Thailand Tourism Sustainability After the 2004 Tsunami

Introduction: Tourism's Role in Thailand's Development

Developing countries are extremely dependent upon the tourism industry for both the economic and social stability it provides. From an economic standpoint, tourism creates jobs and financial stability. From a social point of view, tourism is a form of leisure that fosters knowledge and understanding of different cultures.

Thailand is a prime example of a developing country that values tourism. Tourism in Thailand gathered momentum when the government incorporated a tourism development project into the Fourth National Economic and Social Development Plan (1977–1981). Through this plan, Thailand's government sought to achieve economic growth consistent with national economic and social development. Additional goals included maintaining social and cultural needs by preserving natural resources, the environment, culture, customs and traditions, and ancient ruins.

The tourism industry plays a significant role in the economic growth of Thailand. The rapid growth of the industry reflects the country's booming and diversified economy, evident in rising incomes, improved trade balance, service and gross production employment, income distribution, cultural enrichment, an improved environment, and enhanced international reputation. These factors have made Thailand the most important tourism destination in Southeast Asia.

Rationale for the Study

Although Thailand has enjoyed considerable economic success through its tourism development project, the 2004 tsunami proved to be a formidable challenge to the industry. This, along with other challenges such as tourism quality management, may prove extremely detrimental to the Thai economy over time if not handled appropriately.

The tsunami of 2004, which killed tourists and Thai nationals alike, has challenged the sustainability of the country's tourism industry. The quality management framework of the Ninth National Economic and Social Development Plan (NNESDP, 2002–2006) is regarded as a guideline for sustaining this industry. However, research indicates that tourism development plans are often poorly organised and implemented (Lanfant et al., 1995) without sufficient consideration of their social and natural implications (Wyllie, 2000; Holden, 2000). This may challenge the sustainability of the Thai tourism industry and, by extension, the country's entire economic development (Sinclair and Stabler, 1997).

Moreover, Thailand, under the management of the NNESDP, faces a changing local administration as a result of the 1997 constitution, which requires the government to decentralise administration. Since each local administration operates as an independent unit with its own powers, it is anticipated that separate management structures may, in some areas, cause environmental problems and degradation. This points toward a potentially ineffective future for Thai tourism products and unsustainable outcomes for the wider tourism industry.

Aims and Objectives

This research will therefore investigate the sustainable potential of the Thai tourism industry in the wake of the tsunami disaster and through the quality management guidelines set forth by the NNESDP.

Thailand is regarded as a low-price tourism destination, partly due to the perceived substandard quality of its tourism products and services. Low prices, according to relevant economic theory, may indicate neglected products and services at the administrative level, suggesting that Thai tourism products risk remaining in a low-price bracket. The combination of low prices with low quality perceptions could result in negative economic impacts — in terms of returns on related investments — with equally negative social consequences, given the close interrelation of economy and society. Accordingly, the sustainability of the Thai tourism industry under the NNESDP appears to be dependent on the quality of management. Furthermore, in the aftermath of what was at the time one of the world's worst natural disasters, Thailand's tourism industry faces new challenges relating to the long-term sustainability of the sector.

The aim of this research is therefore to investigate, at a theoretical level, the extent to which a relationship exists between rebuilding consumer trust after a natural disaster, quality management, and sustainable tourism development practices. The academic objective may be understood as a case study intended for future reference, involving an in-depth analysis and evaluation of findings. This may provide feedback and guidelines for valid investigation procedures on similar issues, as well as an insight into the sustainability of Thailand's tourism industry under the NNESDP in the wake of a serious natural disaster.

Literature Review: Travel, Tourism, and the Tsunami's Impact

According to a research report published by Mintel, nearly a third of Thailand's territory is arable land; however, agriculture accounts for less than 10% of gross domestic product (GDP). Industry and services hold dominant positions, generating 44% and 46.3% of GDP respectively in 2003. According to the World Tourism Organization (WTO), tourism generated 5.1% of Thailand's GDP in 2003.

The report asserts that, even though Thailand's economy is still described as agrarian, tourism is its fastest-growing contributor. Between 1997 and 2001, foreign tourist expenditure increased by more than one third and proved a consistent performer throughout the earlier float of the baht currency in 1997. Rittichainuwat et al. (2001) also report that Thailand was Asia's third-most-popular tourist destination in 1998. During the economic crash of the late 1990s, Thailand proved an attractive destination for travellers with western currencies. The expectation following the tsunami was that reduced holiday prices could overcome any psychological reluctance to travel and kick-start an off-season recovery.

