Muqbal (2010:1), a tourism journalist, states that, ‘In the last 50 years, Thailand has been hit by more than 30 military coups and assorted other changes in governments, a communist insurgency, image problems, the 1997 economic crash, environmental issues, a near-explosion of the AIDS pandemic, an airport closure, a tsunami, SARS, and numerous other problems that would have long killed off any ordinary country.’
Perhaps because of this long experience, interestingly, the Thai government has responded to crises in an increasingly structured way, particularly in the past decade, as shown in Table 8.1. Some crises, such as the Asian economic melt-down, are external to Thailand, but in response to them, and to strengthen the country’s competitiveness and compete with rival destinations, Thailand has rein-troduced the ‘Amazing Thailand’ campaign in order to illustrate the best of Thai-land’s tourism products and services (Kontogeorgopoulos, 1999). Other problems are more localized; violence due to Muslim separatists in the south affects mainly Malaysian tourists crossing the border to Thailand, and hence the Tourism Author-ity of Thailand has responded by briefi ngs for the media and tour operators in Malaysia (Tourism Authority of Thailand, 2009). Similarly, in the case of SARS and the 2004 tsunami, Thai offi cials communicated with stakeholders, both in Thailand and overseas, in order to restore tourists’ confi dence in the safety and security of the country (Tourism Authority of Thailand, 2005). A key role for any
Responding to Crises in Thailand: A Governance Analysis 93
Table 8.1. Thai tourism crises: impacts and responses 2001–2009.
Period
Nature
of crisis Impacts Government response
2001–
present
Economic crises
● Asia Pacifi c more expensive for US visitors
● Fuel surcharges
● Increasing infl ation
● Global economic slowdown
● Financial support and stimulation
● Tax credits
● Reduced fees and deposits (http://www.tatnews.org/
Press_kits/Roadshow_SG_
Presentation_Final.ppt) 2001–
present
Violence in southern provinces
● Some countries issue travel advisories warning that Thailand may be an
‘unsafe’ destination (http://
www.bangkokpost.com/
tourismreview2007/
27.html)
● Alleviate rural poverty
● Develop tourism potential
● Local TAT offi ce risk assessments
● TAT visitor and tourism industry advice and liaison (http://www.
tatnews.org/ccc/2483.asp) 2003 SARS ● MICE visitors fell 8.3%
● Decrease of 7.36% in arrivals and 4.39% drop in revenue from the previous year (http://www2.tat.or.th/
stat/web/static_tsi_detail.
php?L=&TsiID=9)
● Public–private partnership in marketing promotion
● Pricing measures to attract international visitors
● Travel security presented by the Royal Thai Government through the hosting of the APEC Conference in October (http://
www2.tat.or.th/stat/web/static_
tsi_detail.php?L=&TsiID=9) 2004 Tsunami ● First quarter tourism
2005 –10%
● Many Chinese and Japanese travellers refused to go to Phuket for cultural reasons (http://
www.bangkokpost.com/
tourismreview2007/
27.html)
● International passenger movements at Phuket Airport fell by 88%
in January 2005 and domestic passenger movements fell by 44%.
For the fi rst 6 months of 2005, the fi gures were down 65% and 14%, respectively (http://
www.bangkokpost.com/
tourismreview2005/
07.html)
● Prime Minister Thaksin visited Phuket next day to announce relief to those affected and to help those seeking to make contact with friends and relatives in cooperation with local
embassies
● 24-h Crisis Communication Centre (CMC) set up to
disseminate updated information to all relevant organizations
● Government agencies began to restore and rehabilitate all the affected areas, including roads, telephone, water, electricity and waste management facilities
● Extensive surveys of the affected areas to assess damage to the tourism infrastructure
● TAT began to lay plans to restore the confi dence of domestic and international travellers
(Continued )
94 K. Campiranon et al.
government is to anticipate and respond to crises. By defi nition, a crisis is unpre-dictable and therefore the immediate responses to it are taken urgently and with limited information and resources. A natural disaster such as the 2004 tsunami requires immediate and large-scale rescue efforts, with subsequent repair to the infrastructure and the restoration of services and economic activity extending over several years. Most concern must focus on the needs of local residents, but visitors are also caught up and require special attention such as repatriation to their home countries. Crisis events attract ongoing media attention, with images of suffering and destruction being broadcast around the world. Immediately after the 2004 tsunami, governments of the main tourist-generating countries issued advisory notices warning their residents against travel to Thailand. This further damaged the incoming tourist industry and special efforts were required to restore market confi dence. Specifi c programmes were introduced to inform and reassure travel industry partners and the travelling public.
Thailand experienced a different type of crisis in 2008 when tensions between the main political parties erupted into street violence and the occupa-tion of a major regional internaoccupa-tional airport for a week. The decisions and actions taken by the Thai government included the introduction of martial laws and violent police action against the protestors. Regulations included a new Table 8.1. Continued
Period
Nature
of crisis Impacts Government response
● Tsunami warning systems and drills set up
● Evacuation sites and routes set up
● Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation established (http://
www.bangkokpost.com/
tourismreview2005/07.html 2008 Airport
closure
● Survey: 81% consider political crisis the key factor in decision not to travel to Thailand
● Airports of Thailand
‘week-long closure cost 540 million baht’
● Thai Airways lost 500 million baht daily
● Adverse international publicity
● New Airport Security Bill
● Internal Security Act imposed 29 August to 1 September
Note: Sources for 2008 are provided in the text.
Responding to Crises in Thailand: A Governance Analysis 95
airport security bill and an internal security act (TNA, 2009). This crisis also received widespread international media coverage and source market govern-ments again issued advisory notices warning their residents against travel to Thailand (Tourism Authority of Thailand, 2009).
Media reports of risk and the resultant perceptions of political instability at a tourist destination are key factors infl uencing decisions made by travellers, the industry and investors, who all generally show an aversion to risk (Henderson, 2006). Natural disasters initially attract substantial media attention, often lasting for a relatively short but intensive period of time. In contrast, the effects of a continued and sustained political crisis can attract media coverage for a much longer period (Beirman, 2002; Baral et al., 2004).
Increasingly, events are fi lmed informally on individual travellers’ mobile phones and forwarded instantly to major media such as the BBC and CNN, thereby effectively negating any efforts by the host government to limit media access to incidents or to control the way in which the events are portrayed. In turn, localized political incidents may result in serious damage to the country as a whole, the wider region and even the world through what has been termed the
‘generalization effect’ (Lepp and Gibson, 2003).
Furthermore, international tourists also tend to be more vulnerable to a political crisis than domestic tourists. Due to distance and unfamiliarity, interna-tional tourists are likely to have distorted perceptions of risk caused by inaccurate and incomplete circulated information (Henderson, 2006). Another factor which infl uences consumer decisions to visit a destination is the availability of travel insurance coverage. Many travel insurance policies have an exemption clause which denies coverage to travellers who suffer death, injury or property loss resulting from political violence or civil disorder, typically defi ned as areas under travel advisories (Beirman, 2002).