Tourism - Public and Private Partnerships during Disasters

TOURIST OPERATORS AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT
By
DAVID REID, BA
A Major Research Project submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
In
DISASTER AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
We accept this Major Research Project as conforming
to the required standard.
_____________________________________
Peter Anderson, MA Communication
Academic Supervisor
_____________________________________
Jean Slick, M.Ed
Program Head, MA Disaster and Emergency Management
_____________________________________
Gregory Cran, PhD
Director, School of Peace and Conflict Management
ROYAL ROADS UNIVERSITY
April 2010

©David Reid, 2010
ii

Running Head: TOURIST OPERATORS AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT i
Abstract
The participation and involvement of tourism operators in emergency
management has been understudied. This project seeks to fill this research gap by
examining the relationships and resource sharing that occurs between a tourism operator
and government response agencies. Eight interviews were conducted in a popular winter
tourism destination with employees of a tourism operator and of local government
response agencies. Each participant was asked eight questions concerning local hazards,
interagency response and past collaborations. These findings were then used to create
recommendations to facilitate future collaborations between tourism operators and
government response agencies.

Acknowledgements
A sincere thank-you to project participants. It was a pleasure working with all of
you and I appreciate you taking the time from your busy schedules to participate in this
research project.
I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my project supervisor and
sponsor. Peter Anderson, thank you for assisting me through this process and acting as
my project supervisor. I arrived at your office from out of the blue and asked you if you
would be willing to take on an unknown student. Thank you for having the courage to
say yes. I could not have successfully written this project without your aid.
Joel Chevalier, my project sponsor, thanks for helping me find participants and providing
guidance. Your willingness to help people is a testament to your character.
I would also like to recognize Paula Vera for being an outstanding friend and
proofreading all my papers over the last three years.
Most importantly I want to thank my wife Petra. None of this could have been
achieved without your assistance. You were willing to take on so many additional tasks
so that I could have the opportunity to work on this project. I would also like to thank my
toddler son Griffin. You were always more than willing to help, you sorted papers, added
text to the paper, and reminded me that play time should be all the time and that nap-time
was optional.
ii

Table of Contents
Abstract.................................................................................................................................i
Acknowledgements..............................................................................................................ii
Table of Contents................................................................................................................iii
List of Abbreviations..........................................................................................................vi
Focus and Framing...............................................................................................................1
Definitions of Terms........................................................................................................2
Researcher’s Bias.............................................................................................................4
The Need for Public-Private Sector Partnerships in Emergency Management...............5
Significance of the Opportunity.......................................................................................6
Benefits of this Study.......................................................................................................6
The Area of Study............................................................................................................7
Natural Hazards and Human-Induced Hazards................................................................9
Canada’s and British Columbia’s Emergency Management System............................11
Organizational Context .................................................................................................14
Summary........................................................................................................................18
Literature Review..............................................................................................................19
Corporate Social Responsibility ...................................................................................19
Interagency Teamwork..................................................................................................21
Community Disaster Research.......................................................................................22
Tourism Research..........................................................................................................24
Summary........................................................................................................................27
iii

Research Conduct and Ethics.............................................................................................29
Theoretical Framework..................................................................................................29
Research Approach........................................................................................................30
Project Participants........................................................................................................32
Data Gathering Tools ....................................................................................................34
Data Analysis Strategies................................................................................................35
Research Ethics..............................................................................................................36
Summary........................................................................................................................37
Project Findings and Conclusions......................................................................................39
Project Findings ............................................................................................................41
Summary of the Findings...............................................................................................55
Project Conclusions.......................................................................................................55
Scope and Limitations of the Research..........................................................................56
Summary........................................................................................................................57
Research Implications........................................................................................................57
Project Recommendations.............................................................................................58
Recommendation 1: Increase familiarity between first response agencies’ and tourism
operators.........................................................................................................................58
Recommendation 2: Engage tourism operators in the emergency planning process....58
Recommendation 3: Create interagency teams to respond to specific hazards............59
Recommendation 4: Develop communication strategies that facilitate communication
between traditional first response agencies and non-traditional response agencies .....60
iv

