Tourism: A Soft Target for Terrorism?

Abstract:
This paper examines the reasons as to why the tourism industry is such a high target for terrorist attacks. It firstly looks at the impacts that a terrorist attack can have on the tourism industry and why popular tourist destinations are considered 'soft targets' for such hard incidents.

Key Words:
Tourism, Terrorism, Soft Targets

The tourism industry has been an ever growing economic and social phenomenon and is one of the largest industries in the world today. According to the World Bank (2013), between 2008 and 2012 the UK had 29,306,000 international inbound arrivals which means that the UK have saw an increase compared to the last statistics of 28,295,000 inbound arrivals between 2003 and 2007.

Unfortunately with an industry that has continued to grow over the last few decades, there has also been an increase with crime within certain popular tourist destination. Terrorism is one of the main factors that affects the decisions of the tourist as to whether to visit or return to a destination (Mansfeld, 2006). According to Mi5 (2013), Terrorists are increasingly looking at "soft" targets within certain destinations where westerners can be found. This can be from small to large social and retail venues to large tourist destinations and methods of transport. Incidents like these have previously caused a major decline within the tourism industry and have had a major effect on the amount of tourists within a once popular destination, (Sonmez, 1998). According to Mansfeld (2006) incidents like this have had a severe impact within the tourism market and major tour operators around the world saw the majority of customers cancel trips or change their bookings to destinations that were seen as safer.

During the first decade of the 21st century, the tourism industry has been hit with many crisis's, the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon in September 2001 is probably the most horrific yet remembered crises the tourism sector has probably seen, (Beirman, 2010).

Sonmez (1998) suggests that targeting tourism is the medium of communication instigated by terrorists, and due to the major impact a terrorist attack can have on the destination and the rest of the world, it's the most beneficial way to send a message to government or society. Choosing a major tourist destination will increase the amount of attention the incident gets.

Where terrorism is concerned, certain sites are classed as soft targets for such attacks. This is because a long period of preparation, such as keeping constant surveillance on the target etc. is not required. All that is required is the creation or infiltration the weapons or explosive devices that are to be used. And a small team of people to carry out the attack (The Rediff Special, 2008).

Generally, it can be suggested that terrorists prefer to attack soft targets because they are areas where there are large groups of people. This is because the attack would then be symbolic, generate a maximum amount of media attention and therefore be broadcasted all over the world (Schneier, 2011). Previous examples of this include the World Trade Centre in New York, the Taj Mahal Hotel in Mumbai and the London Underground - places where there are large volumes of people from locals to tourists, all day, every day.

The obvious impacts that terrorist attacks have on any target are fatalities, injuries and destruction, however though these are the majorly negative impacts. There are also other negative impacts that can affect the tourism industry such as disrupt travel, affect the economy of tourism based services such as hotels, tour operators etc. discourage investment in tourism organisations. Foreign investment is one of the main economic benefits for tourism, and a terrorist attack could hugely effect a destinations economic development. Coshall (2005) conducted a study on the United Kingdom's expenditure overseas, and found that although a terrorist attack can have a substantial effect on a destinations economy, the actual impact can vary depending on the magnitude of the attack and the popularity of the destination. For example, a terrorist attack such as the bombing of the Pan Am flight in Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988 saw a minimum impact on international tourists spending. Whereas, the attack on 9/11 had a significant effect on international expenditure all across the globe.

Bloomberg et al. (2004) discuss that terrorist attacks can have a major negative impact on an economical perspective at first, but the effect in the long run is short lived compared to incidents such as war or internal conflict within destinations. A perfect example for this would be the terrorist attack of 9/11. Just a few years after the incident, the site, now known as Ground Zero, attracts more visitors per year than the World Trade Centre (Travel Weekly, 2012).

Overall, it can be suggested that terrorist attacks within a destination can alter the tourism demand patterns, for example, Chen and Noriega (2004) suggested that there was an increasing demand to cancel travel or holiday plans on receipt of the 9/11 attacks. This therefore suggests that major crisis have major negative impacts on the tourism industry. It is therefore important that with any major tourist destination, the significance of crisis and risk management should be emphasised by the frequency, severity and global scale of the crises, (Beirman, 2010).

References:
Beirman, D. (2010) Crisis, Recovery and Risk management. Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers Limited, p.4

Mansfeld, Y. and Pizam, A. (2006) Tourism, Security and Safety: from theory to practice. 3rd ed. UK: Oxford.

Sönmez, S. (1998). Tourism, Terrorism and Political Instability. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(2):416

The main reason for choosing to commentate over this summary is due to the fact that this author has conducted a study which closely relates to the topic of research I erected in my paper. Many similarities were noticed, moreover, there were also numerous differences; as such, this is an area which I would like to focus and discuss upon.

The general consensus of this summary discusses, 'is tourism a soft target for terrorism', with the main focus being on where terrorists 'choose' to attack and what repercussions follows this action. This summary clearly defines what a 'soft' target is; in addition, the author also clarifies the influences behind the terrorist's motives, whilst acknowledging what impacts this has on the destination in question. However, this topic is much more detailed and it needs to be analysed more thoroughly.

