گردشگران و آب و هوای شدید - اکتشاف نقش جایگاه مسئولیت در تصمیمات رفتار حفاظتی

Severe weather events can impact negatively on tourism and put tourists at risk. To reduce vulnerability, tourists should be aware of and be prepared for possible severe weather. Seeking risk information, a type of protective action behaviour, is an important way to reduce vulnerability. This paper presents the results of a study that investigated the role of Locus of Responsibility (LoR) for protection behaviour for severe weather, by linking it with Information Seeking and related intra-personal antecedents. LoR has previously been found to impact protective action decisions, but not within the context of severe weather and tourism. Our survey research among tourists in New Zealand provided evidence for three Loci of Responsibility; “Internal”, “Shared” and “External”. Significant differences between these groups were found for Information Seeking antecedents, though not for Information Seeking. Next, significant differences were found for weather information preferences, both source and content. Findings and implications for tourism and safety management in New Zealand are discussed.

Weather is an essential component of tourism and it strongly influences destination choice (Førland et al., in press; Rosselló-Nadal, Riera-Font, & Cárdenas, 2011) and preferences, tourist behaviour (Becken, Wilson, & Reisinger, 2010; Moreno, Amelung, & Santamarta, 2008; Wilson & Becken, 2011), safety (Peattie, Clarke, & Peattie, 2005) and satisfaction (Coghlan & Prideaux, 2009). Unfavourable weather can impact negatively on tourism, for example due to severe weather events, which is “any type of weather that can pose a risk to personal safety or property, including thunderstorms, tornadoes, freezing rain, heavy rain, wind, dust storms, blizzards, heavy snowfalls, frost, fog and wind chill” (Silver & Conrad, 2010, p.174). While tourists are able to protect themselves from severe weather, for instance by obtaining relevant information (Scott & Lemieux, 2010), preparing adequately (de Freitas, 2003), and understanding how to behave in certain environmental conditions, little is known about the factors that influence tourist precautionary efforts that protect them from inclement weather. The extent to which tourists are at risk from the weather depends on the type of holiday they undertake and the climatic conditions of the destination. Not all tourist destinations are equally exposed to severe weather and tourists' vulnerability differs across destinations (Becken & Hay, 2012). In New Zealand, which is the focus of this paper, tourists spend significant amounts of time experiencing “the outdoors”, whether it is through active means such as hiking, or passively through travelling in a vehicle (Bentley, Meyer, Page, & Chalmers, 2001; Page, Bentley, & Walker, 2005; Simmons & Becken, 2004). In 2011, 2.6 million international tourists visited New Zealand. For the top five markets, which make up 2.4 million visitors, 75 percent went walking or trekking, 53 percent visited some natural attractions, 28 percent went to see the volcanic and geothermal attractions, and 25 percent undertook a boat trip. Over three quarters (78%) drove their own rental car or campervan. In addition, there were 16.6 million overnight domestic tourists, generating over 49 million guest nights in 2011 and spending considerable time in the outdoors (Ministry of Economic Development, 2012). Tourists in New Zealand often travel in remote areas with limited infrastructure and communication networks (Becken, 2005; Becken & Wilson, 2007). The country is known for its wild and beautiful nature, but exactly these characteristics and environmental dynamics result in a potent ‘hazardscape’ that can pose a risk to tourists. Most recently, these have headlined news media around the world, after the Christchurch earthquakes and the more recent volcanic activity in the Tongariro National Park. Similarly, New Zealand's climate is highly dynamic as it is characterised by high natural variability, with potential weather hazards existing all year round (NIWA, 2010). Typical weather hazards include storms, heavy rain, snow and frost, fog, and indirect consequences of this weather such as landslides and flooding (Becken et al., 2010). Considering New Zealand's changeable climate characteristics, there is a realistic possibility that tourists are negatively inconvenienced by the weather (Becken & Wilson, 2013) or even at risk (Wilson & Becken, 2011) of substantial damage (e.g., to equipment), personal harm, and last but not least, ruined holidays. Indeed, 2008/09 data from the New Zealand Police (2009) show that 1991 people required assistance from Land Search and Rescue. Of these, 245 (12%) were tourists (the report does not specify how a tourist is defined). Yet, there is little knowledge beyond mere descriptive accounts of tourism misery due to inclement weather, leaving a considerable knowledge gap concerning the behavioural and intrapersonal factors that might underlie why tourists find themselves in a position that they experience negative consequences of weather circumstances. As pointed out in a study on the risk of sun burn during holiday time (Peattie et al., 2005), little research has taken risk behaviour into the domain of tourism. Yet, in order for emergency management and tourism agencies in host countries to be able to deal with tourism specific risks, there is a need to better understand protective action decision making behaviour of their visitors. Clearly, tourism safety depends not only on top-down measures of the tourism industry or local governments, but also on pro-active behaviour of tourists themselves. One important protection measure is to obtain information about possible risks and useful protective actions (Griffin, Dunwoody, & Neuwirth, 1999; Griffin, Neuwirth, Dunwoody, & Giese, 2004; ter Huurne, 2008; ter Huurne & Gutteling, 2009; Kahlor, 2007; Kahlor, Dunwoody, Griffin, & Neuwirth, 2006; Lindell & Perry, 2004; Terpstra, 2010; Trumbo, 2002; Wilson, 1999, 2000). In that sense, safety information and knowledge about current local weather circumstances is thus an essential pre-requisite for tourist's decision making in hazardous situations. The question however is to what extent tourists in New Zealand engage in such protective behaviour, and whether they feel personally responsible for it. Earlier research on natural hazard preparedness and response shows that protective behaviour (e.g., seeking risk information) is influenced by attributions of responsibility for protection in combination with perceptions of coping resources (Lalwani & Duval, 2000; Mulilis & Duval, 1997). Likewise, responsibility issues are of great importance in the dynamics of public–authority interaction to the extent that people are informed and inform themselves about possible environmental hazards and how this information is perceived (Stevens, 2009; Terpstra, 2010; Terpstra & Gutteling, 2008). In the tourism context, discrepancies in responsibility perceptions between tourists and tourism related organisations can have far reaching (negative) consequences, when tourists are unaware of risks, or expect to be protected by authorities in situations where they are initially responsible for their own protection. Also, the availability and accuracy of weather risk information is essential for tourists to engage in successfully preparing for and adapting to local weather conditions. This paper is therefore concerned with perceived Loci of Responsibility for protection against the adverse consequences of severe weather among tourists in New Zealand. More specifically, it explores the links between protection responsibility attributions and Information Seeking, its intrapersonal antecedents and information preferences, by addressing the following research questions: 1. To what extent do responsibility perceptions for protection from adverse consequences of severe weather events vary among tourists? 2. How do perceptions of responsibility relate to predictors of Information Seeking behaviour and to Information Seeking itself? 3. How do perceptions of responsibility affect hazard information preferences of tourists? While the first two questions are more theoretically oriented, the last question will generate tangible knowledge on how and where tourists seek and expect to find information in their attempts to prepare for and protect themselves from adverse consequences of severe weather risks during their holiday.

