Sara WUNSCH-Dissertation

HOW FORCE MAJEURE AND RELATED PUBLICITY ADVERSELY EFFECTS TOURISTS’ PERCEPTION OF A DESTINATION

1 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF HOW FORCE MAJEURE AND RELATED

PUBLICITY ADVERSELY EFFECTS TOURISTS’ PERCEPTION OF A

DESTINATION

Sara WUNSCH

12434261

MSc Hospitality and Tourism Service Management

Total word count: 14,652 words



Table of Contents

LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................... 4

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 5

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................... 10

1.1 Force majeure: disaster for the tourism industry ....................................... 10

1.1.1 Natural disasters ................................................................................. 14

1.1.2 Terrorism ............................................................................................. 17

1.1.3 Political instability and War .................................................................. 19

1.2 Destination image and tourists perception ................................................. 21

1.3 Media and communication channels ......................................................... 24

CHAPTER 2: METHOD AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................... 26

2.1 Method ...................................................................................................... 26

2.2 Methodology .............................................................................................. 29

2.2.1 Qualitative approach ........................................................................... 29

2.2.2 Quantitative approach ......................................................................... 32

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 36

3.1 Sample composition analysis and interpretation ....................................... 36

3.2 Travellers’ type analysis ............................................................................ 38

3.3 Risk perception analysis ............................................................................ 39

3.4 Which force majeure is mostly feared: possible correlations seeking ........ 44

3.5 Knowledge acquisition: key element for image and perception creation ... 46



3.6 Perception and reliability of the information sources ................................. 47

3.7 Approaching the media channels and information acquisition in the

perspective of asking tourist their judgement on media’s reliability. ................ 52

3.7 The power of media: reproduction of Milgram’s experiment ...................... 54

3.8 SWOT analysis of media ........................................................................... 55

3.9 Adaptation of Gunn’s model (1988) ........................................................... 57

3.10 Willingness to return at the destination after a disaster ........................... 61

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 66

Appendix 1 .......................................................................................................... 69

Appendix 2 .......................................................................................................... 76

Appendix 3 .......................................................................................................... 78

Appendix 4 .......................................................................................................... 88

Appendix 5 ........................................................................................................ 100

REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 102



LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Cast of features of force majeure .......................................................... 12

Table 2: Sample composition ............................................................................. 36

Table 3: Travellers' type...................................................................................... 38

Table 4: Cross-table analysis of risk and gender factors .................................... 40

Table 5: Cross-table analysis of risk and age range factors ............................... 41

Table 6: Analysis of the fear factor ..................................................................... 44

Table 7: Factor analysis and underlying clusters, KMO measure of sampling

Adequacy and Bartlett's test of sphericity ........................................................... 48

Table 8: Factor analysis and underlying clusters ................................................ 50

Table 9: Swot analysis of media channels .......................................................... 56



INTRODUCTION

Over the last decades, tourism has become one of the world’s largest industries.

It has grown faster than many other notable industries such as manufacturing,

financial services, communication and retail. According to the World Travel &

Tourism Council’s (WTTC) economic research in 2012, the tourism industry has

grown its total contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 3% which

represent a rise of US$500 billion year-on-year and has increased its number of

jobs by five million. WTTC predicts that the travel and tourism industry will

expand its total contribution to GDP by 3.2%, faster than the 2.4% predicted for

global economic growth. The industry is expected to support over 266 million jobs

this year and also to support many other industries.

Therefore, because of its role in the development of national economies,

international trade, and employment, the tourism industry has to be given a high

importance. However, the tourism system is an open system which is subject to

many influences and pressures that arise outside the system itself (Ritchie and

Crouch, 2010). The tourism industry is prone to a vast array of phenomena which

can broadly impact all its sector of activity and which could jeopardise its survival.

A single event in one part of the world today can produce a set of consequences

for current and future tourism flows. Those types of events are identified in this

paper as force majeure and include a range of examples for possible disasters.

The term force majeure is used by all contractors in the tourism industry and is

the most dreaded event. According to the law, force majeure is defined as



unusual and unforeseeable circumstances beyond the control of the party by

whom it is pleaded, the consequences of which could not have been avoided

even if all due care had been exercised (Grant et al. in Wilks, Pendergast and

Leggat, 2006). Carter (1991) defines a disaster as an event, natural or manmade,

sudden or progressive, which impacts with such severity that the affected

community has to respond by taking exceptional measure. The guarantee of

tourists’ personal safety is perhaps the most important prerequisite for any

aspiring tourism destination (Mansfield and Piam, 2005; cited in Novelli, Morgan

and Nibigira, 2012.)

It seems that our environment has become increasingly turbulent and crisis prone

over time, Richardson (1994) has suggested this might be not only because we

have become a more crowded world, but also because we have more powerful

technology now that has the capacity to generate disasters. Acts of terrorism,

crime, natural disasters and epidemic outbreaks all negatively affect destination

image and pose major challenges to the tourism industry, especially as global

media reinforce such security fears (Aston, 1999; cited in Novelli, Morgan and

Nibigira, 2012.)

The negative impact of such events is adversely tenfold by the intervention of

media and the related publicity they broadcast. Force majeure can alter the

country's attractiveness to tourists and therefore the destination image. Every

destination has an image. Hunt (1975) defines the destination image as the

"Perceptions held by potential visitors about an area”, Phelps (1986) believes that

the destination’s image relates simply to the "perceptions or impressions of a



place". Many definitions have been given to destination image, though they

practically all relate to the sense of perception.

The role of the media in disaster management strategies can be crucial to such

extent that it might make the difference between whether or not a difficult

situation evolves into a disaster (Fink, 1986; Koewn-McMullan, 1997). Media

outlets can help by disseminating warnings leading up to impending disasters and

providing information during the recovery stage. However, media intensive

coverage of disaster and false information diffusion can increase the extent of

damage and threaten the whole destination.

One of the reasons so little progress has been made in the advancement of our

understanding of tourism disaster and what measures to take, is the limited

development of the theoretical and conceptual framework required to strengthen

the analysis of this phenomena (Faulkner, 2003). Consequently the purpose of

the current study is to document, analyse and fulfil this gap in order to establish a

framework in destination image control after force majeure.

This study aims at first to critically analyse how force majeure impacts tourists’

perception of a destination, including the notion of destination image. The first

chapter introduces the fundamental notions necessary for the global

understanding of the subject. Therefore the literature review chapter sets the

context of the current study by giving an adapted definition of force majeure

applied to the tourism field based on previous literature and analysis. It also

introduces the importance of destination image and its creation process.

Destination image is made out individuals’ perception. Indeed, this study aims to

identify the main influential factors of tourists’ perception. The hypothesis



researched is that media is the predominant factor of influence in tourists’

perception of a destination, and that they play a crucial role in destination image

recovery process. It also tends to provides further empirical evidence to support

that destination image, measured at one point, tend to differ after the occurrence

of major incidents in the destination.

In order to answer the research questions and validate the hypothesis the method

employed has been inspired by previous research conducted by Gunn (1988) on

destination image formation and by Milgram (1974) regarding the power of

authority. Chapter two exposes the method as well the methodology of research.

The conducted study has been approach with a mix-methodology combining

qualitative and quantitative researches. Therefore, semi-structured interviews

have been conducted to obtain insights and understanding of tourists’ behaviour.

Additionally, a survey has been implemented to collect numerical data in the

objective of making general observations over a large sample of respondents in

order to have accurate valid answers. At last, the findings and analysis chapter

exposes the results of the conducted research and through their interpretation

suggestions are made to improve the destination recovery process and

alternative solutions are proposed to channel the impact of such events on the

destination image.

The global environment of a destination, referred in economy as the macro

environment, is in a constant state of change and evolution. Force majeure can

shift the pattern of wealth to create special concerns, problems, or issues that

countries must adapt to and overcome. Hence why, destination managers need

to regularly monitor the environment to see and understand the “big picture” in



order to anticipate the changes that could alter the tourism landscape (Ritchie

and Crouch, 2010).

The anticipated outcome is to identify the influencing factors of tourists’

perception by validating the hypothesis that media plays a pivotal role in image

and perception of the destination and is one of the determining element of the

decision making process.



CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 Force majeure: disaster for the tourism industry

The term force majeure is the most feared in the tourism industry. With regards to

the law, force majeure can be seen as an unexpected condition out of the party’s

control; the repercussions of which could not have been dodged even if all due

care had been exercised (Grant et al. in Wilks, Pendergast and Leggat, 2006).

Force majeure events are more commonly referred to as disasters. Carter (1991)

defines a disaster as an event, natural or manmade, sudden or progressive,

which impacts with such severity that the affected communities have to respond

by taking exceptional measures.

In the tourism field, force majeure can shift the pattern of wealth to create special

concerns that countries must adapt to and overcome. For most destinations in the

world, tourism represents a major source of income and employment. Any crisis

or disasters would have dramatic consequences on all fields related to the

tourism activity. Similar to Carter’s definition, Seymour and Moore (2000) have

suggested a classification for crisis into two types: the “cobra” type, which strikes

suddenly and the “python” type which occurs gradually. As well, Karagiannis et al.

(2006) have suggested an alternative aspect to classify the crisis that affect the

tourism industry using the factor of human involvement as direct, indirect, or no

human involvement. Sausmarez (2007) gave another approach by suggesting

those crises are either natural such as hurricanes and earthquakes, or manmade

in the case of industrial accidents, plane crashes or terrorist events. The most



interesting definition is given by Parsons (1996), who suggested a classification

of tourism crisis in three types depending on their gestation period.

“Immediate crisis: where little or no warning exists therefore organisations

are unable to research the problem or prepare a plan before the crisis hits,

Emerging crisis: these are slower in developing and maybe able to be

stopped or limited by organisational action,

Sustained crisis: that may last for weeks, months or even years” (Parsons,

1996)

Maditinos and Vassiliadis (2008), in their study on “crisis and disasters in tourism

industry: happen locally – affect globally”, have combined these different

approaches for tourism crisis classification with the major risk factors described

by Lepp and Gibson (2003) in order to categorise disaster and therefore analyse

their impact. In their literature review, Leep and Gibson (2003) have pointed out

four major risk factors: terrorism, war and political instability, health concerns and

crime.

However, along with the existing definitions and classifications Maditinos and

Vassiliadis (2008) have refined the categories and have put forward an

interesting summary table. The following table allows a clear identification of force

majeure events and therefore sets up the limitations of the current study.



Table 1: Cast of features of force majeure

Type of crisis Cobra - Python Gestation period Human involvement Man-made or natural

Natural Disasters Cobra Immediate No involvement and/or

Indirect Natural and/or man made

Terrorism Cobra Immediate Direct Man made

Political instability

and war Python Sustained Direct Man made

Epidemics –

diseases Python Emerging No involvement Natural

Maditinos and Vassiliadis (2008) Crises and Disasters in Tourism Industry: Happen locally - Affect globally

Table 1: Cast of features of “happen locally – affect globally” tourism crises

This table clearly allows the understanding of the nature of force majeure. With

regards to the several definitions presented above, it therefore possible to identify

force majeure as being unavoidable and unpredictable events which strike

suddenly and generate immediate crisis, those can be either natural or manmade

events beyond control. This final definition sets the context and limitations of the

current study. The two categories displayed in table one, natural disasters and

terrorism, can be considered as force majeure through their own criteria. Despite

the fact that political instabilities and war occur gradually and can last for weeks,

the unexpected and unavoidable factor can still be discussed. However, one of

the limitations in this this study is regarding to the consequences of epidemics

and health related situation. These types of situations are not considered in this

paper as being a force majeure as diseases, epidemics and health troubles are

rarely sudden and further consequences have to be considered.



Destination managers need to regularly monitor the environment to understand

and forecast solutions to anticipate the changes that could alter the tourism

landscape (Ritchie and Crouch, 2010). The purpose of this paper is to propose

alternative solutions in order to manage the changes and the consequences due

to a force majeure situation. From a tourism perspective, crisis may include

deteriorating physical conditions of the destination (Beirman, 2002). However,

with greater impact images of the destination tend to be negatively affected

following such major crisis like terrorist attacks, assaults on tourists and natural

disasters (Beirman, 2002; Avraham, 2004).



1.1.1 Natural disasters

Several authors have emphasised the vulnerability of tourist destinations.

Tourism is often described as a fragile industry. Indeed, for many countries the

tourism sector is an important contributor to the economy especially in less

economically developed countries which local economy relies upon the tourism

industry. As previously explained, natural disasters is one of the most

unforeseeable forces affecting tourism. They can have a dramatic impact on

tourism as they usually destroy the natural environment and the infrastructures.

Additionally, natural disasters increase in tourists’ concerns about security and

safety.

Murphy and Bayley (1989) suggest that the exposure of tourism to natural

disasters is linked with the attractiveness of many high-risk exotic locations,

where events such as hurricanes or tropical storm, avalanches or ice storm and

volcanic activity are common. Indeed, hurricanes and tropical storms are among

the most powerful natural disasters because of their size and destructive

potential. Tornadoes are relatively brief but violent. Both earthquakes and

tornadoes strike suddenly without warning. Flooding, however, is the most

common of natural hazards and wildfires are more prevalent in the event of a

drought.

