Creative and Rural Tourism, Public Policies and Land Use Changes: A Multi-Method Approach towards Regional Sustainable Development in Azores Islands

Abstract

This research work aims to give an answer to three preliminary research questions: (RQ1) Are the land-use changes the footprint of the regional public policies conducted over a territory? (RQ2) Could rural and creative tourism be the catalyst for the regional sustainable development of island territories? (RQ3) Assessing the land-use changes dynamics and trends, is it possible to use new forms of tourism business to develop regional public policies? Through a multi-method approach, this paper examines the possible relationship between land-use changes and new tourism typologies as a potential catalyst for sustainable regional development in island territories, using the Azores Islands and some creative tourism projects as case studies. As some of the results show, a footprint of the regional public policies conducted over a territory can be observed through the land-use changes analysis. In addition rural and creative tourism could catalyze the regional sustainable development of island territories.

1. Introduction

The consequence of many global land datasets, which allow the acquisition of land-use changes (LUC) information gathered from a satellite analysis, has been driven by the ongoing need for comprehensive and trustworthy data on LUC, i.e., directions and tendencies [1,2,3,4,5,6]. In this regard, many regional, national, and international projects pushed for this thematic field expansion. Moreover, we should consider that multiple packs of global or continental LUC information from satellite analysis have enabled and delivered various thematic cartography designs [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14].

On the other hand, several studies indicate that different tourism typologies (such as cultural tourism, nature-based slow-tourism, rural tourism, or creative tourism) have a predominant position in reaching regional sustainable development in island regions [15,16,17,18,19,20,21].

Bearing in mind the current demand for the regions and communities to grow based on sustainable development models and the United Nations (UN) Agenda for 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); therefore, new forms of tourism business development imply creating and upgrading critical infrastructures, facilities, equipment, or differentiated activities to bring clients. Thus, such models will be in line with the expected SDGs [19,20,21,22].

By now, a question is probably arising: “What is the relationship between land-use changes and new typologies of tourism as rural or creative tourism?” In fact, it is a legitime question, and based on the authors’ beliefs, a nexus could be defined (through the regional public policies).

Land use cover refers to the physical use of land in a specific area, such as residential, commercial, industrial, or agricultural use. Creative tourism focuses on a destination’s local arts, culture, and heritage. It often involves visiting museums, galleries, and studios, attending performances and workshops, and participating in traditional crafts and other cultural activities. The relationship between land use cover and creative tourism is that the type of land use in an area can impact the availability and accessibility of cultural and creative resources for tourists to experience.

Land use changes can significantly impact the development of creative and rural tourism. Creative tourism is a type of tourism that focuses on experiencing the local culture and arts of a destination. In contrast, rural tourism centers on visiting rural areas and experiencing rural life, including farming, hunting, and fishing.

Rural tourism opportunities can be lost when land use changes occur, i.e., converting agricultural land into urban areas. On the other hand, land use changes can create new opportunities for creative tourism, such as developing cultural or artistic hubs in urban areas.

Moreover, sustainable land use practices can positively impact the development of creative and rural tourism. For example, promoting organic and sustainable agriculture can create opportunities for tourists to experience farm life and learn about sustainable farming practices. Protecting natural resources such as forests and rivers can provide opportunities for eco-tourism, i.e., hiking or kayaking.

Thereby, land use changes can positively and negatively impact the development of creative and rural tourism. Sustainable land use practices can create new opportunities for tourism while preserving natural and cultural resources for future generations. For example, suppose an area has a high concentration of industrial land use; in that case, there may be fewer opportunities for creative tourism compared to an area with a higher proportion of residential or commercial land use.

Contextually, this research work aims to give an answer to three preliminary research questions:

RQ1: Are the LUC the footprint of the regional public policies conducted over a territory?

RQ2: Could rural and creative tourism could be the catalyst for the regional sustainable development of island territories?

RQ3: Assessing the LUC dynamics and trends, is it possible to use new forms of tourism business to develop regional public policies?

This research begins with the present opening framework, followed by a brief state-of-the-art regarding LUC, cultural and creative tourism, and regional public policies. Subsequently, the methods used are presented, following the obtained outcomes. After that, the results’ discussion and paper conclusions are disclosed.

Moreover, this is the first paper to cross and study the LUC, regional policies, and creative tourism projects in the Macaronesia Region.

2. State-of-the-Art: A Brief Overview

2.1. The Land-Use Changes

For the analysis of the dynamics of LUC, satellite information has been a complete and valuable form for the study of land-uses (LU) on the Earth’s surface since they gather a very relevant dataset, i.e., temporary sections or moments explored are just a few examples. Correspondingly, getting the thematic cartography on LU signifies building a close tie between the analyzed material conditions and the social and economic aspects of the studied communities that have assembled a detailed LU [7,12,21,22,23,24,25,26].

The processes created on the LUC must pursue a consistent classification plan to stimulate interpretation and perform comparative research [25]. So, data sets have been made with specific attributes suggesting satellite observation of Earth [26]. Here, the inventory of Corine Land Cover (CLC) should be stressed, as it is one of the most familiar databases employed by institutions in Europe territories. Special monitoring of LUC in European regions has been conducted in a standardized form. Accordingly, the CLC products have been made from standardized satellite imagery [27]. In fact, this database is supposed to have coverage of use in the European Union (EU), which is pertinent since it permits a trustworthy understanding of the LUC produced throughout the EU [28].