This research analysed Locus of Responsibility and its links to information search behaviour in relation to severe weather events by tourists travelling independently in New Zealand. Since Locus of Responsibility has been found to impact protective action decisions in non-tourism contexts, a major focus of this study was on the extent to which tourists perceived protecting themselves from severe weather as their own responsibility. The results revealed significant differences between three different types of groups (“Internal”, “Shared” and “External” LoR) on gender and a range of antecedents of Information Seeking and information preferences, but not on Information Seeking itself. Our research highlights the importance of considering LoR in the future development of risk communication models. Given that ensuring tourist safety is critical for destinations to achieve high levels of satisfaction, avoid accidents and minimise negative publicity, the results of this study provide an impetus for tourism and safety management organisations to (re)consider their risk information policies and keep track of the way ‘their’ tourists perceive protection responsibility and deal with hazard information. Continuous collaboration between scientists and stakeholders in the field is invaluable to make such attempts successful and sustainable. The results presented here constitute a useful step in this respect. For example, tourism-specific campaigns should focus on providing hazard specific knowledge to increase protection efficacy amongst tourists, but they should also enhance tourists' perceptions of responsibility for self-protection, including information on which organisations are responsible for particular aspects of safety. Importantly, information should be tailored to those tourist segments that are potentially more vulnerable, because they perceive that someone else is responsible for their safety (e.g., female tourists found in this study), when this may not be the case. Future research should add depth to our understanding of different tourism segments, including tour group visitors and emerging markets, and also deliver insights about information preferences in the context of specific hazards and ‘weather sensitive’ activities. The need to balance awareness raising and risk preparedness with undesired effects of a ‘climate of fear’ should be proactively addressed in future research and destination management. Such a balance however demands also from tourists themselves that they take their responsibility to inform themselves about risks and protective actions that will keep them safe during their travels.