The purpose of the research is to evaluate the impacts of terroristic attacks on people’s perception of London as a tourism destination. The problem which the study intends to solve is to gauge the possibility of terror attacks affecting the London’s tourism especially noting that the industry employs several people and contributes immensely to the United Kingdom economy. The of the research’s goal is to find ways of stopping terror, building knowledge, and promoting resilience against terror. The study chose both quantitative and qualitative methodologies to highlight a positivist approach. The proposal would find that though London’s market positioning opens it to a robust and strong tourism market base, negative tourism image propagated by terror acts can easily bring it down. The possible results and findings will be that people have a positive perception of London despite separate incidences of terrorism, though more should be undertaken to address the situation.
Keywords: Perception, Terrorism, market confidence, market resilience
Introduction
Terrorism is known to have extensive and undesirable impacts on the travel and tourism industry and the enormity can immensely vary and lead to unemployment, widened homelessness, amplified deflation, and enhancement of several social and economic ills in the society (Nacos, 2016). Ratcliffe & von Hinke Kessler Scholder, (2015) found that terrorism has a debilitating impact on tourism, triggering downturns and pushing governments to act swiftly since the impacts go beyond tourism and extend towards destroying the image and sovereignty of a country. The paper proposes research on the influence of terroristic attacks on people’s perception of London as a touristic destination.
1.1.Background Information
According to Richards, (2015), terrorism has remained a key threat to London’s tourism sector’s growth over a long period, traceable from back in the 1860s during the Fenian attack, Republican attacks in the period between especially between 1939 and 1940; more recently, attacks have been associated with extremism in the Middle East (Matthews, 2016). In the face of growing terrorist threats in the region, the reputation of London as a touristic destination is likely to fall as potential tourists seek other secure places to travel to (Speckhard, 2015). While it is undeniable that regular terror attacks can dwindle the city’s perception as a touristic destination, several factors exist which plays in favor of the United Kingdom’s headquarter, therefore, terrorism might not easily fail its tourism segment (Hunt, 2018).
1.2.Research rationale
The main academic rationale for conducting the research is to accumulate more knowledge in the segment to act as reference material in the future. While terrorism in London has been around for many years, the model of terrorism and factors spearheading the menace have been changing over the years. Lately, terrorism in London and the wider Europe region is attributable to religious extremism (Richards, 2018). Despite scholars of key religions such as Christianity and Islam insisting that the religions have nothing supporting murders and terror acts, several people have been duped into engaging in such heinous engagements causing fear amongst the citizenry and visitors. Academically, the research would investigate the misconceptions, stereotypes and other factors which aggravate terror acts and investigate terror impacts on London (Frey & Osterloh, 2017).
The tourism industry’s rationale for undertaking the study is that the research will provide new understanding of the terrorism view, help eradicate terror, assists locals in integrating with each other to avoid stereotypes and extremist ideologies (Van de Vyver et al, 2016). Through increasing the understanding of the impact of the terroristic attacks on the perception of people, especially the prospective visitors of London as a tour destination, it will be easier to widen growth, inspire confidence in the sector, and protect the delicate industry from malevolent minded people whose aim is to debilitate the country’s economic robustness.
1.3.Aim
The aim of the study is to assess the impact of the terroristic attacks on the perception of people regarding London as a tourism destination. The goal is to compile a new body of knowledge, create tourism sector resilience on terrorism, and demystify factors propagating current terrorism devastating London.
1.4. Objectives
To analyze the causes of the terroristic attacks in London in the 21st century and recommend ways of eradicating or eliminating them.
To evaluate people’s perception of London as a touristic destination and how defiant the sector can be to terror upsurge.
To assess the impact of London’s regional positioning in combating terroristic crimes and how other nations and region can contribute to reducing modern terror threat.
To compare the impact of terror attacks on London and other major European nations capitals, such as Berlin, Brussels as touristic destinations.
1.5 Research Question
How fast is London capable of rebuilding a healthy touristic destination perception following a terror attack especially considering the upsetting 2017 year when the city experienced an increase in attacks?
2. Literature Review
According to Ahmed (2017), in June 2017, visitors were reported to be staying away from some of the United Kingdom’s major tourist attractions following the preceding terrorist acts in London and Manchester as reported by the company managing of London Eye and Madame Tussauds investments. Other tourism sector players, for instance, the Merlin Entertainments reported that demand for their services reduced especially amongst the domestic tourist's sector following the Westminster attack which happened on the 22 March 2017 and situations worsened further following the Manchester’s and the London Bridge terror incidences (Laqueur, 2017).
