1. What new marketing techniques did Christchurch have to adopt? Talk about the de marketing of Christchurch that occurred shortly after the earthquake. The case study is provided in attached file.
2. Relate what Christchurch have done to the Crisis Approach Models that are provided.
Knowledge management and tourism recovery de marketing the Christchurch earthquakes 2010 2011.pdf - PDF Expert Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rcit20 Download by: [La Trobe University] Date: 21 February 2016, At: 03:17 Current Issues in Tourism ISSN: 1368-3500 (Print) 1747-7603 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcit20 Knowledge management and tourism recovery (de)marketing: the Christchurch earthquakes 2010–2011 C. Orchiston & J.E.S. Higham To cite this article: C. Orchiston & J.E.S. Higham (2016) Knowledge management and tourism recovery (de)marketing: the Christchurch earthquakes 2010–2011, Current Issues in Tourism, 19:1, 64-84, DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2014.990424 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2014.990424 Published online: 24 Dec 2014. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 212 View related articles View Crossmark data Knowledge management and tourism recovery (de)marketing: the Christchurch earthquakes 2010–2011 C. Orchiston∗ and J.E.S. Higham Department of Tourism, University of Otago, PO Box 52, Dunedin, New Zealand (Received 20 August 2014; accepted 13 November 2014) New Zealand has a history of deadly earthquakes, the most recent of which in Christchurch (2010–2011) has had major consequences for the tourism sector. Tourism destinations affected by major natural disasters face significant challenges during the response and recovery phases. Christchurch lost a large proportion of its lifelines infrastructure and accommodation capacity, and experienced an unprecedented drop in domestic and international visitor arrivals. The theoretical frameworks informing this paper come from the fields of tourism disaster planning, knowledge management and recovery marketing. They inform an empirical study that draws upon qualitative expert interviews with national and regional destination management organizations regarding their experience of the Christchurch earthquakes. The findings of this research highlight the critical importance of knowledge management and effective inter-agency collaboration and communication in the immediate disaster response, as well as during the development and implementation of (de)marketing strategies, in order to expedite medium- to long- term tourism recovery. Keywords: Christchurch; tourism; knowledge management; recovery marketing; disaster; earthquakes; crisis communication 1. Introduction New Zealand is a geologically active country located on the Pacific-Australian tectonic plate interface. It has a history of deadly earthquakes, most notably, the 1931 Napier earth- quake (magnitude 7.8) which cost 258 lives. While the active geology of New Zealand is fundamental to its nature-based tourism product (e.g. geothermal, alpine and scenic), the country is inherently vulnerable to natural disasters, with the potential for earthquake and tsunami events being prominent in the public consciousness since the recent Christch- urch earthquake, and Japan (2011) and Samoan (2009) tsunami disasters. The New Zealand city of Christchurch experienced a sequence of damaging earthquakes in 2010–2011, with a magnitude 6.3 on 22 February 2011, resulting in 185 deaths and causing major damage and destruction of critical infrastructure. The consequences of this event for the tourism industry were immediate and sustained, not only for the city of Christchurch but also for the wider tourism economy of the South Island. The Christchurch earthquakes (also known as the Canterbury earthquake sequence) are distinct from many natural disasters, due to both the extensive destruction of a modern city, and the prolonged nature of the aftershock sequence. This has presented a significant # 2014 Taylor & Francis ∗Corresponding author. Email:
[email protected] Current Issues in Tourism, 2016 Vol. 19, No. 1, 64–84, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2014.990424 D ow nl oa de d by [L a Tr ob e U ni ve rs ity ] a t 0 3: 17 2 1 Fe br ua ry 2 01 6 challenge to a range of tourism/destination management agencies at both the national and regional levels. The key aims of the research were to (1) investigate tourism agencies responses to the earthquakes, in terms of communication and knowledge management and (2) examine the recovery (de)marketing approaches adopted by tourism marketing organizations in the aftermath of the earthquakes, with specific note of the purpose and timing of marketing efforts. This paper contributes theoretical and empirical insights into tourism disaster recovery within the context of a destructive and prolonged natural disaster. It is situated within the literature on tourism disaster planning (Faulkner, 2001; Faulkner & Vikulov, 2001; Scott, Laws, & Prideaux, 2008), knowledge management (Blackman, Kennedy, & Ritchie, 2011; Cooper, 2006; Koraeus & Stern, 2013; Paraskevas, Altinay, McLean, & Cooper, 2013) and recovery marketing (Walters & Mair, 2012). The research has been carried out over a period of 18 months, in order to understand the unique elements of a natural disaster unlike most, in that it has unfolded over a period of years, rather than hours or days. This paper specifically addresses phase 5 (long-term recovery) of Faulkner’s (2001) six-phase tourism disaster planning/management model. Using empirical material from a programme of expert stakeholder interviews, it critically explores the outcomes and responses of the tourism sector, drawing conclusions that provide insights into the theory and practice of tourism disaster response, knowledge management and recovery marketing. 