Spatial Planning of Tourism Development in Rural Areas of Markazi Province

1. Introduction
Sustainability of rural tourism requires basic and spatial planning studies. Due to lack of planning for participation of local communities in the process of rural tourism development, tourism has not been able to motivate the economic growth of Iranian villages and sustainable livelihood of their villagers. 25 villages of the Markazi Province have introduced as tourism destinations. Many others have potential or realized capacities and heritages for tourism in historical, cultural and natural contexts, all 130 are identified and investigated in this study. The purpose is to classify these villages for strategic planning towards the sustainable development of tourism and to answer the question of which villages are the real potentials for tourism development, its long-term sustainability and contribute to the livelihoods of their residents? Further, what is the causal path of their tourism development?
2. Methodology
The present study focuses on 130 villages of Markazi province that have been introduced as key villages of rural tourism or have potential in different types of tourism. Data were gathered primarily through a survey and field operations. To this end, a comprehensive worksheet on the situation and accessibility of villages, various aspects of structural and human requirements needed for the formation and prosperity of tourism, the types of attractions and potentials, any related activities and businesses, related products and events, incentives and barriers to the development of different types of rural tourism at the provincial level, has designed, validated and completed interviewing the local village managers.
3. Results
The variables and indicators were entered into the statistical model of factor analysis to reduce the dimensions of data. Three factors of "tourism heritage and attractions", "tourism employment and entrepreneurship" and "tourism infrastructure and facilities" were extracted as distinct prerequisites, independent and complementary aspects of rural tourism development. The first and third factors are in fact necessary and sufficient conditions for the formation of rural tourism and the second one is the result and outcome of its favorable and sustainable development. Based on positive or negative factor scores, the villages were divided into four distinct groups. In the best situation, in all three areas, they received positive scores in the second negative in one, then they only had positive scores in one field, and in the most unfavorable situation none of the three aspects are positively scored. Also, by structural and causal analysis of collected survey data, the proposed theoretical path for rural tourism development in rural provinces was not confirmed in villages lacking talents and priorities and was confirmed for talented and priority villages with superiority of the role and position of history and culture over natural heritages.
4. Discussion
Only 10 villages were positively scored in all three respects of "attraction and heritage potentials", "supporting facilities" and "entrepreneurship", which implicitly denotes that in addition to the development of tourism, it has also led to the rural development and it can be hoped for sustainability of tourism development in them. This small number shows that the rural tourism has unrealistically overstated both in the statements of policy-makers and executives, and in the academic literature. This group is suitable for more deliberate policies, more investments, introductions and promotions and proper branding. Among these, the situation in the villages of Anjdan, Ravanj, Dehno, and Alvir is very significant. However, none of the villages in this group have had a very prominent status in terms of employment and entrepreneurship, and this field still requires more and more deliberate reflection and planning. Contrarily, for the fourth group of villages, at least in the short term, the tourism is not an appropriate and viable economic option to improve the livelihood and income of their residents, and planning or investing in their tourism development will not be rational. In the more numerous villages of the third group, each of which has a better situation than average and positive score in one of three aspects, tourism will not have much priority for planning as the driver of the development. In contrast, the most important finding of the present study is identification of the second group villages with the highest number (50 villages), divided into three distinct categories, each in two areas of three aspects identified for sustainability of tourism development and needs planning to strengthen the third dimension in order to realize and stabilize tourism. Among the top villages in terms of attractions and supporting facilities and weakness in job creatin, the Vafs in Komijan county, the top villages in the fields of attraction and employment but requiring more facilities, the Ghalhar villages in Delijan county, Khorheh in Mahallat and Taraz-Nahid in Saveh, and villages that despite the lower attraction status are higher in the fields of facilities and employment, the Abgarm village of Mahallat and Samqavar and Chahraghan in Komijan, they have more prominent situations than other villages and are placed in the top priorities of planning.
5. Conclusion
Rural tourist destinations differ in terms of the ability to attract tourists and according to the history, valuable heritages and attractions of nature and culture, each responsive to specific parts of the market. Spatial analysis is one of the requirements of sustainable development of tourism and avoidance of spatial inequalities. Considering and estimating the carrying capacity of the areas, economic infrastructures, the ability to supply other products needed by tourists, the study and estimation of the facilities and special tourism infrastructure in residential destinations are important factors in tourism-based strategic planning. Inappropriately, the regional and spatial planning of tourism development is limited only to the capability-measuring of tourism attractions. To change this superficial view, identification and planning of rural tourism destinations in accordance with different capabilities and appropriate planning in order to effective use of them is necessary. All prioritized villages in this study are suitable targets for foresight of rural tourism development programs in the province, but not all are equally important. More accurate prioritization of this group, based on the type of tourism and providing appropriate strategic and operational plans, requires further studies with survey approach.