Suggestions for Future Research...................................................................................60
Summary........................................................................................................................61
Lessons Learnt...................................................................................................................62
Project Management......................................................................................................62
Project Process...............................................................................................................63
Summary........................................................................................................................63
References .........................................................................................................................64
Appendix A........................................................................................................................72
Sample Letter of Invitation............................................................................................72
Appendix B........................................................................................................................75
Sample Research Consent Form....................................................................................75
Appendix C........................................................................................................................78
Interview Questions.......................................................................................................78
v

List of Abbreviations
BC British Columbia
BCAS British Columbia Ambulance Service
CSR Corporate Social Responsibility
EM Emergency Management
EMO Emergency Management Office
EMC Emergency Management Coordinator
EPM Emergency Procedures Manual
ESS Emergency Social Services
GOC Government Operations Center
MRP Major Research Project
PEP Provincial Emergency Program
PREOC Provincial Regional Emergency Operations Center
RCMP Royal Canadian Mounted Police
RMOW Resort Municipality of Whistler
WFRS Whistler Fire Rescue Service
vi

Focus and Framing
The tourism industry has been identified as an industry that is more prone to
disasters and the lack of research in tourism and disaster management is a concern
(Cioccio & Michael, 2007; Faulkner 2001). Numerous research papers have indicated
that tourism operators need to be incorporated into disaster and emergency management
to ensure that both local residents and tourist populations are cared for during
emergencies and/or disaster events (Murphy & Bayley, 1989; Ritchie, 2008). Research
evidence suggests that by involving tourism operators in disaster management the local
community will be better prepared to respond to and manage future emergency and
disaster events (Murphy & Bayley, 1989; Ritchie 2008).
This project investigated the question of “how can a tourism operator support and
assist the local community during an emergency or disaster event?” The community
where this investigation took place is the Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) and
the tourism operator that was part of the study is the ski resort Whistler Blackcomb. The
central questions include:
1) What hazards would you consider significant in this community? Why are these
hazards significant? Are there plans in place to mitigate or respond to these
hazards?
2) What hazards could overwhelm the community and require additional resources?
What resources could it require?
3) Has Whistler Blackcomb worked with first response agencies or local government
in past emergencies or disasters? If so could you describe the scenario and what
1

the company did?
4) Is there a process in place for Whistler Blackcomb to interface and collaborate
with local first responder agencies and local government during an emergency or
disaster? If so how does it work? If not what can be done to facilitate this
process?
5) How can Whistler Blackcomb enhance first responder agencies ability to respond
to an emergency or disaster event?
6) What aid or resources can Whistler Blackcomb provide to the community during
an emergency or disaster event?
7) Are there additional ways in which Whistler Blackcomb could assist the
community that has not been used in the past? If so, what are they?
8) Does Whistler Blackcomb have a responsibility to the local community during an
emergency or disaster event? If so, what is its responsibility?
Definitions of Terms
This major research project uses many different terms. This section provides a
brief overview of key terms.
Community: A group of individuals and households living in the same
location and having the same hazard exposure, who can
share the same objectives and goals in disaster risk
reduction (Victoria, 2003)
Disaster: A serious disruption to community life which threatens or
causes death or injury in that community and/or damage to
2

property which is beyond the day- to-day capacity of the
prescribed statutory authorities and which requires special
mobilization and organization of resources other than those
normally available to those authorities (Coles & Buckle,
2004)
Emergency: A natural or human generated event with negative physical
or economical consequences on people, resources or
property, which does not require the aid of external
resources.
Emergency Management: “The organization and management of resources and
responsibilities for dealing with all aspects of emergencies
and disasters” (UNISDR, 2004, ANNEX 1, P.4). The
current emergency management system is built around four
pillars that include: preparedness, mitigation, response, and
recovery (Geis, 2000).
First Response Agencies: A trained or certified group of individuals who, upon
arriving early to an emergency, assume immediate
responsibility for the protection and preservation of life,
property, evidence and the environment.
Hazard A potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon or
human activity that may cause the loss of life or injury,
property damage, social and economic disruption or
3

