Impacts of the Christchurch earthquakes on regional tourism activity Dr. Caroline Orchiston Assoc. Prof. John Vargo Dr. Erica Seville

Tourism and natural disasters Infrastructural damage Reduced access Temporary business closures Media Travel advice Perceptions Fear/anxiety Cancellations Change itineraries Damage to reputation Response Funding Rebuild timing Disaster External forces Tourist/Operator Recovery I just put this together today – I want it to summarise broadly how vulnerable tourism is to natural disasters, to set the context for the discussion

Seasonally adjusted guest nights Canterbury international dropped 8% after Sept, then another 33% after Feb. Source: MED Commercial Accommodation Monitor data

Tourism sector survey Project initiated in 2011 – building on ResOrgs work Aims Direct/indirect impacts on tourism businesses Insurance and staffing issues Preparedness and resilience Tourism operators defined as: Accommodation Activity/attraction Visitor transport This work was designed to gather data to contribute an evidence-base for policy and industry recommendations. Because you need good data to back up assumptions, anecdotes and observations about the industry.

Method Two postal surveys sent in April 2012 ‘Impact Zone’ – 500 surveys (46% response) ‘Rest of Canterbury’ – 220 surveys (31% response) These areas were defined using Modified Mercalli intensity ‘felt reports’ (GeoNet data)

Impact zone Rest of Canterbury

Business type Multi-response = 242 (point out that some are activity/attraction PLUS accommodation too). Accommodation – 61% of IZ sample Comprising – 14% motels (of total 242) 22% hosted Similar proportions for ROC – but accommodation is 65% and visitor transport on 4%.

% of businesses affected Mean Factors affecting businesses % of businesses affected Mean Reduced visitor numbers 55 3.2 Non-structural damage (fittings) 29 1.8 Changes in staff emotional wellbeing 22 2.0 Damage to equipment (non-computing) 19 1.7 Structural damage to building 16 Damage to ground surface 15 1.6 Damage to nearby buildings 12 Damage to computers 9 1.5 Damage to adjacent buildings 8 Staff temporarily relocated 6 1.4 Located within the cordon 7 Staff felt unsafe returning to building 5 Staff permanently relocated 2 1.2 Physical harm to employees 1 1.1 I have cross-tabbed all the factors with business location, which produced some significant results (I’ll add these into the report). 14 businesses in Christchurch (14/65) said they were located within the cordon. Reduced visitor numbers – felt most in Christchurch (78%) and Banks Peninsula (100%). 2/3 of Christchurch operators described this as being very disruptive. Non-structural – 54% of Christchurch operators said this affected their organisation, with a broad range of levels of disruption reported. Damage to equipment – 41% of Christchurch operators, 36% said it was either moderately or very disruptive. Structural damage – 28% of Christchurch operators, again with a broad range of levels of disruption.

Change in visitor type Activity/Attraction and visitor transport – significantly more likely to report drop in International Accommodation – significantly more likely to report increase across all four markets

Increases in visitor type by district % Just within impact zone because there were not enough responses from ROC to do this analysis with any certainty

Change in revenue Larger proportion reporting increased revenue after Feb compared to Sept.

Revenue by sector

Revenue by sub-sector %

Revenue by business location %

After the earthquakes Winners and losers – as a function of location, business type and direct physical impact.

By sector Accommodation showing as having a higher proportion of ‘winners’ compared to act/att and transport. Ties into resilience debate – maybe the earthquakes were the last straw for businesses that were already stagnating and weak? Whereas more resilient businesses were able to capitalize on the opportunities presented by the earthquakes.

Tourism Score Card Christchurch CBD Christchurch excl. CBD Regional Canterbury Hotel accommodation Motels/B&Bs/Holiday Parks Visitor transport Activity/Attraction For Regional Canterbury I put them all as yellow, but I could easily argue for calling them being red too. The other issue is that I couldn’t do a cross-tab on business type vs revenue because of the low sub-sample populations, so the yellow is an assumption rather than based on data. Also, I haven’t looked at the performance of hotels outside the CBD compared to within it – so we are making assumptions here. They could be green, not yellow. I’m thinking of the Sudima etc round the airport, which must be doing really well. Christchurch activity/attraction operators – I would say they are hanging in there, but how long can they hold out? Desperately need visitors to come back to the city. Performing poorly Doing ok Performing well

Conclusions The whole tourism sector is not ‘on its knees’ –> ‘In disaster there is opportunity’ Some businesses struggling, others are thriving; Parts of accommodation sector are performing very well Transport and activity/attraction are harder hit – how long can they hold out before numbers increase? Change in visitor type = a major impact felt throughout Canterbury Sector responses to the earthquakes differed -> Tourism sector need to be looked at separately

Recommendations Operators need to adjust their marketing strategy Change focus to domestic market to improve short term outcomes Work towards an international market recovery for the region and the South Island, using Christchurch as the gateway Full recovery for the city once the CBD and tourism infrastructure rebuild is underway Need to look at solutions for sub-sectors CBD rebuild is slow – focus energy on places/businesses that are open and ready to take visitors This will benefit the transport sector, which is especially in need.

Link to the full report Acknowledgments Orchiston, C., Vargo, J., & Seville, E. Outcomes of the Canterbury earthquake sequence for tourism businesses. Resilient Organisations Research Report 2012/09. http://www.resorgs.org.nz/images/stories/pdfs/Organisationsfacingcris is/tourism_canterbury_earthquakes.pdf Acknowledgments

Response by district District Total # businesses Response rate (%) Christchurch City 287 40% Ashburton 101 45% Kaikoura 98 19% Hurunui 55 41% Mackenzie 47 29% Timaru 42 48% Selwyn 36 56% Waimakariri 31 Waimate/Waitaki 22