariahs’ by businesses that con-sider themselves as more ‘local’ on the strengthof the number of years they have operated inthe area. Some were critical of incomers mainlybecause of what they perceived as a lack ofunderstanding of local history and apprecia-tion of the local way of life on their part:

. . . there are different factions in theChamber who I feel have got fairly selfishinterests because they are new comers . .. they are not here for the good of Castle-ton as a whole . . . they are here for short-term, make their business do good,whatever! They are waiting for their timeto retire so that they can sell their busi-ness and move on like nothing happenedbecause that is what they will do. But we. . . are here for my lifetime, and hopefullymy children’s lifetime. We are all here forthe village, but it is because we have all been in business for a long time inCastleton . . . it is our damn life not justour business (Local Business Owner,Castleton).

Overall, many participants were apprecia-tive of the ‘comforting presence’ of bodies suchas the local chambers of trade in Castleton andTideswell and newer networks such as theRATS and the PDP based in Bakewell, whichoffer representation to most businesses irre-

spective of their scale and nature of operation.These were described as providing vigour tolocal projects and presenting important path-ways in obtaining funding for local projects.

Corollary of joining-up and bonding

As an ongoing process, personal and socialbonds have led to a ‘microculture’ in the PDNPsignified by interactions and personal mean-ings based on friendliness, comfort-level andtrust. As the focus shifts towards vigorousmarketing of the PDNP as a tourism destina-tion, kinship ties that had little meaning in thelocal context are being mobilised by proactivelocal leaders to foster social-support relation-ships that transcend the meaning of simplesocial linkages. For example, Tideswell, which‘likes to call itself a practical market town ofpractical people’ has a history of proactivelyinitiating projects on its own. Recently, it hassecured funding from Sports England and thePDNP authority for a skateboarding park withactive involvement of local businesses andyoungsters in order to reduce antisocial behav-iour. In Castleton, the businesses havemobilised their social and kinship ties to col-lectively stage a sense of welcome at the newlyopened visitor centre by raising awareness ofthe landscape, lifestyle and recreational oppor-tunities. In Bakewell, social networks are seenas providing a means by which those excludedfrom or marginalised by formal systems canmake an input and apply some influence, as isevident here:

Table 2. Frequency of mentions of attributes in personal and social bondinga

Social bonds attribute n % Trust attribute n % Commitment attribute n %

Empathy 28 23.1 Trust 30 24.7 Integrity 17 14.0Kinship 5 4.1 Honesty 18 14.8 Reliable 26 21.4

support systemFriendliness 6 4.9 Accessibility to

resources 34 28.0 Mutual concern 14 11.5Attachment 2 1.6 for each otherBelief 32 26.4 Open 21 17.3 Quality and 24 19.8

communication overall imageInvolvement 22 18.1Total 95 78.2 103 84.8 81 66.7

a Percentages do not sum to 100% because multiple responses allowed.

We are an association and the aims of thegroup really are to help foster a feeling ofbelonging, because it can be a very lonelybusiness. For instance, being a craft work-shop you are stuck in your little work-shop most of the time . . . you might notsee anybody all week . . . sometimes itcan be a depressing sort of living and tobe able to get out for a weekend for anexhibition and belong to something likethe PDP . . . links you to others. It is busi-ness support as well . . . we do get quite abit of business spin-off from one another(Member of the PDP, a business associa-tion based in Bakewell).

Successful local milieus in all three case-study areas are generating a dynamic, collec-tive learning process. They are fast developinga capacity for self-sustaining innovation that isgenerating new products and enterprise.However, sometimes the social and personalbonds among business owners/managershave inevitably pulled some of them ‘in bedsthey would not normally get into’ but describethe process of ‘inviting them in’ as inevitable,as is evident here:

yes I am in partnership, by the definitionyou give it, with the Peak National ParkAuthority by virtue that they can affectmy business through interfering with it.My friends realise this too. What theAuthority does (e.g. by imposing envi-ronmental regulations and considering itto be right) can damage my business andthat of my mates. Now my business isn’texactly a very profitable one and it isn’t abig business but it is not a matter of bigbusiness. My business is my life becauseI live for the business. It is my enjoymentbut we here all know the Peak NationalPark Authority is capable of making deci-sions that can ruin it for all of us (LocalBusiness Owner, Castleton).