From an administrative and technical standpoint, the prospect of CLC and LUC thematic cartography is undeniable—it is a relevant instrument for studying LUC. Such affirmations are corroborated in the INSPIRE 2007-2-EC directive [29]—in there, CLC is shown as one of the sets where technological and semantic harmonization has been reached, forming one of the most coordinated European datasets [30,31,32].

Instruments that permit relating various elements to the usage of the territory are significant in the design of public policy for the regions, being viewed as essential mechanisms for planning and territorial governance via the definition of management policies of natural and endogenous resources [32,33,34,35,36,37].

In this sense, considering the efficient governance of endogenous assets, it is essential to consider not only what the LUC is but also what the allocation of such LUC is, in order to efficiently manage natural resources [37]. Moreover, many projects have grown with the purpose of reviewing the LUC, its imprints, as well as its dynamics, established fundamentally on the need for learning and knowledge on the state of the surface and occupation of the territories [1,35].

2.2. Regional Public Policies

Regarding the regional public policies and focusing specifically on our case study area (The Azores Autonomous Region), a few milestones should be highlighted—especially regarding the tourism development.

Back in 2008, the Azores (Regional) Autonomous Government declared the Spatial Plan of Tourism of the Azores’ Autonomous Region (POTRAA) [38]. It was described as the basic tool for acquiring the regional sustainable development of the tourism sector. Consequently, it was even a mechanism to drive the different economic players and guide the administrative act, setting the strategic tourism products and the development of the tourism supply (until 2015). However, it is still in effect, although it has been somewhat discontinued and is under profound review at this moment.

Such an instrument (POTRAA) was the primary mechanism of the Azorean touristic strategy. Nevertheless, POTRAA is a territorial management and governance tool. If we look at its conception, it was permitted the engagement of more than just spatial management instruments, extending its influence to all the Azores Archipelago tourism plan. Comprehending that the brand of the destination “Azores” was deeply connected to nature and sustainability, the strategy designated six strategic development guidelines: (1) support and exacerbate technical, organizational, and regulatory requirements to sustain tourism growth; (2) reinforcement for the advancement of critical infrastructures and additional support to services related with the tourism sector, to the internal and external accessibility-connectivity as well as the tourism signage; (3) support for the expansion, qualification, and diversification of the regional tourism supply; (4) fostering the tourist demand and the external attention of the regional tourism requirements; (5) emphasis on clear measures concerning the spatial planning of tourism; and (6) encouraging the execution and monitoring of the plan.

Furthermore, POTRAA launched a territorial organization model (TOM), with thematic cartographic aid, offering a prototype for allocating the tourism supply in each of the nine Azorean islands and a collaborative process with municipal territorial management tools. The plan suggested initiating places with specific tourism purposes, according to their endogenous, picturesque, and metropolitan features, and with unique engagement to the most fragile environmental sites, limiting their use for tourism purposes.

In addition, the document recognized the leading tourism products for each island and strategically set a detailed essence tourism product as well as some additional characteristics regarding each one of the nine Azorean islands. Those could be understood as guidelines for the islands’ tourism expansion, mobilize differentiating features, and set a concise plan for the conservation and protection of each island’s identity. Such endogenous assets should be introduced in the regional tourism plan and the local tourism expansion, always based on the islands’ specificities in the different spheres (as ecological, socio-cultural, or financial-economic).

According with Silva and Almeida [39]: “regions such as the Azores have great potential for the development of nature and adventure tourism products, but, due to their early stage of development as destinations and the limitations in their carrying capacity, it is necessary to guarantee a sustainable tourism development model.” Such a model should concentrate on endogenous assets to reach the diversification of tourism products and consumers’ anticipations [40]. Furthermore, it should mitigate the effect of tourism activities. Thus, detailed destination planning and tourism growth, development, and management necessarily detour some of the consequences associated with the maturity and saturation phases of a destination lifecycle, e.g., contaminated habitats, landscapes, and the environment in general, the heritage and culture deterioration, water resources contamination, soil erosion or traffic congestion. Contextually, nature-based or slow tourism models fit this plan and can be a path to reach regional sustainable development as well as solid and sustainable tourism development [41,42,43]. In this regard, regional leaders handled the sustainability concept in the Azores Region remarkably, which is assumed to be a crucial element for the success of the tourism sector in the archipelago [44,45,46,47]. For example, the National Geographic Traveler (in 2007) selected the Azores Region as the second-best ultra-peripheral insular territory for sustainable tourism. The report contained pertinent reviews of the natural, cultural and endogenous assets and ecological diversity. However, it was also specified that unsuitable development was starting to emerge in the region.

Once more, looking at Silva and Almeida’s [39] studies, it is possible to find evidence that individuals and firms that deliver adventure tourism activities (as is the case of canyoning) in the Azores Islands are conscious that the environment is an essential resource for the differentia of their brand. Thus, the involved actors should actively add to its protection, regarding activities and tourism firms in the Azores Autonomous Regions [48].

2.3. New Trends of Tourism in the Post-Covid

Shifting now to the new trends on tourism (rural, nature-based, creative, or slow-tourism), we can obtain from the thematic literature several pieces of evidence of their relevance for regional development. Considering Williams’ [49] reflections regarding the relevancy of those tourism typologies for tender and peripheral regions, it was already proved that tourism creates work for regional, local, and even national economies. Likewise, the practical proof reveals that tourist spending creates more employment and benefits than any other economic sector and contributes to regional economic development and strength [50,51,52,53,54,55,56].