environmental degradation (UNISDR, 2004).
Phenomenological Research: “A qualitative [research] method that attempts to
understand participants’ perspective and views…” (Leedy
& Armond, 2005, p.108) of the phenomenon being studied.
Semi-structured Interviews: Interviews that are structured around a focused set of
questions. Open, two-way conversation is encouraged and
topics may be discussed that are not specific to the
interview questions.
Tourists: People or individuals who are visiting an area and are not
residents.
Researcher’s Bias
My interest in examining how a tourism operator might assist a community during
an emergency or disaster event was the result of a number of factors. The first was as a
result of past work experience. I have worked as an Emergency Coordinator for
municipal government, the health sector and for the private sector. From this work
experience I discovered that supplies, resources and people required to manage an
emergency event were often available within the local community. However, during
emergencies and/or disasters local resources and personnel were often unused or
forgotten. I believe the reason for this is because first response agencies are often
unaware of the local resources available within a community or have not had discussions
with non-governmental agencies concerning what they might contribute.
Another reason for wanting to conduct this research project is that I have lived
4

and worked in the Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) for 15 years. During this
period I worked with local government, first responders and the private sector during
many emergency events. This has led me to believe that there is a strong connection
between Whistler Blackcomb, the RMOW and first response agencies. I feel that this
strong connection is worth investigating to better understand the coordination and
collaboration that occurs between Whistler Blackcomb, the RMOW and government
response agencies.
The Need for Public-Private Sector Partnerships in Emergency Management
Worldwide disasters are occurring with greater frequency and having greater
negative social and economic impact (An Emergency Framework for Canada, 2007). The
importance of emergency management to governments, the private sector and the public
is becoming increasingly more relevant and important (Britton, 2002; Geis, 2000).
Disasters require the mobilization of large amounts of people, resources and capital.
Often these events exceed the capacity of traditional first response agencies (Coles &
Buckle, 2004; Drabek, 2000).
The responsibility of emergency management practitioners is to develop plans
processes and procedures that enhance public safety and help mitigate the impacts of
emergency and disaster events (Plattner, Plapp, & Hebel, 2006). Coles and Buckle
(2004) have argued that emergency management practitioners should use a participatory
community-oriented approach. They recommend that emergency management
practitioners engage local stake-holders to discover what aid or resources exist within the
community that could complement or assist traditional first response agencies and local
5

government. They state that emergency management practitioners “need to engage the
community whose knowledge and capacity are essential components of any response”
(Coles & Buckle, 2004, p. 14).
Significance of the Opportunity
Denis Mileti (1999) has stated that “until fairly recently, studies of the response of
private-sector organizations in disaster situations were virtually non-existent, and to date
very few systematic studies have been done” (p. 224). Researchers have more recently
noted that the contribution of the private sector and tourism sector in emergency
management is understudied (Cioccio & Michael, 2007; Faulkner, 2001). This project
seeks to fill this research gap by examining the relationships and resource sharing that
occurs between a tourism operator and first response agencies.
The project is guided by the recognition that emergencies and disasters are
community events that require community responses. This MRP helps to further
understand the relationship and resource sharing that occurs between a tourism operator,
the local government and local first response agencies within a community. This allows
for a better understanding of how a tourism operator can assist a community’s response to
emergency and disaster events. It is my hope that the knowledge gained from this study
will be used by other communities to help them collaborate with tourism operators in the
management of emergency and disaster events.
Benefits of this Study
This MRP benefits the sponsoring agency, Whistler Blackcomb, because it
6

provides knowledge and information concerning ways in which Whistler Blackcomb
might provide assistance to the local community and first response agencies during an
emergency or disaster event. By having this knowledge Whistler Blackcomb will be
better able to respond to and reduce the impact of future emergency or disaster events.
The MRP benefits the RMOW and first response agencies because it provides
information concerning how Whistler Blackcomb might assist the community during
emergencies and disaster events.
This MRP also benefits other communities, because it provides insight and ideas
concerning how tourism operators might enhance the capacity of first response agencies
to respond to emergency and disaster events.
The Area of Study
The RMOW is located in a geographically remote area in the southwest region of
British Columbia (BC). The ground transportation links to the area consist of Highway
99 a two and four lane highway and a single rail line. The RMOW is also accessible by
helicopter and has a heliport. The two adjacent towns are Pemberton and Squamish.
Pemberton is located approximately 30 km north and Squamish is located 50 km south of
the RMOW. Pemberton and Squamish both have small airports that are used for private
aircraft, flying clubs, and other commercial activities. The closest metropolitan area is
Vancouver, which is 124 km south of Whistler.
The 2006 census numbers for permanent residents in the RMOW is listed at 9,595
(Statistics Canada, 2006). During the popular tourist months the population can exceed
40,000 as a result of tourists (Vancouver2010, n.d.). The RMOW holds many festivals
7

