Ken Hughey - West Coast Regional Council

download report

Transcript Ken Hughey - West Coast Regional Council

Catering for DRR with a multicultural,
transient population: development and
application of the Visitor Action Plan
Ken Hughey
Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand
(Invited paper, South Island Civil Defence Emergency Management
Conference, Greymouth, 30-31 July 2014)
Who are these populations, where are
they found, and what are they like?
Some context
Who are these populations?
Tourists – domestic and international
Migrant workers – domestic and international
School pupils – domestic and international
University students – domestic and international
Where are they and how many?
• Remember NZ has a popn of c.4.5m people; 1m in the
SI and the rest in the North.
• Others are virtually everywhere in the country, at any
time, often in vast numbers, e.g.,:
– Foreign school students: N=16,000 (in 2011), mainly in major
towns & cities (CTV Building in CHCH EQ)
– Foreign university students: N= 80,000 (2011) - cities
– Migrant workers: N=120,000 (2011) – varies, but CHCH
– International visitors: N=2,500,0009 (2013) – everywhere
(with some overlap in numbers with above data)
Characteristics and issues:
• English often the 2nd or 3rd language:
– challenging to communicate with?
• Highly mobile – in one place for less than a day or maybe
up to 6-months:
– of no fixed abode?
• Multiple forms of communication – cell, email, etc:
– how best to communicate?
• Often use diverse and hard to track forms of
transport/accommodation: camper vans, bikes, boarding,
freedom camping:
– how do you know where they are?
Developing an approach for dealing with
these challenges within a tourism
Application to Northland
Tourism in Northland
• Very seasonal, peak in January
• Core products: coastal tourism and
cultural products
• Winterless North, but …
• Exposed to extreme climatic events
(floods, storms) and tsunamis
• Key players: Destination Northland
and Tourism Development Group
Guest nights in Northland
Ex-Tropical Cyclone Wilma –
28-29 January 2011
A not a-typical Northland cyclonic
scene (including July 2014!)
How tourism is affected
Directly: safety, closures, cancellations
Indirectly: damaged assets, disruptions, negative media coverage
Wilma and tourism
Many roads were cut
Many tourists were stranded
Much media interest
General view: ‘we were lucky’
Both Civil Defence and Tourism interests wanted
to know how well the event was ‘managed’
• Interviewed key stakeholders in both CDEM and
the tourism industry …
Wilma-related findings
• Tourism operators generally experienced with natural disasters
• No formal warning system (or contact tree) for tourism
• Freedom campers are a concern
• No plan for communication to tourism stakeholders (in NZ and
overseas) during and after an event
• Northland CDEM systems in place, but no formal integration of
tourism (We reviewed all NZ CDEM plans and found little or no
reference to tourism in almost all (Queenstown an exception)
• Opportunity for greater integration of tourism aspects into
disaster risk reduction (based on the Four Rs)
General Visitor Needs:
• Visitor welfare
– Food and potentially clothing
– Shelter (welfare centre/other accommodation)
– Socio-psychological support
(e.g. through Victim Support or Salvation Army)
• Information flows, different target groups - Important observations:
– Visitors are generally able to obtain information (e.g. many have
mobile phones): language challenges
– Information centres are critical for information and assistance):
language challenges
– TNZ website and channels are important): language challenges
– The role of social media needs to be examined and opportunities
exploited): language challenges
General Visitor Needs: Flow-on
• Passports and Visas
– Diplomatic implications when passports/visas are lost
– Partnership between tourism organisations, education
organisations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade,
Immigration NZ, embassies and others
• Families of Victims
– Assistance required (socio-psychological, travel
arrangements, other logistics and formalities)
– Specific information needs
Potential contribution of the
Visitor Sector to CDEM
Tourism can play an important role in the Response:
1. Assisting in dealing with displaced visitors
2. Gathering of information from the tourism and education sectors
(how many and where?)
3. Connecting Civil Defence with accommodation and other
hospitality (food/feeding/catering) services
4. Providing external communications and dealing with the media
5. Maintaining tourism activities (and economic flow on effects)
elsewhere in New Zealand (e.g. rebooking of itineraries)
Summary of tourism issues
• Rescue and Missing people
– All people are treated the same
– “Tracking down” of visitors is challenging
• Coordination and Communication
– Challenges and gaps in the first 24 hours very typical for any disaster situation
– Lack of consideration of visitor industry resulted in oversights in the immediate
response by Civil Defence
– Different protocols for different organisations involved in offshore communication
• Destination image
– False reporting, some sensationalism
– Relationship with media essential to avoid damaging
reporting and to capitalise on media as communication channel
