Page 1 of 16

SHAPING OUR TERRITORY: STRATEGIC TOURISM PLANNING PLAYS A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN DISASTER RECOVERY

Ms E. Kate Armstrong Lecturer/PhD student

School of Business and Government Division of Business, Law and Information Sciences

University of Canberra ACT 2601 Australia

Phone: +61 (0)2 6251 5257

Email: kate.armstrong@canberra.edu.au

This paper was supported by scholarship funding from the Australian Department of Education, Science and Training and the Sustainable Tourism Co-operative Research Centre.

Page 2 of 16

SHAPING OUR TERRITORY: STRATEGIC TOURISM PLANNING PLAYS A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN DISASTER RECOVERY

ABSTRACT Numerous authors call for increased attention to planning for disasters or crises but little attention has been paid to disaster recovery planning, that is the planning that is fundamental to the recovery of a destination after a disaster has occurred. Disaster management frameworks for the tourism industry (for example, Faulkner & Vikulov, 2001; Ritchie, 2004) don’t specifically mention recovery planning although it is clear that this activity is a fundamental component of destination recovery. A planning study for non-urban land in the Australian Capital Territory following devastating bushfires is the focus of this paper. The data was drawn from documents and 33 interviews with representatives of government agencies, professional associations and businesses. The planning study gave the tourism industry an unusual opening to work with land management agencies on a critical planning issue for the community and break down the real and artificial barriers that commonly exist. The final outcomes resulted in destination management initiatives which would not have been envisaged without the turning point provided by the disaster. Another important outcome was the recognition that the agencies responsible for forestry, environment, education, conservation and tourism needed to develop higher levels of cooperation, consultation and strategic coherence.

INTRODUCTION Disaster or crisis management for the tourism industry and destinations is receiving increased research and practitioner attention. Henderson (2007, p.13) indicates that tourism crisis management is ‘planning for and managing tourism crises in order to protect the interests of the industry, tourists and other stakeholders involved’ and planning is clearly an important part of preparing for and managing disasters or crises. The research literature for disaster and crisis management overlaps somewhat but this paper will concentrate on disaster management, which is an emergency management term, rather than crisis management which is an organisational term. In both situations, numerous authors call for increased attention to planning for disasters or crises (for example, Heath, 1998; Henderson, 2007; Ritchie, Dorrell, Miller, & Miller, 2003) reflecting the larger risk assessment, disaster and crisis preparedness and contingency planning literature. However, there has been little attention paid to disaster recovery planning, that is the planning that is fundamental to the recovery of a destination after a disaster has occurred. In fact, standard tourism planning texts such as Mason (2003) and Hall (2000) do not address this topic despite the planning processes and principles they espouse remaining relevant and applicable albeit in a unique context. Numerous authors have constructed disaster management frameworks for the tourism industry and destinations. One of the best known was developed by Bill Faulkner (1999; 2001) and, after its application to the 1998 Australia Day Floods in Katherine in the Northern Territory of Australia, refined in Faulkner and Vikulov (2001) (Figure 1).

Page 3 of 16

Figure 1. Tourism disaster management framework from Faulkner and Vikulov (2001). There is no specific mention of recovery planning in either Stage 4 – Recovery or Stage 5 – Reconstruction and Reassessment although the need to devise strategic priority profiles as part of contingency planning is identified in the right hand column. Stage 6 - Review also recommends reappraisal of the marketing, planning and policy regime. Ritchie’s (2004) strategic and holistic disaster and crisis management framework was partly based on Faulkner and Vikulov (2001) and contains a more obvious link to tourism recovery planning in ‘strategy evaluation and strategic control’ (Figure 2).

Page 4 of 16

Figure 2. Strategic and holistic framework for crisis and disaster management from Ritchie (2004).

This activity refers to ‘the thorough evaluation of the possible strategies that are available to the organisation and the selection of those that will best fit its needs’ (Ritchie, 2004, p.675). The context of this material, however, indicates that Ritchie is referring to the need for rapid decision making to limit the impacts of the disaster as opposed to medium or long-term recovery planning. The Pacific Asia Travel Association’s (2005) crisis management strategy follows the common four stage model of reduction (of risk), readiness, response and recovery. The recovery phase describes a business continuity plan incorporating rehabilitation, normalisation and expansion activities – close allies to recovery planning. The checklist for the recovery stage also refers to a strategic recovery plan involving all stakeholders. Murphy and Bayley (1989) used four disaster planning stages - assessment, warning, impact and recovery - to examine the Mount St Helens eruption in 1980 and the East Kootenay Fires in 1985. In discussing the recovery stage they refer to the replacement and reconstruction period when destroyed facilities are rebuilt and an improvement on pre-disaster conditions by re-planning and redevelopment. Despite the lack of specific documentation of planning in the recovery stage of these frameworks it is clear that this activity occurs. One example is the production of the Mount St Helens Regional Visitor Industry Development Program in 1983 with a focus on future tourism activities on the mountain and other proposals for an interpretive centre, conference centre and commercial complex. The planning was based on integrating tourism into the local economy due to the new and unique ‘attraction’ formed by the volcanic activity and ‘making positive use of the consequences of the disaster’ (Murphy & Bayley, 1989, p.42). Another example is the production of the Phuket Action Plan which was written after the Boxing Day 2004 Tsunami to facilitate rehabilitation of Indonesia, the Maldives, Sri Lanka and Thailand (World Tourism Organization, 2005). Strategies were categorised into five action areas – marketing communications, community relief, professional training, risk management and sustainable redevelopment – with the latter a reminder of the need for recovery planning and development to be