and events throughout the year and recently served as an Olympic Venue for the 2010
Winter Olympics. The 2010 Winter Olympics was the largest event ever hosted by the
community. During this period the population exceeded 50,000 (Vancouver2010, n.d.)
Whistler Blackcomb Profile. During winter months Whistler Blackcomb, which
is situated in the RMOW, operates North America’s largest ski operation. Whistler
Blackcomb has the largest skiable area in North America at 8,171 acres (33 km2
) (Resort
Municipality of Whislter, 2010). During the spring, winter and fall seasons tourists are
attracted to the area for recreational activities such as mountain biking, hiking, fishing,
rafting and golf. Whistler Blackcomb also provides lift service for mountain biking,
hiking, and skiing during the summer months. Whistler Blackcomb off-season skiing
takes place on Blackcomb glacier. Lift serviced mountain biking takes place on Whistler
Mountain. Both mountains provide hiking during summer months.
Whistler Blackcomb Development. Two separate companies originally
developed Whistler and Blackcomb mountains as ski resorts. These two companies
merged in 1997 when Intrawest, the company that owned Blackcomb, purchased
Whistler. The result of the merger was the creation of the company known as Whistler
Blackcomb. Whistler Mountain was developed first and was opened for public skiing in
1965. The original name was London mountain and it was renamed Whistler in 1965.
Blackcomb Mountain opened for skiing in 1980. Whistler Blackcomb has won numerous
awards and has been rated the number one North American ski destination by Skiing
Magazine thirteen times. Whistler Blackcomb regularly receives more than two million
tourist visitors each year (Resort Municipality of Whistler, 2010).
8

Resort Municipality of Whistler and Whistler Blackcomb Interface. There
are three separate areas in the RMOW that provide lift access to the Whistler Blackcomb
ski area. These areas are Creekside, Whistler Village and the Upper Whistler Village.
Creekside is the historic village centre and is located four kilometers south of Whistler
Village. To access Whistler Blackcomb from this area there is a gondola. Whistler
Village is the village centre and the primary commercial hub of the area. There are three
separate lifts that provide access to Whistler Blackcomb from Whistler Village. These
consist of a detachable four person chairlift and a gondola which provide access to
Whistler, and another gondola which provides access to Blackcomb. The most recent
developed area is the Upper Whistler Village which is situated at the base of Blackcomb
Mountain. This area has a detachable four person chairlift and a fixed-grip three person
chairlift which provide access to Blackcomb Mountain. Whistler Blackcomb also has a
lift that provides access between the two mountains across the Fitzsimmons River. This
lift is called the Peak 2 Peak Gondola and its total length is 4.4 km (2.7 mi). It has the
longest unsupported span for a lift of its kind in the world at 3.02 km (1.88 mi). In total
the mountain has 38 lifts. The mountain also has 17 restaurants that can seat 6540
people.
Natural Hazards and Human-Induced Hazards
BC is an area that regularly experiences natural hazards and human-induced
hazards. The high number of natural hazards in BC can be attributed to its complex
geography and climate. The British Columbia Provincial Emergency Program (PEP) has
identified fifty-seven different types of hazards that could impact public safety, the
9

environment and the economy of the province (Provincial Emergency Program, 2008a)
The RMOW and Whistler Blackcomb have experienced natural and human-induced
emergencies and disasters. Recent hazard events include the Quicksilver chair lift
derailment on December 23, 1995, which killed two people and injured eight, the
Excalibur gondola tower failure on December 16, 2008, which injured ten people, and a
high-alpine forest fire on July 30, 2009, which required the evacuation of 375 people off
of Blackcomb Mountain. The alpine area of Whistler Blackcomb and neighboring
mountains experience snow avalanches during the winter season. The avalanche hazard
within the operational area of Whistler Blackcomb is mitigated through avalanche control
conducted by Whistler Blackcomb ski patrollers.
Some frequent natural hazards that affect the province and the RMOW are listed
below:
• Debris flows and snow avalanche hazards: Landslides and avalanches are a
yearly occurrence within BC that results in damaged roadways, transmission lines
and property damage.
• Flooding hazards: Flooding in BC can be caused by numerous different events
such as rain on snow events, ice jam flooding, storm surges, flash floods, and
natural dam failures or human built dam failures. Flood events typically occur in
the spring and fall as a result of rain on snow events.
• Forest and interface fire hazards: Forest fires and interface fires are yearly
occurrences in BC and are caused by either lighting or human ignition.
• Seismic hazards: Southwestern British Columbia is exposed to the highest seismic
10