Thus the inevitability of some relationshipsintruding upon the interaction space of busi-ness owners/managers renders complexity tothe social exchange processes that is in partguided by calculative trust aimed at ensuringongoing profitable transactions and joint

investments. Although requiring these moreformal ties with public sector agencies, whatbusiness owners/managers describe as ‘self-appointed leaders hell-bent on co-ordinatingco-operation’ amongst them, they are never-theless using National Park led initiatives todeepen existing, traditional relations, and tocushion themselves against competition andfluctuating consumer demands. Thus in theface of dynamic change:

. . . these tourism businesses in Castletonwhich haven’t changed for three genera-tions . . . realise that there is a very goodreason why people aren’t coming innumbers; they used to. Because theyhaven’t changed . . . so they (the localcavern owners in Castleton) are consciouslytrying to modernise . . . saying this is notgoing to support my children if you don’tdo something now.

The diverse nature of recreation and tourismmeans that the industry is difficult for policymakers and planners to define and grasp con-ceptually (Hall and Page, 1999). Consequently,for the public sector bodies, the widespreaduse of social networks and personal bondsamong tourism businesses presents an oppor-tunity to fill in the gaps in the overall tourismpolicy, where such unrepresentative groupingshighlight the issues so far unaddressed inpolicy making. This is manifest here from oneof the responses of members of the PDNP:

. . . we (the National Park) can’t do every-thing on our own. . . . Therefore, we haveto include other people who have interestin the area, land-owners or people wholive in the area. And that is the reason. . . and also it is better leverage if we arelooking for external funding because ourManagement Plan focuses very much onpartnership working and that is wherewe (are) going . . . for example, our strate-gies have brought different actors (e.g.the National Trust, the local businessesand the PDNP authority) closer together.And it brings us all closer to the localpeople in the bargain.

Increasingly, these cross-sector ties charac-terised by overlapping networks (in which a



member of one group can gain access to theresources of another group because of criss-cross membership) are likely to provide busi-ness owners/managers with a greater role indecision making and thereby augment theirability to influence the economic developmentof their locality. Thus on the whole, socio-economic interactions in the PDNP involve different relational dimensions of bonding(or exclusive) and/or bridging (or inclusive).Bonding involves trust and reciprocity inclosed networks (in which members of net-works know other members), and helps theprocess of ‘getting by’ in life on a daily basis.The former may be more inward looking andhave a tendency to reinforce exclusive identi-ties and homogeneous groups. The latter aremore outward-looking and encompass actorsacross different divides. Whereas bonding canmobilise solidarity and reciprocity, bridgingnetworks, by contrast, are better for linkage toexternal assets and for information diffusion.Moreover, bridging social capital can generatebroader identities and reciprocity (Putnam,2000).

The changing nature of rural space in thePeak District National Park

As the preceding discussion and examplessuggest, social clusters as well as spatial prox-imity have contributed to the formation of bothformal and informal networks (Saxena, 2005)in the PDNP. However, there is now emerginga new geography of networks as a result of agrowing tourism industry in the PDNP. It hasincreasingly started attracting newer busi-nesses with fewer bonds to the national parkand older businesses. This influx of newerbusinesses with low social bonds to thenational park differs greatly from its past,when nearly every resident was heavilydependent on it; the Park being their solesource of income, the home of their familymembers, and the foundation of their sociallives.