Page 5 of 16

governed by the philosophy of sustainability as explored in the 2005 BEST Education Network conference Managing Risk and Crisis for Sustainable Tourism: Research and Innovation (BEST Education Network, 2005). It is recognised that disasters can have positive impacts on a destination. Despite the chaos that they cause disasters may lead to innovation and opportunity. Faulkner (2001) argues that a disaster can start a chain reaction that makes the pre-fire situation no longer viable and promote creativity and innovation. In discussing the recovery of the Thai tourism industry following the Boxing Day 2004 Tsunami Henderson (2007, p.99) notes that ‘the disaster was seen by some officials as an opportunity to revisit tourism development policy, taking into account former mistakes regarding hasty and unplanned growth.’ In this way recovery planning activities can take advantage of the unique opportunity provided by a disaster to renew and reinvigorate planning efforts and its place and role in disaster management frameworks warrants further examination. This paper responds to this research gap by analysing a major non-urban land planning study that followed devastating bushfires (forest fires) that swept through the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) in January 2003. After explaining the research design this paper will briefly describe the ACT tourism industry before outlining the disaster and its impacts. The land planning study will be analysed in the context of disaster recovery before concluding with recommendations for further research. RESEARCH DESIGN This article is based on emerging findings from a doctoral study on destination recovery after a natural disaster. The research design is informed by the interpretive social sciences paradigm which features a holistic-inductive approach where the whole phenomenon of destination recovery in all its complexity is being studied. This paradigm also assumes that there are multiple explanations or realities to explain a phenomenon such as recovery (Jennings, 2001). The methodology is qualitative and a case study method is being adopted. According to Beeton’s (2005, p. 42) definition, a case study is 'a holistic empirical inquiry used to gain an in-depth understanding of a contemporary phenomenon in its real-life context, using multiple sources of evidence'. Document analysis, participant-observation and in-depth interviewing are the key data collection tools (Jennings, 2001; Yin, 2003). The findings for this paper are drawn from documents and in-depth interviews with representatives of government agencies, professional associations and businesses. The 33 in-depth interviews investigated the short, medium and long term actions taken by organisations to assist destination recovery and were structured around the tourism disaster incident response evaluation (DIRE) grid which provides a chronological framework for studying a sequence of events and reactions in a disaster situation (Faulkner & Vikulov, 2001). An outline of interview topics is provided in Table 1. The length of the interviews ranged from 28 minutes to almost 2 hours with an average duration of 66 minutes. Given that the resulting interview transcripts were quite lengthy they were coded using the qualitative analysis software QSR NVivo V2 which is an effective tool for handling large quantities of textual data. They were analysed based on the grounded theory approach using constant comparative analysis and successive approximation (Jennings, 2001; Wimmer & Dominick, 1997).

Page 6 of 16

Table 1. Outline of interview topics

Phase of disaster Interview topics

Pre-event (when action can be taken to prevent or mitigate the effects of potential disasters)

• preparedness • existing Disaster Management Plan or Emergency Response

Plan Prodromal (when it is apparent that a disaster is imminent)

• activation of plans • preparations for disaster

Emergency (the effect of the disaster is felt and action is necessary to protect people and property)

• involvement in specific emergency management actions

Intermediate (short-term needs of people have been addressed and main focus is restoring services and community to normal)

• closure of facilities • internal communication with staff • staffing issues • assessments/inventories of damage • media issues • recovery planning • communication with external stakeholders

Long-term recovery (continues from intermediate but with more major tasks)

• research • marketing and public relations • major reviews of policy and planning • internal communication with staff • partnerships • fund raising and distribution • cleaning up, repairing, restoring, rebuilding, rehabilitation,

reopening • special visitor/tourist activities • special recovery events (eg, industry briefings, government

briefings, seminars, conferences) • use of volunteers in recovery • lessons learned