The December 2004 tsunami catastrophe in Indonesia is an indicative example

for the consequences of force majeure on the destination image. The influence of

the tsunami reaches beyond the borders of the area affected. One of the impacts

of the tsunami catastrophe for the tourism industry is that many tourists tended to

perceive the whole Southeast and South Asia as a risky destination, therefore the



tsunami has caused a redistribution of outbound tourists and stimulated a rapid

increase in some other outbound and domestic destinations, this implies the

arrivals in the affected areas severely decreased (Zhang, 2005, WTO, 2005). In

the case of Indonesia tsunami, the toll was heavy, over 7,000 tourists are said to

have died from the disaster, and nearly 500 are missing (De Vries, 2011). Those

unfortunate events were accompanied with a drastic drop of the tourist

frequentation of the whole geographical zone. However, ten years after the

disaster, Indonesia has returned to the status of paradisiac destination and

tourists don’t seem to be reluctant anymore to travel to this destination.

Therefore, what is the acceptable time for destination recovery in tourists’ mind?

Disasters can take many different forms, and the duration can range from an

hourly disruption to days or weeks of ongoing destruction. One interesting case is

Mt. eyjafjallajokull eruption in Iceland. This incident wasn’t outstanding because

of its casualties, but because it wreaked havoc on Europe’s air transport system.

This sudden event also threatened to turn off the number of foreign tourists

expected to visit Iceland in 2010. In fact, after a twenty percent drop in visitor

numbers in April and May compared to the previous year, tourism stakeholders

were alarmed. In response to the critical situation, Iceland’s tourism actors and

stakeholders got together and pooled their efforts in a joint marketing campaign

named Inspired by Iceland (De Vries, 2011). The successful management of the

disaster and its consequences minimises the negative effects on tourists’ beliefs

regarding the affected area. Nevertheless, the unsuccessful management

enforces the negative perception of the area hit by the disasters from a safety

and security point of view.



Surprisingly, natural disasters appear to have become more frequent in recent

years. Richardson (1994) has suggested this might not be only because we have

become a more crowded world, but it might be due to the fact that we now have

more powerful technology that has the capacity to generate disasters. Besides,

Burton et al. (1978, in Faulkner, 2003), explained the role of technology in

exposing humankind to natural disasters is linked to the fact that humans are

putting considerable efforts into controlling the natural world. Their conclusion is

that the global the global toll of natural disaster rises at least as fast as the

increase in population and material wealth, and probably faster.

However on another point of view it might be that over the years the number of

tourist destination has increased exponentially. Some of the destinations that

emerged with the growth of the tourism industry were built on areas that were

susceptible to be hit by natural events. Therefore, it might be considered that the

fact that we are a more crowded world has led to be more exposed to risk of

disasters.



1.1.2 Terrorism

Sonmez (1998) explained that “it can be inferred that crisis situations which

threaten tourist activity, often begin with short-lived disasters, whether natural or

human-caused. Thus, a single terrorist incident initially viewed as a disaster can

create a crisis situation if that destination’s image of safety is significantly

damaged. The destination must not only manage the crisis but also initiate

marketing efforts to recover lost tourism by rebuilding the positive image of a

destination”. Tourists often are the specific targets of terrorist organisations.

Regardless of the number of occurrence, terrorism continues to capture world

attention for the last two decades and continues to exacerbate public perception

of danger in general and in particular at some destinations. Since the beginning

of the millennium several terrorist attacks occurred; in 2011 New York City and

Washington D.C on September 11th, followed by Bali bombings in October 12th

2002, frequent armed unrest in Thailand since January 2004, London terrorist

attacks in July 2005, hotel bombing in Sharm-el-Sheik and Egypt revolution since

January 2005 (Maditinos and Vassiliadis, 2008) .…

Following the 25th January revolution in Egypt, the Egyptian stock market

dropped 10% (Werr, 2011) and has widely affected the tourism industry of the

country. According to the Egyptian Tourist Authority (ETA), tourism represents

11% of the gross domestic product, combining direct and indirect employment, as

there are 2.5 million people working in the tourism industry. After the events, the

figures returned to the level they were before the liberalisation of the Egyptian

economy in 2004 (Amara, El Samadicy, Ragheb, 2011).



The case of Egypt shows the sensitive relationship between the occurrence of

terrorist acts and the political stability of a country.



1.1.3 Political instability and War

Political instability describes a situation "in which conditions and mechanisms of

governance and rule are challenged as to their political legitimacy by elements

operating from outside of the normal operations of the political system" (Hall and

O'Sullivan, 1996). At first sight, political instability and terrorism may not seem

related. However, after closer examination, certain situation demonstrates

otherwise such as the previous example of Egypt. Terrorism can be the

manifestation of a political crisis (Sonmez and Graefe, 1998).

In fact, terrorism has been identified by Hall and O’Sullivan (1996) as being a

dimension of political instability along with international and civil war, riots, social

unrest and strikes. The political environment very often impacts on the

sociocultural environment. Using the concrete example of Thailand, in 2008 the

country was perceived as a politically unstable destination largely shaped by

several incidents such as, the closure of Suvarnabhumi Airport in 2008, political

riots in 2010, followed by social unrests all over the country.

However, Thailand has made considerable efforts in promoting its tourism

industry and its attempts have been very successful as Thailand is now known as

one of the top tourist destinations for both leisure and business tourism (Thailand

Convention and Exhibition Bureau or TCEB, 2010 in Jarumaneerat and

Promsivapallop, 2012). Based on Maditinos and Vassiliadis (2008) table, political

instability didn’t seem to be classified as force majeure in a first place. However,

Faulkner (2003; p265) made an interesting point which softens the basic

definition of force majeure by saying “natural and human induced disasters alike

are neither absolutely predictable nor avoidable. Furthermore, while disasters are



relatively of rare occurrence and are to some extend random, it is also true that

no destination is immune from such events.” Therefore political instabilities can

be considered as force majeure in the event of unexpected changes in the

political landscape and unforeseeable consequences. Comparable to terrorism,

political instability and war can increase the perception of risk at the destination.

Risk is an inherent component of travellers’ product and destination choice.

Individuals have different perceptions of possible destination choices, and tend to

be risk-averse or risk-taking to different degrees (Amara, El Samadicy, and

Ragheb, 2011). Destinations differ in many respects; their location, historical

experience, to political instability, ethnic conflicts and crime. Given these

differences, the analysis of destination risk perception and components is of

substantial interest. Similarly, Leep and Gibson (2008. cited in Korstanje, M.E.)

argue that travel seems to be circumscribed to two contrasting tendencies, the

sensation of novelty seeking and risk aversion. Even if risks are important

elements to determine the security of visitors, it is perception that pays the most

pervasive role in the psychological construction of danger.



1.2 Destination image and tourists perception

In the tourism industry every destination has to face significant marketing

challenges. In order to remain competitive and successful each destination must

be differentiated from the other. The differentiation appears with an effective

positioning strategy, a clear identification of the targeted markets and appropriate

promotion tools. The key component of the positioning process is the creation

and the management of a distinctive and appealing perception or image of the

destination (Calantone, Di Benetto, Hakam & Bojanic, 1989). Several studies

have illustrated that destination image influences tourists’ behaviour (Hunt, 1975;

Pearce, 1982). Those studies have shown that a negative image is thought to be

an obstacle for the future evolution and prosperity of a destination as tourists may

be reluctant to visit or return to a destination with such an image. Indeed, in order

to be chosen or considered in the travel decision process, destinations must

present a strong and positive image (Goodrich, 1978; Woodside & Lysonski,

1989).

Reynolds (1965) describes the creation of image as the development of a mental

construct based upon a few impressions chosen from a flood of information.

Several other definitions of destination image can be found. Most of them refer to

the sense of perception. Calantone, et al. (1989) determine the destination image

as the "Perceptions of potential tourist destination", Richardson & Crompton

(1988) as the "Perceptions of vacation attributes" and Gartner & Hunt (1987) as

the "Impressions that a person holds about a state in which they do not reside".

In the case of Reynolds’ (1965) definition of destination image, the flood of

information has many potential sources. It includes: promotional literature, travel



brochures, opinions of others such as family, friends and travel agents, general

media like television, newspapers, magazines, books, and movies. Nowadays

those sources can be extended to internet and all specific websites which provide

tourists with information. Furthermore, the image a tourist creates of a

destination will be primarily affected and modified based on direct information and

experience, i.e., by visiting the destination itself (Echtner and J.R. Brent, 2003).

The influence of these various sources of information and their role in destination

image formation have been put into context by Gunn (1988) in his model of the

seven phases of the travel experience:

1. Accumulation of mental images about vacation experiences

2. Modification of those images by further information

3. Decision to take a vacation trip

4. Travel to the destination

5. Participation at the destination

6. Return home

7. Modification of images based on the vacation experience.

Using this model, four states of destination image formation can be identified:

phases 1, 2, 5 and 7. In phases 1 and 2, destination images are formed based on

secondary sources of information, whereas in phase 5 and 7, actual first-hand

experience is used to modify the destination's image. The process of destination

image formation highlights the importance of individuals that can develop an

image of a destination without having necessarily visited or having been exposed



to commercial types of information relating to the fore-mentioned destination.

(Echtner and Richie, 2003).

This paper aims to identify what would happen for the tourist perception in case

of a force majeure event. In order to answer this question it is imperative to

consider one of the widely cited definitions by Gartner (1996) who defined

destination image to be made up of three distinctively different but hierarchical

interrelated components: cognitive, affective and conative. Qu, Hyunjung Kim,

and Hyunjung Im (2010), in their book entitled a model of destination branding:

integrating the concepts of the branding and destination image explains the three

components as follow. “The cognitive component is conceptualized as the sum of

beliefs and attributes of the destination, while the affective component is related

to the feeling and values an individual places on destination based on travel

benefits or motives for which they seek (Balogulu and McCleary, 1999). Lastly,

conative component is referred to the action and decision an individual makes

such as whether or not to travel to a particular destination (Gartner, 1996)” (Qu,

Hyunjung Kim, and Hyunjung Im, 2010, 6).

Since destination image or a mental picture of the destination can exercise great

influence on consumer decision-making process in many ways, destination image

is regarded as one of the important factors in ensuring the long term viability of

any tourist destination (Beerli and Martin, 2004). Therefore, this study aims to

identify and analyse the in depth factors which influence the perception.



1.3 Media and communication channels

The media has a very important relationship with the tourism industry as they

have significant influence on the image of potential tourist destinations and

therefore affecting potential tourists’ destination choice (Amara, El-Samadicy and

Ragheb, 2011). This suggests that travel-related information plays crucial role in

the imaginary of travellers when a territory remains unfamiliar (Smith et al. 2009

in Korstanje, 2011). As in any other industry, Internet, and especially Web 2.0,

has changed significantly the way individuals plan and consume travel (Buhalis

and Law, 2008). The internet has given a virtual environment and created a

platform for a multitude of activities, social networking being the most pervasive

so far. Indeed, the apparition and the quick expansion of social media have

influenced several components of tourists’ behaviour such as awareness,

information acquisition, opinions, but also purchase behaviour and post-purchase

communications and evaluation (Mangold and Faulds, 2009 in Amara, El-

Samadicy and Ragheb, 2011).

Therefore, many transport, hospitality and tourist-related businesses use internet

and social media as a promotion tool. Moreover, either word of mouth

recommendations or online travel reviews are valid instruments to reduce

travellers’ angst (Korstanje, 2011). Additionally, the role of media in disaster

management strategies can be crucial to such extent that it might make the

difference between whether or not a difficult situation evolves into a disaster

(Fink, 1986; Koewn-McMullan, 1997). Furthermore, Ritchie (2004) calls for the

contribution of different research disciplines to address how a destination can

recover from crisis, and mentions the discipline of communication and information



systems management as one of those (Mistilis and Sheldon, 2006). In other

words, all media channels can be used as a tool to disseminate warnings in the

impending disasters and provide information during the recovery stage. However,

continuous media coverage of dramatic events, such as natural disasters, acts of

terrorism, political unrest or wars can discourage tourists to travel to specific

destinations or even entire regions. (Sonmez, Apostolopoulos and Tarlow, 1999).

In this global capacity, media can significantly influence international tourism

flows towards a country hit a disaster. Decisions made by tourists can be altered

depending on the attitude and commands of tour operators, information obtained

on internet, news on television, and word of mouth. The general public relies

widely on media to display an understanding of terrorists’ motives, the implication

of aggressive actions, and the essential details of any critical situation the

destination may be facing, which as a result may affect tourists’ destination for

their future holiday. Therefore, this study aims to identify the power of each factor

influencing the decision-making process and show that risk perception is affected

by media and marketing communication messages.

The information media broadcast can be either positive or negative, moreover

they represent threats or opportunities for the destination’s recovery. As Faulkner

(1999) explained, through the development of a disaster management strategy,

many potential impacts can either be totally avoided, or at least their

consequences can be minimised. Hence why, the purpose of this analysis is also

to reveal the need of developing innovative approaches to risk management and

suggesting alternative solutions in order to reduce destination recovery time.



