×
Home
2024 Conference
All Conferences
Instructions
TSVC | Tourism Students Virtual Conference

'Resilient' tourists: Breaking free from a (global) risk society?

'Resilient' tourists: Breaking free from a (global) risk society?
Author: Leanne Warrener
1 Commentries
'Resilient' tourists: Breaking free from a (global) risk society?


ABSTRACT:

The challenges tourists face, in the aftermath of terrorism, in the pursuit of travel. Challenges include external forces and physical barriers. An exploration into how tourists are overcoming such gripping forces and breaking out of risk society; or are they?

Key words: risk society, resilient tourist, terrorism industry, misrepresentation, risk perceptions, mass media


New York, London, Madrid and Bali: all culturally rich destinations and tourism trademarks of their country. Mentioned sequentially in the same sentence, however, what is the first thought that springs to mind? Why do we consciously or subconsciously have an instinct to immediately form a connection between these destinations and terrorism? Is there someone 'behind the scenes' guiding your thoughts?

Still not figured out the culprits responsible for your train of thought? How about looking at it this way… Are you a consumer of mass media? Following the Madrid train bombings in 2004, would you have cancelled a pre-booked package? Would this action have been out of respect to victims, or due to immense fear of risk?

It has become apparent in today's uncertain world, that civilisation is now existing within a risk society. Danger is perceived to be possible around every corner, in every destination, and by every individual. Though this may be true, the questions posed above, are a gesture to consider that this danger is in fact, highly dramatised, and that risk society may not be as inescapable or restricting as we think.

Discovered is the realisation that it is not ourselves, who have unknowingly exaggerated risk, therefore, restricting our own travel. External forces are responsible, such as the Terrorism Industry, tour operators and media. These forces have manipulated our perceptions of risk through extreme misrepresentations and exaggerations of terrorism threat; forcing us tourists into a confined and isolated risk society, whereby we have difficulty making our own judgements in terms of travel.

Tourists determined to travel are halted in their tracks, faced with the issue of increased security measures. Posner (2003) believes that the real challenge facing tourists is when security continues to be dramatised, long after the act of terror has passed. Tourist victimisation causes a decline in tourist arrivals to destinations where terrorism has occurred. Such extremities keep the perception of risk strong in the forefront of the mind, resulting in a constant association of terrorism between the tourist and destination. A barrier is then formed whereby the tourist seeps into risk society, and their freedom is gradually eroded, since the tourists will not cross the barrier until security is minimised.

Tour operators, in addition to the Terrorism Industry, are culprits of forming 'barriers of the mind' amongst prospective travellers; forming the external forces of influence. In response to the proposed questions above, these external forces are the 'behind the scenes' operators of our minds, and those responsible for why we choose to visit certain destinations, whilst deviating away from others, during periods of high terrorism activity.

Tour operators work on the tourist mind, managing to 'herd' tourists away from particular destinations due to their own perception of risk. However, this risk is often 'alarmism', evoked in order to heighten fear, for the purpose of looking out for themselves. Highlighted in the paper, is the case of Nepal. Bhattarai et al (2005) assures us that the involvement of tour operators in security procedures has led to decline in adventure tourists to Nepal; the destination suffering a 42% decline. Amazingly, pilgrimage tourism remained regular at this time, portraying an amplification of dangers by tour operators. This succeeded in controlling future travel decisions made by tourists since decline was accountable over 2 years; from 464,000 in 2000, to a staggeringly low 216,000 in 2002.

Media has been discovered as an additional source of 'mind-control', keeping tourists within the bubble of risk society through their constant streaming of terrorism-related news. Such topics fail to leave the media entirely, though when spectacle has reduced, tourists appear to be released from the grips of risk society. During times of high spectacle, and constant publicity, tourist arrivals to the destination in question decline. In 2009, according to the worlds most popular countries, the U.S ranked 2nd for tourist arrivals, whereas Spain ranked in the bottom 10 (UNWTO, 2010).

Overcoming barriers and escaping risk society is possible; this is not a permanent existence. Tourists appear to be more confident in their own judgements when they abandon mass media consumption, so their minds are no longer clouded with the perceptions of external forces. Furthermore, influence of the Terrorism Industry etc. is weakened when news becomes outdated, although the tourist then must overcome physical barriers. Though we may escape for a while, what happens when the media begins spectacle on another trauma? Tourists have become trapped in the middle of the worlds 'war on terrorism'.

REFERENCE LIST:

Bhattarai, K, Conway, D and Shrestha, N. (2005) Tourism, Terrorism and Turmoil in Nepal. Annals of Tourism Research Vol 32(3)

Posner, R A (2003). The Truth About Our Liberties. In: A, Etzioni and J H, Marsh, eds. 2003. Rights vs Public Safety After 9/11: America in the Age of Terrorism. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Ch 5

UNWTO (2010) UNWTO: Tourism Highlights 2010 Edition. [Online] Available at: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2002_e/its2002_e.pdf
[Accessed: May 3rd 2011]
Resilient tourists: Breaking free from a (global) risk society?
Author: Rebecca Waltham
This particular conference paper is engaging as it poses many relevant questions which surround the world of terrorism. The examples used are diverse in terms of the destinations in which they occurred, however, the key element is that all these destinations have one thing in common, they are all tourists destinations. They have all been targeted by the terrorists at key times when there would be crowds of tourists, thus ensuring that the attacks caused maximum impact.

There could of being more emphasis on exploring further the examples outlined in the paper these being the attacks in the United States, London, Madrid and Bali. It would have been interesting to compare how the fear factor for these destinations differed in terms of their immediate impact on tourists.


Within this conference paper there appears to be an emphasis on tour operators and how the policies they have adopted, are deterring the more adventures tourist as they fear they could become a victim of terrorism. However, there could have been reference to how the severity of the attacks means the security measures in place are for tourist's protection. By deviating tourists away from destinations which are targets for terrorism it is important to outline that there are arguments to suggest that tour operators are influencing tourists decision making. Although many good points were made, it is important to say that although tourists have the fear factor once attacks have taken place, because of the enhanced security measures that were put in place tourists begin to return to these destinations in time. Tour operator's co- operating with government enforced security measures outlines that their main propriety is the safety of their customers, and it shows that compliance with the authorities is important.

There could have been more emphasis on the media's interpretation of terrorist attacks, as there are many interesting points made about how they control the tourists mind set. This is primarily because the media does infuse certain perceptions of safety, especially in terms of terrorist attacks which are broadcast world wide. Therefore, there are many interpretations from different media outlets, but it would have been better to have referred to examples used i.e. Bali, Madrid, London and New York, in order to outline how the media impacted on these tourism destinations. There was however, reference to Spain and America and the impacts the terrorism attacks had on these destinations.

This conference paper outlines in an informative way, how tourists are vulnerable to media perceptions. When terrorist attacks occur, this is also linked to how tour operators deter tourist from travelling to countries which are perceived has being risky.