THE ACT TOURISM INDUSTRY Canberra, the national capital of Australia located in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) (population 333,667), is a tourist destination of local, national and international significance with a unique position in the Australian tourism landscape. It is the seat of Federal Government and features national attractions which present the history, future and values of the nation (Australian Capital Tourism Corporation, 2004). The ACT has a broad range of tourist and visitor infrastructure and a diverse range of special interest products and services with a focus on cultural, nature-based, sport and wine tourism and festivals and events (Canberra Tourism and Events Corporation & Tourism Industry Council, c. 2000). Based on data from the National Visitor and International Visitor Surveys conducted by Tourism Research Australia, domestic tourism accounts for the majority of overnight visitors with 1,908,000 visiting in 2006 with an average duration of stay of 2.9 nights. The purpose of trip was dominated by those visiting friends and relatives (38 %) followed by business (29 %) and holiday/leisure (28 %). In 2006, 153,975 international tourists visited the ACT, a decline from a peak of 230,000 in 2000, the year that Sydney hosted the Olympic Games. The key source markets in 2006 were the United Kingdom (20 %), USA (12 %), Singapore/Malaysia/Thailand/Hong Kong (9 %) and New Zealand (8 %) (Australian Capital Tourism Corporation, 2007).

Page 7 of 16

THE BUSHFIRE On 8 January 2003 electrical storms in New South Wales and the ACT resulted in a series of lightning strikes and consequent ignition of bushfires. Exacerbating conditions included dry fuel due to prolonged and severe drought, high fuel loads and difficult weather conditions. The separate bushfires gradually spread eastwards across the ACT and became a single fire front and a total fire ban was declared from 16 to 21 January, a duration unprecedented in ACT history. Day 11 of the fire (Saturday 18 January 2003) is recognized as the day of the ‘Canberra firestorm’ despite the bushfires having already wrought critical impacts on reserve, forestry and rural lands by that date. Locally, this date has gained ‘iconic’ status because of the extensive damage to the suburbs of Canberra and the mass evacuation of residents and for the first time in the ACT’s history a state of emergency was declared underlining the situation’s extreme seriousness. On Sunday 19 January 2003 the ACT community was in a state of shock as the widespread and severe impacts of the fire became known. The bushfires continued to threaten but response and recovery actions commenced in an atmosphere of ongoing preparedness. The state of emergency was eventually lifted on Tuesday 28 January 2003 (McLeod, 2003). Impacts on the tourism industry Soon after the bushfires the Tourism Industry Council ACT and Region Ltd (2003b) (TIC) conducted the ACT Bushfire Impacts Survey so they could provide credible information to local and federal government. They found that the bushfires had ‘significant impacts upon the ACT and region tourism industry’ (p. 1) and tourism operators reported on average a 50 % decline in visitation with the impact of the fires continuing much longer than expected (Tourism Industry Council ACT and Region Ltd, 2003a). In-depth interviews conducted with stakeholders revealed general agreement with the TIC findings and a representative of the National Capital Attractions Association explained that ‘even businesses that were not physically affected, fire affected, were affected in other ways’ referring to a typical ripple effect. The impacts on the tourism industry are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2. Summary of negative and positive impacts of the bushfires on the ACT’s tourism industry.

Negative impacts

Sensationalised reporting in domestic and international media of level of damage with subsequent impact on destination image and public perceptions. Significant and immediate decrease in visitor numbers reported by Visitor Centres with evidence from documentary and interview sources that the disaster had a short to medium term impact on visitor activity. Many undamaged attractions experienced approximately 50 % decrease in visitor activity with recovery to pre-bushfire levels not occurring until September 2003. National parks, nature reserves, forest plantations and rural land severely impacted with 66 % of total ACT land area affected. Ecosystems, ecological communities, built, natural and indigenous heritage attractions, visitor services and facilities and recreational access were all lost. Key attractions damaged were Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve, Cotter Reserve, Namadgi National Park and Mount Stromlo Observatory. Nature-based tour operators severely affected in the medium to long term due to loss of access to natural attractions that had featured on tour itineraries. Food and beverage outlets affected by less tourism activity combined with downturn in local patronage. One outlet destroyed and several operations affected due to location in damaged areas.

Page 8 of 16

Impacts on accommodation mixed although many experienced substantial cancellations. These were tempered by high demand for temporary accommodation for homeless residents, volunteers, fire fighters and emergency services personnel. Positive impacts

Emerging community spirit, ‘humanising’ the city, raised profile and public awareness of destination, valuing of tourism as an economic activity, valuing of attractions that had been ‘taken for granted’ and an opportunity for product development through recovery planning and development.