risk in Canada. The Juan de Fuca and North America plates are believed to be
locked together causing strain to build up in the earth’s crust. Many leading
seismic researchers predict that at some time in the future the two locked plates
will become unlocked which will result in an offshore ‘subduction’ earthquake
(Natural Resources Canada, 2009). It is believed that this type of earthquake
would result in numerous fatalities and massive infrastructure damage in the
southwest region of BC.
Canada’s and British Columbia’s Emergency Management System
Canada’s Emergency Management (EM) system is organized through
partnerships of public, private, non-profit, and volunteer organizations. “The ultimate
purpose of emergency management is to save lives, preserve the environment and protect
property and the economy” (An Emergency Management Framework for Canada, 2007,
p.4). EM is shared between a three-tiered government system that includes federal,
provincial/territorial, and municipal organizations (Wachtendorf, 2001).
The current EM system is built around four pillars that include: preparedness,
mitigation, response, and recovery (Geis, 2000). The present focus of emergency
management is on a comprehensive, all-hazards approach (McEntire, Fuller, Johnston, &
Weber, 2002). This approach does not limit the focus to one agency or one type of
hazard, but instead focuses on the interaction of various agencies and their response to
hazards within a jurisdiction or community (Disaster Preparedness Resource Centre,
1998).
The guiding principle of the Canadian EM system is that management during
11

emergency or disaster events lies with local government and/or regional districts. The BC
provincial government has passed legislation that requires local government and regional
districts to plan and prepare for emergencies and disasters within their area of geographic
responsibility (Emergency Program Management Regulation, 1994). In BC the
Emergency Program Act (1996) states that local authorities “must prepare or cause to be
prepared local emergency plans respecting preparation for, response to and recovery from
emergencies and disasters” (Emergency Program Act, 1996). Municipalities and regional
districts usually assign this task to an emergency management coordinator (EMC). The
EMC is responsible for creating emergency plans, developing exercises, and acting as a
liaison with local community stakeholders, municipalities and the private sector. In BC
the role of EMC is often a person from the Fire Department, local police services, or is an
employee of either municipal government or the regional district.
At the provincial level, the Provincial Emergency Program (PEP) is responsible
for overseeing emergency management in BC. PEP is a division of the Ministry of
Public Safety and Solicitor General, Emergency Management BC. PEP will activate a
provincial regional emergency operations center (PREOC) to help assist and coordinate
provincial aid to a municipality or regional district. The PREOC does not manage the
incident but helps coordinate provincial resources to an impacted area.
At the federal level, Public Safety Canada (PSC) holds the leadership role for EM,
coordinating lower levels of government (An Emergency Management Framework for
Canada, 2007). PSC creates the legal and policy frameworks, which outline the direction
and guiding principles for EM across the country. Under this framework provincial and
12

territorial governments have the authority to pass legislation on the organization and legal
framework for emergency management in the province or territory. When a disaster
event is beyond the capacity of provincial resources, requests can be made to Public
Safety Canada. Public Safety Canada will activate the Government Operations Center
(GOC). The GOC coordinates all federal departments and agencies during national
emergencies and liaises with international partners such as NATO or other countries.
The provincial government of British Columbia has mandated the use of the
Incident Command System (ICS) by all provincial ministries and agencies (Provincial
Emergency Program, 2008a). BC local governments and regional districts are not legally
mandated to utilize ICS, however, first response agencies and local government are
increasingly adopting ICS as part of their training and as part of their standard operating
procedures.
ICS is a command and control system delineating job responsibilities within an
organizational structure for the purpose of managing operations during emergency and/or
disaster incidents. ICS provides a mechanism for organizations to shrink or expand as
required to meet the operational needs of an incident. The system is flexible and can be
used to manage either large catastrophic events or smaller emergency events. ICS
functional goals are to: (1) establish clear lines of authority, (2) provide common
terminology, and (3) provide appropriate span of control between different levels within
the response team organization (Auf der Heide, 1989). Some researchers have argued that
ICS might not be the best method of choice for responding to major events due to its
focus on command and control (Kuban, 1996; Watchendorf & Kendra, 2005; Quarantelli,
13