CHAPTER 2: METHOD AND METHODOLOGY

The existing literature provides fundamental information in order to analyse force

majeure and define the current context of the study. The classifications of

Parsons (1996), Leep and Gibson (2003), Maditinos and Vassiliadis (2008),

Seymour and Moore (2000), Karagiannis et al. (2006) and Sausmarez (2007),

allows to establish clearly the situation considered as force majeure and

determine the limits of this study. There is a lack of analysis and study on the

impact of force majeure as they represent the trickiest scenario destination

managers hypothetically have to deal with. In this context, this paper aims to

propose alternative tools and solutions for the recovery of destinations hit by such

crisis as a force majeure. Once the context set, it is then essential to comprehend

the tourist perception and how destination image is built itself.

2.1 Method

This study aims to identify the main influential factors of tourists’ perception. The

hypothesis researched is that media is the predominant factor of influence in

tourists’ perception of a destination, and that they play a crucial role in destination

image recovery process. It also tends to provides further empirical evidence to

support that destination image, measured at one point, tend to differ after the

occurrence of major incidents in the destination.



In order to answer the research questions and validate the hypothesis the method

employed has been inspired by previous research conducted by Gunn (1988) on

destination image formation; previously detailed in the literature chapter; and by

the far-famed experiment of Milgram (1974) regarding the influential power of the

media.

In order to highlight the influencing power of the media this study based its

research on an existing experience. The Milgram experiment is a psychological

experiment conducted between 1960 and 1963 by the American psychologist

Stanley Milgram. This experiment sought to assess the level of an individual’s

obedience to an authority he considers legitimate and analyse the submission

process to the authority, especially when it leads to actions which pose ethical

concerns. The real purpose of the experiment is to measure the level of

obedience even if the order stands against the ethical values of who executes it

(Milgram, 1974).

Several reproductions of this experiment have been done around the world and

have confirmed Milgram’s findings. In 2009, France Télévisions produced a

documentary “Death’s Game” featuring a fake game show (The Xtreme Zone)

reproducing Milgram's experiment. The notable difference is that the scientific

authority represented by the technician in a grey blouse in the initial experiment

was replaced by a television host.

The results of the experience showed an 81% obedience rate. The Milgram’s

experiment and all its reproductions have shown how an authority, such as the

media, can own power on individuals’ perception.



Therefore this study has identified the media as being the most pervasive

influencing factor. Moreover, Milgram’s experiment is bringing essential

information for the interpretation on the survey’s results detailed in the findings’

chapter.



2.2 Methodology

This paper also intends to answer several questions in order to develop a

framework illustrating how force majeure and related publicity adversely affect

tourists’ perception of a destination. By understanding the operation of tourists’

perception as well as its main influencing factors, it will allow to express

alternative solutions in order to reduce the recovery time of a destination. The

current research uses a mixed method approach, combining qualitative and

quantitative analyses. The choice of methodology has been made with regards to

the intangible aspect of perception and the necessity of a numerical

representation to support the hypothesis that there are behavioural similarities

related to the perception tourists holds about a destination.

2.2.1 Qualitative approach

In-depth scrutiny of the tourist perception has been conducted with a qualitative

approach through ten semi-structured interviews. These type of interviews were

chosen as they combine open-ended questions to which participants are

encouraged to answer freely with no limitation in the length or in the content of

their answer, and closed questions for which either a positive or a negative

answer is expected (Clough & Nutbrown, 2007). The major benefits of the semi-

structured interview are that this approach is less intrusive and influencing than

structured interview since the interviewee can ask questions to the interviewer, it

encourages a two-way communication.

Also, in the case of fairly closed-ended questions (Cohen et al., 2007), the

interviewees often give more than closed answers, they usually also provide the



reasons of their responses which bring interesting insight and understanding

(Gillham, 2000; Ritchie &Lewis, 2003). The informed consent from each

participant have been collected, therefore each participation is unsolicited.

Participants have been provided with sufficient information necessary to allow

them to reach and informed decision as to whether to participate or not

(Dissertation guide). Through the whole process, the research activities have

been designed, carried out, reported and documented accurately, transparently

and objectively. Whilst tourism research is unlikely to do anyone physical harm, it

could embarrass, cause anxiety, loss of self-esteem or some other form of

psychological discomfort. Indeed, all measures have been taken to ensure that

no physical or psychological damage were caused to the participants. The

anonymity of respondents and confidentiality of data collected has been strictly

respected at all times (see EA2 form in Appendix 1).

The 10 participants have been interviewed one by one, face to face in neutral

places and all interviews have been tape recorded, contend analysed and

partially transcribed for interpretation (Cohen and Crabtree, 2006). Questions

have been clearly structured prior to the interview (Cohenet al., 2007) in order to

encourage the interviewee, and therefore to make it easy to respond (Clough &

Nutbrown, 2007, p.134). The framework of the conducted semi-structured

interviews is available in Appendix 2.

Interviewees are from both gender, with different age rate, socio-economic status

and nationality. This approach intends to collect multiple perceptions through

people with various backgrounds and different personal experiences to obtain a

balanced sample. The qualitative analysis aims to understand the in depth



relation between perception and behaviour and at the same highlight the

influencing factors in publicity and information.

Nevertheless, although the qualitative analysis gives an exhaustive

understanding of the relation between perception and behaviour in the case of

the participants and highlights the influencing factors in publicity and information,

it remains challenging to output a general framework from a reduced sample of

the population. In that event, in order to support the obtained results of the

qualitative analysis, complementary research has been conducted under a

quantitative approach. It consists to factor into statistics the results obtained from

a survey in order to produce a statistically validated stereotype.



2.2.2 Quantitative approach

Quantitative research is a study involving the analysis of numerical data and

using statistical techniques. The hypothesis associated with the survey remains

that there might be behavioural similarities related to the perception tourists holds

about a destination. The research question within is to analyse the influencing

factors and identify their roles. The advantages of the quantitative method are

that the result is quantifiable as it is numerical. It can be considered as more

objective and generalised to a larger population. Therefore the results of

quantitative method can be used to develop a framework illustrating how force

majeure and related publicity adversely affects tourists’ perception of a

destination.

The survey has been conducted over 213 people with respect to the Rules of

thumb. The survey has been created on the internet with accessible tools and the

final data has been implemented on SPSS for accurate results. According to

Leary (1995), there are distinct advantages in using a questionnaire

methodology. There are cheap and easy to administer and allow confidentiality to

be assured. As well, Robson (1993) has indicated, mailed surveys are extremely

efficient at providing information in a relatively brief time period and at low cost to

the researcher. In the current study, the questionnaire was sent to participants by

email and through social networks. The use of this method’s distribution has a

snowball effect which reaches a large number of people. Gay (1987) admitted

that random sampling is the best single way to obtain a representative sample,

available for the measurement which corresponds accurately to the overall tourist

population which confirms its validity.



However, the limitation of sampling is regarding the language. As the survey is in

English only English speakers, native speakers or foreign, can answer the

questions. Moreover, another limitation can be highlighted; using emailing and

social media to diffuse the survey offers the opportunity to reach large audiences,

nevertheless it dismisses all people who are not using the Internet. In the

meantime, this exclusion puts in light one important criteria of the study; tourism

is an information intensive industry and the most important feature in reaching

information nowadays is by using the internet as an information channel. The

research question is being answered using the statistical tools. It begins with

frequency analysis and the sample composition.

Moreover the use of cross-tabulation analysis with categorical variables provides

a basic picture of the association of two variables. The hypothesis of current

study regarding whether or not there is a pattern in tourists’ behaviour towards

their perception of destination is confirmed by the Chi-square analysis. This

analysis is a test of independence used to determine whether the observed

values significantly deviate from the expected ones. The greater the difference

between expected and observed, the more patterning there is in the observed

data. However, to determine if there is a statistical relationship between key

variables the analysis of variance (ANOVA) is the tool to be used. With ANOVA

method the significance can be tested and the likelihood that those particular

outcomes occur by chance can be identified. The significance is represented in

the table by the p value. To have a full understanding of the findings tables, it is

important to remind that the smaller the p value, the greater the likelihood that the



findings are valid. All tables are analysed and discussed in the following sections.

To be able to consider the result as statistically significant, p has to be lower than

0.05. The limitation with the ANOVA method is that it only enables to determine if

there is a relationship between categories but it does not provide the necessary

information to evaluate this particular relationship. Several independent variables

were examined, including travel experience, risk perception level, age and

gender, type of travellers and occurrence of children in households. Dependent

variables were three key stages of the decision-making process, including the

general decision to travel, the extent of information research and concern for

safety in evaluating destination alternatives.

To finish, an accurate evaluation of the dimension structure of variables has to be

done. To do so, factors are examined in order to explore interrelated variables.

Once the common factors are calculated with the correlation matrix, the factors

are extracted and rotated to create a more understandable factor structure that

enables a good interpretation of the results. The different aspects of the tourists’

perception must be related or correlated in some way. If several variables

correlate highly, they may measure aspects of a common underlying dimension.

Those dimensions are called factors. Potentially there are as many factors as the

number of questions. In order to forecast the market orientations and limit the

negative impact of an uncontrollable event, a typical profile of the target market is

generated. It considers the higher rates in answers to create a general profile

corresponding to the target. Although, any variations in responses are identified,

analysed and explained in every step.



If this pattern is acknowledged then an efficient plan can be made: in order to

produce alternative strategic solutions so as to assist the tourism industry and the

destination image recovery in response to force majeure.

Considering all those theoretical findings from the past, this study aims to check

their validity. The general frame of the analysis having been set through the prior

explanation, the results of the interviews are henceforth extracted and analysed,

in order to respond to the initially formulated question, how force majeure

adversely effects tourists perception of a destination.



CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

3.1 Sample composition analysis and interpretation

The results of the conducted research are described and analysed in this section.

Tables have been organised in order to be clear and show the revealing data.

However additional detailed tables are available in Appendix 4. Descriptive

analysis involves examining the characteristics of individual variables. As the

online survey was designed for participants to answer each field before

submitting, all the data collected and used are valid. Therefore, the percentage

obtained is accurate and includes the whole panel of answers.

Table 2: Sample composition

Nationality Gender

Pourcentage % Pourcentage %

French 44.5 Male 54.0

British 16.0 Female 46.0

German 9.1 Age range

Swiss 1.1 Pourcentage %

Swedish .4 15 to 20 4.9

Italian 3.4 20 to 30 38.0

American 7.2 30 to 40 22.8

Dominican 4.6 40 to 50 12.2

Colombian 1.1 50 to 60 14.4

Japanese 1.5 Over 60 7.6

Jamaican 5.7 Do you consider yourself as used to travel? Indian 1.1

Spanish 1.1 Pourcentage %

Tunisian 1.5 Yes 76.4

Mexican 1.5 No 23.6

The data used in Table 2 are frequency data



The sample consisted of 263 participants, with slightly more males (54% (n =

142)) than females (46% (n =121). The questionnaire diffusion went snowballing

from France. This explains why 44.5% from the respondents have a French

nationality; however several other countries are represented in the sample which

makes nationality an interesting variable for cross tabulation, correlations and

interpretation. Surprisingly the respondents’ age range is relatively well balanced

as all categories are signifying, as well as for the nationality variable, the facts

that all age rages are represented makes the sample representative and reliable.

The last information given in table 2 is a subjective question regarding whether or

not the participants consider themselves as used to travel.

The question has been asked with the intention of identifying if the respondents

are informed about travels and therefore have the sufficient knowledge to answer

this specific questionnaire. A large majority (76.4%) believe themselves that they

are indeed used to traveling, thus by extension they have the abilities to

understand the topic and respond. Regarding the 23.6% of participants that do

not think they are used to traveling, it can be inferred that their answer implies

some form of modesty. It has been verified with question 2 and 3, asking

respectively how many times a year participants travel for leisure (question 2) and

for work (question 3), that every participant is travelling at least once a year for

leisure (table available in Appendix 4, Table 10).

Therefore, it is possible to consider their answers as they know how to travel.

Even though the frequency of their travels is low they are also representative of

the overall population. This paper aims to study, among other things the risk

perception and its influencing factors such as safety perception of a destination.



3.2 Travellers’ type analysis

Regarding the type of travellers, risk perception and the criteria of safety may be

different. Hence why, the travellers’ type is primarily analysed as being part of the

sample composition.

Table 3: Travellers' type

What type of traveller are you?

Pourcentage %

With a group of friends 23.2

With your family 21.7

On your own 19.8

With your friends and family 14.4

With a friend 14.1

With collegues for business related trip 6.8

The above table shows with whom travellers are usually sharing their experience.

There is an attention-grabbing question arising from it concerning the relation

between the risk perception and type of traveller. The hypothesis would be that

there is a relationship between the travellers’ type and the risk perception;

however the quantitative analysis tool ANOVA, used to determine correlation

between variables, doesn’t allow an analysis of this particular relationship.

Therefore, as the question cannot be answered through the quantitative analysis,

a closer look as been given to interviewees’ perceptions.



3.3 Risk perception analysis

Through the qualitative analysis of the interviews some of the in-depth reasons

for this relationship have been revealed.

“On a personal matter, I wouldn’t mind going to those destinations even right after

the disaster, because as people say “lighting never strike twice at the same

place”, but when it comes to travelling with my family I don’t consider the same

travel destinations at all […] it’s just that as a mother I don’t want to put my kids in

danger at any point.” (Participant 4: Sacha, single mother with two kids)

“I don’t know if safety is really the thing I’m seeking, but as I grow older it is more

the sanitary conditions of the destination that matter to me rather than the political

environment situation or whatever.” (Participant 8: John, 62 and freshly retired)

Those two quotes bring partial explanations regarding the nature of the

relationship of travellers’ type and risk aversion. It appears that the vulnerability of

children seems to be a predominant factor in the decision making-process of

parents. Applying these results to the destination recovery process and the need

of destination to regain their previous market, it might be interpreted that families

are not the right group to target in the period following the disaster. It is therefore

understandable that for parents, as they have the responsibility of looking after

their kids would be more reluctant to take the risk considering the responsibility

they have.