Nevertheless, although newer businessesmay not have kinship ties in the PDNP, theyare likely to have many socio-economic peers:people who share a similar history of socialexclusion and see an opportunity to form alter-nate exchange networks based on the informal

ties and thereby benefit from ancillaries avail-able therein. The social and personal bondingprocesses are helping them to strengthen theeconomic and social ties with older businessesthrough shared interest in sustainably devel-oping local initiatives and opportunities thataccrue increased tourist trade in the region. Asprocesses advanced by economic practicalityand personal and social bonds are breakingdown some inequalities between and withingroupings in the PDNP, they are equally creat-ing/reproducing many others. Perhaps thebest that can be said is that the cleavages ofsocial stratification have become morecomplex and malleable, offering additionalprospects for integration to business owners/managers who are incomers.

CONCLUSION

Central to this discussion has been the endeav-our to identify the role of social and personalbonding processes as having the legitimacyand potential to foster equity in resource use,creating a broader leadership base in whichmore actors can be involved in decision-making, and thereby contribute towardslocally acceptable development and growth oftourism. This research has presented keyissues and meanings significant in the personalbonding processes that tourism businessowners/managers in the PDNP are engagedin. It underlines the importance of horizontalassociations, acceptance, affirmation andassurance in cementing mutual trust in per-sonal and social bonding processes, enablingthem to test their mutual compatibility,integrity, interdependence and social coopera-tion for shared benefits. The identified barriersto successful relationship building and net-working mainly relate to conflicts over notionsof representation, immediate costs of networkinvolvement (as opposed to possible longer-term benefits) and the difficulties involved inbuilding ‘vertical’ network links across local,regional and national levels.

The role that social and personal bondingprocesses play in local livelihoods is complex.More research is needed to assess their valuein generating economic capital and opening upa window of opportunity for businessesowners/managers to achieve effective, effi-

274 G. Saxena


cient and transparent service delivery andbecome more demand-driven in their opera-tion. It is also important to explore the linkagesbetween the local social structure and theresource base itself to assess their contributionin:

(i) stimulating social mobilisation, confi-dence and ownership among businessowners/managers through their partici-pation in the design and implementationof marketing programmes;

(ii) inspiring an inflow of external funds toencourage the involvement of smallerbusinesses who can benefit most fromcommon pool of resources;

(iii) linking with public sector agencies toprovide technical guidance;

(iv) providing a strategy to allow businessowners/managers autonomy in theirsphere of competence, while ensuringjoint responsibility for successful projectmanagement;

(v) facilitating the management of social ten-sions through ensuring that the legitimateinterests of dominant groups are met onlyif those of the weaker groups are also met.

However, the extent to which they are suc-cessful in achieving the above depends on ahost of factors such as the level of mobilisation,possibilities of collective action and supportfrom public-sector agencies. For instance, theirpotential to ‘scale-up’ successful activitiesremains limited in the PDNP because they arenot vertically integrated into the political struc-ture. Thus more research is needed onmicro–macro linkages, shaped both histori-cally and spatially, that can reproduce orchange relations among business owners/managers and public-sector based agencies.This can ensure that social and personal bondsare able to become sine qua non mechanismsthrough which resources are distributed andclaimed, and broader social, political andmarket logics governing control, use and trans-formation of resources are either reproducedor changed.

Furthermore, it is important to bear in mindthat no matter how extensive and long-lasting,relationships can end, sometimes suddenlyand other times gradually over a period oftime. Ending relationships frequently is a

process in its own right that differs fromsimply reversing the path of relationship for-mation. Personal relationships can declinerapidly when market forces make furthertransactions economically impossible. On theother hand, when a purely formal relationshipends, the personal ties can continue, even ifthey are largely dormant. These pave the wayfor future interaction processes. At the veryleast, former partners can exchange informa-tion about other possible contacts, and therebyextend each other’s networks. The relationshipbuilding is a slow, tortuous process, requiringa large investment of time and effort, but expe-dites problem solving and minimises the riskof uncertainty. The real pathways towards rela-tionship building lie in the recognition of theprocess as a long-term life-supporting coursefor all actors engaged in tourism provision asopposed to short-term manipulation of associ-ations for economic gains. This use of tradi-tional ties is also not without conflicts as at bestit may offer short-term protection against per-ceived ‘threats’, but in the long-term, it mightresult in closed networks, and possiblyobstruct actors’ capacity to innovate in thefuture.