Silke & Schmidt-Petersen, (2017) argue that to some investors in the tourism industry, the terrorism effects on the sector were likely to trigger a knock-on effect chiefly on the demand emanating from the foreign tourists in the subsequent months and they were nearly sure that while the terror acts had triggered short-term disturbance in the market, the sector was bound to regain much quickly as it had done before. Despite the magnitude of fear occasioned by the incidences, investors oozed confidence in the long-term market resilience and predictable growth trajectory of the tourism market unlike the tourism markets in the developing world.
Monaghan & Butler (2017) found that while the reduced number of visitors is informed by the significant number of people who postponed their trips, market updates indicates that some tourists were denied travel opportunities following security inspections especially at airports and equally reduced operations following the closure of some entertainment joints. To illustrate the minute impact of terrorism on tourism, the Financial Times Stock Exchange 100 Index (FTSE 100) rated the greatest faller company (Merlin) being down at 3.5% only (Manelici, 2017).
According to Monaghan & Butler (2017), many of the interviewed London tourists showed positivity and trust in the city and even hinted that they did not think twice or even worry about the destination. Some said that the city seemed quieter than usual and did not expose any quantifiable level of nervousness nor fear. Visitors from other European Union cities, for example, Cologne in Germany, argued that terrorism was a global affair and could happen anywhere meaning that they did not perceive any unusual level of exposure threats while in London as contrasted to security back in their various countries.
According to Peter Jacob, a visitor from Los Angeles, the attacks did have any impacts on their business and trips, and he believed that London was a safe destination despite the notable cases of incidences (Spinks, 2017). The visitors and locals in equal measures are found to be immensely defiant of the terror acts and courageous enough to visit regions which had been directly affected by terror incidences such as the Westminster Bridge.
Despite visitors current good perception and trust in the London tourist destination, slight fall in trust levels especially propagated by increased attacks can highly jeopardize the country’s tourism sector which is responsible for over 700,000 jobs and which in 2017 was valued at around £36 billion (Coaffee, 2017).
Ceallaigh (2017), avers that while industry stakeholders’ show amplified confidence in the resilience and growth of the market, some market players are tempted to compare the London scenario to Paris especially following the November 2015 terrorist attack. Unlike in the past incidences of London terror attacks, Paris tourism shrank by around 30 percent following the November attacks as both local and foreign visitors reduced significantly. Statistics indicate London as growing in popularity, considering that in 2016, it recorded 19.1 millioninternational tourists arrival and in 2017 it was welcoming 25 percent more as contrasted to the past five years. Paris appears to be some steps above London especially noting that in 2017, the French capital recorded 23.6 million visitors’ arrivals.
Coffey (2017) argues that it is easier for terror attacks news to capture global attention even when casualties are much more less than those accounted annually in England’s roads. Luckily, visitors seem to be more informed especially noting that traffic and road related accidents contribute to around 1,800 death annually in the UK which is far more than the few killed or injured in separate terrorism acts (Horgan, 2017). For example, the 22 March 2017 terror attacks undertaken by Briton Khalid Masood on Westminster Bridge lead to the injury of 40 people and killed six while the 3 June 2017 terror incidence on London Bridge murdered eleven people while 48 people were injured. The attack on 19 June 2017 conducted close to Finsbury Park Mosque in London, one person died while eleven were injured and a person died and other in other remaining incidences, only injuries were recorded (Pisoiu & Jackson, 2018). London’s police unit has always moved in well in time to neutralize the terror agents contributing to a limited number of casualties, for instance, the 2017 terror-related deaths were about 18 as highlighted in the various incidences of attacks which is less than 1800 deaths attributed to road accidents annually (Chalk, 2017).
Methodology
The methodology approach will entail two key segments including the primary and secondary research approaches.
3.1.Secondary Research
Secondary research can be defined simply as the analysis of past findings or existent research to write a new study. In this study, secondary research will be used in the incorporation of summaries, collation, and synthesis of prevailing research materials bordering on the tourists’ perception of the impacts of London’s terrorism attacks. There are significant research archives holding critical data which is regarded as secondary research on the past terror incidences in the region. London has often been exposed to diverse terror attacks in which some are closely related to politics while others are relatable to religious extremism. Secondary materials will be essential in guiding the research and contribute to the growth of knowledge; however, caution will be undertaken to use the past material in a manner that generates new knowledge base.