In Sacha’s perception the destination seems to be safe enough for her to go,

however the destination doesn’t fulfil her own underlying perception of a safe

environment for children. On another hand John’s insights on safety relates to the



sanitary aspect of the destination. In other words the destination in which natural

disasters would have damaged the environment could show sanitary deficiencies

at the initial stage of recovery. For example after the occurrence of flood, all water

cannot be drained and stagnant water can remain. It increases the risk of

diseases and insects carrying diseases.

Considering Sacha and John’s previous statements, it seems that they are

adopting a risk-averse behaviour. In question 10 of the survey, respondents are

asked if they consider themselves risk averse or risk seeking. The answers are

displayed in Appendix 4 table 11 and reveal a quasi-fifty-fifty results, risk averse

represents 49.4% (n=130) and risk seeking 50.6% (n=133). In order to interpret

the results and understand which factor is correlated to being risk averse or risk

seeking, question 10 has been cross-tabled with gender and age range (see table

4 and 5 below).

Table 4: Cross-table analysis of risk and gender factors

In general, do you consider yourself as being more:

Effectif

Risk averse Risk seeking Total

Gender Male 72 (27.3%) 70 (26.6%) 142

Female 58 (22%) 63 (24%) 121

Total 130 133 263

It appears that the factors are equivalents. The 72 risk-averse males represent

27.3% of the total respondents (n=263) and 50.7% of the males (n=142), the

other 70 risk seeking males represent another 26.6% of the whole sample and as

well 49.3% of the males. The female results are also well-adjusted. Females risk-

aversion represents 22% of the sample which embodies 58 females out of the



263 respondents, it is as well 48% of the total number of females (58 out of 121),

while females who are risk-seeking represent the remaining 24% of the general

sample and 52% of the female sample (63 out of 263 on general sample and 63

out of 121 females).

It can therefore readily be concluded that gender doesn’t impact the trait of being

risk-averse or risk seeking. Moreover it is inferred that those two variables alone

are not related. Leep and Gibons (2007), in their paper entitled “Sensation

Seeking and Tourism: Tourist role, perception of risk and destination choice”

have suggested that sensation seeking is a personality trait associated with the

need for novelty and stimulation. As gender doesn’t seem to influence the risk

perception there might be a correlation with another variable such as age range.

Table 5: Cross-table analysis of risk and age range factors


Effectif


Age range

15 to 20 7 6 13

20 to 30 49 51 100

30 to 40 26 34 60

40 to 50 4 28 32

50 to 60 33 5 38

Over 60 11 9 20

Total 130 133 263

Similarly results are balanced within age range categories except for the “50 to

60” and “Over 60” in which the tendency is clearly to favour risk aversion rather

than risk seeking. This result is understandable, as mentioned before risk seeking

is associated with the need for novelty and stimulation. Therefore, it has been

verified that the age is not the predominant factor in risk perception. Given that



gender and age range are not predominant factors the same analysis has been

done with nationality import influencing factors of tourist perception.

The cross-table of risk and nationality can be found in Appendix 4 Table 13. The

result of the analysis shows that the larger sample of French people is as risk

averse than risk seeking with respectively 57 and 60 respondents over 117;

British are more risk seeking than risk averse unlike Americans who seem to be

totally risk averse, as well as Dominicans, Tunisians, Mexican, Colombians and

Indians where all respondents have chosen risk averse. On the contrary, all

respondents from Switzerland, Sweden, Italy, Japan and Spain have answered

risk seeking.

On the first sight it appears that nationality influences risk perception and

therefore could be an inducing factor of the destination decision making process.

However, since the sample for each nationality is limited, generalisation is not

possible. When looking at the overall sample (n=263) and the answers given, it

appears one more time that the results are balanced. In fact over 263

respondents, 130 are risk averse and 133 risk seeking. Consequently, nationality

is not the predominant factor influencing risk perception. Under these conditions

further in depth analysis needs to be conducted. Korstanje (2007) in his study

about risks entitled “Why risks, why now?” arrived at the conclusion that the type

of psychological personality plays a crucial role at the time of determining risk

perception. His deduction partially answer the question enquired in this study

regarding the most important factor influencing tourists’ perception.

Indeed, personality and psychological profile are individuals’ factors that cannot

be damaged by the external environment. Going further in the analysis, the



hypothesis of the current study is that external factors such as media plays a

crucial role in creating and influencing perception and thus impact drastically

tourist’s decision making process.

In other interesting research question of this study is to identify which of the force

majeure is perceived as the most frightening. The analysis of the obtained figures

at this question is making progress answering the hypothesis.



3.4 Which force majeure is mostly feared: possible correlations seeking

The conclusion that gender, age and nationality do not significantly impact

perception of risks, based on question 10 of the survey, a further precise question

has been asked seeking for a predominant correlation factor. As risk has a wide

terminology, the question has been asked in a roundabout way including the

notion of fear and directing to three possible answers which correspond to the

three categories of force majeure established in this study. Therefore, question

16 is asking the participants which force majeure frightens them the most among

natural disasters, political turmoil and terrorist attacks. The obtained results are

as follow.

Table 6: Analysis of the fear factor

When travelling, which of the following force majeure frightens you the

most?

Effectif

When travelling, which of the following force

majeure frightens you the most? Total

The occurrence of Natural disaster 41

The occurrence of Political turmoil 71

The occurrence of Terrorist attacks 151

Total 263

Initially the same cross tabulation with gender, age and nationality has been done

in order to confirm or not the results found with the risk perception question. The

three crossed-tables are available in Appendix 4 table 14, 15 and 16.

In fact, the results obtained show once more that the significance of variation in

answers is not important enough to affirm that those three factors significantly

influence tourists’ choice of the most frightening force majeure.



However the repartition of responses itself raises a thought-provoking question.

Indeed, terrorism attacks are ranked as the most frightening force majeure by far

compared to natural disaster and political turmoil for more than 50% of the

respondents. In fact, when it comes to terrorism, the number of answers almost

triples regardless of the nationality, age or gender. A common thought would be

that terrorism is the worst of force majeure. Nevertheless, this statement only

relies on ones’ perception. Indeed, which factor is determinant in prompting

terrorism as the scariest force majeure?

When comparing natural disaster, political turmoil and war, and terrorism the

facts shows that, as explained in the literature review, the three of them share the

same characteristics. They are unpredictable, unavoidable, strike suddenly,

create a situation of crisis, generate confusion and fear, damage the

environment, impact the populations and most of all they each cause a large

amount of deaths and victims when they occur. Moreover, there is no tangible

distinction in their frequency or location of occurrence nor in the number of deaths

they have caused so far. In facts, the obtained results could have probably been

explained if terrorism had the most important deaths toll over the two others.

However, according to GTI (Global Terrorism Index, 2014) and the UNISDR

(United Nations Office for Disaster Risk reduction, 2013), it appears that between

2000 and 2012 the total deaths toll of terrorism acts was over 89,000 deaths

while natural disasters count over 1.2 million deaths. Therefore, the influencing

factor is not the amount of victims generated by force majeure.



Consequently, there is another existing reason to explain the results. Indeed, it

seems like here is an interesting differentiation that could be highlighted and

which might explain the obtained figures.

3.5 Knowledge acquisition: key element for image and perception creation

In order hold a perception about something, it is needed to have sufficient

knowledge, i.e., information has been received or sought to enable creation of

opinions and perception. Therefore, where is the information received or sought?

Through which channel are the intentional information gathered?

A useful contrast in characterising information acquisition is to consider passive

versus active information gathering (Jensen, 1988; Feder and Slade, 1984).

Passive information is received through medial channels such as; TV,

newspapers, or radio, where the audience or the readers are informed about

general news whether they are interested in the subject or not. Active information

relates to information seeking, while passive information includes all information

received consciously or subconsciously through different media. When travelling

to a destination, 92.1% of the tourists are willing to gather information prior to

travel (see table 17in Appendix 4). Therefore the question has been asked

‘through which channels are the information collected?’

About 30% of the respondents proceed to a general internet research to collect

data about the destination, 22.4% are researching directly through the tourism

office’s website of the destination, 15% use online blogs, where content is

generated by both professional and travellers, and 12.2% are checking the



governmental website of the destination. The remaining 11% are using articles

from both online and journals and lastly 8.4% would ask their travel agent for

further information about the destination (table available in Appendix 4, table 18).

Those results show how intentional formation is acquired. Therefore, as media

has many forms and can be broadcast through diversified channels, it is

important to identify the credit given to the different sources of information people

are exposed to.

3.6 Perception and reliability of the information sources

To have an idea of which source of information is the most trusted, respondents

were asked to rate a proposed list of information channels from one to five, one

being a very reliable source in their opinion, and five being absolutely not reliable

for information. The descriptive table of the results is available in Appendix 4

table 19. To go further in quantitative data analysis, and in order to have a better

understanding of the influence of each media channel, those sources have been

examined through a factor analysis in the objective of finding underlying clusters.

Indeed, questions and variables measure something unique but also something

common with other questions. The factor analysis tends to demonstrate whether

different measures are relevant aspects of a common dimension. This method is

realisable applicable in the case of our study as we have a large data set. It was

initially assumed that there are some underlying structures within the data. The

factor analysis is a statistical procedure of data reduction. It first starts with the

KMO and Bartlett’s test of sphericity which reveals if in this specific case factor

analysis would be conductive conducive.



Table 7: Factor analysis and underlying clusters, KMO measure of sampling

Adequacy and Bartlett's test of sphericity

Indice KMO et test de Bartlett

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .793

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square 2837.698

df 190

Sig. .000

The above table of KMO and Bartlett’s test of sphericity produces the Kaiser-

Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s test. The value of

KMO should be greater than 0.5 if the sample is adequate. In fact, the KMO and

Bartlett’s Test indicates that the data is conducive to factor analysis as the KMO

value (0.793) is greater than 0.5.

Consequently, the different aspects of media and level of reliability must be

related or correlated in some way. If several variables correlate highly, it means

that it measures aspects of a common underlying dimension. Those dimensions,

called factors, are revealing the intensity of their impact on tourist perception.

Potentially there are as many factors as the number of questions, in this case it

means 20 factors were possible. Due to the Eigenvalues and the percentage of

variance accounted for each factor in table 8 it was possible to extract 6

significant and usable factors out of the 20 asked questions with Eigenvalues

greater than 1. Those results are demonstrated in Appendix 4 table 20.

The factor analysis has helped to reduce the number of variables by identifying

groups of inter-correlated variables. To go deeper in the interpretation of the six

factors, the dataset has to be rewritten according to these new factors in order to



score each individual respondent in terms of these new dimensions. For accurate

analysis of the computed factor scores a factor rotation matrix is implemented.

The original table of factor rotation obtained after proceeding with SPSS is table

21 (Appendix 4).

It is already possible to see the six different dimensions according to each column

but as the data is raw the table has been cleaned to ease visualisation and

interpretation of the clusters. Moreover, in order to assist the interpretation and

the delimitation of dimensions it is possible to maximise the loading of variables

on one factor while minimising its loading on all other factors. As a matter of

reliability, only the greater values in each row has been retained, i.e., that the

lowest value with less significance has been eliminated in order to have a clear

and relevant table of the six factors as exposed next page in table 8.



Table 8: Factor analysis and underlying clusters

Rotated component Matrixa

Which source of information do you trust the most?

Components

1 2 3 4 5 6

General media

Tv Advert .700

Tv News .694

Documentaries .466

Journal articles .639

Newspaper .734

Web media

Blogs .805

Social Media .769

Internet Commercials .689

Tangible readings

Magasin .624

Brochure .847

Leaflets .751

Entertainments

Books .739

Movies .613

Tv shows .699

Representatives of an authority

Government websites .736

Specialized websites .824

Professional .845

First hand sources

Your own Experience .312

Word of mouth .727

Your family and relatives experience .772

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

a. Rotation converged in 12 iterations.



The factor analysis has succeeded in reducing the number of measures from 20

to 6. Each factor represents a dimension of media. Exanimating the underlying

data structure and reducing the number of measures has facilitated the analysis.

It now fits with the conceptual framework.

The obtained factors have been named according to the elements they include,

namely: general media, web media, tangible reading, entertainment,

representative of an authority, and first hand sources. The most important

dimension in terms of key attribute and trust by the tourists is their own

experience and by extension the first hand sources factor. Nevertheless, the

second most important category is the representative of an authority. The general

media category followed by the social media with mitigate trust of the participant

regarding they reliability.

Concerning the remaining two categories, their reliability in respondents’ opinion

is quite low, except for books within the tangible sources category. All those

components are important to take into consideration with the aim of suggesting

alternative solution for destination recovery, the communication and marketing

have a large impact on the factors within this dimension.



3.7 Approaching the media channels and information acquisition in the

perspective of asking tourist their judgement on media’s reliability.