2. The Canterbury earthquake sequence and tourism Christchurch is the second largest city in New Zealand (population 340,000), and prior to the earthquakes, it contributed 16% of the total national tourism activity (Ministry of Econ- omic Development, 2012). Christchurch was known as the ‘Garden City’ because of its green space, with a tourism product based on heritage and scenic values, and significant events, conventions and cruise industries. The Australian inbound visitor market comprised 43% of the arrivals to Canterbury prior to the earthquakes (CCT, 2012). In the year to March 2010, Christchurch received 820,000 international visitors; however, between 2006 and 2010, the central city was in a period of decline; international arrivals fell by 80,000, which was considered only partially a consequence of the Global Financial Crisis and more about a stagnating tourism product (Simmons & Sleeman, 2012). A major strategic advantage for the city is its position as the aviation gateway to Canter- bury and the rest of the South Island, with 85% of international visitor arrivals and depar- tures to and from the South Island travelling through Christchurch International Airport (CIAL, 2012). Tourism in the wider province of Canterbury focuses on natural heritage and scenic values, including skiing (Southern Alps), thermal hot springs (Hanmer Springs), whale-watching (Kaikoura) and alpine environments (Mt Cook and Arthur’s Pass national parks), including the Trans-Alpine railway. In 2009, international tourists stayed for a total of 6.6 million guest nights in Canterbury, in addition to similar numbers of domestic visitor nights (Tourism Strategy Group, 2012). The Canterbury earthquake sequence began at 4:30 am on 4 September 2010 with the shallow rupture of the Greendale Fault (M 7.1), 30 km west of Christchurch. Damage in the city was considered significant at the time, with many heritage building facades collapsing and large quantities of liquefied silt erupting from the ground surface as a consequence of shaking (liquefaction). The fact that there were no casualties was attributed to New Zeal- and’s rigorous building codes, and that the earthquake took place in the early hours of the morning while people were at home asleep. Five months later, at 12:51 pm on 22 Feb- ruary 2011, a shallow aftershock (M 6.3) struck southeast of the central city at a depth of Current Issues in Tourism 65 D ow nl oa de d by [L a Tr ob e U ni ve rs ity ] a t 0 3: 17 2 1 Fe br ua ry 2 01 6 5 km, resulting in unprecedented damage and destruction to the city (Stevenson et al., 2011). The aftershock claimed 185 lives, with two major building collapses accounting for 133 deaths. The fatalities included foreign nationals from 20 countries. It also destroyed many heritage buildings, notably Christchurch Cathedral, an iconic building of significance to the people of the city, and as a tourist attraction. Less than 24 hours later, the government declared a state of National Emergency, highlighting the need for national and international resources to effectively manage the disaster. The earthquake also resulted in rapid response by tourism stakeholders at national and regional levels, an event that was unprecedented in New Zealand for a natural disaster. In the months following the 22 February 2011 earthquake, Christchurch experienced several damaging aftershocks and thousands of smaller seismic events. During this time, 220 historic buildings were demolished, effectively changing the face of the city of Christchurch (Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, 2012). The February earthquake destroyed two-thirds of existing hotel stock and many backpacker hostels in Christchurch, leading to a decrease of 1 million visitor guest nights (two-thirds were international visitors) (CCT, 2012). Eighteen months after the earthquake, the city had 1100 hotel rooms, com- pared to 3750 before (The Press, 2012), with direct losses in visitor expenditure of $235 million in Christchurch city (CCT, 2012). The Christchurch Central Business District (CBD) remained cordoned off from public access for more than 18 months, although the size of the cordon gradually reduced. The city’s modern convention centre was destroyed and with it, the conventions market. After many months of assessment AMI Stadium was declared beyond repair, and all Rugby World Cup games (September/October 2011) sched- uled to take place in Christchurch were relocated to other cities. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) and Christchurch City Council developed a blueprint for redevelopment of the CBD. In a submission to CERA on 12 September 2011, the Regional Tourism Organisation (RTO), Christchurch Canter- bury Tourism (CCT), urged CERA to expedite the rebuilding of the CBD. It claimed that the tourism sector would remain in a state of ‘limbo’ because of the critical shortage of accommodation facilities, and the lack of a convention centre. A master plan to rebuild the city was finally completed almost 18 months after the February earthquake fol- lowing a lengthy period of community and stakeholder engagement, discussion and plan- ning. The rebuild has been posited as a unique opportunity to revitalize the CBD and outer suburbs by creating a future city, to correct past urban design failings and to construct a dynamic and attractive place for residents and visitors. 3. Natural disasters, knowledge management and recovery (de)marketing Natural disasters lead to major disruption of tourism systems, and can result in prolonged and cascading impacts on destinations (Faulkner, 2001; Glaesser, 2003; Laws & Prideaux, 2005; Pforr & Hosie, 2009; Ritchie, 2009; Sharpley, 2005). The impacts of natural disasters on tourism have been described in the academic literature addressing crisis management and response, resilience and recovery. While academic attention has focused on disaster planning and management (Ritchie, Bentley, Koruth, & Wang, 2011; Scott et al., 2008), greater empirical attention needs to be paid to the recovery of tourism destinations affected by natural disasters. Recent recovery-focused natural disaster studies have been carried out on tsunami (Carlsen, 2006),