1996).
The Justice Institute of British Columbia (JIBC) is Canada’s leading public safety
educator (Justice Institute, 2008d). The JIBC provides training and education to
firefighters, paramedics, police officers and emergency coordinators. ICS courses are a
standard part of these agencies education.
Organizational Context
The Whistler Fire Rescue Service’s (WFRS) Fire Chief is the Emergency
Program Coordinator for the RMOW. The Fire Chief is responsible for the management
and coordination of emergency preparedness, response and recovery activities (Resort
Municipality of Whistler - Emergency Management Plan, 2005). The Emergency
Program Coordinator reports to the Deputy Municipal Administrator and receives policy
direction and support from the Emergency Management Committee. “A prime function
of the Whistler Fire Rescue Service involves both planning and response in the event of a
major incident within the resort community” (Resort Municipality of Whistler
-Emergency Management Plan, 2005 p.21).
The RMOW Emergency Management Committee is a committee responsible for
setting policy direction and ensuring that all aspects of the RMOW’s Emergency Program
are addressed. The Emergency Program Coordinator and/or RMOW Deputy Municipal
Administrator chair the Emergency Management Committee. The Emergency
Management Committee meets 4 times a year and consists of the following
representatives:
Mayor and / or Council Representation, as required
14

Municipal Administrator
Deputy Administrator
Emergency Program Coordinator
Fire Chief
RCMP Officer in Charge
BCAS Unit Chief
General Manager of Public Works / Engineering
General Manager of Parks and Recreation
Emergency Social Services Director
Search and Rescue Coordinator
Whistler Health Care Centre Representative
Whistler Blackcomb Representative (Resort Municipality of Whistler -Emergency
Management Plan, 2005 p.21).
Whistler Blackcomb’s corporate emergency management program is part of the
Safety Office. The Safety Office is responsible for conducting accident investigations,
managing the occupational health and safety program, and providing emergency
management training and education for Whistler Blackcomb employees. The Safety
Supervisor and Safety Manager coordinate Whistler Blackcomb’s response to
emergencies and disasters and act as the liaison with external (non Whistler Blackcomb)
agencies. The Safety Supervisor is responsible for updating the Emergency Procedures
Manual (EPM) every year. The EPM acts as Whistler Blackcomb’s Emergency plan. It
describes roles, responsibilities and actions for dealing with on-mountain emergencies (P.
15

Jean, personal communication Jan 15, 2010).
The mission statement of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) the policing
agency for the RMOW is to
be a progressive, proactive and innovative organization; provide the highest quality
service through dynamic leadership, education and technology in partnership with the
diverse communities we serve; be accountable and efficient through shared decision-
making; ensure a healthy work environment that encourages team building, open
communication and mutual respect; promote safe communities; demonstrate
leadership in the pursuit of excellence. (Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 2006, p.2)
The employees of the RCMP are committed to communities through:
• unbiased and respectful treatment of all people
• accountability
• mutual problem solving
• cultural sensitivity
• enhancement of public safety
• partnerships and consultation
• open and honest communication
• effective and efficient use of resources
• quality and time service (Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 2006, p.2)
The mission statement for the RCMP emphasizes partnerships, shared decision making,
open communication and promotes the ideal of safe communities. Of note in the RCMP
vision statement is the bullet that states the effective and efficient use of resources. The
16