Interestingly, TV shows and movies have been graded as having the lowest

reliability level. However considering past examples of common situation those

two sources of random information diffusion have shown good results in term of

subconscious influence. Indeed, after the tsunami disaster in Indonesia in 2004

and the terrorist attacks in Bali in 2007, the tourism had slowed down as for any

destination hit by force majeure.

However, in August 2010 the movie “Eat, pray, love”, realised by Ryan Murphy,

was broadcasted in cinemas of several countries. It had a pronounced success at

the time and two years later, Bali had reached its highest number of tourists and

was classified as one of the top 10 destinations in the world. Nonetheless, it

cannot be said affirmatively that this specific movie had any influence on the

tourist’s choice of destination as there is no scientific facts that support this

theory.

In the same vein, the French TV show called “Les Marseillais” (called after the

appellation of the city of Marseille inhabitants) has been very popular since its

first broadcast in 2012. Already four seasons have been broadcasted on the main

TV chains for the past two years. For each season, habitants from Marseille are

selected to go to attractive tourist destination to accomplish challenges and

missions.

The first destination was Cancun, which, at the time, was not a destination of

interest for the French tourist for several reasons (expensive travel and low



amount of packages available at the time). However, after the diffusion of the first

season starting in November 2012, the number of packages for Mexico and

especially Cancun were found in almost every tour operator or travel agency. The

same thing happened with Miami and Rio as in season 2 and 3. Once again,

there is still no valid data regarding the actual influence of this particular TV show.

Nevertheless, it raises an interesting point about subconscious influence of the

media as they are reported to be the less reliable source of representative

information about a destination. The elements could be a research topic for

further studies. Relating to the results of the factor analysis table, it can be

pointed out that the two most trusted dimensions, first hand sources and

representative of an authority, are both considered as active information sources

as they are used for the specific purpose of seeking information about a

destination. However the other four dimensions mainly relate to passive

information acquiring during which information are gathered subconsciously.

Moreover, those four dimensions all together represent more than 80% of

information channels.

The first conclusion that can be drawn from the rotated matrix in table 8 is that

media rule the passive information system. In other words, if the information is

not communicated through media then it can be assumed that the majority of the

population would not be aware of it, except people who are specifically looking for

it. This observation places the media in a position of unprecedented power over

the information they broadcast, moreover while everybody in the population is not

able to receive first-hand information such as own experience or benefit from

relatives and family experience.



Therefore their opinion is created upon available information, which is displayed

by the media. It confers significant power as population rely on them as if they

were an authority, in fact it seems like they are the authority in information

broadcasting. This statement has been verified thanks to the replication of the

Milgram experiment (1963, 1974) done in 2009 by French and other European

searchers in science and psychology, on the power of television and my

extension the power of media.

3.7 The power of media: reproduction of Milgram’s experiment

In spring 2010, a documentary by Christophe Nick called the Game of Death was

broadcast on several large European chains. This documentary intends to

present the replicated experiment of Milgram showing the impact of television

media environment on the behaviour of individuals. Indeed, the experiment

reveals that television is a distinctive tool of power, which can force people into

obedience or to obey either consciously or subconsciously. Those results are

similar to those obtained by Milgram in 1963, during his second experiment on

obedience, regarding the power of institution, governments, science, religion etc.

(Milgram, 1974).



3.8 SWOT analysis of media

In this paper, the media has been presented with a singular negative connotation

in influencing tourists’ perception. However, on a global scale, the media, as a

communication channel is the most important distributor when it comes to

notifying and updating the population in case of force majeure. In fact, because of

their established power on population they could be considered as the main asset

of governments in large communication campaigns to alert the population of

upcoming disasters when forecasted or to communicate security and safety

instruction in case of force majeure.

Moreover, during the recovery of the destination, the media embody the perfect

marketing when used adequately. This will be discussed in the next part of the

repot as it relates to the alternative solutions proposed to assist destination

recovery process. Pro tem, strengths, weaknesses, opportunity and threats of

media channels are listed in the following SWOT table (on the next page). This

type of inquiry is usually conducted for a market analysis, in the context of this

paper, it is the tool used to bring out the perspective of media gainful use.



Table 9: Swot analysis of media channels

Strengths Weaknesses

- The proved power of media

- Majority of media channels are

accessible to populations

- Information can be given in real time

- Information travels and is not limited

to the country where it is first

broadcasted

- Source intensive medium

- Multiplicity of media channels

- Contradiction of information

- Tendency to exaggerate and dramatize

- The own purpose of media is not

always in favour of external actors

- Quality of information is not always

verified

Opportunities Threats

- Powerful tool for communication in

case of force majeure

- Important communication tool usable

for marketing

- Specific media as social media

represent an ideal channel to use

indirectly for marketing

- Multiplicity of sources can create

confusion,

- Loss of reliability and accuracy in

information

- Media aim to make profit on

information broadcasting regardless of

the impact on other economy systems.



3.9 Adaptation of Gunn’s model (1988)

Now that opportunities and threats have been identified with regards to the

strengths and weaknesses of media, it is therefore possible to investigate what

opportunities can be taken in order to support the positive image creation and

recovery of destinations. To do so, the current study refers to the model

established by Gunn (1988), presented in the literature review chapter, to

implement marketing strategies using the right media channel at the right time.

Gunn’s model of destination image formation includes seven phases of the travel

experience:

1. Accumulation of mental images about vacation experiences.

The first phase of image creation relies on personal experiences of previous

vacations, word of mouth, relatives and family experiences, which correspond to

the first dimension in factor analysis.

2. Modification of those images by further information.

The first idea or image held about a particular destination is then subject to

change with passive and active information acquiring. It tends to be that

information sought out has more influence than information received

subconsciously as the travellers are intentionally looking for data to gather and

interpret them objectively to create their own opinion.

In this stage, the associated dimension would be the “representative authorities”

which is confirmed in table 18 answering the question “which channel do you

usually use prior to your travel to collect information concerning the destination”.



The main channels quotes were; tourism office websites, governmental websites

which embody the authority of institutions, online blogs which refers to

information generated by other travellers so it can be related to the first hand

dimension, and general internet research which demonstrates the willingness of

travellers to gather data from different sources to compare them and thus obtain

accurate data. Among the information collected some of the destination’s assets

are decisive in decision making such as; safety of the travel location, historic

sites, friendliness of the locals, accessibility, cultural patrimony and weather at

destination (see table 22 in Appendix 4). On a marketing point of view, phase 2 of

Gunn’s model is where there is a card to play for strategic marketing.

Through the knowledge of travellers’ favourite information channel and the credit

they give to information sources in general, it is therefore possible to plan an

effective marketing strategy when rebuilding the destination image.

3. Decision to take a vacation trip

The final decision to take a vacation trip to a particular destination relies at the

end on tourists’ internal characteristics or personal factors. This has been

explained by the researcher Beerli and Martin (2003) who have conducted a

study on travel decision making process. They conclude that the decision is

influenced by “tourists’ internal characteristics or personal factors on the different

components of perceiving image”. They also have analysed and defined more

precisely “the relationship between the perceived image and the tourist

motivations, their accumulated experience of vacation travel and socio-

demographic characteristics referring to their gender, age, and level of education,

social class and country of residence are assessed” (Beerli and Martin, 2003).



The results of their study has indicated that: “(1) Motivation influence the affective

component of image; (2) The experience of vacation travel has significant

relationship with cognitive and affective images, and (3) The socio demographic

characteristics influence the cognitive and effective assessment of image” (Beerli

and Martin, 2003).

4. Travel to the destination

While traveling to the destination tourists are having their own experience and

collecting first-hand information and therefore start creating or improving the

conceptual image they had of the destination. Therefore, the journey to the

destination is the first step of their travel experience, in order to start with a

positive impression it would be surely preferable that the travel experience comes

about smoothly.

5. Participation at the destination

Participation at the destination is one important element after force majeure. It

can even be thought as an attractive asset for the first tourists to come back.

Therefore, one of the suggestions in destination image rebuilding is to encourage

humanitarian missions in the initial phase of recovery. Indeed, volunteers could

be the right target market in promoting the recovery of the destination. Their

experience and participation at the destination will provide them with positive

images which they will share back home. Moreover, in a media communication

perspective, while recovering, the destination should ensure to prioritise the

access to internet in hotels and other places of interest. This might seems, at first

sight, a shallow concern considering that the destination just suffered the



occurrence a major disaster; however, it is the most important indirect marketing

strategy.

In a time where smartphones are blooming in every household and where social

networking has become a common daily phenomenon, internet access is the key

for positive advertising when tourists are still at the destination. When Gunn

(1988) created his model, the factors of destination image diffusion were

implemented in phase 6, when tourists were returning home. Nevertheless, in the

current time technology systems are abundant and regardless of nationality, age

or gender, the majority of tourists like to share real-time impressions, pictures and

surprises.

Pictures of the tourists’ travels are an important asset, as Smith et al. (2009) have

suggested, travel-related information plays crucial role in the travellers’

imagination when a territory remains unfamiliar. Therefore, “Word-of-mouth

recommendations or travel online reviews are valid instruments in order for

travellers to diminish their angst during their stay out of home” (Korstanje, 2007).

To this extent, it is suggested to encourage hotels and other facilities to have

sufficient access to the internet and also to implement online reviewing of the

hotel, so that tourists can give their insight in real time and contribute implicitly to

the marketing strategy of the destination during and after their holidays.

6. Return home

Once at home, the information diffusion continues regarding the places of interest

tourists have visited, activities that have been done, contribution to the

destination, they also usually bring back souvenirs and gifts for relatives and

family and there is when the experience is shared and spread again. Moreover,



travellers usually compare their travel experiences and intend to receive feedback

from other destinations. Therefore it can lead to the modification of the image

others could hold about the destination and have a positive influence in attracting

other tourists. Additionally, the perception tourists held about the place before

travelling at the destination might have changed between phase 1 and 6 which

leads to the very personal phase 7 in which the final set of the image is done.

7. Modification of images based on the vacation experience.

Travel experience is one of the factors helping building individuals’ psychological

personality and therefore influencing their decisions as Korstanje (2007)

demonstrated in his study “Why risks, Why now?” To complete the current study

two final questions still have to be discussed.

The first one aims to identify the willingness of tourists to travel back to a known

destination after a disaster, and the reasons of their answers, and the perceived

period of time necessary, in travellers’ opinion, for destination to recover from

each type of force majeure.

3.10 Willingness to return at the destination after a disaster

Question 11 of the survey was seeking for respondents to give their opinion on

whether or not they would return to a destination hit by force majeure. In the

objective of obtaining accurate answers, the question was formulated using their

favourite destination as a reference. This means, they are already familiar with

the destination and they are not usually reluctant to travel there.



Table 10: Willingness to return at destination

Cross table If one of your favourite destination was hit by a

disaster, would you still be willing to travel to the destination? *

How many times a year do you travel for leisure?

Effectif

If one of your favourite destinations was hit by a disaster, would you still be willing to travel

to the destination? Total

Yes, I would travel to the destination anyway 24

Yes, I would travel to the destination when it will have recover from the disaster

82

No, I am not willing to go back to the destination 59

No, I am not willing to go back yet 63

I don't know 35

Total 263

The majority of respondents are willing to return to the destination when they will

perceive it as safe and secure, i.e., when it will have recover from the disaster.

This relates to question 11, 12 and 13 of the survey regarding the recovery period

of destination. In fact, if tourists’ perception of recovery time is too long they might

turn away from the destination and that would explain why in the above table 82

respondents, are positive to return after recovery of the destination, while 63

answer that they are not willing to go back yet, meaning that they are not

abandoning the idea of returning to the destination, however as they might not

know how the situation will evolve they prefer to play it safe and chose the “No”

answer hiding a slight possibility that they will return after all.

To the question of assumed recovery time period for a destination after each

disaster the results are the following.



Table 11: Estimated recovery time of destinations

In your opinion, what would be the recovery time after:

Natural Disaster Terrorism Acts Political Instabilities

N % N % N %

1 to 10 Weeks 14 5.3 1 to 10 weeks 13 4.9 1 to 10 weeks 5 1.9

1 to 6 months 100 38.0 1 to 6 months 65 24.7 1 to 6 months 37 14.1

6 months to 1 year 30 11.4 6 months to 1 year 49 18.6 6 months to 1 year 75 28.5

At least 1 year 58 22.1 At least 1 year 41 15.6 At least 1 year 57 21.7

Several years 48 18.3 Several years 71 27.0 Several years 53 20.2

More than 5 years 13 4.9 More than 5 years 17 6.5 More than 5 years 32 12.2

More than 10 years 0 0.0 More than 10 years 7 2.7 More than 10 years 4 1.5

Total 263 100.0 Total 263 100.0 Total 263 100.0

The obtained results are much diversified. This can indicate two things; first that

the respondents don’t have a precise idea on how fast a destination can recover;

this is probably to a lack of information or knowledge on this specific topic; or that

they have each answered having different specific examples in mind. For

example, as Marc explained when he was answering the same question in his

interview “I think it depends on the exact type of disaster we are talking about.

Let’s see, when I’m working with the Caribbean islands, first of all I make sure I’m

not going there or sending my clients there when it’s the hurricanes’ season (...)

but then when it has happened, I don’t need to wait long before I can go back

there.” (Participant 7, working in the travel industry related field, travels a lot).