If we look closer at the ultra-peripheral island territories, the comprehended literature demonstrates that economic growth is a catalyst for sustainable regional development [57,58,59,60,61,62]. Accordingly, the chance of designing and promoting other sorts of tourism—as the ones mentioned above—is interconnected to entrepreneurship, new company, and business models (particularly in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)) [63,64,65]. Here it stresses the new paradigm in tourism that emerged during the coronavirus outbreak: slow tourism; in fact, those tourist tendencies seem to be more suitable in insular and low-density areas [65,66,67,68,69,70,71].

For the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) [72] rural tourism is the “(…) type of tourism activity in which the visitor’s experience is connected to an extensive content of products generally linked to nature-based activities, agriculture, rural lifestyle/culture, angling, and sightseeing“.

Rural tourism is a tourism typology with vast potential to stimulate the growth of the local economy [73]. This kind of tourism, along with creative or cultural tourism, can be seen as “alternative tourism” or “new tourism products,” which are affected by environmental factors [74]. About cultural and creative tourism, it is comprehended that it promotes regional sustainable development by valuing endogenous natural assets and resources, encouraging an innovative economy, and not decreasing culture through the act of consuming products [75,76,77,78,79,80]. Such implications make room for liberation, independence, and new adventures, initiate contact with traditions and rituals, as well as to generate income through other tourist itineraries.

Pimenta et al. [75]., tell us that it is feasible to detect the powerful connection between creative tourism and regional sustainable development. This research work evidences that creative tourism works “(...) through some type of reality transformation process and demonstrates direct correlations with cultural, material and immaterial factors, by committing and involving local development agents—public and private—in the elaboration and implementation of cultural policies that attract creative tourists”.

Furthermore, many other pieces of research conclude that there is a condition to work on growth and development models, concepts, and systems that include regional social, ecological, and economic topics—the bases of the sustainable development model. Nonetheless, additional methods are possible concerning cultural and creative tourism. Here, Richards [78] indicates the recent case of cultural and creative tourism and its diverse underlying backgrounds known worldwide.

3. Materials and Methods

Considering this paper’s scope, we have used a multi-method approach. A multi-method approach is a research strategy that uses multiple methods to study a phenomenon. This can include using qualitative and quantitative methods or combining different quantitative methods such as surveys and experiments. The goal of using multiple methods is to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the studied phenomenon by triangulating different data sources. This approach can also increase the validity and reliability of the research findings by providing multiple perspectives on the same issue.

Contextually, the Azorean territory was selected as a case study once the above-mentioned creative tourism pilot projects were located in the archipelago. The research team applied to provide coherence to these concepts that were essentially based on observation, professional experience, site analysis of the pilot projects of creative tourism working on the Azorean territory, and above all, on the direct interaction with the main actors and leader of the initiatives (Figure 1).

Moreover, previous studies were conducted where it is possible to identify the interest of the current work—here, the authors recommend the review of: ([1,3,6,14,16,17,19,20,27,33,39]) those studies are just a few examples.

3.1. Creative Pilot-Projects in the Azores Islands

The study focuses on seven pilot projects of cultural and creative tourism ongoing in the Azores. The projects were: (i) CDIJA; (ii) Refunction Project—GOODBYAZORES; (iii) Art in Nature (Arte na Natureza); (iv) Discover the Azores through Photography (Descubra os Açores através da fotografia); (v) Mahilawake; (vi) The Farm; and (vii) Local Network of Artisans. The case studies are located on four of the nine Azorean islands. So, four are located on S. Miguel Island, namely, CDIJA, Art in Nature projects, The Farm, and Local Network for Artisans; 1 on Terceira Island (Refunction Project—GOODBYAZORES); and, one on Faial Island (Mahilawake).

Questionnaires and Interviews

About the surveys, those were divided into sections: (a) a brief description of the projects; (b) business models; and (c) creativity, culture, and social impact. Therefore, the entire interview was made up of around fifty questions. Throughout the interview questions, the researchers have used open-ended and item selection questions, as well as agreement-level affirmations (through the use of a Likert Scale). The questionnaires and interviews were conducted both online and face-to-face.

The twelve major interview questions were divided among all the sections, with questions sub-divided and formulated by the interviewer (when necessary). As a result, the entire interview was made up of around fifty questions. Throughout the interview questions, we used open-ended questions, item selection questions, and agreement level affirmations (through a Likert Scale).

Considering the scope of the investigation research and the data acquisition method-ology, the research team opted for a data treatment based on simple, descriptive statistics and compared the results obtained with the existing thematic literature to look for a nexus and connections between the pilot projects of creative tourism and regional development.

3.2. The LUC Gathering Methods

Considering the study area, the Azores Archipelago, through the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS), it was possible to obtain the LUC land for the study area from 1990 to 2018. Here, we emphasize three critical steps. Initially, the thematic cartography from CLC was acquired—such material illustrates the Azores Islands’ LUC and their administrative limit. Then, thematic cartography was created to specify the different varieties of LUC and where they are located in the study area. Finally, the hectares of each LUC were quantified.

Initially, CLC delivers the three levels of LUC (

Table 1. CLC identified in the Azores territory (source: [81]).