After Thailand's inbound tourism market surpassed 10 million arrivals for the first time in 2001, the government announced its intention to make the country one of the world's top five tourism destinations by 2020. Mintel's International Tourism Forecasts — published prior to the December 2004 tsunami — had projected that Thailand was capable of attracting almost 20 million arrivals by the close of the decade, and subsequent reporting suggested that this target might still be achievable.

The damage caused to the southern peninsula by the Boxing Day tsunami at the close of 2004 was being actively addressed. Thai authorities promoted images of restored facilities and pristine beaches in an effort to persuade the international market to return. Although the affected areas represented one of Thailand's most popular tourism zones, the country offers considerably more than beachfront attractions. The disaster created an opportunity to publicise the mountainous north, the central plains, and the Gulf of Thailand, as well as the restored and renovated southwest peninsula.

Thailand also spent millions of dollars on an advertising campaign to attract tourists back to the region (After the Tsunami, 2005). This campaign involved flying more than 1,000 journalists from across the globe to Thailand to demonstrate that the country was ready to receive visitors. Fresco (2005) describes it as one of the largest marketing endeavours of its kind, with over £3 million spent on bringing print and television journalists to Bangkok and then to various hotels on different islands. The campaign was particularly directed at tourists from the UK and Ireland.

In addition to the December 2004 earthquake and tsunami, an earthquake that struck off the coast of Indonesia in early 2005 also threatened the sustainability of Thailand's tourism industry. Senior Thai government officials were concerned that tourists would mistakenly believe this new earthquake affected Thailand as well (Fresco, 2005). Officials warned that if tourists did not resume travel to Thailand, the economy would be further devastated and certain sectors might never recover. The Governor of the Tourist Authority of Thailand issued a public statement encouraging visitors, saying "it was business as usual and they had not been affected," while privately officials worried that tourists would view the earthquake as another sign that the region was unsafe (Fresco, 2005).

Fresco (2005) further asserts that a failure to revive Thailand's tourism industry would have serious social implications. Thai officials believed that a prolonged absence of tourists and tourist spending would lead to social unrest among the thousands of people whose livelihoods depend on the industry — including hotel workers and merchants operating near the affected beaches. This problem was particularly acute at Patong, a stretch of road in Phuket well known for low-cost goods. Wichit Na Ranong, President of the Tourism Council of Thailand, stated: "In a few months there will be a lot of social problems. We need more work for our people. We need the tourists to come back and spend their money, to restore people's livelihoods, otherwise we could be in trouble."

The beaches on the west coast of Phuket — including Patong, Kata, and Karon — were the most heavily affected by the tsunami. Approximately 200 hotels were damaged and 3,000 of the island's 32,000 rooms were destroyed, though the damage caused by the waves was limited to less than one kilometre inland. Despite most accommodation being structurally operational, many hotels in Phuket and other islands reached only 15% of their total capacity, compared to 90% capacity the previous year (Fresco, 2005). As one report noted, "Phuket is totally back to normal, but it's like a ghost town" (Tourism Hangs in the Balance, 2005). More than 80% of room bookings that remained operational after the disaster were cancelled by tourists.

An additional economic burden was the cost of keeping workers employed. In an attempt to maintain employment levels, the government paid for hotel workers to undertake further professional training. Senior managers at leading resorts also took unpaid leave during what would ordinarily have been the busiest period. As Fresco (2005) observed, "Rumours of redundancies stalk all the hotels where staff far outnumber tourists."

Conclusion and Research Constraints

There are certain courtesies that need to be followed when arranging and conducting semi-structured interviews. These include providing details of the purpose of the research, a proposed date which the interviewee may change to one that is more convenient, and an outline of the topics to be covered. Each interviewee will also be given a copy of the final report once it is completed. After identifying the key participants, a message will be sent to each individual via email, giving details of the research, an outline of the subject areas to be covered, and requesting their agreement to be interviewed. Constant evaluation and critical analysis of all findings — both primary and secondary — will remain priorities throughout the research process.