On the other hand John was referring to the tsunami when answering the same

question “(..) I think, (..) it would take up to two years before thing starts to go

back to normal. The first year they (referring to the locals) will have to rebuild

everything and cope with the damage, then when one year has passed there is

the commemoration of the losses – which by the way might bring back to the

destination people that have lost relative in the disaster, it’s kind of like



commemoration tourism (..) then, well, yeah after the second year I think people

have (..) not forgotten, but at least the disaster in not as fresh in their mind as it

would be the first year following the disaster.” (Participant 3, freshly graduated

young worker)

This interesting comment meets Alina’s opinion when she said when she was

referring to recovery after the occurrence of terrorism acts “[…] it’s all that media

coverage that gives bad perception of the destination. As soon as the media

would have find something else to talk about then people will not here about it

anymore and they will probably forget and go back to the vision they had initially

of the destination.” (Participant 1, freshly graduated and currently working in the

tourism field)

Alina added later in the interview that things shouldn’t be hidden to the tourists

when selling packages but she also mentioned “I never know what to say when

people are asking me if a destination is safe or not (laughter) actually it depends

where you stand in your risk attitude. I had this middle age couple willing to travel

to Brazil for one month and stopping in several cities. They asked me if Brazil

was safe. The generic answer that we are usually giving is: it depends where you

go! Every destination has its own risks; even in the smaller village you can face a

thief who will be willing to rob you. I explained them that some areas were to

avoid and that if they were careful everything should go fine. But if tomorrow

there is a terrorist attack, a flood or a civil war there I would have not be able to

forecast it. This is the point with force majeure. As a travel agent I can make

people aware of the daily risks but with regards to force majeure, no destination is

really safe”.



Alina and the other interviewees brought a lot of consistent information in order to

conclude this study. Unfortunately it was not possible to include in this paper all

substantial extracts from the interviews for word count reasons. However, as

most of the interviews were conducted before and at the same time as the

survey, their answers to the questions have helped analysing the quantitative

data gathered and therefore help to draw the conclusions of this study.



CONCLUSION

In the current tourism industry, many destinations rely on tourism for their

economy to be stable and as it generates a lot of employment. In the event of

force majeure, the wealth of whole country can be shifted if the appropriate

measures are not taken in time. Existing literature provide a lot precious

information on crisis management and disaster prevention. Institutions such as

the WTO (World Tourism Organisation) even provide guidelines and procedures

of measure to be taken in the occurrence of disasters or crisis. Nonetheless, the

existing literature has little to offer in terms of tourists’ behavioural framework

which could help destination to cope with the consequences of such events.

Therefore, this study offers first an understanding of the circumstances in which

destinations stand when force majeure has occurred. Moreover it analyses and

explains the perception of tourist post-disaster.

The tourism industry is a very competitive environment in order to remain

competitive and in the case of some destinations to survive economically after

force majeure, there is a need to regain the lost market as soon as possible.

Therefore, in the critical analysis of “how force majeure and related publicity

adversely effects tourists’ perception of a destination”, force majeure events have

been identified as being unforeseeable, unavoidable, natural or man-made,

sudden events that can strike in every destination of the world; even though some

places have a favourable location to natural disaster; and for which exceptional

measure have to be taken. Among them are natural disasters, acts of terrorism

and political instabilities; when these are not avoidable or predictable in some

way.



Tourists’ perception is an intangible element which depends mainly on

individual’s psychological personality but which can be influenced by external

factors such as the media. Regarding perception of risks, it has been

demonstrated that in terms of risk aversion or risk seeking, factors such as

gender, age range, nationality or travel frequency only have a small incidence

and limited effect on their perception which meets the conclusions of Korstanje

(2007) on the dominance of psychological personality attributes in influencing risk

perception.

Therefore the power of media has been acknowledged and its impact has been

clearly point out in both literature (Faulkner, 1999), past experiments (Milgram,

1974), and verified in the conducted interviews, as well as in the analysis of the

data collected through the questionnaire. The capacity of media to influence

directly or indirectly the construction of mental picture and perception of a

destination has been demonstrated through their intervention and participation at

each stage of the seven phases of destination image creation process

established by Gunn (1988). Furthermore, their influence has been established

and confirmed through examples and statistics.

However, it has also been established that the power the hold can be used as an

asset for the tourism industry when used as a strategic marketing tools.

Moreover, media with their intensive coverage of and their capacity to reach a

large amount of person represent the most efficient channel to broadcast

prevention warnings, safety information, etc. and therefore they constitute an

important security vector in the event of force majeure.



Nevertheless, this same media coverage post-disaster represents an actual

threat for the well-being of tourism in the affected destination. Therefore, now that

the influential power of media has been acknowledge and measured on both

opportunities it creates and the threats it spreads, it is thus conceivable to use it

to the advantage of the destination for its recovery process as suggested in

chapter three. The pattern drawn along this study reveals that risk perception of a

destination influences the willingness to travel or return to the destination.

Additionally, Even though all media channels are not considered as reliable they

still characterize the prominent vector of passive and active information

acquisition as demonstrated in section 3.7. To conclude briefly on the pettern of

destination recovery process, it might be said that the longer the disaster is

exposed to media coverage, the longer the recovery process will last unless

some positive material is strategically broadcasted as well.

Considering all the elements brought, the effects of post disaster crisis at the

destination, may be short-lived when there are effective marketing and

communication strategies implemented.



Appendix 1

EA2

Ethical Approval Form:

Human Research Projects



EA2 Ethical Approval Form: Human Research Projects

Business School Please word-process this form, handwritten applications will not be accepted

This form must be completed for each piece of research activity whether conducted by academic

staff, research staff, graduate students or undergraduates.

Please complete all sections. If a section is not applicable, write N/A.

1 Name of Applicant

Sara WUNSCH

Department:MSc Tourism and hospitality service management

Email: [email protected] Phone: 0033649765014

2 Position in the University (indicate)

(replace this with your own content)

Teaching Staff Research Staff Administrative Staff Other (details):- Undergraduate Student Postgraduate taught Student Research Student

3 Role in relation to this research (indicate)

Student supervised by Business School Staff

4 Brief statement of main Research Question

The purpose of the study is to critically analyse how force majeure and related publicity adversely effects tourists’ perception of a destination

• Which are the influencing factors of tourists’ perception • And what role does each factor play • Hypothesis: the media represent the most pervasive and influencing factor

5 Brief Description of Project

(Please indicate the period you require ethical approval using the start and finish dates)

(replace this with your own content)

• Mix method • Participants: 263 random anonymous persons responding to a questionnaire,

this might involve minor as the lowest categorie of age range includes people from 15 to 120 years old and has been answered by 13 persons

• Also 10 voluntary participants for semi-structured interviews (all adults) • Methods of data collection: qualitative; interviews/ quantitative: questionnaire • Methods of data analysis, Google forms, excel spread shits, and SPSS

there must be both a start and a review date

Approximate Start Date:

Approximate End Date:

6 Name of Principal Investigator or Supervisor

(Only if relevant - this applies to a project with multiple researchers)

Hanya Pielichaty Email address : [email protected] Telephone:

7 Names of other researchers or student investigators

1. 2. N/A 3.



involved

(Use this section for group coverage e.g. a class engaged in teaching/ learning involving primary research)

4.

8 Statement of the ethical issues involved and how they are to be addressed.

This section should be completed so that a dispassionate party can judge whether consideration of ethical issues has been undertaken reasonably thoroughly.

(replace this with your own content. In your risk assessment you should address the ethical issues suggested below, point by point:)

1. To what extent is participation in your research “voluntary”?

Participants were informed about the subject prior to the interviews, the were able to ask question, there was no obligation in answering the questions and they can withdraw at anytime

2. Do you have informed consent? Are the participants capable of giving consent?

No interviews have been conducted on minor (persons under 18)

A convenience sample has been selected for interviews

3. Is there any risk of your participants being harmed psychologically (inc. taking offence or being embarrassed) or physically? What risk of any harm becoming dangerous/ permanent etc? How have the likelihood and the harm been minimised? Will the College face potential embarrassment/ complaint?

There was no risk taken or included at any stage

4. Can participants withdraw their consent at any stage? Yes, participants have been informed that they could withdraw at any time without justification or penalty

5. Will you need to debrief participants? Only some of them were interested in reading the conclusions of my dissertation

6. How is the anonymity of the participants maintained? Questionnaire are fully anonymous, interviews are saved on a computer protected with passeword

7. How will you maintain confidentiality?

Documents, notes and records will be destroyed after process

8. How will information/data be stored during, and will it be destroyed after, the project is completed?

YES

9. Have you informed fully/ discussed these ethical issues with your supervisor/ those signing off the EA2?

YES

10. What are the personal risks (to you) in the undertaking of this project?

NO



Ethical Approval From Other Bodies

9 Does this

research require

the approval of

an external

body?

e.g. NHS

No

10 Has ethical

approval already

been obtained

from that body?

N/A

Please append documentary evidence to this form.

Please note that any such approvals must be obtained and documented before

the project begins.



Only complete this form once a robust consideration of the ethical issues has been

undertaken. The form is designed for approval or referral only.

Approval requires 3 signatures for supervisees or two signatures for self-supervised staff.

Approval: For completion by the applicant: with supervision

Having reviewed the ethical implications of this research, I certify that there are no issues requiring Ethical

consideration from the College Research Ethics Sub-Committee. I certify that the research will be carried out

in compliance with the University’s ethical guidelines for research, on humans, with Health and Safety

regulations, and with all other relevant University policies and procedures. If there are any changes to the

research requiring ethical clearance, I shall gain approval for my updated EA2 before continuing with the

research. I have given my supervisor a full picture of the procedure I have followed so far and/or am

committed to follow by signing this form.

I certify that I have read the University’s ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR CONDUCTING

RESEARCH WITH HUMANS AND OTHER ANIMALS.

Sara WUNSCH____________________ ________________________________

_____23/01/2015______

PRINT NAME Applicant Signature

Date

Approval: For completion by the applicant’s supervisor (member of academic staff) (If

self-supervised, sign below)

I have considered the request for ethical approval. The risks in the research project are

those that one might reasonably expect to encounter, and have been considered

appropriately.

_Hanya PIELICHATY__________________________ ________________________________ _______/_______/______ PRINT NAME Signature

Date

Approval: For completion by a member of academic staff who is not directly related

to the conduct of the applicant’s project



I have considered the request for ethical approval. The risks in the research project are

those that one might reasonably expect to encounter, and have been considered

appropriately.

_____________________________________ ________________________________

_______/_______/______

PRINT NAME Signature

Date

_____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________

REFERRAL: For completion by the applicant’s supervisor (member of academic

staff) IF THE ETHICAL ISSUES ARE TOO COMPLEX TO APPROVE WITHOUT WIDER

CONSULTATION

I have considered the request for ethical approval. I am UNABLE to grant request for

ethical approval. There are issues involved in the research project that one might

reasonably expect to occur that require broader consideration.

_____________________________________ ________________________________

_______/_______/______

PRINT NAME Signature

Date

Please contact the officer of the Business School Research Committee

Approval: For completion by the BSRC

The committee has considered the request for ethical approval and is sure that the

research team has considered the risks involved in the research project as one might

reasonably expect.

_____________________________________ ________________________________

_______/_______/______

PRINT NAME Signature of Ethics Representative

Date



BSRC (or nominee)

Supervisor’s Role: Supervisor should, if requested, provide guidance on how to undertake the research and the concomitant

risks;

They should provide guidance on completing the EAF;

Make clear which other members of staff considered the EAF;

Make a clear recommendation (Approval to proceed or Referral to the CEC).

A referral requires the supervisor to provide some guidance as to the nature of the complexity inherent in the

application and why further consideration is deemed necessary.

Approval is granted on the basis of complete disclosure. Responsibility for the conduct of the research rests

with the applicant. The EAF is a means of shielding the applicant and the supervisor from the accusation of

improper conduct.



Appendix 2

This appendix sets the framework of the semi-structured interviews.

Before asking the questions the interviewer introduces the current study, presents

him- or herself and informs the interviewee that he or her can ask and withdraw

questions at any given time if the need should occur.

After having introduced the survey, the interviewer continues by asking the

following eleven questions. The different interviews and associated answer are

tape recorded and partially transcribed. Quotes from the interviews and

interpretation are given in the Findings section and discussion over findings

section.

1) Force majeure can be associated with disasters. When thinking about the

tourism field, what type of disaster can occur in your opinion?

What comes to mind when you think about tourism and disasters?

2) What consequences do you see for a destination when such events occur?

Are there any examples of such events or consequences that come to

mind?

3) Recently or in the past have you experienced any of these types of

situations? (being in a destination hit by a disaster)

4) All of those events often come with a lot of media coverage. What do you

think about the related publicity done by the media in this type of circumstance?

How do you think it impacts the destination?



5) What type of media channel do you trust the most?

6) What sources do you usually use to gather information regarding major

world events?

7) Would events like force majeure affect your perception of a destination?

How?

8) Do you see any examples of a destination for which your perception has

changed after a crisis or a disaster?

Why?

9) Are you still willing to travel to those destinations, during and/or after the

crisis?

How long after?

10) In your opinion, what would be a reasonable period of time to wait before

going back to the destination?

Examples

11) What do you consider as the most determining factors for the tourist

attraction to a destination?