Level 1	Level 2	Level 3
1 Artificial surfaces	11 Urban Fabric	111 Continuous urban fabric 112 Discontinuous urban fabric
	12 Industrial, commercial and transport units	121 Industrial or commercial units 122 Road and rail networks and associated land 123 Port areas 124 Airports
	13 Mine, dump and construction sites	131 Mineral extraction sites 132 Dump sites 133 Construction sites
	14 Artificial, non-agricultural vegetated areas	141 Green urban areas 142 Sport and leisure facilities
2 Agricultural areas	21 Arable land	211 Non-irrigated arable land
	22 Permanent crops	221 Vineyards 222 Fruit trees and berry plantations
	23 Pastures	231 Pastures
	24 Heterogeneous agricultural areas	242 Complex cultivation patterns 243 Land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation
3 Forest and semi natural areas	31 Forests	311 Broad-leaved forest 312 Coniferous forest 313 Mixed forest
	32 Scrub and/or herbaceous vegetation associations	321 Natural grasslands 322 Moors and heathland 323 Sclerophyllous vegetation 324 Transitional woodland-shrub
	33 Open spaces with little or no vegetation	331 Beaches, dunes, sands 332 Bare rocks 333 Sparsely vegetated areas 334 Burnt areas
4 Wetlands	41 Inland wetlands	411 Inland marshes
5 Water bodies	51 Inland waters	511 Water courses 512 Water bodies

). Contextually, level 3 is the most explicative once it was used.

3.3. The Azores Region—Region in Brief

The Azores is an archipelago located in the Atlantic Ocean, approximately 1500 km west of Portugal. It consists of nine volcanic islands, which are divided into three groups: the eastern group (São Miguel and Santa Maria), the central group (Terceira, Graciosa, São Jorge, Pico, and Faial), and the western group (Corvo and Flores).

The Azores has a mild maritime climate, with temperatures ranging from 14 °C (57 °F) in winter to 24 °C (75 °F) in summer. The islands’ beautiful landscapes include lush green forests, volcanic peaks, and stunning coastlines.

The economy of the Azores is primarily based on agriculture, dairy farming, fishing, and tourism. The islands are popular with visitors who enjoy the natural beauty, unique culture, and outdoor activities such as hiking, whale watching, and surfing.

The Azores is a Portuguese autonomous region with its government and parliament. Portuguese is the official language, and the currency is the euro. The population of the Azores is around 250,000, with most residents living on the islands of São Miguel, Terceira, and Faial.

The Azores has a mixed economy with diverse industries, including agriculture, fisheries, tourism, and services. The islands are home to several small and medium-sized enterprises and multinational companies operating in sectors such as energy, telecommunications, and transportation.

Agriculture plays a vital role in the economy of the Azores, with dairy farming being a significant sector. The region is known for its high-quality milk and dairy products, such as cheese and butter. Other agricultural products include pineapples, bananas, and wine.

The fishing industry is also significant, with the Azores being a major producer of tuna, swordfish, and other types of seafood. Many local fishermen practice sustainable fishing methods, and the region is home to several marine protected areas.

Tourism is a growing sector in the Azores, with visitors attracted to the islands’ natural beauty, unique culture, and outdoor activities. The region has several hotels, guesthouses, other accommodation options, and restaurants and cafes serving local cuisine.

The Azores has a relatively high standard of living compared to other regions in Portugal, with a median household income above the national average. However, the region also faces some socio-economic challenges, such as a declining population and a high unemployment rate, particularly among young people. The government has implemented various policies and initiatives to address these issues and promote economic development in the region.

4. Results

In order to create a better interpretation of the study results, several thematic sub-sections were created.

4.1. LUC from 1990 to 2018 for the Azorean Islands with Pilot-Projects

In

Table 2. Identified LU in the Azorean Islands with pilot-projects of creative tourism—period from 1990 to 2018.