REFERENCES

Altman I, Taylor DA. 1973. Social Penetration: theDevelopment of Interpersonal Relationships. Holt,Rinehart and Winston: New York.

Anderson E, Weitz B. 1989. Determinants of conti-nuity in conventional Industrial Channel Dyads.Marketing Science 8: 310–323.

Arias JTG. 1998. A relationship marketing approachto guanxi. European Journal of Marketing 32:145–156.

Ashworth GJ, Vood H. 1994. Marketing and Place Promotion. In Place Promotion, Gold JR, Ward SV (eds). John Wiley and Sons: New York.

Beatty SE. 1993. Relationship selling in retailing.Arthur Andersen Retailing Issues Letter 5: 1–3.

Bejou D, Palmer A. 1998. Service failure and loyalty:an exploratory empirical study of airline cus-tomers. Journal of Services Marketing 12: 7–22.

Blau P. 1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life. Wiley:New York.

Bramwell B, Lane B (ed.). 2000. Tourism Collaborationand Partnerships: Politics, Practice and Sustainabil-ity. Channel View: Clevedon.



276 G. Saxena


Bramwell B, Sharman A. 1999. Collaboration inLocal Tourism Policymaking. Annals of TourismResearch 26: 399–415.

Butler R. 1999. Sustainable tourism: a state-of-the-art review. Tourism Geographies 1: 7–25.

Carter CS. 1998. Neuroendocrine perspectives onsocial attachment and love. Psychoneuroen-docrinology 23: 779–818.

Carter CS. 2003. Biological perspectives on socialattachment and bonding. Dahlem Workshop onAttachment and Bonding: A New Synthesis, Berlin,28 September–3 October.

Duck S. 1994. Meaningful Relationships: Talking Senseand Relating. Sage: London.

Ford D (ed.). 1997. Understanding Business Markets:Interaction, Relationships and Networks. TheDryden Press: London.

Grundlach GT, Achrol RS, Mentzer JT. 1995. Thestructure of commitment in exchange. Journal ofMarketing 59: 78–92.

Gummesson E. 1996. Toward a theoretical frame-work of relationship marketing. In Development,Management and Governance of Relationships, ShethJN, Soellner A (eds). Humboldt Universitaet:Berlin; 5–18.

Hakansson H, Henders B. 1995. Network dynamics:forces and processes underlying evolution andrevolution in business networks. In Business Mar-keting: an Interaction and Network Perspective, MollerKE, Wilson DT (eds). Kluwer: Boston. 62–78.

Hall CM, Page S. 1999. The Geography of Tourism andRecreation. Routledge: London.

Hirschi T. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. University ofCalifornia Press: Los Angeles.

Ioannides D. 2001. Sustainable development andthe attitudes of tourism stakeholders. In Tourism,Recreation and Sustainability. Linking Culture andthe Environment, McCool SF, Moisey RN (eds).CABI Publishing: Wallingford.

Information Fact Sheet 15. 1997. Park ManagementCommittee, Recreation and Education Direc-torate: Bakewell.

Jamal TB, Getz D. 1995. Collaboration Theory andcommunity tourism planning. Annals of TourismResearch 22: 186–204.

Jamieson W, Noble A. 2000. A Manual for SustainableTourism Destination Management. CUC-UEMProject: AIT.

Kirchmajer L, Patterson PG. 2003. Interpersonal com-munication, social bonding and relationship commit-ment in small professional service enterprises: a clientperspective. Working Paper, School of Marketing,University of New South Wales, Sydney: Australia.

Miles MB, Huberman AM. 1994. Qualitative DataAnalysis: a Source Book of New Methods. Sage:London.

Morgan RM, Hunt SD. 1994. The commitment-trusttheory of relationship marketing. Journal of Mar-keting 58: 20–38.

