Risk and Tourism: An investigation of perception in tourist types.
Author: Dale Palmer
1 Commentries
Abstract
This paper seeks to add further weight to the area of risk and its relationship with tourism. Of particular interest to this paper is how different tourists perceive risk, with an adopted focus upon the organised mass tourist. The intention was to seek if assertions made about this typology of tourist decades ago were still accurate today, suggesting that the acquisition of information is of paramount importance.
Keywords: Risk, Tourism, Perception, Knowledge, Experience.
We've all been on a holiday of some form, haven't we? The practice of 'going away' for a week or more is becoming more prevalent, as people wish to escape the rigours of every day life. Something which has always ran as an undercurrent in the tourism industry is that of risk. The world is becoming not only an increasingly risky place to live, but also to travel (Fischhoff, Nightingdale and Iannotta, 2001).
Haddock (1993) identifies three forms of risk, actual, real and perceived. In a tourism context, it is perceived risk which has received the most research, according to Simpson and Siguaw (2008), and this has been defined contextually as the perception of uncertainty and the potential negative consequences of purchasing a tourism product or service. There has been a pool of limited research surrounding the topic.
Within a tourism environment, risk is said to stem from two main sources. Chang (2009) concludes that these sources contain a lack of knowledge about the destination and a lack of knowledge of future conditions, ranging from the weather to extreme natural or societal hazards. The nature of the tourism 'product', its intangibility, inseparability, diversity and perishability make it particularly difficult to assess the scale and the severity of risks (Mitchell and Greatorex, 1993). There is a growing opinion that there is an increasing awareness of risk, ranging across all aspects of the tourist process, including the booking of a holiday, to considering events that may, or may not, occur whilst on the holiday itself.
Levinson (1990) contended that research focused upon behaviour constituted as being purposive activity that entailed novelty, or danger sufficient to create anxiety. For example, using an unused travel agent or tour operator may provoke anxiety, as their may be an element of distrust. Williams and Baláž (2013) refer to research concerning risk and tourism in a number of areas surrounding risk perception of specific hazards, risk and decision making, the contribution of risk perceptions to destination image and how different types of tourists perceive and, or respond to risks. This research is said to draw heavily upon Cohen's (1972) tourist typologies.
Of Cohen's typologies, 'the explorer', or the independent traveller has attracted the most attention. Distinguishing characteristics of independent travellers involve being willing to take risks in holidays or experiences, having a desire for what is referred to as 'unplanned experiences'. These independent tourists consider risk factors such as political instability, illness and terrorism to be less risky and view them as a source of excitement. Lepp and Gibson (2003) contribute to the case of independent traveller's being considered as 'care free', suggesting that when it comes to risk in international tourism it is directly related to preferences for familiarity (safety) versus novelty (risk).
In comparison, and of importance to this paper, was the organised mass tourist, defined as people who opt for familiarity as opposed to novelty, requiring affirmation that their safety won't be compromised during the course of their holiday (Wall and Mathieson, 2006). These are generally people who are low risk takers (Yiannakis and Gibson, 1992).
With the majority of the literature concerned with these tourists dated. The research attached to this paper sought to ascertain if this assertion was still the same today. The majority of participants in the study, a survey-based questionnaire, cited that they felt package holidays, the hallmark of these organised tourists were safe. The majority of these tourists cited that they considered risks attached to their tourism practices.
Notably, nearly all respondents revealed that they research their chosen destinations before going and that doing so allows them to feel comfortable and safe within a destination. This supported the work of Lepp and Gibson (2008), who stated that experience of a destination, which can be acquired by knowledge, stimulates competence and the ability to be prepared for or handle risk. It is felt that this paper compliments and supports existing work in the field.
References
Cohen, E. (1972). Towards a sociology of international tourism Sociological Research, 39, pp. 164-182
Lepp, A. and Gibson, H. (2008). Sensation seeking and tourism: tourist role, perception of risk and destination choice. Tourism Management, 29 (4), pp. 740-750.
Williams, A. and Baláž, V. (2013). Tourism, risk tolerance and competences: Travel organization and tourism hazards. Tourism Management, 35. pp. 209-221.