The reasons for involving the secondary research approaches are to widen the research study, highlight key unresolved areas, and even provide direction in the way primary research should be conducted (Beckman, 2016). By reading past research limitation and findings, it will be easier to direct the primary research effectively and come up with important and valid findings. The secondary research will be undertaken through close analysis and assessment of existent research materials.
3.2.Primary Research
Primary research can be defined as a research methodology deployed by a researcher to gather data directly instead of relying on the existent data findings from previously conducted studies; therefore, it means that a primary researcher owns the data (Abrams et al. 2017). Besides, the study is undertaken to handle a specified challenge in society and demands an in-depth analysis. Primary research is conducted to address specific questions and can involve questionnaires, interviews, or surveys to accumulate data.
The primary research will be undertaken to analyze the causes of the terroristic attacks in London in the 21st century and recommend ways of eradicating or eliminating them; moreover, it will help in the evaluation of people’s perception of London as a touristic destination and how defiant the sector can be to terror upsurge (Sobolewska & Ali, 2015). Besides that, the research will assess the impact of regional positioning in combating terroristic crimes and how other nations and region can contribute in reducing modern terror threat and compare the impacts of terror attacks on London and other major European nations’ capitals, such as Berlin, Brussels as touristic destinations (Coaffee, 2017).
3.2.1. Positivist School of Thought
The study would adopt a positivist approach and will highly stress on assessing the empirical association between fall and growth in perception ranking of London as a tourist destination in contrast with increase or decrease in the terror acts leveled on the city (Tugwell, 2017). By adopting a positivist approach and using primary data, it will be easier to confirm the validity of whether the increase in the number of terror attacks has an impact on the view of tourists (both domestic and international) to the city.
3.2.2. Qualitative versus Quantitative
The research will predominantly entail quantitative approach but will include some qualitative approaches to complement the study. The research will employ quantitative data especially to find the number of tourists who visit London and who cancel trips in situations of terror (Dingley, 2016). Assess the number of tourist aspects which continue attracting people even in cases of attacks, and statistically compare London and other European cities which have been previously under attacks. A qualitative approach will essential in assessing the impact of regional positioning in combating terroristic crimes and how other nations and contribution in reducing modern terror threat (Rapport, 2015).
3.2.3.Study Sampling
The study anticipates to involve a respondent sample size of 400 people with an expected over 375 sufficiently answered questionnaires. The study population will include local dwellers in London (potential domestic tourists), international tourists in London and even stakeholders in the tourism industry and will be randomly selected. The research will employ questionnaire as a sampling technique and will entail both hard-copy or manual questionnaire delivery for respondents in adjacent areas and electronic questionnaires for respondents in remote regions. The research will not compensate respondents because such as payments are controversial and have been argued to have a possibility of influencing or coercing respondents in one way or another (Srivastava, 2016). Furthermore, financially disadvantaged groups can easily grasp the moment and be biased in their response (Freilich & LaFree, 2015).
3.2.4.Limitations
There are several possible research limitation for study, for instance, challenges of attaining sufficient sample size or enough response rate noting the study lacks any form of compensation or incentives to respondents which means that many potential respondents may fail to turn up for the exercise (Wilson et al. 2015). As the study involves tourists, a language barrier may emerge and communication to the people non-English speaking regions can be problematic (Blakemore, 2016). Respondents may be biased depending on the cultures, place of origin and contribute in several inaccuracies. Lastly, accessing the appropriate sample population be challenging and several resources may be needed to employ enumerators and logistics (Gal-Or, 2015).
References
Book sources
Srivastava, V. K. (2016). Should anthropologists pay their respondents?.Anthropology today, 8(6), 16-20.
Horgan, J. G. (2017). Psychology of terrorism: Introduction to the special issue. American Psychologist, 72(3), 199.
Coaffee, J. (2017). Terrorism, risk and the city: The making of a contemporary urban landscape. Routledge.
Nacos, B. L. (2016). Terrorism and counterterrorism. Routledge.
Laqueur, W. (2017). A history of terrorism. Routledge.
Freilich, J. D., & LaFree, G. (2015). Criminology theory and terrorism: Introduction to the special issue.
Dingley, J. (2016). Terrorism and the politics of social change: a Durkheimian analysis. Routledge.
Silke, A., & Schmidt-Petersen, J. (2017). The golden age? What the 100 most cited articles in terrorism studies tell us. Terrorism and political violence, 29(4), 692-712.
