As noted earlier, Faulkner (above, page 52) wrote extensively about disaster and crisis in tourism. In 2001, with Russell, he published a simple model to distinguish between the two conditions. They argued that, together, disaster and crisis
66 epitomised chaos phenomena, in which systems are inherently complex and unstable, a phenomenon dealt with earlier in this chapter. They further posited that the link between the two conditions and entrepreneurial behaviour ―can be described in terms of a two-fold relationship involving opportunities and changes‖
(2001, p. 337). As the former USA President, John F. Kennedy (1959), noted, the Chinese use two brush strokes to write the word ―crisis‖ – one stroke represents danger, the other opportunity. ―In a crisis, be aware of the danger – but recognise the opportunity,‖ he said.
Faulkner‘s generic model for disaster management had been in development for some time (Faulkner, 1999) and when published as ―Towards a framework for tourism disaster management‖ in Tourism Management in 2001, two years after submission, was timely in the context of the events of September 11. The framework established three points: 1, tourism destinations everywhere are certain to experience a disaster at some point; 2, few destinations have properly developed disaster management plans to cope, and 3, a limited amount of systematic research has been undertaken in this field. The paper set definitive, tourism-specific distinctions between disaster and crisis and assessed through the literature generic crises management strategies and models and community stages of response to a disaster. Faulkner examined a range of insights from disaster events, adapted key considerations used by practiced disaster plans in real events and analysed plans that had been developed by other researchers (for example, Young &
Montgomery, 1998). His tourism disaster management framework (Figure 4) is the result of this investigation and continues to be a touchstone in this area of research.
67 The definitions applied in his paper were adapted from other articles.
Figure 4
68 Faulkner‘s tourism disaster management framework identifies six phases within which he proposed a set of responses and associated strategies. His first reference to the media is in what he termed the prodromal stage, a preliminary stage when it is apparent that a disaster is imminent. It was at this point that the media were to be warned by industry of a disaster. His next reference to any media activity is in the post-crisis recovery response which recommends a media communication strategy, so avoiding any interaction at all with the media during the periods in between, a gap which this research finds provides an opportunity for tourism to act. In the same issue of Tourism Management, Faulkner and Vikulov (2001) published a case study post-mortem of a tourism disaster in the Australian regional town of Katherine, thereby illustrating the potential contribution the plan could make to disaster preparedness and to assist in testing and refining the generic disaster management model.
Ritchie (2004, p. 674) proposes three stages of disaster management (Figure 5) to help destinations limit the severity of change induced by crises, namely:
1. Prevention and planning: proactive planning and strategy formulation and scanning to planning;
2. Strategic implementation: strategic evaluation and strategic control, crisis communication and control, resource management, understanding and collaborating with stakeholders; and
3. Resolution, evaluation and feedback: resolution and normality;
organisation learning and feedback
69 Ritchie applies the same disaster phases as Faulkner‘s model, but is more explicit in recommending crisis communication and control in the emergency and intermediate phases when a crisis is in its full stages. He advocates control over crisis communication, development of short and long term strategies and the appointment of a spokesperson.
Figure 5: Crisis and disaster management: a strategic and holistic framework (Ritchie, 2004)
The World Tourism Organisation [WTO] developed a media-focused crisis guide for the tourism industry which is distilled into three stages: before, during and
70 immediately after (WTO, 2001). The first stage is in anticipation of the crisis, common with stages discussed by Faulkner (2001) and Ritchie (2004). The second advises that the first 24-hours of a crisis are crucial for the travel industry and proposes a comprehensive information management and media liaison ―to do‖ list for tourism operators. The third proposes a detailed recovery strategy utilising the media. The three models discussed identify the crucial phases of a crisis in which tourism needs to engage with the media.
The Pacific Asia Travel Association [PATA] devised a four-stage crisis management plan called The Four Rs of Crisis Management (Figure 6), the first two stages of which advocate preparation and the second two deal with response and recovery (PATA, 2003a). A media communications strategy is included in the post-event response stage which is to address the immediate aftermath of the event
―when everything is at its most chaotic‖ (p. 10). The plan recognises that a destination attracts increased media coverage as a result of a crisis: ―If handled properly this publicity is good publicity and will ensure a shorter recovery phase by instilling confidence in all stakeholders and customers‖ (p. 12).
Figure 6: The Four R‟s of Crisis Management (PATA, 2003a)
71 Further advice for tourism came from Beirman (2003c, p. 1) who singled out the International Air Transport Association‘s [IATA] ―well honed set of crisis management contingency plans and a highly professional and skilled team of crisis management experts available to assist all its airline members‖. Its media application was minimal, however it focused on safety and security aspects as well as involving stakeholders during a crisis
Gurtner (2006) observes that the tourism industry has been shown through history to be fickle, and that no destination is immune to crisis conditions (p. 65). Risk management strategies may not always be able to prevent the negative consequences associated with a hazard and immediate response efforts are more effective when deliberate and calculated, rather than purely reactive. She noted that afflicted destinations appeared to recover faster when there was cooperation and integration between government, industry, media and the host community.
Baxter and Bowen (2004, p. 72) commented that a good crisis contingency plan closely linked with the media was vital for the tourism industry, saying that bemoaning sensational media responses was inadequate ―because that is how the media covers its commercial obligations. A sharp, accurate, timely and responsive counter…may at least partly balance the equation before the fires of sensationalism cause unnecessary damage to domestic and international tourism markets‖. They noted that tourism is faced with the threat of the growth of instant news and global media. The above models depict an orderly, systemic approach to the plight of the tourism industry and its management of media in times of crisis.
They compartmentalise tourism‘s media actions in the context of crisis
72 minimisation. Fink (1986), however, sees the crisis environment as a less linear system. His model suggested a four-phase anatomy (Figure 7), but also noted that, due to the nature of crises, ―chaos‖ may be a more accurate depiction of a crisis from an individual perspective. In distilling the essential nature of crisis situations, Fink (p. 20) recognised they were characterised by ―fluid, unstable, dynamic‖
situations, more closely in tune with Chaos Theory dimensions. His model (Figure 8) depicted crisis cycles in a manner similar to Lorenz‘s attractor model. He added that the role of the media in crisis management strategies can be crucial to such an extent that it might make the difference between whether or not a difficult situation evolves into a crisis.
Figure 7: What one crisis cycle may look like (Fink, 1986)
Figure 8: What crisis cycles often look or feel like to the individual (Fink, 1986)
73 The models discussed identify generic crisis conditions for tourism that develop with a disaster and set out logical strategies in phases to deal with the resulting conditions. Elements from each were pertinent to the four case studies in this research – such as in Faulkner‘s (2001) Emergency and Intermediate phases, aspects of Ritchie‘s (2004) Strategic Implementation phase and in PATA‘s (2003a) holistic four-stages approach – but the conditions of the case study crises, particularly their abrupt initial impact, did not fit the models‘ parameters and the media‘s role was only minimally factored into the models. So aspects of the phases of crisis development applied by these modellers have been adapted to form the six phases into which the case study crises have been analysed. As the research focuses on the role of chaos within the continuum of a crisis, Fink‘s (1986) modelling of a dynamic, fluid situation represents the less linear nature of that phase.