By Stu Hayes*
Analysis - Recent warnings of a "doomsday" scenario if foot and mouth disease (FMD) arrived in New Zealand inevitably singled out the agriculture sector. But overseas experience tells us FMD can also result in potentially severe impacts on the tourism sector.
An officer sprays disinfectant as a precaution against the foot and mouth disease on livestock at a cattle farm in Palembang, Indonesia on 15 June, 2022. Photo: Muhammad A.F / Anadolu Agency via AFP
As the 2001 FMD crisis in Britain highlighted, inadequate planning and crisis management can cause a reduction in trade, job losses and damage to a destination's image.
This matters, because destination image is one of the leading factors influencing tourists' decisions. Accurate or not, negative images in the media can directly affect demand.
As New Zealand ramps up preparations for a potential outbreak, important lessons from the UK's experiences must be heeded if the local tourism sector is to avoid its own doomsday scenario.
Focus on agriculture
Following the detection in July of FMD fragments in meat products imported into Australia, the New Zealand government has expressed serious concern the disease could also find its way across the Tasman.
The economic impact of this for the agriculture sector would be catastrophic: a reduction in agricultural productivity, suspended trade in animal products, and the ongoing reputational damage of the country losing its FMD-free export status.
These concerns were foregrounded in the 2018 Foot and Mouth Disease Response and Recovery Plan. The risk to the agriculture sector has also seen a recent strengthening of biosecurity measures, including at the border where people arriving from Indonesia (FMD was detected there on 28 April) are now required to disinfect their footwear.
But when it comes to government planning for (and media reporting about) FMD, there appears to be no mention of the potential impacts of an outbreak for the tourism sector. Should we be worried? A brief look at what happened in the UK in 2001 suggests yes.
The UK's FMD tourism disaster
FMD was discovered in an abattoir in Essex on 19 February, 2001. The unexpectedly rapid spread of the virus resulted in the UK government's decision to effectively close the countryside to avoid wider contamination.
The effects on the tourism sector were severe. A National Audit Office report indicated that the sector and supporting industries lost revenues of between £4.5 billion (NZ$8.7 billion) and £5.4 billion (NZ$10.4 billion). Over the course of the crisis, overseas visitor numbers to the UK dropped by 10 percent. In worst hit rural areas, the tourism sector virtually collapsed.
Inevitably, there were significant tourism-related job losses associated with the decline in visitor numbers and spending.
At the same time, the government decision to cull livestock rather than vaccinate resulted in huge pyres of burning carcasses visible throughout farming districts. It ended with what was described as a "media frenzy showing the UK as a giant barbeque".
The images damaged the reputation and image of the UK as a tourism destination and further contributed to the loss of tourism revenue and jobs. But could these impacts have been lessened? Past research suggests they could - and with this come important lessons for New Zealand.
Lessons from the 2001 UK FMD crisis
Reviews of the UK FMD crisis highlighted several key planning and crisis management failings that contributed to the severity of the impacts felt across the tourism sector.
These failings included:
- a lack of appreciation of the potential impacts of FMD for the tourism sector
- a lack of consultation with relevant stakeholders from the tourism sector in crisis planning for an FMD outbreak
I a lack of an integrated communication strategy to counter media tendencies to exaggerate the impacts
To help limit the potential impacts of an FMD outbreak for the New Zealand tourism sector, the government should consider several urgent actions:
1) model the potential impacts of FMD on the tourism sector, including potential job losses, loss of tourism trade and potential impacts on destination image and reputation
2) prepare crisis management plans with the full engagement of key actors in the tourism sector, including relevant ministries and sector bodies
3) establish an integrated communication approach and offer public relations training for tourism enterprises to help maintain a positive destination image in the event of an FMD outbreak.
As the 2001 UK FMD crisis demonstrated, failure to act could be disastrous for the tourism sector in New Zealand.
*Stu Hayes is a lecturer of tourism at University of Otago