An examination of the short, medium and long term recovery of the ACT tourism industry is being undertaken in a doctoral study and emerging findings indicate that it was a complex process that featured many phases, activities and stakeholders. This paper focuses on a major land planning study that formed part of the medium to long term recovery. OVERVIEW OF THE PLANNING STUDY The land use planning study was titled Shaping Our Territory – Options and Opportunities for Non-Urban ACT and was commissioned by the ACT Government to advise on future use of non-urban land with the main impetus coming from the Bushfire Recovery Taskforce. As the Chief Minister indicated 'The restoration and rehabilitation of the non-urban parts of the ACT following the tragic and devastating bushfires … is a major priority of this Government’ and the planning study made a ‘central and valuable contribution to the overall bushfire recovery effort’ (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003a, p. v). The study presented the tourism industry and other stakeholders with a unique opportunity for holistic and comprehensive strategic planning for the destination. The planning study had two goals. The first was to manage the risk from bushfires and better protect the ACT. The ACT’s bush setting brings risks as well as opportunities and a reasonable amount of planning effort focused on fire abatement and the establishment of buffers between urban and non-urban zones (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b). The second goal was to ‘realise opportunities in fields ranging from water management, farming and recreation, through to tourism and education’ based on the understanding that bushfire protection, water supply, ecology and landscape preservation were top priorities (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b, p. x). Additionally, there was an important distinction between typical ‘clean up’ activities following a disaster and planning for fundamental changes in land use and activity. The purpose of the study was to look broadly and strategically at land use possibilities with final recommendations integrated into the ACT’s formal planning and governmental processes. There was an emphasis on new and creative ideas that ‘might not have emerged but for the imperative of recovery from the fires’ (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b, p. iv). It could be argued that the bushfires were the trigger or catalyst for encouraging ‘innovation from chaos’, for a more strategically planned destination. This reflects Faulkner’s (2001) claims of the innovative outcomes that chaos may bring and Ritchie’s (2004) reference to crises or disasters as ‘turning points’ or agents of change. This thinking was echoed in the preliminary report that stated ‘The best chance of achieving a positive legacy from the bushfire tragedy lies in articulating the various possibilities for land use ranging from farming and forestry to recreation, education and conservation’ (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b, p. iv). The planning study was not designed to return the ACT to a pre-fire situation but as an opportunity to enhance the ACT’s position and stimulate lateral and creative thinking and ideas - almost an ‘imagining’ of a new ACT (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b). In a seminar on disaster recovery Andrew Coghlan (2004, 30 November) explained that Emergency Management Australia identifies five core aspects of recovery - community, psychosocial, infrastructure, economic and environment. To an extent, the planning study addressed all of these in relation to non-urban land and it could be argued that it was long overdue. Due to the loss of almost

Page 9 of 16

500 suburban properties in Canberra urban recovery received a lot of immediate attention but once Canberrans sought their familiar nature-based recreation experiences it was clear non-urban recovery was essential. The ‘landscape’ setting for Canberra is fundamental to the planning of the city and forms the basis for the notion of the ‘Bush Capital’ for which the city is renowned. This is the ‘setting’ for many forms of recreation (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b) and it could be claimed that the recovery of this asset should have occurred in parallel with urban recovery. The planning study was completed within a year and the key milestones are outlined in Table 3.

Table 3. Key milestones in the planning study.

Date Milestone

January 2003 Bushfire disaster February 2003 Announcement of non-urban planning study by ACT Government. March 2003 13 member Non-Urban Study Steering Committee (NUSSC)

appointed comprising ACT Bushfire Recovery Taskforce and experts. Chaired by the Chair of the Bushfire Recovery Taskforce.

May 2003 A consortium of consultants, led by Bovis Lend Lease, selected

through open tender and appointed to assist NUSSC. August 2003 Preliminary report Shaping our Territory: Options and Opportunities

for Non-Urban ACT released for public comment. November 2003 Shaping our Territory – Final report: Opportunities for Non-Urban ACT

presented to ACT Government. 2004 - 2008 Further planning and implementation of recommendations.

Sources: Non-Urban Study Steering Committee (2003a; 2003b)

One criticism of the study is the lack of a tourism consultant in the consortium. In constructing the team a government representative indicated that ‘Tourism was a consideration ... it was a multidisciplinary team’ but failing to acknowledge the role and significance of tourism by not appointing a specialist was disappointing and meant that, in the consultation phase, there was added pressure on the tourism representative bodies. Much is made of the often adrenalin-charged activity that surrounds disasters and crises. Bonn and Rundle-Thiele (2007), for example, found that decision-making in the midst of and immediately after a crisis was more intuitive, less analytical, less consultative, simplified and fast. The planning study that is the subject of this paper occurred in a more stable environment and, as Bonn and Rundle-Thiele also found, the decision-making was more co-operative, formal, analytical, comprehensive and slow. There was pressure to complete the study, particularly from agencies awaiting planning decisions to proceed with rebuilding, but it should be clear that recovery does not necessarily occur in the same ‘pressure cooker’ environment as disaster response. Consultation Once the consortium of consultants had been appointed they invited initial comments on non-urban planning issues in an informal consultation which included workshops, correspondence and an open invitation to the ACT community. The resulting 163 submissions were incorporated into a preliminary report designed to collate options and stimulate public debate (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b). A shorter 35 page overview was also prepared with a view to encouraging public input (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003c). It was acknowledged that the preliminary report was