RCMP recognizes that there are limited resources within its operation and that the use
and allocation of resources must be done strategically and systematically (S. LeClair,
personal communication Jan 20, 2010).
“The British Columbia Ambulance Service (BCAS) staff actively participates in
emergency planning, mock disaster exercises, and other joint training initiatives to ensure
disaster preparedness and response capabilities are identified and deployed quickly and
effectively when they are needed most” (British Columbia Ambulance Service -
Emergency Management Section, 2006) BCAS works to ensure that paramedics are
prepared to respond to, and recover from major emergencies. The BCAS Emergency
Management Office (EMO) provides provincial oversight and direction during major
emergencies and disasters. The BCAS EMO develops strategies and plans to mitigate,
manage and respond to regional hazards and provides direction and advice regarding
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive response. (British Columbia
Ambulance Service, 2006)
Emergency Social Services (or ESS) is a provincial emergency response program
for BC. The vision statement for ESS is that it “envisions a province where all
communities have the capacity to effectively respond to the basic short-term needs of
British Columbians affected by an emergency or disaster” (Emergency Social Services,
n.d.). ESS provides short-term assistance to British Columbians who are unable to return
to their homes due to damage caused by fire, floods, earthquakes or other hazards. ESS
provides food, lodging, clothing, and emotional support and family reunification.
17

Summary
This chapter provides the context for this MRP. It provides reasons for the
importance of this study, a description of the area, the development history of Whistler
Blackcomb, hazards within the area, an overview of emergency management in BC and
Canada, and participating agencies emergency management structure or commitment.
18

Literature Review
Several key topics related to emergency management, tourism and the private
sector were revealed in the literature review. These topics include (a) corporate social
responsibility as an argument explaining why the private sector might assist a
community, (b) research on interagency team work, (c) research validating the use of a
community approach to develop emergency management plans and policies and (d)
research on tourism disaster management.
Corporate Social Responsibility
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) can be broadly defined as ‘actions that
appear to further some social good, beyond the interests of the firm and that which is
required by law’ (McWilliams & Siegal, 2001, p. 117). It encompasses notions of
business ethics and the importance of stakeholders besides owners, investors and
shareholders (Schmidheiny et al., 1997). The underlying rationale is that businesses have
responsibilities other than those, which are strictly commercial in nature and must
support the well being of society (Hillman & Keim, 2001; Hopkins, 2006).
CSR implies that private companies have a responsibility to provide aid and care
for society at large (Hillman & Keim, 2001; Hopkins, 2006). Henderson (2007) has
argued that a company’s CSR requires it to intervene and provide aid during disasters.
However, Henderson (2007) has also stated that recognizing and exercising these
obligations is often a challenging task with uncertainty about appropriate forms of
commitment, responsibilities and actions.
19

A socially responsible company should conduct itself in an appropriate manner within
its various spheres of action (Hopkins, 2006). Some important activities, which might be
reasonably expected of it, which are commonly cited in the literature, are summarized
below (Henderson, 2007; Hopkins, 2006).
• Forging of partnerships with government and non-governmental organizations,
including local community groups
• Formulation of policies to avoid damaging social and environmental impacts of
operations.
• Investment and involvement in social welfare and environmental conservation.
• Recruitment and training of local staff and purchase of goods and services from local
suppliers.
• Publication of meaningful and measurable social and environmental goals and regular
reporting on progress towards achievement.
• Full compliance with official regulations and a willingness to exceed these.
• Education and engagement of customers and staff about social and environmental
issues of concern.
While there is no mention of disaster management in the checklist, CSR promotes the
idea that companies should intervene to alleviate the impact of emergency or disaster
events (Henderson 2007; McWilliams & Siegal, 2001). Activities in the list that reflect
EM objectives are the forging of partnerships, the creation of policies to avoid damaging
social and environmental impacts, investments in social welfare, the recruitment and
training of local staff, the purchase of goods and services from local suppliers, and
20

education about social and environmental issues. Ritchie (2008) has stated that,
From a tourism disaster perspective, there is a need to consider reducing disasters
to save tourism businesses or destinations substantial economic costs if
vulnerability or risk can be reduced or managed. Furthermore, a disaster, which
impacts upon a destination, could have major sociocultural impact if the local
community are perhaps reliant on income from tourism activities (p. 323)
The basis of this argument is that tourism is an economic driver for many communities
and the loss of tourism due to an event can lead to repercussions on the communities’
economic success and stability. It is important to acknowledge the importance of tourism
for tourism based communities and develop strategies to minimize the impact or
repercussions of emergencies or disasters on the local economy (Ritchie, 2008).
One strategy is to better understand the actions and activities that a tourism
operator might take to assist a tourism destination during an emergency or disaster event.
Henderson (2007) found that in large disasters tourism operators often provide both
assistance and resources. Examples of this aid occurred in the aftermath of the 2004
Indonesia tsunami where tourism operators provided lodging, food and equipment to both
residents and tourists (Henderson, 2007).
Interagency Teamwork
A significant volume of literature exists on the concept of teamwork. Common
aspects attributed to the success of teamwork are (1) working towards a shared goal, (2)
possessing complementary skills, and (3) using a common language (Ketzenbach &
Smith, 1993). A process for creating a teamwork environment is to adopt strategies in
21

