The COVID pandemic led to an almost total collapse of this sector, especially relating to foreign guests, by far the most numerous visitor group. But the guesthouses remain positive about the future and continue to invest in their houses.
This paper traces the case of Kazbegi National Park expansion and seeks to explore factors that shape or prevent trust-building between the park representatives and stakeholders. The research employed a qualitative methodology, using participatory mapping within discussions to allow the interview partners to link spatial information with extension areas.
The shift in policy focus from agriculture to rural development enables rural families to diversify their economic activities. Household-based resources, particularly human capital, are essential for capitalizing on newly developed opportunities. Locals with sufficient resources seize possibilities in agriculture and emerging economic sectors such as tourism.
This article outlines the stages of tourism development in Georgia before and after its independence. The emphasis is on the transformations in this economic field in the wake of four major highlighted turning points.
The presented article identifies the main actors in the local tourism supply chain and examines its functioning in the spatial context of Mestia Municipality.
Based on the research, acknowledging the increasing dependency on such a sensitive economic branch as tourism, we suggest the new tourism advancement concept under the title of “supportive tourism”.
The Greater Caucasus (Georgia) experiences new forms of hospitality, which ensures the development of authentic and sustainable services in tourism.
we argue that the observed rapid growth of tourist sector in the areas under investigation triggers economic growth, however the development is still fragmented and incomplete, as other branches of economy like agriculture, trade, etc., that should be connected to tourism activities, do not enjoy the expected growth.
The qualitative research analyzed hypothetical factors leading to youth divorce (18-24) including the couple’s socio-economic status before and after marriage, primary and family environment, readiness for living together, education and career.