Page 10 of 16

produced rapidly, especially given the complexity of the task, but this was appropriate given the pressing need for a recovery strategy for non-urban areas. The formal public consultation process following the release of the preliminary report included (i) media releases and publicity, (ii) presentations at community council meetings, functions and shopping centre displays, (iii) meetings and discussions with the NUSSC, government agencies and stakeholder groups, (iv) workshops to further develop key precinct opportunities, and (v) direct mail to 1,000 households (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003a). The process attracted 467 written submissions making a total of 630 submissions for the whole study demonstrating the high level of community interest in the planning process. The planning approach This planning study was approached from two angles. First, the land uses and activities were identified and examined including: planning to reduce bushfire risk, water resources planning, ecological resource conservation, recreation and community well being, forests and plantation industry, tourism, rural settlements and villages, rural residential (hobby farms), rural leases and agriculture, science and education, and transport and municipal services. This paper concentrates on tourism although typically this sector overlapped with other land uses and activities. The second angle was identification of 11 geographic areas based on catchment and social boundaries, logical infrastructure or natural borders. Finally, a matrix of land use/activity by area was developed (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b). Overall the study was concerned with ‘preserving the landscape, look and feel of the non-urban ACT’ and keeping development in harmony with the environment. The final report further stated ‘There will be no Disneyland’ (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003a, p. xx). Implementation The final report identified 113 recommendations including ‘essential’ actions and those subject to government priorities. In December 2003 the Shaping Our Territory Implementation Group was established within the Chief Minister's Department to implement, and to assist agencies to implement, the Government's decisions on the recommendations and monitor and report on progress (Shaping our Territory Implementation Group, 2006). Separate working groups comprising relevant agencies undertook various sustainability studies, feasibility studies and master planning exercises (for example Shaping our Territory Implementation Group, 2004d, 2004e, 2004f). Tourism agencies worked with land management agencies on key tourism-related sites including the design ideas competition for an International Arboretum and Gardens, the Cotter Reserve and Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve (Shaping our Territory Implementation Group, 2004a, 2004b, 2004c). The timeline for each development varied but the implementation program was expected to stretch over three to five years. RESPONSE OF THE TOURISM INDUSTRY AND RELATED AGENCIES TO THE PLANNING STUDY From the perspective of a government representative in the Chief Minister’s Department the tourism industry response to the planning study was initially mixed:

Not all of the tourism operators were instantly fully on board … there were all sorts of questions and comments from ‘this is the greatest thing since sliced bread’ to ‘it’s a total waste of time’.

He also mentioned that tourism businesses were, to an extent, concentrating on managing their own affairs and involvement in industry-wide activities such as the planning study was confined to limited spare time. This issue is not new to those seeking to consult the tourism industry. Industry fragmentation was also mentioned as a factor in the less than united front presented to the planning

Page 11 of 16

process. He explained

It was a slow process - the [typical consultation] processes that worked with other industries didn’t work with the tourism industry.

A key representative body that was involved in the planning study was the government tourism authority and destination management organisation, the Australian Capital Tourism Corporation (ACTC). The Corporation made an initial brief submission and, once the preliminary report was released, became more heavily involved. In September 2003 they organised a forum of experts from around Australia to help prepare a detailed submission and, as ACTC staff explained ‘Given the timeframe we had to put in a submission we thought that was the best way to get a good depth of ideas rather than an individual consultant’. They didn’t involve local tourism operators partly because ‘We wanted quite big picture ideas and not sort of be constrained by what was there in the past’. ACTC wanted the experts to be ‘clear of any local political issues and really give us what are the opportunities - really quite big picture strategic visionary sort of stuff’. The significance of the planning opportunity was recognised:

Let’s look at this properly before we just build it and put back what was there and then go ‘it would’ve been nice if we’d done it differently’.

This sentiment echoes that of Faulkner and Vikulov (2001) who claimed that returning a destination to a pre-disaster state is neither realistic nor necessarily desirable. The opportunity that the planning study provided for tourism was very clear to the ACTC. As a staff member explained ‘Obviously tourism plays a big part along with the recreation and there is also a lot of opportunities that have come out of the fires with the rebuilding’. Another staff member explained

We looked at it very much as if the slate’s clean now … so it was about looking at what tourism industry we could develop … So rather than shy away from the fact of the bush capital we wanted to reinforce that, we wanted enviro-tourism to be a very strong part of the message … not just replacing, but look towards building something that is unique.

An important ingredient of the study was the promotion of creative and innovative ideas although some left participants bemused. Forestry staff explained that an environmental art expert

was very taken with the nice clean lines of the heaped, burned windrows [of the trunks of pine trees] and I think there was even a suggestion that we might like to leave some - some really strange concepts emerged.

