Profile of rural tourism consumers in Serbia and Austria1

In order to achieve successful positioning, rural tourism managers and marketers need to understand consumer behaviour. Above all, they need to answer the question of which customer profiles are suitable to particular tourist destinations There are three types of statistical measurement used for research into consumer, i.e. tourist behaviour, and those are volume, value and profile. A profile encompasses characteristics of the consumers per se and characteristics of trae. The aim of the paper is to define the profile of rural tourism consumer based on the results of the conducted research, taking into account two socio-demographic characteristics of the consumers – age and education level in relation to three characteristics of travel – frequency of engaging in rural tourism, travel companions and information sources used to plan the trip. The research encompassed 150 respondents each from Serbia and Austria respectively. Cross-tabulation method was used for testing the set hypotheses


Introduction
As a separate branch of tourism, rural tourism can be defined as hospitality providing rural environment for consumers (Erdeji et al., 2013). Despite the fact that consumers, i.e. tourists, experience the "quaint" lifestyle during their visits to tourist destinations, a need imposes itself to adapt the offer to their needs and expectations (Grubor et al., 2019) as a rule, the offer of rural tourism encompasses festivals, events, as well as manufacture and sale of handicrafts and agricultural products. It also includes numerous additional activities arranged by rural hosts such as hunting, fishing, horse-riding, walking, even wellness (Đorđević et al., 2019;Quendler, 2020).
A more intense development of rural tourism in Europe started in the second half of the 20 th century, as a results of consumers' enormous wish to relate to nature, discover new landscapes, new cultures and customs. Nowadays, it accounts for a noteworthy portion of the global tourist offer. An estimation of the share of consumers of rural tourism in the total number of tourists is 3% on the global level and 25% within the EU (Radović & Vasiljević, 2018). Rural tourism in Serbia takes up almost 25% of all forms of tourist activities (Stepanov et al., 2018) whereas rural tourism in Austria accounts for more than 80% of Austrian national tourism (Breiling, 2005).
Rural tourism managers and marketers should take into account what kind of consumers they want to attract for a particular rural tourist destination. In other words, they need to answer the question, what is the profile of those consumers? Consumers of rural tourism in Serbia and Austria are the subject of this paper. The aim was to define the profile of the rural tourism consumer based on the results of the conducted research, taking into account two socio-demographic characteristics of the consumer -age and education levelin relation to three characteristics of travel --frequency of engaging in rural tourism, travel companions and information sources used to plan the trip. In this, the research was limited to two forms of rural tourism -homesteads and wineries.

Theoretical background
In order to achieve successful positioning rural tourism managers and marketers need to understand consumer behaviour. Necessary information can be obtained by researching habits, desires and needs of consumers of rural tourism. Cooper & Schindler (2006) propose three types of statistical measurement used for research into consumer behaviour of tourists, and those are volume, value and profile. Volume includes elements such as the number of overnight stays and average duration of visit. Value includes all elements pertaining to the budget of the intended travel, such as the amount of money spent per day, the amount allocated for lodging, dining etc. Profile, as statistical measurement, incorporates the characteristics of the consumers themselves and the characteristic and the characteristics of the travel.
Socio-demographic factors frequently used in the process of forecasting tourists' behaviour patterns are: age, gender, family life cycle, education and income (Colins & Tisdell, 2002;Foot, 2004;Ma et al., 2018;Kara & Mkwizu, 2020). According to Koteski et al. (2017) there are multiple types, i.e. profiles of consumers of rural tourism: day-trippers, visitors on a short holiday, families, elderly visitors, special interest tourists and educational groups. Further, Đenadić et al. (2016) deduce that the majority of the consumers of rural tourism are families with children and couples, and the second largest are groups of friends and young people.
On the other hand, there are several types, i.e. forms of rural tourism. What is significant from the aspect of this paper are homesteads and wineries. Farm, i.e. homestead tourism is characteristic of Vojvodina and features as a well-developed and popular rural tourism product (Radović & Vasiljević, 2018). Homesteads used to be isolated, plain farms. Today, some of them are Skansen-like museums with a diversity of heirloom objects, household furnishings and farming tools. Farms and homesteads have retained the traditional lifestyle while adapting it to the modern way of life, so that many of them have swimming pools, sports facilities, fish ponds and miniature ZOOs. (Medojević et al., 2011). From the cultural and tourist point of view, homesteads are distinctive marks of the Province of Vojvodina. (Vujko et al., 2017). Wine tourism refers to travelling down wine routes (Radović & Vasiljević, 2018) and includes vine cellars, wine tasting, culinary experience, leisure and cultural activities (Vasiljević & Vujović, 2012). The main motivation of this branch of rural tourism is to sample local cuisine and wine (Hall et al., 2002;Erdeji et al., 2013).