Richards, A. (2015). From terrorism to ‘radicalization’to ‘extremism’: counterterrorism imperative or loss of focus?. International Affairs, 91(2), 371-380.
Beckman, J. (2016). Comparative legal approaches to homeland security and anti-terrorism. Routledge.
Speckhard, A. (2015). Alex P. Schmid (Ed.). The Routledge Handbook of Terrorism Research: New York and London: Routledge, 2011. 718 pp., $61.00 paperback. ISBN: 0415520991.
Blakemore, B. (2016). Policing cyber hate, cyber threats and cyber terrorism. Routledge.
Hunt, P. (2018). Lessons identified from the 2017 Manchester and London terrorism incidents. Part 1: introduction and the prehospital phase. Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps, jramc-2018.
Chalk, P. (2017). The Response to Terrorism as a Threat to Liberal Democracy 1. In War on Terrorism (pp. 83-98). Routledge.
Tugwell, M. (2017). Terrorism and propaganda: Problem and response. In Insurgent Terrorism (pp. 51-61). Routledge.
Rapport, M. (2015). The French Revolution and early European revolutionary terrorism.
Frey, B. S., & Osterloh, M. (2017). Strategies to Deal with Terrorism. CESifo Economic Studies.
Gal-Or, N. (2015). International Cooperation to Suppress Terrorism (RLE: Terrorism & Insurgency). Routledge.
Richards, A. (2018). Defining terrorism. Routledge Handbook of Terrorism and Counterterrorism, 13-21.
Pisoiu, D., & Jackson, R. (2018). Contemporary debates on terrorism. Routledge.
Van de Vyver, J., Houston, D. M., Abrams, D., & Vasiljevic, M. (2016). Boosting belligerence: How the July 7, 2005, London bombings affected liberals’ moral foundations and prejudice. Psychological science, 27(2), 169-177.
Wilson, N., d’Ardenne, P., Brewin, C. R., & Catchpole, M. (2015). How Can the Experience of a Terrorist Attack Inform Public Health Priorities? Some Lessons from the London 7/7 Bombings. In International Perspectives on Terrorist Victimisation (pp. 149-169). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Abrams, D., Van de Vyver, J., Houston, D. M., & Vasiljevic, M. (2017). Does terror defeat contact? Intergroup contact and prejudice toward Muslims before and after the London bombings. Peace and conflict: journal of peace psychology, 23(3), 260.
Manelici, I. (2017). Terrorism and the value of proximity to public transportation: Evidence from the 2005 London bombings. Journal of Urban Economics, 102, 52-75.
Ratcliffe, A., & von Hinke Kessler Scholder, S. (2015). The london bombings and racial prejudice: Evidence from the housing and labor market. Economic Inquiry, 53(1), 276-293.
Sobolewska, M., & Ali, S. (2015). Who speaks for Muslims? The role of the press in the creation and reporting of Muslim public opinion polls in the aftermath of London bombings in July 2005. Ethnicities, 15(5), 675-695.
Matthews, J. (2016). Media performance in the aftermath of terror: Reporting templates, political ritual and the UK press coverage of the London Bombings, 2005. Journalism, 17(2), 173-189.
Websites sources
Monaghan A. & Butler S. (13 Jun 2017). Visitor numbers fall at UK attractions after terrorist attacks. The guardian. Retrieved on 23rd December 2018
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/13/merlin-entertainments-uk- attractions-visitor-numbers-fall-after-terrorist-attacks
Spinks R. (2017). The Cultural Reason Terrorism Hurts Some Tourist Hotspots More Than Others. Retrieved on 23rd December 2018. https://qz.com/quartzy/1127113/would- you-vacation-in-a-country-following-a-terrorist-attack/
Ahmed M. (2017). UK tourism shows resilience in face of terrorist attacks. Retrieved on 23rd December 2018 https://www.ft.com/content/1144b2f2-567f-11e7-9fed-c19e2700005f
Coffey, L. (2017). Is London Safe To Visit? Statistics and Official Advice For Travelers. Retrieved on 23rd
December 2018
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/is-london-safe-terror-attacks- finsbury-park-westminster-visit-travel-tourist-advice-stats-a7796946.html
Ceallaigh. J. O (2017). London's tourism industry counts cost of latest terrorist attack. Retrieved on 23rd
December 2018
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united- kingdom/england/london/articles/london-terrorist-attack-citys-travel-tourism-industry/