(Safety, weather, travel time to destination, travel mode, tourist infrastructures…)



Appendix 3

How force majeure and related publicity adversely effects tourists' perception of a

destination

The following survey aims to collect data in order to critically analyse how force

majeure and related publicity impacts the destination image and what perception

the tourists holds about a destination when such event occur.

* Required fields

1) Nationality

2) Gender

Male

Female

3) Age range

o Under 15

o 15 to 20

o 20 to 30

o 30 to 40

o 40 to 50

o 50 to 60



o Over 60

4) What type of traveller are you?

Do you usually travel:

o On your own

o With a friend

o With a group of friends

o With your family

o With your friends and family

o With collegues for business related trip

o Other:

5) How many times a year do you travel for leisure?

o 0

o 1

o 2

o 3

o 4

o 5

o 6



o 7

o 8

o 9

o 10

o more than 10 times

6) How many times a year do you travel for work?

o 0

o 1

o 2

o 3

o 4

o 5

o 6

o 7

o 8

o 9

o 10

o More than 10 times



7) How do you usually book your travels?

o Tour Operator

o Travel agent

o Online booking

o Self reservations

o Other:

8) Do you consider yourself as used to travel?

o Yes

o No

9) Before your travels do you collect information on the destination?

o Yes

o No

10) If you are willing to collect information regarding the destination you

are travelling to and its environment what channel of information would you

use?

o Tourism office website

o Info.gouv - Official websites

o Online blogs

o General internet research



o Journal articles

o Online articles

o Ask the travel agent

o Other:

11) Which of the following disasters will keep you the most away from a

destination?

You can choose up to five answers

o Tornade

o Earthquake

o Hurricain

o Act of terrorism

o Flood

o Civil war

o Political unrests

o Volcano eruption

o Tsunami

o Nuclear incident

o Other:



12) What are the most important criteria when choosing a destination for

travel? *

Rate from 1 to 5 the following criteria in choosing your destination. 1 being the

most important and 5 the less important

1 Very

important 2 3 4

5 Not

important

Weather /

Temprrture

Sunny

destination

Cultural

patrimony

Tourist

infrastructures

Friendliness

of the local

Language Accessibility

of the place

Safety of the

destination

Beaches

Historic sites Natural

resources

Developped

counrty

Religion of

the

destination

13) In general, do you consider yourself as being more:

o Risk averse

o Risk seeking



14) If one of your favourite travel destination is hit by a disaster, either

natural (floods, earthquake, tsunami...) or man-made (act of terrorism,

nuclear explosion, civil war...), would you still be willing to travel to the

destination?

o Yes, I would travel to the destination anyway

o Yes, I would travel to the destination when it will have recover from the

disaster

o No, I am not willing to go back to the destination

o No, I am not willing to go back yet

o I don't know

15) In your opinion, what would be the adequate time for a destination to

recover after the occurrence of a force majeure? In other word, how long

would it take for the destination to be safe and secure enough so that

tourists are willing to come back.

In the case of Natural disasters ( Floods, earthquakes, tornados, tsunami,

volcano eruption...)

o 1 to 10 Weeks

o 1 to 6 Months

o 6 Months to 1 Year

o At least 1 Year

o Several Years



o More than 5 Years

o More than 10 Years





In the case of Terrorism acts (Bombimg, terrorists attacks or threats...)

o 1 to 10 Weeks

o 1 to 6 Months


o At least 1 Year

o Several Years

o More than 5 Years






In the case of Political instabilities ( political turmoil, civil rebellion, civil, local, or

national wars...)



o 1 to 10 Weeks

o 1 to 6 Months


o At least 1 Year

o Several Years

o More than 5 Years


18) When trying to make an opinion about a subject, which source of

information do you trust the most *

Please rate the following source of information from 1 to 5. 1 being the sources

you trust the most and 5 being the ones you don't trust

1 Very

reliable

source of

information

2 3 4

5 Absolutely

not reliable

for

information

Tv advertising Tv news

Documentaries Your own

experience

Word of

mouth

Your family

and relative

experience

Blogs

Social media Governmental

websites



1 Very

reliable

source of

information

2 3 4

5 Absolutely

not reliable

for

information

Specialised

websites

Internet

commercials

Professionals

Books Journal

articles

Newspapers Magsins

articles

Brochures

Leaflets Movies

Tv shows

19) When traveling, which of the following unforeseeable and

unavoidable situation frightens you the most?

o The occurrence of Natural disaster

o The occurrence of Political turmoil

o The occurrence of Terrorist attacks

20) Is there any country you are strongly unwilling to visit and why?

(open question)



Appendix 4

Table 10: Travel frequency per year

Statistiques descriptives

N Minimum Maximum Moyenne Ecart type

How many times a year do

you travel for leisure?

263 1 10 3.16 2.328

How many times a year do

you travel for work?

260 0 10 2.37 3.105

N valide (listwise) 260

Table 11: Risk aversion or risk seeking


Effectifs Pourcentage Pourcentage

valide

Pourcentage

cumulé

Valide

Risk averse 130 49.4 49.4 49.4

Risk seeking 133 50.6 50.6 100.0

Total 263 100.0 100.0

Table 12: travel frequency per year


Minimum Maximum Average

How many times a year do you travel for leisure?

1 10 3.16

How many times a year do you travel for work?

0 10 2.37



Table 13: Cross table analysis of risk and nationality

Tableau croisé Nationality * In general, do you consider yourself as being

more:

Effectif


Nationality

French 57 60 117

American 19 0 19

German

Dominican 15 9 24

12 0 12

British 11 31 42

Tunisian 4 0 4

Mexican 4 0 4

Colombian 3 0 3

Indian 3 0 3

Jamaican 2 13 15

Swiss 0 3 3

Swedish 0 1 1

Italian 0 9 9

Japanese 0 4 4

Spanish 0 3 3

Total 130 133 263

Table 14: Cross table of fear and gender

Crossed table When travelling, which of the following force majeure frightens you the most? *

Gender

Effectif

When travelling, which of the

following force majeure frightens you the most?

Gender Total

Male Female

The occurrence of Natural disaster 15 26 41

The occurrence of Political turmoil 35 36 71

The occurrence of Terrorist attacks 92 59 151

Total 142 121 263



Table 15: Cross-table of fear and age range

Cross-table: Age range * When travelling, which of the following force majeure

frightens you the most?

Effectif

When travelling, which of the following force majeure


Total

The occurrence

of Natural

disaster

The occurrence

of Political

turmoil

The occurrence

of Terrorist

attacks

Age range

15 to 20 0 3 10 13

20 to 30 20 18 62 100

30 to 40 6 14 40 60

40 to 50 5 18 9 32

50 to 60 5 18 15 38

Over 60 5 0 15 20

Total 41 71 151 263



Table 16: Cross-table of fear and nationality

Cross-table: Nationality * When travelling, which of the following force majeure frightens

you the most?

Effectif

When travelling, which of the following force majeure


Total

The occurrence

of Natural

disaster

The occurrence

of Political

turmoil

The occurrence

of Terrorist

attacks

Nationality

French 17 32 68 117

British 9 12 21 42

German 0 9 15 24

Swiss 2 1 0 3

Swedish 1 0 0 1

Italian 2 7 0 9

American 0 6 13 19

Dominican 7 2 3 12

Colombian 0 0 3 3

Japanese 0 0 4 4

Jamaican 0 2 13 15

Indian 3 0 0 3

Spanish 0 0 3 3

Tunisian 0 0 4 4

Mexican 0 0 4 4

Total 41 71 151 263

Table 17: Descriptive table of data collection

Do you collect information on the

destination before your travels

Pourcentage %

Yes 92.1

No 7.9



Table 18: Which information channel is the most used?

If you are willing to collect information on a destination, what information channel would you

choose?


valide

Pourcentage

cumulé

Valide

Tourism office website 59 22.4 22.4 22.4

Info.gouv - official websites 32 12.2 12.2 34.6

online blogs 40 15.2 15.2 49.8

General internet research 78 29.7 29.7 79.5

Journal articles 14 5.3 5.3 84.8

Online articles 18 6.8 6.8 91.6

Ask the travel agent 22 8.4 8.4 100.0

Total 263 100.0 100.0



Table 19: Descriptive statistics

Minimum Maximum Moyenne

Your own experience 1 5 1.87

Your family and relatives' experience 1 5 2.09

Documentaries 1 5 2.18

Specialised websites 1 5 2.23

Professionals 1 5 2.23

Governmental websites 1 5 2.28

Books 1 5 2.38

Word of mouth 1 4 2.39

Newspapers 1 5 2.64

journal articles 1 5 2.67

Blogs 1 5 2.73

Tv news 1 5 2.80

Magazins 1 5 2.96

Brochure 1 5 3.02

Social media 1 5 3.15

Tv advert 1 5 3.17

Leaflets 1 5 3.19

Internet commercials 1 5 3.32

Movies 1 5 3.48

Tv shows 1 5 3.65



Table 20 : Descriptive statistics


What are the most important criteria when choosing a destination for travel?

N Minimum Maximum Moyenne Ecart type

Safety 263 1 4 1.94 0.849

Friendliness of the locals

263 1 4 2.13 0.99

Weather - Tempreture

263 1 4 2 0.798

Cultural patrimony 263 1 5 2.21 1.094

Historic sites 263 1 5 1.86 0.873

Sunny destination 263 1 5 2.45 1.268

Tourist infrastructure

263 1 4 2.29 0.916

Accessibility 263 1 4 1.79 0.846

Natural resources 263 1 4 2.33 0.945

Beaches 263 1 5 2.04 0.966

Language 263 1 5 2.29 0.954

Developed country 263 1 5 2.69 1.092

Religion 263 1 5 3.27 1.223

N valide (listwise) 263



Table 21: Cross-table Age range and risk

Tableau croisé Age range * In general, do you consider yourself as

being more:

Effectif

In general, do you consider

yourself as being more:

Total

Risk averse Risk seeking

Age range

15 to 20 7 6 13

20 to 30 49 51 100

30 to 40 26 34 60

40 to 50 4 28 32

50 to 60 33 5 38

Over 60 11 9 20

Total 130 133 263

Table 22: Cross table of gender and risk

Tableau croisé Gender * In general, do you consider yourself as

being more:

Effectif

In general, do you consider

yourself as being more:

Total

Risk averse Risk seeking

Gender Male 72 70 142

Female 58 63 121

Total 130 133 263

Table 22 : Descriptive table of natural disater recovery

In your opinion, what would be the recovery time after a Natural Disaster?


valide

Pourcentage

cumulé

Valide

1 to 10 Weeks 14 5.3 5.3 5.3

1 to 6 months 100 38.0 38.0 43.3

6 months to 1 year 30 11.4 11.4 54.8

At least 1 year 58 22.1 22.1 76.8

Several years 48 18.3 18.3 95.1

More than 5 years 13 4.9 4.9 100.0

Total 263 100.0 100.0



Table 23: Descriptive table of terrorism recovery

In your opinion, what would be the recovery time after Terrorism acts?


valide

Pourcentage

cumulé

Valide

1 to 10 weeks 13 4.9 4.9 4.9

1 to 6 months 65 24.7 24.7 29.7

6 months to 1 year 49 18.6 18.6 48.3

At least 1 year 41 15.6 15.6 63.9

Several years 71 27.0 27.0 90.9

More than 5 years 17 6.5 6.5 97.3

More than 10 years 7 2.7 2.7 100.0

Total 263 100.0 100.0

Table 24 : Descriptive table of political instability recovery

In your opinion, what would be the recovery time after Political instabilities?


valide

Pourcentage

cumulé

Valide

1 to 10 weeks 5 1.9 1.9 1.9

1 to 6 months 37 14.1 14.1 16.0

6 months to 1 year 75 28.5 28.5 44.5

At least 1 year 57 21.7 21.7 66.2

Several years 53 20.2 20.2 86.3

More than 5 years 32 12.2 12.2 98.5

More than 10 years 4 1.5 1.5 100.0

Total 263 100.0 100.0

Table 25: KMO and Bartlett’s test

Indice KMO et test de Bartlett

Mesure de précision de l'échantillonnage de Kaiser-Meyer-

Olkin.

.793

Test de sphéricité de Bartlett

Khi-deux approximé 2837.698

ddl 190

Signification de Bartlett .000



Table 26 : Total variance

Variance totale expliquée

Composante Valeurs propres initiales Extraction Sommes des carrés des

facteurs retenus

Total % de la variance % cumulés Total % de la variance % cumulés

1 6.672 33.360 33.360 6.672 33.360 33.360

2 2.392 11.961 45.321 2.392 11.961 45.321

3 1.843 9.217 54.539 1.843 9.217 54.539

4 1.348 6.739 61.278 1.348 6.739 61.278

5 1.138 5.691 66.969 1.138 5.691 66.969

6 1.048 5.242 72.210 1.048 5.242 72.210

7 .823 4.113 76.324

8 .680 3.400 79.724

9 .626 3.132 82.856

10 .511 2.555 85.411

11 .476 2.378 87.789

12 .445 2.223 90.012

13 .433 2.167 92.179

14 .347 1.735 93.914

15 .271 1.356 95.270

16 .255 1.273 96.543

17 .247 1.236 97.779

18 .171 .856 98.634

19 .156 .781 99.415

20 .117 .585 100.000

Méthode d'extraction : Analyse en composantes principales.