Methodology
The aim of the paper is to point to the existence of differences in consumer/tourists' age and education levels in relation to frequency of engaging in rural tourism, travel companions and sources of information the consumers use when planning and making decisions on visiting particular tourist destinations. The paper presents a part of the results of research conducted on convenience samples of 150 respondents each od different and education levels from the territories of Serbia and Austria. The only condition for participating in the research was that the respondents had visited a rural tourist destination in the past two years. In Serbia, this condition was limited to homesteads and wineries in Vojvodina, or wineries around Vienna. The research was conducted in April and May, by sending an online questionnaire consisting of three parts, drafted and adapted from the questionnaire used by Polo Pena et al. (2012) and Alcaniz et al. (2009) in their research studies. Results presented in this paper were obtained based on data from the first two parts of the questionnaires regarding respondents' socio-demographic characteristics and characteristics of travel. The presentation of characteristics of respondents included in this research is given in Table 1.
The majority of respondents in Serbia were aged between 30 and 39 (37.3%) with a bachelor's degree (45.3%), while the majority of respondents in Austria were aged between 18 and 29 (35.3%) with a Bachelor's degree (49.3%). The majority of the respondents in Serbia (36.0%) and Austria (42.0%) visit rural tourist destinations once or twice a year. Respondents in both countries travel most often with their families (50.7% in Serbia, 60.0% in Austria), and Internet is the most frequently used information source when planning a trip (49.3% in Serbia, 52.0% in Austria).
Based on the analysed theoretical background and set research objective, the following hypotheses were proposed: H1: Younger respondents visit rural tourist destinations and use the Internet for planning visits to rural tourist destinations more often, whereas all age groups visit rural tourist destinations with families most often.
H2: Respondents with Bachelor's degrees visit rural tourist destinations more often, and together with respondents with completed secondary school and Master's degrees use the Internet for planning visits to rural tourist destinations, while all education levels of respondents visit rural tourist destinations with families most often

Source: the authors' calculation
The hypotheses were tested by means of cross-tabulation method. The statistical software used for data processing and testing the proposed hypotheses is IBM SPSS version 21. Table 2 presents the differences in frequency of visiting tourist destinations according to the respondents' age. Based on the cross-tabulation of categorical variables Frequency Of Engaging In Rural Tourism, (i.e. Frequency of Visiting Tourist Destinations) and Respondents' Age in Serbia, the most respondents aged 30 to 39 (34.3%) go once in two or three years, the most respondents aged 30 to 39 (38,9%) go once or twice a year, the most respondents aged 18 to 29 (32,4%) go three or four times a year, and the most respondents aged 30-39 (48,1) go more than four times a year. All age groups (except respondents aged 60 and up) mostly visit rural tourist destinations once or twice a year).

Results and discussion
In Austria, the most respondents aged 40 to 49 (33.3%) go once in two or three years, the most respondents aged 18 to 29 (41.3%) go once or twice a year, the most respondents aged 30 to 39 (47.4%) go three or four times a year, whereas the most respondents aged 18 to 29 (43.2%) go more than four times a year. All age groups mostly visit rural tourist destinations once or twice a year).
It can be established that younger groups of respondents (up to 39 years of age) visit rural tourist destinations more often (three, four or more times a year). Table 3 presents the difference in travel companions according to the respondents' age. Based on cross-tabulation of categorical variables Travel Companions and Respondents' Age in Serbia, respondents aged 30 to 39 (50.0%), and respondents aged 60 and up (50.0%) travel alone most often, respondents aged 18 to 29 (29.0%) and respondents aged 30 to 39 (29.0%) travel with a partner, respondents aged 30 to 39 (39.5%),) travel with families most often, respondents aged 30 to 39 (34.2%) travel with friends most often, and 3 respondents aged 30 to 39 travel with other companions (100.0%).
It can be established that all age groups of respondents in both countries visit rural tourist destinations with families in most cases. Table 4 presents the differences in information sources used by consumers when planning visits to rural tourist destinations according to the respondents' age.