Islands	Years
	1990		2000		2006		2012		2018
Faial	112	1,872,435	112	1,872,427	112	9,786,022	112	9,843,063	112	9,843,063
	123	582,896	121	3,191,732	121	319,173	121	3,932,456	121	3,932,456
	124	5,599,056	123	5,829,059	123	5,829,059	123	604,816	123	604,816
	211	111,658	124	5,599,043	124	5,599,035	124	5,599,035	124	5,599,035
	231	4,950,707	131	2,514,781	131	2,514,781	131	251,478	131	2,662,681
	242	1,604,559	211	1,116,578	211	1,758,327	211	1,758,327	211	1,758,327
	243	5,043,837	231	4,905,816	231	4926,42	231	4,910,463	231	5,333,488
	311	1,562,912	242	1,572,357	242	9,738,843	242	966,477	242	9,675,679
	312	5,236,415	243	5,028,245	243	4,728,517	243	4,721,771	243	4,317,447
	313	7,831,671	311	1,505,563	311	1459,13	311	1,465,877	311	1363,41
	321	1,046,399	312	568,534	312	6,231,512	312	6,894,355	312	6,727,173
	322	9,610,605	313	9,763,922	313	1,521,711	313	1,521,711	313	2,141,281
	324	5,731,411	321	1,021,546	321	1,015,301	321	1,015,301	321	1,020,361
	332	1,157,638	322	9,740,377	322	9,059,014	322	9,345,373	322	9,240,918
	333	9,556,787	324	6,137,725	324	6,620,075	324	6,059,759	324	6,501,346
	411	3,810,836	332	1,157,638	332	1,157,638	332	1,157,638	332	1,157,638
	412	1,236,245	333	9,556,893	333	8,106,063	333	5,242,491	333	5,242,491
	523	2,307,041	411	3,810,816	411	3,810,816	411	3,810,816	411	3,810,816
			412	123,624	412	1,236,239	412	1,236,239	412	1,208,079
			523	2,307,019	523	2,307,019	523	2,304,827	523	2,304,827
Pico	112	2,974,744	112	3,348,191	112	6,047,929	112	6,047,929	112	6,125,684
	121	7,042,244	121	5,016,319	121	5,016,312	121	5,016,312	121	5,016,312
	124	4,644,381	124	4,644,415	124	6,201,526	124	6,201,526	124	6,201,527
	211	3,888,835	211	3,888,834	142	3,141,128	142	3,141,128	142	3,141,128
	221	4,809,942	221	3,776,567	211	3,632,919	211	3,632,919	211	3,632,919
	231	3,656,105	231	3,653,191	221	3,966,864	221	3,966,864	221	1073,87
	242	1,942,741	242	1,822,489	231	3,661,702	231	3,661,702	231	3,648,503
	243	5,284,535	243	5379,92	242	1,660,166	242	1,660,166	242	1,697,666
	311	7,962,205	311	8010,83	243	5,246,942	243	5,246,942	243	5,287,372
	312	1,602,772	312	1,750,497	311	7,694,012	311	7,694,012	311	8,007,846
	313	3,956,265	313	4,062,559	312	1565,66	312	1,641,421	312	1,130,249
	321	11975,5	321	11924,68	313	538,264	313	538,264	313	4,975,382
	322	3,137,855	322	3088,59	321	11916,71	321	11925,72	321	11886,28
	324	4,807,363	324	4,814,507	322	3,188,509	322	3,188,509	322	3,163,595
	332	3,175,595	332	3,175,596	324	5,068,599	324	4983,83	324	4,513,716
	333	1,603,691	333	1,603,691	332	3,175,595	332	3,175,595	332	3,175,595
	412	1,704,399	412	1,704,395	333	1,603,691	333	1,603,691	333	1,576,536
	523	3,568,136	523	356,812	412	1,704,395	412	1,704,395	412	2,204,359
					523	3,568,118	523	3,568,117	523	3,568,117
São Miguel	111	2,674,342	111	2,674,319	111	2,674,318	111	2,674,318	111	2,674,318
	112	1,928,566	112	2,245,898	112	2,943,384	112	3,083,384	112	3,240,655
	121	2,874,953	121	428,025	121	4,651,454	121	5,840,836	121	6,079,555
	123	1,300,122	123	1,300,106	123	1,300,106	123	1,300,106	123	1,300,106
	124	1,342,727	124	1,342,723	124	1,342,724	124	1,342,724	124	1,342,723
	131	5,805,268	131	1,003,931	131	1,357,891	131	1,480,334	131	2,302,817
	132	2,893,833	132	1,193,111	132	5,673,946	132	5,673,946	132	2,539,527
	133	2,519,011	133	2,593,604	133	6,386,449	133	2,855,338	133	2,855,338
	141	5,457,144	141	5,457,141	141	6,163,115	141	6,163,115	141	5,283,525
	142	1,600,197	142	1,600,196	142	1,859,557	142	1,859,557	142	1,859,557
	211	5,874,006	211	5,793,882	211	6,166,615	211	6,376,093	211	7,258,138
	222	2,508,707	222	2,508,696	222	2,508,693	222	2,508,693	222	2,508,693
	231	17,347,62	231	17,239,57	231	17,773,41	231	17,282,12	231	17,385,15
	242	6,369,067	242	6,048,126	242	6,453,378	242	6,474,845	242	5,940,478
	243	21,678,47	243	21,339,43	243	18,655,83	243	18,613,34	243	17,926,5
	311	5,093,842	311	5,325,737	311	5,313,303	311	5,180,341	311	5,726,492
	312	5,328,031	312	5,606,653	312	6,094,713	312	5,939,608	312	5,730,623
	313	1,383,876	313	1,383,877	313	1427,27	313	1,449,221	313	1416,11
	321	4,883,642	321	7,917,452	321	537,689	321	4,466,122	321	3,853,054
	322	5,064,299	322	4,912,782	322	5,012,301	322	5,039,992	322	5,142,741
	324	1,431,303	324	1,025,777	324	1,254,719	324	1,651,183	324	1,321,519
	512	8,223,727	512	8,223,723	512	8,223,723	512	8,223,723	512	8,223,723
	523	849,009	523	8,489,874	523	848,987	523	848,987	523	8,460,359
Terceira			111	9,668,487	111	9,668,494	111	9,668,494	111	9,668,494
	111	9,668,497	112	1,416,687	112	2,675,062	112	2,689,701	112	2,693,664
	112	1,292,897	121	2,583,302	121	2,564,227	121	3,047,442	121	3,078,777
	121	1,976,831	123	5,844,936	123	4,984,256	123	5,171,538	123	5,171,538
	123	5,844,975	124	3,114,826	124	3,166,435	124	3,166,435	124	3,182,392
	124	3,114,839	131	6,629,187	131	1,325,793	131	1,402,663	131	1,402,663
	131	5,540,318	132	406,303	132	406,303	132	406,303	132	406,303
	141	1,084,322	133	3,620,348	133	4,497,854	141	1,084,319	141	1,084,319
	142	6,638,392	141	1,084,319	141	1,084,319	142	955,674	142	8,687,735
	211	1,821,377	142	6,638,414	142	6,638,414	211	1,775,167	211	2,938,665
	221	1,425,647	211	1,801,499	211	1,801,039	221	1,004,326	221	1,004,326
	231	15532,15	221	1,004,327	221	1,004,326	231	15,527,52	231	14,779,73
	242	3,164,117	231	15,520,66	231	15,539	242	1911,89	242	1,619,889
	243	6,296,177	242	3,146,985	242	1911,89	243	6,202,097	243	6,514,395
	311	1,860,128	243	6321,54	243	6,197,332	311	1,966,008	311	2,348,996
	312	4,869,931	311	1,886,253	311	1,879,745	312	1,476,495	312	1,356,078
	313	220,578	312	1064,75	312	1,253,174	313	1,404,567	313	1,153,091
	321	2,384,305	313	2,897,785	313	1,504,373	321	1,795,419	321	9,555,637
	322	2,853,469	321	1,955,361	321	1,881,185	322	2,308,977	322	3,387,857
	324	1,524,558	322	2,798,021	322	2,338,517	324	1,500,011	324	1,224,478
	412	1,301,835	324	1,191,232	324	1,695,673	412	1,226,812	412	5,898,867
	523	2,805,389	412	1,239,585	412	1,239,585	523	2,805,383	523	2,805,382
			523	2,805,384	523	2,805,382