As the summary unfolds, it is clear to see that the author has explained the overall strength of the tourism industry, in regards to revenue and visitation, however, without a 'particular' destination in mind for the study; it may have been more effective to find literature that backed up the global economy, rather than just the UK's. The author emphasises the case; even with an industry as large as tourism, it is still susceptible to external factors, in particular reference to terrorism.

The next point which is raised in the study is mean by a 'soft target' and why terrorists aim their objectives towards these destinations. Vasilogambros (2013) supports the author's research on 'soft' targets, by stating that there are soft targets in places situation in malls and movie theatres, as well as themed events, which are vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

Undoubtedly, these terrorist occurrences will have a negative effect on the destination, which subsequently will lead to a dip in visitation, which in hindsight; tourists will chose to travel to a destination unaffected by terrorism. Research from my paper would agree with the notion, pointed out by the author; the reason why terrorists choose to attack tourists is to send a message to their local government, with the ability to then attract mass media coverage to satisfy their needs (Ali, 2008, Sommez, 1999). When talking terrorists motives and why they choose to attack a soft target, I would highly recommend referencing to Waugh (1983) analysis of terrorist objectives, which will explain to the reader; what are the differences between direct and indirect strategic objectives.

The discussion is a well-structured case, which clearly outlines the external factors facing the tourism industry, such as the impacts of terrorist events and their influences on the tourism industry. On the other hand, when researching this subject, it is important to have a specific focus in mind, maybe in regards to choosing a particular destination, rather than writing about the industry in broader terms. Also, it is vital to define 'what is a terrorist' as from the literature I produced for my report; the term is difficult to define, without further detailed research into the field.

References

Ali, S. (2008) The Impact of Terrorism on Tourist Destination Choice: A Case Study of Bali and Sharm el-Sheikh. Msc International Business: University of Nottingham.

Sommez et al. (1999) Tourism in Crisis: Managing the Effects of Terrorism. Journal of Travel Research, 38; 13-18.

Vasilogambros, M. (2013) Soft Targets' Remain Vulnerable to Terrorist Attacks. (Online) Available at; http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/soft-targets-remain-vulnerable-to-terrorist-attacks-20130419 (Accessed 8th May 2013).

I selected this summary to comment upon as the author researched a subject that is similar to my own paper. Although there are a number of similarities within this summary and that of mine, I also noticed a number of differences, some of which I would like to comment upon.

The summary focuses on a variety of reasons why tourists become the targets of terrorist attacks and why tourist destinations are defined as being 'soft' targets. This area has been well researched and provides an explanation of the term a 'soft' target and why terrorists target these types of destinations. Examples of incidents that have caused massive disruption to the public have been given.

I agree with the author that terrorists select 'soft' targets as these gain maximum publicity for their cause worldwide. These attacks had a massive effect on the travel industry globally, with the effect still felt to this day. Additional security has been introduced not only at airports and by airlines but also at popular tourist locations.

Without question, terrorist attacks have had a negative effect on tourism, with the attacked locations suffering short term decline as destinations.

The paper provides information and statistics regarding how the tourism industry has grown and how along with this growth, there has been a growth in crime. The growth statistics provided relate to the UK and I feel that additional statistics are needed to show the growth in tourists in another area affected by a terrorist attack, e.g. USA.

The author quoted that according to Mansfeld (2006) incidents like this have had a severe impact within the tourism market and major tour operators around the world saw the majority of customers cancel trips or change their bookings to destinations that were seen as safer. However, in the research I conducted into the bombings at the Boston Marathon 2013, I discovered that clients of tour operators and tour agents with customers already in Boston were happy to remain in the city and company spokespeople saying the attack is not expected to impact bookings (Griffiths, S, 2013). Therefore, it could be said that the size and scale of the terrorist attack has an impact over whether tourism is likely to be affected in a severe way or not.

The author does not appear to have provided evidence regarding an increase in crime occurring. I recommend a definition of crime is required, (as suggested by Page, S), 'there is no clear evidence to support the notion that the development of tourism in destination areas leads to crime'.

A well-structured case has been made explaining why terrorists select 'soft' targets and the impact terrorist attacks have on the tourist industry. However, I believe the research should have concentrated on one location rather than writing about the tourist industry in general. In addition, there is no definition as to 'what a terrorist is', although from my own research and paper, it is very difficult to define this term without a lot of detailed research.

References:
Griffiths, S, 2013, Boston attack will not affect US tourism' [online] Available from: http://www.ttgdigital.com/news/boston-attack-will-not-affect-us-tourism/4687338.article [accessed: 04.05.2013]
Mansfeld, Y. and Pizam, A. (2006) Tourism, Security and Safety: from theory to practice. 3rd ed. UK: Oxford.
Page, S.J. and Connell, J. (2009) Tourism: A Modern Synthesis. Third edition. London: Cengage Learning