Table 27 : Rotated matrix

Matrice des composantes après rotationa

Composante

1 2 3 4 5 6

Which source of information

do you trust the most? TV

ADVERT

.700 .402 .082 -.002 .095 -.051



NEWS

.694 .232 .336 -.085 .269 .103


do you trust the most?

DOCUMENTARIES

.466 .008 .075 .441 .304 .048



YOUR OWN EXPERIENCE

-.387 -.132 .259 .501 -.102 .312



WORD OF MOUTH

.005 .316 -.138 .413 .057 .727



YOUR FAMILY AND

RELATIVES EXPERIENCE

.163 -.098 .279 -.139 .252 .772



BLOGS

.024 .805 .162 .159 .052 -.011



SOCIAL MEDIA

.215 .769 .306 .008 -.074 .128



GOVERNMENTAL

WEBSITES

.251 .036 .298 .025 .736 .354



SPECIALISED WEBSITES

.112 .029 -.072 .174 .824 .057



INTERNET COMMERCIAL

.425 .689 .093 .150 .126 .085



PROFESSIONALS

-.040 .017 .174 -.002 .845 .005





BOOKS

.079 .094 .164 .739 .308 .159



JOURNAL ARTICLES

.639 .061 .095 .438 -.005 .101



NEWSPAPER

.734 .110 .365 .123 -.069 .112



MAGASINS

.430 .155 .624 .127 .197 -.031



BROCHURE

.100 .244 .847 .141 .112 .067



LEAFLETS

.283 .218 .751 .235 .116 .158



MOVIES

.202 .548 .039 .613 .011 -.102



SHOWS

.240 .417 .255 .699 -.080 -.146

Méthode d'extraction : Analyse en composantes principales.

Méthode de rotation : Varimax avec normalisation de Kaiser.

a. La rotation a convergé en 12 itérations.


100 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

Appendix 5

Fig 1 : Deaths from

Global Terrorism Index 2014: measuring and understanding the impact of

terrorism ; intitute for economics and peace

Available at

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Terrorism%20Index

%20Report%202014_0.pdf

Fig 2 death from nat dis

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Terrorism%20Index%20Report%202014_0.pdf

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Terrorism%20Index%20Report%202014_0.pdf


101 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

UNISDR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk reduction); Disaster impacts /

2000-2012

Available at

http://www.preventionweb.net/files/31737_20130312disaster20002012copy.pdf



102 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

REFERENCES

(Aston, 1999. Cited in Novelli, Morgan and Nibigira, 2012.)

Allen, J., O’Toole, W., Harris, R. and McDonnell, I. (2008), Festival and Special

Event Management. John Wiley and Sons, Brisbane.

Amara, D., El Samadicy, A., and Ragheb, M. (2011). Tourists’ risk aversion and

willingness to take risks: the case of tourists visiting Egypt after 25th January

revolution

Avraham, E. (2004), “Media strategies for improving an unfavourable city image”,

Cities, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 471-479.

Balogulu and McCleary, (1999) Cited in Mistilis, N. and Sheldon, P.J. ( ? )

Knowledge management for tourism crisis and disaster

Beck (2006) Cited in Korstanje, M.E., (?) Why risk, why now ? Conceptual

problems around the risk perception in tourism industry

Beerli and Martin (2003) over the influence of tourists’ internal characteristics or

personal factors on the different components of perceiving image.

Beirman, D. (2002), “Marketing of tourism destinations during a prolonged crisis:

Israel and the Middle East”, Journal of Vacation Marketing, vol.8, no. 2, pp. 93-

98.

Blaikie et al. (1994) Cited in Faulkner, B. (2003) Processing tourism research

Booth, (1993) Cited in Faulkner, B. (2003) Processing tourism research


103 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

Buhalis, D. and Law, R. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism

management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet – The state of eTourism

research. Tourism management, 29(4), 609-623.

Burton et al. (1978:1-2) Cited in Faulkner, B. (2003) Processing tourism research

Calantone, R.J., di Benetto, C.A., Hakam, A., & Bojanic, D.C. (1989). Multiple

multinational tourism positioning using correspondence analysis. Journal of

Travel Research, 28( 2 ) (Fall), 25-32.

Carter (1991: xxiii) Cited in Faulkner, B. (2003) Processing tourism research

Cavlek, N. (2002). Tour operators and destination safety. Annals of Tourism

Research, 29(2), pp.478--496.

Clark,D. and McCleary, K.W. (1995), Influencing associations’ site selection

process, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 2,

pp. 61-68.

Clough, P. and Nutbrown, C. (2004). Special Educational Needs and Inclusion:

Multiple Perspectives of Preschool Educators in the UK. Journal of Early

Childhood Research, 2(2), pp.191-211.

Cohen et al. (2007). Crime, social control and human rights. Cullompton, Devon,

UK: Willan Publishing.

Crouch, G.I. and Ritchie, J. (1998), Convention site selection research: A review,

conceptual model, and prepositional framework, Journal of Convention and

Exhibition Management, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 46-49.


104 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

De Vries, J., (2011). ETHICAL Natural Disasters: Real Force Majeure for

Tourism; Tsunami effects on tourism; Tourism review

Echtner, C. and J.R. Brent, R. (2003). The Meaning and Measurement of

Destination Image. The Journal of Tourism Studies, 14(1), pp.37-48.

Faulkner, B. (2003) Processing tourism research; collated and edited by Liz

Fredline, Leo Jago, and Cris Cooper in p.244-268/chapter 11: art. Bill Faulkner;

Towards a framework for tourism disaster management

Faulkner, B. (1999). Tourism disasters: Towards a generic model. CRC for

Sustainable Tourism.

Feder, G. and Slade, R. (1984) The Acquisition of Information and the Adoption

of New Technology, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66, 312-320.

Ferreira Lopes, S. (2011). Destination image: Origins, Developments and

Implications. Pasos: Revista de Tourism y Patrimonio Cultural, 9(2), pp.305-315.

Fink, (1986). Koewn-McMullan, (1997) Cited in Faulkner, B. (2003) Processing

tourism research

Gartner, (1996) Cited in Mistilis, N. and Sheldon, P.J. Knowledge management

for tourism crisis and disaster

Gartner, W.C., & Hunt, J.D. (1987). An analysis of state image change over a

twelve-year period (1971-1983). Journal of Travel Research, 16(2) (Fall), 15-19.

Gillham, V. (2000). Journal of Government Information, 27(6), pp.783-830.


105 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

Global Terrorism Index 2014: measuring and understanding the impact of

terrorism ; intitute for economics and peace: Available at

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Terrorism%20Index

%20Report%202014_0.pdf

Goodrich, J.N. (1978). The relationship between preferences for andperceptions

of vacation destinations: Application of a choicemodel. Journal of Travel

Research, Fall, 8-13

Giddens (1999), Cited in Korstanje, M.E., Why risk, why now ? Conceptual


Grant, D. et al. in Wilks, J., Pendergast, D. and Leggat, P. (2006). Tourism in

turbulent times. Amsterdam: Elsevier

Gunn, C. (1988). Vacationscapes: Designing tourist regions. Ne w York: Van

Nostrand Reinhold.

Horlick, Jones et al. (1991), Cited in Faulkner, B. (2003) Processing tourism

research

Hall, C. M., and V. O’Sullivan, 1996, Tourism, Political Stability and Violence. In

Tourism, Crime and International Security Issues, edited by A. Pizam and Y.

Mansfeld. Chichester, UK: Wiley, pp. 105-21.

Hunt (1971), cited in Gallarza, Saura and Garcia, (2002) Cited in Mistilis, N. and

Sheldon, P.J. Knowledge management for tourism crisis and disaster

Hunt, J.D. (1975). Image as a factor in tourism development. Journal of Travel

Research, 13(3) (Winter), 1-7.


106 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

Jarumaneerat, T. and Promsivapallop, P. (2012). Measuring Post-Crisis

destination Image of Thailand as a MICE Destination. pp.642-655.

Jensen, R. (1988) Information Capacity and Innovation Adoption, International

Journal of Industrial Organization, 6, 335-350.

Karagiannis, A., Z. Maditinos, and C. Vassiliadis, 2006, “Organizational

Preparation for Crises and Disasters in the Tourism Sector: Perceptions and

Planning of Tourist Businesses in Northern Greece”, Proceedings of 24th

EuroCHRIE Congress, Thessaloniki, Oct.2006.

Korstanje, M.E. (2007) Why risk, why now ? Conceptual problems around the risk

perception in tourism industry

Leep, A., and Gibons, M. (2007) Sensation Seeking and Tourism: Tourist role,

perception of risk and destination choice

Lepp, A., and Gibson, H. (2003) Tourist Roles, Perceived Risk and International

Tourism, Annals of Tourism Research,30(3),606–624

Leep, A., and Gibson, M. (2008) Cited in Korstanje, M.E., (?) Why risk, why now

? Conceptual problems around the risk perception in tourism industry

Loftstedt (2010) Cited in Korstanje, M.E., (?) Why risk, why now ? Conceptual


Maditinos, Z. and Vassiliadis, C. (2008). Crises and Disasters in Tourism

Industry: Happen locally - Affect globally


107 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

Mangold, W. and Faulds, D. (2009). Social media: the new hybrid element of the

promotion mix. Business Horizon, 52(4), 357-365. Cited in Amara, D., El

Samadicy, A., and Ragheb, M. (2011).

Mansfield and Piam, 2005. Cited in Novelli, Morgan and Nibigira, 2012.

Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority. New York: Harper & Row.

Mistilis, N. and Sheldon, P. (2006). Knowledge Management for Tourism Crises

and Disasters. Tourism Review International, 10(1), pp.39-46.

Murphy, P.E. and Bayley, R., (1989). Tourism and disaster planning,

Geographical Review, 79(1):36-46.

Novelli, M., Morgan, N., and Nibigira, C. (2012) Tourism in a post-conflict

situation of fragility

Parsons, W., (1996). Crisis management, Career Development International,

1(5):26–28.

Pearce, P.L. (1982). Perceived changes in holiday destinations. Annals of

Tourism Research, 9, 145-164.

Peattie, Clarke and Peattie (2005) Cited in Korstanje, M.E., (?) Why risk, why

now ? Conceptual problems around the risk perception in tourism industry

Phelps, A. (1986). Holiday destination image - The problem of assessment: An

example developed in Menorca. Tourism Management, September, 168-180.

Pike, S. (2005) Tourism destination branding complexity. Journal of Product and

Brand management. 14(4): 258-9


108 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

Qu, H., Hyunjung Kim, L., and Hyunjung Im, H. (2010) A model of destination

branding: intergrating the concepts of the branding and destination image

Reynolds, W.H. (1965). The role of the consumer in image building. California

Management Review, Spring, 69-76.

Richardson (1994) Cited in Faulkner, B. (2003) Processing tourism research

Richardson, S.L., & Crompton, J.L. (1988). Cultural variations in perceptions of

vacation attributes. Tourism Management, June, 128-136

Ritchie (2004) Cited in Korstanje, M.E., (?) Why risk, why now ? Conceptual


Ritchie, J. and Crouch, G. (2010). A model of destination

competitiveness/sustainability: Brazilian perspectives. Revista de Administração

Pública, 44(5), pp.1049-1066.

Sausmarez N., (2007). Crisis Management, Tourism and Sustainability: The Role

of Indicators, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5(6), 700-714.

Scott, J. (2008). Tourism in turbulent times — towards safe experiences for

visitors by Jeff Wilks, Donna Pendergast and Peter Leggat (eds), Elsevier,

Oxford, UK, 2006. No. of pages: 382. ISBN; 0-08-044666-3. International Journal

of Tourism Research, 10(3), pp.289-289.

Seddighi, H.R., Nuttall, M.W., and Theocharus, A.L. (2000) Does cultural

background of tourists influence the destination choice? An empirical study with

special reference to political instability


109 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

Seymour, M. and Moore S. (2000). Effective Crisis Management: Worldwide

Principles and Practice, Cassell: London.

Smith et al. (2009) Cited in Korstanje, M.E., (?) Why risk, why now ? Conceptual


Sonmez, S. (1998). Tourism, Terrorism and Political Instability”, Annals of

Tourism Research, 25,416–456.

Sonmez, S., Apostolopoulos, Y. and Tarlow, P. (1999). Tourism in Crisis:

Managing the Effects of Terrorism. Journal of Travel Research, 38(1), pp.13-18.

Thailand Convention and Exhibition Bureau (2010), “TCEB assesses impact of

political crisis on MICE industry. Urgent discussions with private sector on

recovery measures” available at http://www.tceb.or.th/about-us/e-

community/news/1072-tceb-assesses-impact-of-political-crisis-on-mice-industry-

urgent-discussions-with-private-sector-on-recovery-measures.html

UNISDR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk reduction); Disaster impacts /

2000-2012 available at


Werr, P. (2011). Egypt bourse tumbles in first trading since January. Reuters

Wilks, J., Pendergast, D. and Leggat, P. (2006). Tourism in turbulent times.

Amsterdam: Elsevier cited in Scott, J. (2008).

Woodside, A.G., & Lysonski, S. (1989). A general model of traveller destination

choice. Journal of Travel Research, 17(4) (Spring), 8-14.


110 Sara WUNSCH : 12434261

Zhang, H.Q., 2005,“Impact of the tsunami on Chinese outbound tourism“

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,17(5),433435