Tourism featured significantly in the final report and subsequent planning and development activities. As ACTC explained ‘Tourism is a major consideration in all decisions at the moment so we’ve really managed to get that at the forefront of people’s thinking’ and the work on new opportunities provided by the planning study was seen as energising for staff. That said, there was concern that some ideas had been ‘badged’ as sustainable by the simple addition of tourism and its alleged promise of ‘thousands of people’ whereas some propositions were clearly not feasible. In the master planning for the Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve that followed the planning study, for example, ACTC felt that

tourism was being touted as a means to justify a level of investment and we didn’t necessarily agree with the potential tourism benefits that were being touted. … Tourism was a buzz word in the redevelopment out there – ‘great, we’ll build it and they will come and spend millions and millions of dollars’ when the reality was that we would most likely have a big white elephant sitting out in the bush.

Tourism was providing a reality check and the forum of experts was essential in supporting the ACTC’s position in this regard.

The other representative body that was closely involved in the planning study was the Tourism Industry Council ACT and Region Ltd (TIC), a professional association. TIC’s role was prompted partly

Page 12 of 16

by a desire to put tourism on the agenda – ‘we were trying to make government aware that tourism does have quite an important role to play and looking at tourism opportunities as well as just rebuilding’. TIC, like ACTC, had put in a brief initial submission and, upon discovering that the preliminary report didn’t have a great deal on tourism, initiated an industry forum in September 2003. As they explained

There was a real cross section of attendees from tour operators to the attractions to Australian Capital Tourism … transport providers, some accommodation people. It was throwing up what could be done or what are the opportunities.

An important feature of the forum was the opportunity for industry to speak directly to the NUSSC and the consultants on the feasibility of development options. The immediacy and effectiveness of this type of forum was noted by TIC staff who explained

It is very hard to get operators to write anything so to be able to gather them in one room and for them to be able to have the opportunity to talk to [the Chair of the NUSSC], and say ‘oh yeah, that’s a great idea’ or ‘if you do that this is going to be affected’ so it was sort of a real opportunity for the team to hear direct from those affected.

Overall, the planning study was seen as TIC’s ‘best vehicle for being involved [in recovery] - it was certainly the way to make sure that tourism wasn’t forgotten’ and appropriate resources were devoted to the process as part of an awareness raising exercise. The other agencies that were most involved in the tourism planning aspects of the study were Environment ACT, ACT Forests and the Mount Stromlo Observatory which is part of the Australian National University. Given their position as major land management agencies for much of the ACT’s non-urban land, both Environment ACT and ACT Forests were heavily involved in submissions to the preliminary and final reports and that continued through the subsequent planning and implementation activities. Both agencies experienced additional workloads from this and other aspects of bushfire recovery as a staff member at Environment ACT explained

I think that is probably the biggest impact on the organisation, just the enormous increase in workload because we’ve had to deliver everything that we had to do before plus all this recovery stuff.

This echoes Faulkner and Vikulov’s (2001) observation that increased workloads in the reconstruction period following a disaster mean that agencies tend to be distracted from strategic marketing and development issues. Both agencies were also affected by the timing of the planning study in that they were unable to implement rebuilding until the outcomes were released and many of their own reviews and plans had to adjust to fit in with the study. Overall the agencies were satisfied with the final outcomes and general thrust: ‘It gave a direction. It set the agenda which was probably the most important thing’ and having a separate group coordinating the ‘big picture planning’ was effective. That said, there was also concern that if the land management agencies weren’t fully involved they would inherit a problem. Similarly the Mount Stromlo Observatory staff were very conscious of the planning study’s importance given their geographic position in the midst of mixed land uses that could affect the site for both scientific research and public programs. The way that the planning study promoted a ‘whole of government’ approach and inter-agency coordination was also, in the long run, appreciated. As an Environment ACT staff member explained

I loathed and detested it at the beginning because it stopped me doing a lot of things but it was good because it brought everyone together and knocked our heads together and said shut up and talk. Stop talking to yourselves, talk amongst yourselves, plan cooperatively.