, it is possible to find a summary of the collected data regarding the identified LU in the Azorean Islands with pilot-projects of creative tourism in the period 1990 to 2018. Furthermore, the research collected all the LU (from 1990 to 2018) for all the Azores territory (Appendix A).

Table 2 allows us to understand the evolution of LU (from 1990 to 2018) in four of the nine Azorean Islands—the ones where the creative tourism pilot-projects are implemented—namely, Faial, Pico, São Miguel, and Terceira. Suppose we analyze the LU of Faial island. Consequently, we observe an increasing trend in many LU—more precisely, in CLC-1 (artificial surfaces). The most notable increase was in CLC-11 (urban fabric). Similarly, CLC-112 (discontinuous urban fabric surfaces) increased considerably, as well as industrial, commercial, and transport units (CLC-12, CLC-121, and CLC-123). Nevertheless, CLC-2 (Agricultural areas) indicates a decrease of around 8%—with reconversion between CLC-242 (Complex cultivation patterns, showing a reduction of almost 40%) and CLC-243 (Land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation, showing a reduction of around 15%). CLC-3 (forest and seminatural areas) increased by approximately 1%. Moreover, we should highlight that some LU reconversion appears, specifically between CLC-333 (Sparsely vegetated areas), with around a 45% decrease, and CLC-313 (Mixed forest), with a considerable increase of more than 170%.

About the LU evolution in Pico island (from 1990 to 2018), it is possible to demonstrate a significant expansion in CLC-112 (Discontinuous urban fabric) by more than 100%. Still, the most significant increase in this specific island was verified CLC-221 (Vineyards). Consequently, the substantial expansion in CLC-221 between 2012 and 2018, as well as the immense development in CLC-124 (Airports)—particularly between the period 2000 to 2006—permit consecutive flights from outside the Autonomous Region. Moreover, the increase in CLC-412 (Peatbogs)—from 2012 to 2018—should be considered. Conversely, the most significant decrease matches with CLC-312 (Coniferous forest) and CLC-121 (Industrial or commercial units). We can theorize that CLC-3 (forest and seminatural areas) has seen a reduction in favor of other different LU—the CLC-221 (Vineyards) and CLC-112 (Discontinuous urban fabric). If so, it is feasible to assume that anthropogenic activity has been enormous on Pico island. Nevertheless, CLC-121 (Industrial or commercial units) LU decreased by around 30%; in fact, the highest increase LU was caused by human origin. Moreover, in the CLC-313 (Mixed forest), it is possible to encounter a substantial increase of more than 25% from 1990 to 2018—however, a decrease of almost 8% took place between 2012 and 2018.

In Azores’ biggest island as well as the most populated—and consequently with more economic activity; we notice that many LU increases were demonstrated from 1990 to 2018, i.e., CLC-112 (Discontinuous urban fabric), CLC-121 (Industrial or commercial units), CLC-131 (Mineral extraction sites), CLC-211 (Non-irrigated arable land), CLC-311 (Broad-leaved forest). Contrarily, it was also likely to verify multiple LU decreases. Focusing on the decrease in LU from 2000 to 2018, the CLC-132 (Dump sites), CLC 243 (Land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation) and CLC-321 (Natural grassland) should be emphasized.

From 1990 to 2018, artificial surfaces (CLC-1) and forest and seminatural areas (CLC-3) increased by almost 70% and 5%, respectively—in fact, mainly from agricultural areas (CLC-2), with a decrease of more than 5%. Regarding agricultural areas, some transformations recorded a decrease of nearly 15% in CLC-24 and more than 20% in arable land (CLC-21). In forest and seminatural areas, shrub and herbaceous vegetation associations (CLC-32), particularly CLC-321 (natural grassland) and CLC-324 (Transitional woodland shrub), were transformed into the forest (CLC-31), especially in terms of CLC-311 (Broad-leaved forest) or CLC-312 (Coniferous forest).

LU decreases from 2006 to 2018are most evident in CLC-133 (Construction sites) and CLC-312 (Coniferous forest), with more than 55% and 6% of these LU decreases, respectively. Eventually, from 2012 to 2018, substantial decreases were also discovered in the CLC-141 (Green urban areas), CLC-242 (Annual crops associated with permanent crops), and CLC-324 (Transitional woodland shrub), with variations of nearly 15%, 10%, and 20%, respectively.