Mummalaneni V, Wilson DT. 1991. The influence of aclose personal relationship between a buyer and a selleron the continued stability of their role relationship.Working Paper, The Institute for the Study ofBusiness Markets, The Pennsylvania State University.

Narayan D. 1999. Bonds and Bridges: Social capital andpoverty. World Bank: Washington, DC.

Norton BG, Hannon B. 1997. Environmental values:a place-based approach. Environmental Ethics 19:227–246.

Patton MQ. 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and ResearchMethods. Sage Publications: London.

Peak District National Park Authority. 2004. VisitPeak District Management Plan. Park ManagementCommittee, Recreation and Education Directorate: Bakewell.

Peak District National Park Authority. 2005. PeakDistrict Asset Management Plan.

Peak District Sustainable Tourism Marketing Strat-egy. 2002. Park Management Committee, Recre-ation and Education Directorate: Bakewell.

Putnam RD. 1998. ‘Foreword’. Housing Policy Debate9(1): v–viii.

Putnam R. 2000. Bowling Alone: the Collapse andRevival of American Community. Simon and Schuster: New York.

Saxena G. 2005. Relationships, networks and thelearning regions: case evidence from the PeakDistrict National Park. Tourism Management 26:277–289.

Schoenberger K. 1994. Networking pays off forChinese. Los Angeles Times. 4 October (p. 8).

Selin S, Beason K. 1991. Inter-organisational rela-tions in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research. 18:639–652.

Selin SW, Chavez D. 1993. Recreation partnershipsand the USDA Forest Service: managers’ percep-tions of the impact of the National RecreationStrategy. Journal of Park and Recreation Administra-tion 11: 1–8.

Selin SW, Chavez D. 1994. Characteristics of successful tourism partnerships: a multiple casestudy design. Journal of Park and Recreation Admin-istration 12: 51–62.

Selin SW, Myers NA. 1998. Tourism marketingalliances: member satisfaction and effectivenessattributes of a regional initiative. Journal of Traveland Tourism Marketing 7: 79–94.

Selin SW, Schuett MA. 2000. Modeling stakeholderperceptions of collaborative initiative effective-ness. Society and Natural Resources 13: 735–745.

Siu W, Kirby DA. 1998. Approaches to small firmmarketing. A critique. European Journal of Market-ing 32: 40–60.

State of the Park Report. 2000. Park ManagementCommittee, Recreation and Education Direc-torate: Bakewell.

Stokowski PA. 1991. Sense of place as a social con-struct. Paper presented at the National Recreationand Parks Association Research Symposium, Baltimore, Maryland.

Stokowski PA. 1994. Leisure in Society: a NetworkStructural Perspective. Mansell: London.

Teo P, Li LH. 2003. Global and local interactions intourism. Annals of Tourism Research 30: 287–306.

Thibault JW, Kelley HH. 1959. The Social Psychologyof Groups. Wiley: New York.

Waddock SA. 1991. Correlates of effectiveness andpartnership satisfaction in social partnerships.

Journal of Organisation Change Management 4:74–89.

Watkins M, Bell B. 2002. The experience of formingbusiness relationships in tourism. The Interna-tional Journal of Tourism Research 4: 15–28.

Wilson DT. 1995. An integrated model ofbuyer–seller relationships. Journal of the Academyof Marketing Science 23: 335–345.

Wilson DT, Mummalaneni V. 1986. Bonding andcommitment in supplier relationships: a prelimi-nary conceptualisation. Industrial Marketing andPurchasing 1: 44–58.

Witkowski TH, Thibodeau E. 1999. Personal bondingprocesses in international marketing relationships.Journal of Business Research 46: 315–325.

Woolcock M. 2000. Why should we care about socialcapital? Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration98: 17–19.



Documents

Beyond mistrust and competition—the role of social and personal bonding processes in sustaining livelihoods of rural tourism businesses: a case of the Peak District National Park