Page 13 of 16

Outcomes for the tourism industry The preliminary report supported the development of tourism in the non-urban zone arguing that ‘Future tourism growth … presents an opportunity which should be grasped to boost and diversify the ACT economy in a manner sympathetic with the natural environment’ (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003b, p. xiv). With 53 per cent of the ACT land area designated national park or nature reserve the Territory was considered well placed to provide nature-based tourism product to match the acknowledged growth in that market. Nature-based tourism in the ACT prior to the bushfires was considered an immature market and not realising its full potential in terms of product development. The basic ingredients were there but few local people knew about them and few tourists were aware. The linking of popular national attractions such as Parliament House, the National Gallery of Australia and the National Museum of Australia with accessible nature-based tourism product was seen as a vehicle for increasing the destination’s attractiveness and the bushfires provided an opportunity for a significant rethink of product range and destination management and marketing. Faulkner and Vikulov (2001) argue that this type of fundamental reassessment of a destination’s management and planning approach post-disaster can be important to ensure accentuation of any positive enduring effects. Their findings from the examination of the Australia Day flood in 1998 led to the addition of the ‘reappraisal’ step to their framework pointing to the significance of organisational learning for tourism disaster or crisis management. This is also the subject of a conceptual paper by Ritchie and Blackman (2007 in press). Another key theme emerging from the final report was that 'the [non-urban component of the] ACT should be open for business' (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003a, p. 4), that is, diversified and vibrant use of the areas should be actively encouraged and this was particularly pertinent to tourism. On the other hand the report indicated that tourism development needs to be realistic given the competitive nature of the industry and the requirement for special, even unique, attractions to draw visitors. Non-urban ACT was seen as primarily adding value to the already established national attraction itinerary of most visitors with potential to develop or further develop walking, camping, mountain bike riding, abseiling, white water rafting, rock climbing, wildlife education, heritage and indigenous cultural attractions and science-related tourism. The final report made recommendations for the development of themed tourism precincts or hubs based around the Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve, the Cotter Reserve and Mt Stromlo Observatory-Canberra Deep Space Communication Complex (Non-Urban Study Steering Committee, 2003a). It also recommended that the existing tourist drive be developed and that high impact activities such as mountain bike riding, which are gradually being excluded in urban fringe areas elsewhere in Australia, be catered for as a point of difference for the ACT. Development of small-scale farm-based tourism was also recommended with recognition of the need for flexibility in purpose clauses for rural leases to encourage farm-based activities such as cellar door outlets, food outlets, farm demonstrations and farm stays. The need for an improved range of accommodation was also noted. The final report included sample studies for precincts with tourism and recreation features indicating the importance and priority placed on these type of land uses in the overall study. An important outcome of the planning study was the statement that, if non-urban tourism potential was to be realised, the agencies responsible for forestry, environment, education, conservation and tourism needed to develop higher levels of cooperation, consultation and strategic coherence. Ritchie (2004) also argues that understanding and collaborating with stakeholders is critical to the strategic implementation of recovery and Henderson (2007, p.169) notes that ‘cooperation within the industry and beyond is fundamental to the process of preparing, responding to and recovery from certain crises’. The recognition of the role of tourism by the other agencies was a significant acknowledgement of its integration with other government portfolios and the need to break down the artificial barriers that have dogged comprehensive planning in the past. In fact, the response to and recovery from the bushfires was characterised by an effective whole of government approach (Coghlan, 2004, 30 November) and this gave tourism a unique opportunity to raise its profile, form partnerships and work with other agencies. Furthermore, the final report noted that cross-border regional tourism opportunities with neighbouring New South Wales need to be considered stressing

Page 14 of 16

further the need for developing partnerships. That said, the report argued that government agencies should limit their involvement to further planning activities, appropriate rebuilding and industry assistance (eg, marketing) with the responsibility for development resting with the private sector and market forces. CONCLUSION Faulkner and Vikulov (2001) list a range of positive impacts of disasters and crises including improved infrastructure, improved teamwork within organisations and the industry, an increased profile for tourism and a greater appreciation for preparedness and disaster planning. The major planning study that formed part of the recovery phase for the ACT contributed positively to these four impacts in relation to the tourism industry. Examination of the study has demonstrated that planning, and particularly land planning, was a key component of recovery and presented the ACT tourism industry with a unique opportunity to work cooperatively with a wide range of stakeholders to strategically plan for tourism activities on non-urban land and potentially produce ‘innovation from chaos’. The study gave the tourism industry an unusual opening to work with land management agencies on a critical planning issue for the community and break down the real and artificial barriers that commonly exist. The final outcomes resulted in destination management initiatives which would not have been envisaged without the turning point provided by the disaster. In conclusion, further research in this area could examine the role that other planning exercises have played in destination recovery and their place in the current frameworks. Future disaster management frameworks, whether new or based on existing frameworks such as Faulkner and Vikulov (2001) or Ritchie (2004), could more comprehensively document the role that planning plays in recovery. REFERENCES Australian Capital Tourism Corporation. (2004). Fact sheets - 2002 domestic and international visitor profiles.

Retrieved 3 March 2004, from www.tourism.act.gov.au

Australian Capital Tourism Corporation. (2007). Fact sheets - 2006 domestic and international visitor profiles. Retrieved 24 April 2007, from www.tourism.act.gov.au

Beeton, S. (2005). The case study in tourism research: A multi-method case study approach. In B. W. Ritchie, P. Burns & C. Palmer (Eds.), Tourism research methods: Integrating theory with practice (pp. 37-48). UK: CABI Publishing.