In Terceira island, we encountered numerous LU changes, with increases, decreases, and some resilience in the LU during the 1990 to 2018 period. Artificial surfaces (CLC-1) showed an increase of more than 80%, agricultural areas (CLC-2) showed an increase of approximately 3%, and wetlands (CLC-4) showed an expansion of almost 30%—mainly, these LU were reclaimed from the forest, and seminatural areas (CLC-3). In addition, the LU CLC-312 (Coniferous forest), CLC-131 (Mineral extraction sites), CLC-112 (Discontinuous urban fabric), CLC-211 (Non-irrigated arable land), and CLC-121 (Industrial or commercial units), also should be highlighted once they showed increases of more than 175%, 150%, 105%, 60%, and 55%, respectively. Concerning the LU with the most significant decreases (in 1990–2018), we have CLC-321 (Natural grassland), CLC-412 (Peatbogs), CLC-242 (Complex cultivation patterns), CLC-313 (Mixed forest), and CLC-221 (Vineyards), with a drop variation of almost 60%, 55%, 50%, 48%, and 30%, respectively. Isolating the period from 2000–2018, there were substantial reductions in CLC-242 (Complex cultivation), with a deviation of almost 50%, and CLC-313 (Mixed forest), with a reduction of 60%. Likewise, we verify a constant decrease within agricultural areas (CLC-2). In fact, it is possible to find increases in CLC-211 (Non-irrigated arable land) and CLC-243 (Land predominantly occupied by agriculture, with considerable areas of natural vegetation)—it should be noted that those results could be explained mainly through the conversion of CLC-221 (Vineyards) and CLC-242 (Complex cultivation patterns).

Thematic Cartography

Additionally, thematic cartography was created to allow a better and faster interpretation regarding the LUC in the first and last analyzed years (1990 and 2018, respectively) in the Azorean Islands with creative tourism pilot-projects (Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4).

Based on the thematic cartography, we immediately understand that the Agricultural areas are the predominant LU in Faial (from 199 to 2018). Nevertheless, in Pico´s Island, the most predominant LU (1990–2018) is forest and semi-natural areas. Still, we should not underestimate the verified increase in artificial surface ongoing on Faial Island through the last three decades.

Even if, in general, the LU changes in São Miguel Island (1990–2018) are predominantly agricultural, forests and semi-natural areas, it is impossible not to notice the constant increase in urbanized areas on the island over the last decades.

Similarly to São Miguel Island between 1990 and 2018, the LU in Terceira Island are predominantly agricultural, with forests and semi-natural areas, with an inevitable tendency for the steady growth of urbanized areas on the island over the last decades.

4.2. Summarizing the Creative Tourism Pilot-Projects Located in the Azores

With the conducted analysis of the seven creative tourism pilot initiatives ongoing on the Azores Islands, it was attainable to summarize them by thematic areas (

Table 3. Summary of the projects by thematic areas.

Thematic Areas	The projects
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Integrative	x					x	x
Human regional talent development	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Artistic			x	x	x		x
Socio-cultural and gastronomy				x		x	x
Nature-based tourism focus on endogenous resources		x	x		x	x

). Furthermore, from now on, for a better direct understanding of the tables, the projects will be specified by a number: 1—CDIJA; 2—Refunction Project—GOODBYAZORES; 3—Art in Nature; 4—Discover the Azores through Photography; 5—Mahilawake; 6—The Farm; and 7—Local Network for Artisans.

From Table 3, it is attainable to comprehend the pertinence and significance of the Azorean Creative Tourism pilot project in the various domains. Likewise, we can understand the relevance of the projects for developing regional human resources. For a more in-depth interpretation of the obtained results that enabled the creation of Table 3, the collected data about the Azorean creative pilot-projects business model type (through the questionnaires and interviews) can be found in Appendix B.

5. Discussion

Land use changes can have significant relevance for island territories, which often have limited land resources and vulnerable ecosystems. The literature and this study’s results corroborate it once more: (i) Impact on biodiversity: Island ecosystems are often unique and home to many endemic species found nowhere else on earth. Land use changes such as deforestation, urbanization, and agriculture can severely impact these species and their habitats. (ii) Water resources: Island territories often have limited freshwater resources, and land use changes can affect the quality and quantity of water available for human and ecological needs. For example, deforestation can reduce water infiltration and cause soil erosion, leading to lower water availability and degraded water quality; (iii) Tourism: Island territories often rely heavily on tourism as a source of income. Land use changes, such as building new tourist infrastructure, such as hotels and resorts, can positively and negatively impact the local economy and environment; (iv) Climate change: Islands are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, such as the sea-level rise and increased storm frequency and intensity. Land use changes can exacerbate these effects by altering the natural coastal protection of mangroves, coral reefs, and other ecosystems.

Contextually, land use changes can have significant implications for the sustainability and resilience of island territories, highlighting the need for careful management and planning of land resources.

Generally, from 1990 to 2018, it seems that in most of the Azorean islands, there is a steady increase in artificial surfaces (CLC-1) and forest and seminatural areas (CLC3), basically urban fabric (CLC-11), industrial, commercial, and transportation units (CLC-12) and forest (CLC31). In fact, most of those LU emerge from applying European Union (EU) funds beneath the different community aid frameworks that, from 1989 to the present date, add to increasing investment in the Azores Region. Moreover, we should add that this Autonomous Region (Azores-Portugal) has an Administration with political and governance autonomy.

According to Castanho et al. [33]: “(…) several of these investments co-financed by EU funds have made it possible to develop ports, airports, roads, waste recovery centers, basic sanitation, wastewater treatment plants, industrial parks, social facilities, tourist, sports, and leisure facilities, natural attractions, protection areas for natural parks, among many others critical infrastructures for the economic and social development of the Azores. These investments forced the increase of artificial surfaces; also, the increase of forest and seminatural areas, by decreasing agricultural areas, following the development strategy of the Azores pursued by several governments, based on sustainable economic development in harmony with the breathtaking Azores nature”.