– Overly negative travel advisories
– Innovative campaigns important – see photo above
Taking a systematic approach to
thinking about how tourism and CDEM
can be integrated for better
management of multi-cultural and
highly transient visitors
Disaster frameworks
frameworks: PPRR
(e.g. Hills, 1998 in
Ritchie, 2008)
Faulkner’s Framework (2001)
Prevention / Mitigation 1. Pre-event phase: contingency plans, scenario analyses, hazard
New Zealand: the
Four Rs used in the
CDEM framework
2. Prodromal phase: due to an imminent disaster, early warning
systems are activated and command centres are established.
3. Emergency phase: Actions are necessary to protect people and
4. Intermediate phase: short term needs of people/tourists have to be
addressed and media communication is critical.
5. Recovery phase: Rebuilding of infrastructure, marketing of
6.Resolution phase: evaluation and feedback.
Developing a Visitor Action Plan
(VAP) for Northland
Initial consultation
Two rounds of interviews
Business survey
In-depth meetings with CDEM and Destination
• Workshop with Tourism Development Group
• Final workshop with tourism stakeholders approval of VAP
Template for linking tourism into the existing
Civil Defence structure (on the left hand side of the
Figure) based on the Northland case study
Northland Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group
Coordinating Executive Group
CDEM Offices (regional and local)
Tourism Cluster
Destination Northland
Tourism Development Group
Business groups
Maori RTO
Response Groups
Northland CDEM Plan
Response Plans
Tourism Action Plan
Tourism-specific Reduction
Tourism-specific Readiness
Tourism-specific Response
Tourism-specific Recovery
Suggestions for what a Visitor Action Plan
for tourism should contain (provided by
respondents to the tourism operator survey)
Not specific to
one of the Rs
Planning and
Warning systems
Rescue and welfare
(Early) Evacuation
Consultation and
Visitor Action Plan adopted by the Tourism
Cluster in Northland – example components
Identify, map,
Civil Defence in
understand hazards for partnership with
Destination Northland
Use existing hazard assessments (e.g. tsunami
maps) and ensure tourism operators know about
Tourism linked into CEG Destination Northland
Attend meetings of the Coordinating Executive
Group (CEG) in CDEM.
Destination Northland
Crisis Plan
Destination Northland
communications plan
and templates
Destination Northland
and businesses
Hold a staff meeting and collect information on
contact details and what people would do in an
Perform emergency drills.
Prepare templates and keep them in a readily
available folder and electronically;
Consider media training for emergency.
Identify, map,
understand hazards
for businesses
Leadership (proposed)
Civil Defence in partnership
with Destination Northland
Use existing hazard assessments (e.g. tsunami maps) and ensure
tourism operators know about them
Workshop format?
Develop a
I-site mgrs coordinate
development of contact tree by
sub region and by industry
group (include DN manager)
Identify existing contact trees (e.g. CRPs, MANZ, etc.)
Develop trees for gaps (consider new technology like twitter)
Ensure that trees are linked to CD in most efficient way
Discuss back up and data sharing protocols
Tourism linked into
Annual Review
Destination Northland
Attend meetings of the Coordinating Executive Group in CDEM
Allocate slot in meeting once a year to discuss CDEM issues (e.g.
winter meeting); discuss upcoming issues
Use existing checklists (e.g. PATA, p. 51-58)
Workshop format?
Templates, e.g. Tourism Victoria
Hold a staff meeting and collect information on contact details and
what people would do in an emergency (follow example of Positively
Business Crisis “Todo” list and plan
Destination Northland in
partnership with CD
Destination Northland Destination Northland
Crisis Plan
I-Site Crisis Plan
I-Sites, either individually or
Hold a staff meeting and collect information on contact details and
what people would do in an emergency
Ensure tourism is well TDG
Keep informed and maintain contacts with important national and
regional organisation that might assist recovery
External comms plan
and templates
Prepare templates and keep them in a readily available folder and
Consider media training for emergency
Destination Northland and
Where to from here?
• Project recently approved (for KH and Susanne Becken, Griffith
University) with CDEM Resilience Collaborative Fund to:
– Evaluate Northland experience – what is working, what isn’t,
what can we do better?
– Apply that experience to the West Coast of the South Island
• Consider how the VAP concept might be linked with an integrated
certification programme, e.g., Qualmark in New Zealand
• Tie to international initiatives in this space
• Raise the question more generally – would your region benefit from
closer links with Tourism and would this build resilience?
• Tourism is probably more exposed to natural disasters
than any other ‘group’ in the population
• Often, emergency management systems do not explicitly
consider tourism
• Tourism’s concerns need to be addressed, and at the
same time tourism is an important resource
• Tourist destinations are a suitable partner for disaster
• A proactive approach is better than a reactive one
Contact: [email protected]