BEST Education Network. (2005). BEST Education Network Think Tank V - Managing risk and crisis for sustainable tourism innovation, www.besteducationnetwork.org.

Bonn, I., & Rundle-Thiele, S. (2007). Do or die - Strategic decision-making following a shock event (Case study). Tourism Management, 28, 615-620.

Canberra Tourism and Events Corporation, & Tourism Industry Council. (c. 2000). ACT Tourism Masterplan 2001 - 2005. Canberra, ACT: Canberra Tourism and Events Corporation and Tourism Industry Council.

Coghlan, A. (2004, 30 November). Recovery management in Australia: A community based approach - Presentation at seminar on Disaster recovery: Research and communication at the University of Canberra.

Faulkner, B. (1999). Tourism disasters: Towards a generic model (Work-in-progress report 6). Queensland, Australia: CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd.

Faulkner, B. (2001). Towards a framework for tourism disaster management. Tourism Management, 22(2), 135-147.

Page 15 of 16

Faulkner, B., & Vikulov, S. (2001). Katherine, washed out one day, back on track the next: A post-mortem of a tourism disaster. Tourism Management, 22(4), 331-344.

Hall, C. M. (2000). Tourism planning: Policies, processes and relationships. United Kingdom: Pearson Education Ltd.

Heath, R. (1998). Crisis management for managers and executives. London: Financial Times Management.

Henderson, J. C. (2007). Tourism crises: Causes, consequences and management. USA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Jennings, G. (2001). Tourism research. Queensland: John Wiley and Sons Australia Ltd.

Mason, P. (2003). Tourism impacts, planning and management. United Kingdom: Butterworth-Heinemann.

McLeod, R. (2003). Inquiry into the operational response to the January 2003 bushfires in the ACT. Canberra: ACT Legislative Assembly.

Murphy, P. E., & Bayley, R. (1989). Tourism and disaster planning. The Geographical Review, 79(1), 36-46.

Non-Urban Study Steering Committee. (2003a). Shaping our territory - final report: Opportunities for non-urban ACT. Canberra, ACT: ACT Department of Urban Services.

Non-Urban Study Steering Committee. (2003b). Shaping our territory: Options and opportunities for non-urban ACT. Canberra, ACT: ACT Department of Urban Services.

Non-Urban Study Steering Committee. (2003c). Shaping our territory: Options and opportunities for non-urban ACT - Overview. Canberra, ACT: ACT Department of Urban Services.

Pacific Asia Travel Association. (2005). Crisis: It won’t happen to us! Bangkok: Pacific Asia Travel Association.

Ritchie, B. W. (2004). Chaos, crises and disasters: A strategic approach to crisis management in the tourism industry. Tourism Management, 25, 669 - 683.

Ritchie, B. W., & Blackman, D. (2007 in press). Tourism crisis management and organizational learning: The role of reflection in developing effective DMO crisis strategies. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing.

Ritchie, B. W., Dorrell, H., Miller, D., & Miller, G. A. (2003). Crisis communication and recovery for the tourism industry: Lessons from the 2001 Foot and Mouth disease outbreak in the United Kingdom. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 15(2/3), 199-216.

Shaping our Territory Implementation Group. (2004a). Shaping our Territory - Canberra International Arboretum and Gardens: Design ideas competition. Canberra, ACT: ACT Chief Minister's Department.

Shaping our Territory Implementation Group. (2004b). Shaping our Territory - Revitalising the Cotter: Action to date and future opportunities. Canberra, ACT: ACT Chief Minister's Department.

Shaping our Territory Implementation Group. (2004c). Shaping our Territory Business Case and Master Plan: Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve. Canberra, ACT: ACT Chief Minister's Department.

Shaping our Territory Implementation Group. (2004d). Shaping our Territory Sustainability Study: Pierces Creek Settlement. Canberra, ACT: ACT Chief Minister's Department.

Shaping our Territory Implementation Group. (2004e). Shaping our Territory Sustainability Study: Stromlo Settlement. Canberra, ACT: ACT Chief Minister's Department.

Shaping our Territory Implementation Group. (2004f). Shaping our Territory Sustainability Study: Uriarra Village. Canberra, ACT: ACT Chief Minister's Department.

Page 16 of 16

Shaping our Territory Implementation Group. (2006). Shaping our Territory Implementation Group website. Retrieved 29 March 2006, from www.cmd.act.gov.au/nonurban/index.shtml.

Tourism Industry Council ACT and Region Ltd. (2003a). $500,000 Federal Government support welcome! TIC Update, 16 May, 3.

Tourism Industry Council ACT and Region Ltd. (2003b). The impact of bushfires on the ACT and region tourism industry: Survey results, unpublished document.

Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (1997). Mass media research - An introduction (5th ed.). USA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

World Tourism Organization. (2005). Tsunami relief for the tourism sector - Phuket action plan. Spain: World Tourism Organization.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). California: Sage Publications.