Source: the authors' calculation
Based on cross-tabulation of categorical variables Sources Used by Consumers when Planning Visits to Rural Tourist Destinations and Respondents' Age in Serbia, the Internet is used most often by respondents aged 30 to 39 (36.5%) friends' and relatives' recommendations are used most often by respondents aged 30 to 39 (33.9%), whereas planning travel based on their own experience is practiced most often by respondents aged 30 to 39 (50.0%).
In Austria, the Internet is used most often by respondents aged 18 to 29 (39.7%), friends' and/or relatives' recommendations are used most often by respondents aged 30 to 39 (32.7%), planning travel based on their own experience is practiced most often by respondents aged 18 to 29 (35.3%), newspapers/magazines/catalogues are used by 1 respondent aged 60 and up (100%), and travel agencies are mostly consulted by respondents aged 18 to 29.
It can be established that respondents aged up to 49 use the Internet for planning visits to rural tourist destinations, most often, whereas respondents aged 50 and up mostly listen to friends' and relatives' recommendations when planning visits to rural tourist destinations.
Based on the results obtained by cross-tabulation, it can be concluded that respondents aged up to 39 visit rural tourist destinations more often, that all groups of respondents visit rural tourist destinations with families most often; furthermore, that respondents aged up to 49 use the Internet most often to plan visits to plan visits to rural tourist destinations, whereas the elderly mostly listen to friends' and relatives' recommendations when planning visits to rural tourist destinations. Based on cross tabulation of categorical variables Frequency of engaging in rural tourism (i.e. visits to rural tourist destinations) and Respondents' education levels in Serbia, respondents with Bachelor's degrees (34.3%) go once in two or three years most often, respondents with Bachelor's degrees (55.6%) go once or twice a year most often, respondents with Bachelor's degrees (38.2%) go three or four times a year most often, respondents with Bachelor's degrees (48.1%) go more than four times a year. Groups of respondents with elementary or secondary education visit rural tourist destinations in most cases once in two or three years, while respondents with Bachelor's or higher degrees visit rural tourist destinations in most cases once or twice a year.
In Austria, respondents with Bachelor's degrees (45.2%) go once in two or three years most often, respondents with Bachelor's degrees (54.2%) go once or twice a year most often, respondents with Bachelor's (31.3%), Master's (31.3%) and PhD degrees (31.3%) go three or four times a year most often, and respondents with Bachelor's degrees go more than four times a year. Groups of respondents with elementary education and PhD degrees visit rural tourist destinations in most cases once in two or three years whereas respondents with Bachelor's or Master's degrees visit rural tourist destinations in most cases three or four times a year.
It can be established that respondents with Bachelor's degrees visit rural tourist destinations more often (three, four or more than four times a year). Table 6 presents differences in travel companions according to the respondents' education levels. In Austria, 1 respondent with Bachelor's degrees travels alone most often, respondents with Bachelor's and Master's degrees (34,5%) travel with partners most often, respondents with Bachelor's degrees travel with families (48,9%) most often, respondents with Bachelor's degrees travel with friends (62,1%) most often, and 1 respondent with Bachelor's degrees (100.0%) travels with other companions.
It can be established that respondents of all education levels in both states visit rural destinations with families most often. Table 7 presents differences in information sources used by consumers when planning visits to rural tourist destinations according to respondents' education levels. In Austria, the Internet is used most often by respondents with Bachelors' degrees (38.8%) planning travel based on their own experience is practiced most often by respondents with Bachelor's degrees (58.8%), newspapers/magazines/catalogues are used by one respondent with a PhD degree (100.0%), and travel agencies are consulted most often by respondents with Bachelor's degrees (800%).
It can be established that, in both countries, respondents with completed secondary school, Bachelor's and Master's degree plan visits to rural tourist destinations most often based on their own experience and friends' and/or relatives' recommendations, whereas respondents with PhD degrees plan visits to rural tourist destinations based on friends' and/or relatives' recommendation most often.
It can be concluded based on the results obtained by cross-tabulation that respondents with Bachelors' degrees visit rural tourist destinations more often, that all groups of respondents visit rural tourist destinations with families, that respondents with completed secondary schools, Bachelor's and Master's degrees use the Internet most often to plan visits to rural tourist destination, those with elementary education, in most cases, plan visits based on their own experience and friends' and/or relatives' recommendations, whereas respondents with PhD degrees plan their visits to rural tourist destinations most often based on and friends' and relatives recommendations. Bearing in mind all of the above, it can be concluded that the set hypothesis H2 is adopted, i.e. that respondents with Bachelor's degrees visit rural tourist destinations more often, and together with respondents with completed secondary school and Master's degrees use the Internet for planning visits to rural tourist destinations, while all education levels of respondents visit rural tourist destinations with families most often.

Conclusion
In both countries covered by this research, rural tourism can play a key role in terms of advancing local economy, thereby creating new job opportunities which will generate additional incomes for rural households and, at the same time, it can help maintain or repopulate rural destinations. Rural tourism enriches the tourist offer and provides new quality to the development of tourism in both countries.
The geographical diversity of both countries provides the basis for further planning and actions in the development of rural tourism and its special forms such as homestead and wine tourism. In Serbia, especially in Vojvodina, tourism is one of the key pillars of economic development (Đorđević et al., 2019). Multiculturalism is what makes this region specific and that is why it should invest in development of destinations with tourist and hospitality, foster its authenticity, and exploit the preserved potential and unspoilt nature. (Tomić & Stoiljković, 2013). In Austria, rural tourism has a long history, and, as such, features as the instrument for restructuring the agricultural sector. In the future, it should have the task to strategically use the potential of touristically attractive rural destinations.
Identifying profiles of potential consumers, i.e. tourists plays a key role in the formation of tourist offer. This paper identifies the profile of tourists visiting rural tourist destinations -homesteads and wineries -in Serbia and Austria. The research's limitation is a small sample, as well as the fact that it covered only a part of Serbia -Vojvodina -and a part of Austria -the area surrounding Vienna. Another limitation is that it only covers two forms of rural tourism -farms and wineries. Thus, in future research, the sample should be expanded, territory researched should be extended, and some more forms of rural tourism should be included into the scope of research.