Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
Sadly, there have been many disasters around the world which have affected tourist destinations,
and therefore there have been plenty of opportunities to witness recovery efforts and to assess
the effectiveness of marketing communications following such disasters. We know that it is vital
for destinations and operators to have disaster management plans, yet we also know that many
do not. However, research has not kept pace with the number of disasters that have occurred, and
while we have some ideas how to help a destination recover from a disaster, we are not yet in the
position to make any substantive claims about the best way to do this. This chapter examines
visitor responses and post-disaster marketing communications in two case studies - the Brisbane
and Queensland fl oods of 2011 and the Black Saturday Victorian Bushfi res in 2009. In doing so,
this chapter reviews a number of marketing techniques and messages that have been used in
disaster-struck regions, and identifi es those messages that appear to have been effective, and those
that should not, perhaps, have been employed.
Disastrous events and the tourism market
The importance of the destination image perceived by potential tourists is universally
acknowledged, given its infl uence on the tourist's decision-making process and ultimate
destination choice (Gartner 1993; Pearlman and Melnik 2008; Lehto, Douglas and Park 2007;
Armstrong and Ritchie 2008; Pearlman and Melnik 2008; Machado 2010; Dolnicar and
Huybers 2007; Beirman 2006; Faulkner 2001; Walters and Clulow 2010). The downturn in
visitor numbers following a disastrous event provides increasing evidence of this. Following the
2004 Tsunami, tourist arrivals to Phuket decreased by 50.4 per cent (Tourism Authority of
Thailand 2005a); visitor numbers to Victoria declined signifi cantly following the Black Saturday
bushfi res (DRET 2009); whilst Christchurch, NZ, experienced a loss of one million guest nights
in the year following the 2011 earthquake (Carlville 2012). The global and often sensationalized
coverage by the media can rapidly lead to negative perceptions, and it is these perceptions (which
may not refl ect reality) that have the potential to dissuade tourists from visiting the destination
(Cavlek 2002; McKercher and Pine 2005; Kozak, Crotts and Law 2007). The management of
such perceptions represents the biggest challenge for tourism destination marketers (DMOs),
and one possible explanation for this is that little is known or understood of the precise reasons
why tourists choose to stay away from disaster prone areas (even after the immediate danger has
long passed), and what motivates those who choose to visit regardless. The following case study
presents a snapshot of behavioural responses to a destination struck by disaster, and subsequent
motivations behind a tourist's decision to travel to the destination.
Case study 1: The tourism market's response to the Queensland fl oods
Between December 2010 and January 2011, a series of fl oods hit the Australian state of
Queensland and over 75 per cent of the state was underwater. Prolonged rainfall, accompanied
by the mismanagement of Queensland's waterways and storage resources (Queensland Floods
Commission 2012), led to the loss of 33 lives and the inundation of 29,000 homes and businesses.
Over 2.5 million people were affected by the disaster, which was estimated to have cost the state
in excess of 5 billion dollars. Much of the state was offi cially declared a disaster zone, and the
majority of the state's main thoroughfares remained closed for up to seven days, leading to a
signifi cant shortage of food and water supplies in the short term. The tourism industry expected
to lose up to 590 million dollars (IBISworld 2011) for the year following the event, and saw as
its most immediate challenge the extensive damage to the image of its tourist product (Tourism
Queensland 2011).