Land use changes in the Azores can significantly impact the unique and fragile ecosystems found on the islands and the local economy and culture. In this regard, we can name some: (i) Biodiversity: The Azores are home to several endemic species, including plants, insects, and birds. Land use changes such as deforestation, urbanization, and agriculture can threaten the survival of these species and disrupt the delicate balance of the island ecosystems; (ii) Agriculture: Agriculture is an essential industry in the Azores, with crops such as pineapple, tea, and bananas grown on the islands. However, land use changes associated with the agricultural expansion can lead to soil erosion, water pollution, and the loss of natural habitats; (iii) Tourism: Tourism is also an essential industry in the Azores, with visitors attracted to the islands’ natural beauty, cultural heritage, and outdoor activities. However, land use changes associated with tourism development, such as new hotels and infrastructure construction, can negatively impact the environment and local communities; (iv) Climate change: Like other island territories, the Azores are vulnerable to the effects of climate change, such as sea-level rise, increased storm frequency and intensity, and changes in temperature and precipitation patterns. Land use changes that affect the natural coastal protection provided by ecosystems such as forests, wetlands, and coral reefs can exacerbate the impacts of climate change.

Therefore, LUC in the Azores Archipelago can significantly impact the islands’ environment, economy, and culture, highlighting the need for sustainable land use management and planning to ensure the long-term resilience and sustainability of the Azores.

Based on the above-mentioned, we can answer RQ1. There is a footprint of the regional public policies conducted over a territory which can be observed through the LUC analysis.

6. Conclusions

The pilot projects briefly considered cultural and creative tourism initiatives in the Azores Autonomous Regions. It is recommended that the autonomous authorities, regional leaders, as well as other relevant main actors and participants in the Azores territory design and implement processes that increase those cultural and creative tourism ambitions. The initiatives only add to the sustainable regional growth but are a possible alternative to the non-sustainable mass tourism model inappropriate for the long-term promotion of the Azores’ destination. Likewise, the reviewed initiatives allow regional economic revitalization via partnerships with various tourism businesses, cultural organizations, and public institutions, especially in the Azorean Islands, where the projects are established.

Pimenta et al. [75] affirms that “(...) one could be left to wonder about the kind of development concept addressed in the reviewed literature and its correlation with creative tourism”.

If we focus on the business model patterns of the analyzed creative tourism initiatives, we get two leading standards: (A) targeting foreign tourists (an international model), and (B) targeting Portuguese a (national model). A typical tourist profile pattern still emerges in the A and B models: “a tourist that pursues a cultural, rural and nature-based tourism”, confirming prior investigations [16]. The outcomes are in line with the trend that emerged in multiple low-density and insular territories during the coronavirus pandemic, where the consumer (tourist) follows these kinds of tourism [39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49].

6.1. Practical Implications

In sum, it is possible to reveal the nexus between cultural and creative tourism, and different development methods and techniques that could push additional developments depending on the region’s social and cultural aspects as well as heritage and natural assets [82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92]. Contextually, RQ2 confirmed that rural and creative tourism could catalyze the regional sustainable development of island territories.

Consequently, it is possible to confirm RQ3, even if not in such a direct way as the previous research questions (namely RQ1 and RQ2). Through the assessment and analyses of the LUC in a territory, the decision-makers obtain valuable knowledge of how these territorial dynamics and trends are evolving. Therefore, they can design regional policies that will meet the expectations of the new business models—in this case, the creative tourism business models.

Furthermore, several practical policy implications can help manage land use changes in island territories such as the Azores Archipelago: (a) Land-use planning: The development of land-use plans can help guide decision-making around land use in island territories. These plans should consider environmental and social factors, such as protecting natural habitats, promoting sustainable agriculture, and preserving cultural heritage. (b) Protected areas: Establishing protected areas can help conserve essential ecosystems and biodiversity in island territories. These areas can also provide opportunities for ecotourism and other sustainable economic activities. (c) Sustainable agriculture: Policies and incentives that promote sustainable agriculture practices, such as organic farming and agroforestry, can help minimize the negative impacts of agriculture on the environment in the island territories. (d) Green infrastructure: The promotion and restoration of green infrastructure, such as forests, wetlands, and coral reefs, can help provide natural coastal protection and mitigate the impacts of climate change in island territories. (e) Tourism management: Policies that promote sustainable tourism practices, such as ecotourism and responsible travel, can help minimize the negative impacts of tourism on the environment and local communities in island territories.

Contextually, policies prioritizing sustainable land use practices, conservation of ecosystems, and community involvement can help ensure the long-term sustainability and resilience of island territories such as the Azores Archipelago.

6.2. Future Research Steps

Future research steps to understand and address land use changes in island territories such as the Azores Archipelago could include: (i) Monitoring and evaluation: Regularly monitoring and evaluating land use changes and their impacts on the environment, economy, and social well-being can help identify emerging issues and inform policy and management decisions. (ii) Spatial analysis: Spatial analysis can help identify areas of high conservation value, areas at risk of degradation, and areas suitable for sustainable land use practices in island territories. (iii) Modeling: Modeling approaches, such as ecological models and land use change models, can help predict the impacts of future land use changes and inform decision-making around land use management. (iv) Stakeholder engagement: Involving local communities, landowners, and other stakeholders in land use decision-making can help ensure that policies and management practices are effective, equitable, and socially acceptable. (v) Interdisciplinary research: Interdisciplinary research that combines expertise from different fields, such as ecology, economics, and sociology, can help address the complex and multifaceted challenges of land use changes in island territories.

Thus, by conducting these and other research steps, we can better understand the impacts of land use changes in island territories and develop effective strategies for sustainable land use management and conservation.