Public and private sector stakeholders concur that tourism is very important to individual island states, as well as, to the region. Referring to its fast rate of growth, one tourism stakeholder described the tourism industry as a ‘sun rise’ industry that is: “…a big employer… it brings in foreign resources….”. Such a major industry is supported by large‐ scale investments. One hotel association executive disclosed that: ” …. there are massive amounts invested in hotels. Any reasonable hotel with 100 bedrooms would probably cost you … minimum 50 to 80 million dollars Fijian…” .
High Tourist Demand for a Coastal Product
High tourist demand for a coastal experience is reflected by the standard tourism product of bures by the beach, as well as, hotels within 30m of the high water mark.
Weak Enforcement of Regulatory Standards
Stakeholders in Fiji noted that while regulatory standards are high with the nation subscribing to building code standards derived from New Zealand and Australia, the enforcement of these standards is not widespread. As a result, as noted by one risk evaluator with a long history in the region, building code standards are often not met: “…the Fiji building code, which dictates the standards of various structures. Yes, that code does require certain standards to be met…But I know of several resorts where those standards have not been met, they simply have not…”. There are capacity problems associated with weak enforcement. According to this stakeholder, the engineer who takes care of the largest city council in the country (Suva) is himself not accredited at a professional standard, only holding graduate membership and not professional membership from the local professional society of engineers. The stakeholder is of the opinion that this is a reflection of a regulatory environment that is poor and has no ‘teeth’.
Single Hazard Approach
The narrow focus on cyclones in Fiji is also a concern. A risk manager commented that although the resorts are very aware of cyclone risks, they are not so aware of tsunami risk. In fact, “…the perception of tsunami risk is very low…”. Moreover, certification is only required for the cyclone hazard.
Construction Standards
Although there have not been major failures of structures, vulnerability of the built tourism environment in Fiji to physical damage arises out of material selection and design. For example, one engineer made the connections between the competing need for the built environment to be culturally Fijian in appearance, the use of particular materials such as timber shingles to achieve culturally and market driven aesthetical goals and the resulting sub‐standard quality of the physical resilience of accommodation buildings: “Timber singles in my opinion while they look good… but you're just asking for trouble when the next cyclone comes along…”.
Use of Offshore Insurers and Financiers
In Fiji, the use of offshore insurers and financiers to avoid large capital outlays demonstrates a situation in which it is the wider international economic context that is a source of large‐ scale structural vulnerability at the destination/national level. In talking about the high cost of retrofits that may be required as a result of the certification process, one engineer that works with the industry acknowledged that, “…very often what resorts do to actually work around it is they decide to turn their backs on the local insurance companies’ requirements ….the offshore insurance companies tend not to require the local engineers to sign off that certain standards are actually met. So, they [hotels] would prefer to pay higher premiums each year so as to avoid the capital expenditures involved in upgrading to meet the local
insurance company standards…”. Another stakeholder continues: “I understand that there are number of resorts in Fiji who have done that. They are currently insured offshore…” . Lack of Resources to Address DRR
A lack of resources is thought by one tourism association executive to be a barrier to investment in DRR. This is reflected in the difference in capacity between large and small operators. For instance, when evaluating the response to the 2012 floods, a public sector representative believes that, “Most of the large organisations were very well prepared…”. As a risk evaluator who works in the region explains, “Larger organisations can pay for the services of a risk manager that conducts a risk audit and gives individual advice. The majority of the smaller ones, they probably wouldn’t be big enough for an insurance broking firm to afford to send me out there… they would not get the individual advice. They would have to go to the tourism association conventions to…be exposed to that type of advice”. Although the smaller operators want to participate in training and the Association has been doing its part in providing that training, smaller operators still are not always able to benefit due to limited capacity – “… the symposiums we have… people would attend subject to cost and time. We often have a lot of our training. People want to attend but they just can’t. They don’t have enough staff or they have got other things …especially the smaller properties. Some of our smaller properties are the ones that maybe need more assistance…”. This was reflected when the floods hit –“… last time, we lost quite alot of power. We lost telecommunications and these things. So you know, depending where you were staying….if you are in larger resorts with large generator and plenty of diesel, you know …they basically have the electricity flowing with limited services. Smaller places basically did not have any. So really, this, I think depends upon the size of organisation how seriously they have disaster preparation plan…”.
Disaster Response Issues Related to the Nature of the Business
The industry also has unique response capacity issues that are directly related to the nature of the business. In talking about challenges related to the 2012 floods, a tourism executive noted that a challenge was the low level of staff to perform all the necessary duties associated with disaster response especially on the ‘graveyard’ shifts. Lack of threshold staff levels will have implications for staff and tourists in times of disaster.