This paper seeks to add further weight to the area of risk and its relationship with tourism. Of particular interest to this paper is how different tourists perceive risk, with an adopted focus upon the organised mass tourist. The intention was to seek if assertions made about this typology of tourist decades ago were still accurate today, suggesting that the acquisition of information is of paramount importance.
Keywords: Risk, Tourism, Perception, Knowledge, Experience.
We've all been on a holiday of some form, haven't we? The practice of 'going away' for a week or more is becoming more prevalent, as people wish to escape the rigours of every day life. Something which has always ran as an undercurrent in the tourism industry is that of risk. The world is becoming not only an increasingly risky place to live, but also to travel (Fischhoff, Nightingdale and Iannotta, 2001).
Haddock (1993) identifies three forms of risk, actual, real and perceived. In a tourism context, it is perceived risk which has received the most research, according to Simpson and Siguaw (2008), and this has been defined contextually as the perception of uncertainty and the potential negative consequences of purchasing a tourism product or service. There has been a pool of limited research surrounding the topic.
Within a tourism environment, risk is said to stem from two main sources. Chang (2009) concludes that these sources contain a lack of knowledge about the destination and a lack of knowledge of future conditions, ranging from the weather to extreme natural or societal hazards. The nature of the tourism 'product', its intangibility, inseparability, diversity and perishability make it particularly difficult to assess the scale and the severity of risks (Mitchell and Greatorex, 1993). There is a growing opinion that there is an increasing awareness of risk, ranging across all aspects of the tourist process, including the booking of a holiday, to considering events that may, or may not, occur whilst on the holiday itself.
Levinson (1990) contended that research focused upon behaviour constituted as being purposive activity that entailed novelty, or danger sufficient to create anxiety. For example, using an unused travel agent or tour operator may provoke anxiety, as their may be an element of distrust. Williams and Baláž (2013) refer to research concerning risk and tourism in a number of areas surrounding risk perception of specific hazards, risk and decision making, the contribution of risk perceptions to destination image and how different types of tourists perceive and, or respond to risks. This research is said to draw heavily upon Cohen's (1972) tourist typologies.
Of Cohen's typologies, 'the explorer', or the independent traveller has attracted the most attention. Distinguishing characteristics of independent travellers involve being willing to take risks in holidays or experiences, having a desire for what is referred to as 'unplanned experiences'. These independent tourists consider risk factors such as political instability, illness and terrorism to be less risky and view them as a source of excitement. Lepp and Gibson (2003) contribute to the case of independent traveller's being considered as 'care free', suggesting that when it comes to risk in international tourism it is directly related to preferences for familiarity (safety) versus novelty (risk).
In comparison, and of importance to this paper, was the organised mass tourist, defined as people who opt for familiarity as opposed to novelty, requiring affirmation that their safety won't be compromised during the course of their holiday (Wall and Mathieson, 2006). These are generally people who are low risk takers (Yiannakis and Gibson, 1992).
With the majority of the literature concerned with these tourists dated. The research attached to this paper sought to ascertain if this assertion was still the same today. The majority of participants in the study, a survey-based questionnaire, cited that they felt package holidays, the hallmark of these organised tourists were safe. The majority of these tourists cited that they considered risks attached to their tourism practices.
Notably, nearly all respondents revealed that they research their chosen destinations before going and that doing so allows them to feel comfortable and safe within a destination. This supported the work of Lepp and Gibson (2008), who stated that experience of a destination, which can be acquired by knowledge, stimulates competence and the ability to be prepared for or handle risk. It is felt that this paper compliments and supports existing work in the field.
References
Cohen, E. (1972). Towards a sociology of international tourism Sociological Research, 39, pp. 164-182
Lepp, A. and Gibson, H. (2008). Sensation seeking and tourism: tourist role, perception of risk and destination choice. Tourism Management, 29 (4), pp. 740-750.
Williams, A. and Baláž, V. (2013). Tourism, risk tolerance and competences: Travel organization and tourism hazards. Tourism Management, 35. pp. 209-221.