which team members are familiar with one another and have worked together on past
projects or work initiatives (Paton & Flin, 1999).
Due to the complexity of disaster events response agencies must be flexible in
their response and be willing to work with other agencies and/or other stakeholders
(Kouzes & Posner, 2002; Watchendorf, 2001). A method of developing interagency
teams is to provide opportunities in which members from different agencies participate in
training exercises (Whetstone, 2001). Agencies that interact with one another in training
exercises or other activities are more likely to be familiar with the capabilities, capacity
and resources of each other and have a greater willingness to work together (Auf der
Heide, 1989).
Community Disaster Research
Disasters typically exceed the internal surge capacity of first responder agencies
and require additional equipment and personnel from external agencies (Coles & Buckle,
2004; Drabek, 1985; Dynes, 1970; Dynes, 1976). Donahue and Joyce (2001, p. 728)
have defined disasters as an event that “exceeds the capability of government” and
“overwhelms the administrative and resources capabilities” available in the affected area.
Traditionally, the request for aid and/or resources has been requested from higher levels
of governments. This has often resulted in a failure to capitalize on non-governmental
resources available locally from either the private sector and/or community based
organizations (Dynes, 1970; Dynes 1976).
Russell Dynes (1970) has argued that the community needs to be part of disaster
management as it is the unit, which is affected by a disaster, and more importantly
22

responds to and deals with the event. Researchers have argued that the reliance on
external agencies to help mitigate the impact of a disaster is flawed because external
agencies often arrive too late, are unfamiliar with the area impacted, and often fail to
address local needs (Coles & Buckle, 2004; Dynes, 1970; Victoria, 2003; Quarantelli,
1996). In order to address these needs, emergency planners are increasingly focused on
enhancing local capacity through the involvement of local stakeholders from non-
governmental organizations (Coles & Buckle, 2004; Drabek, 1999; Dynes, 1970; Murphy
& Bayley, 1989; Ritchie, 2004). The “community as a resource” model has become the
accepted standard for emergency management models and practices (Lichterman; 2000,
p. 265). These types of partnerships often result in the availability of additional resources
and personnel. This results in an increased capacity for the community to respond and
mitigate the impact of emergency or disaster events.
A community is defined as “a group of individuals and/or households living in the
same location and having the same hazard exposure, who can share the same objectives
and goals in disaster risk reduction” (Victoria, 2003). Tourists are often not considered
as a part of the community as they do not reside or “live” in the area. However, tourists
should be viewed as temporary residents and emergency management should create plans
to ensure their safety (Ritchie, 2008). Emergency management has typically focused on
actions that increase residents’ safety. This has often meant that EM plans have failed to
plan for tourists’ needs and issues (Ritchie, 2008).
Community based emergency planning needs to ensure that both resident and
non-resident populations are cared for during an emergency or disaster event (Miyaguchi
23

& Shaw, 2007). A strategic approach is to develop EM strategies and plans that mitigate
the effects of a disaster for both residents and non-residents. An approach to developing
this capacity is to include tourism operators in EM to help develop strategies that assist in
the care and management of both resident and tourist populations (Bird, Gisladottir, &
Dominey-Howes, 2010; Miyaguchi & Shaw, 2007; Ritchie, 2008).
Tourism Research
Evidence from research suggests that safety and security are necessary for a
prosperous tourism industry (Chauhan, 2007). Cohen (1984) found that tourism is
associated with relaxation and enjoyment, and that tourists generally rank security and
comfort as essential when choosing a destination. His research shows that travelers will
stay away from destinations that are considered to be life threatening or hazardous.
Recent studies have since supported this supposition (George, 2003; Lepp & Gibson,
2003; Lepp & Gibson, 2008; Mawby, Brunt & Hambly, 2000; Pizam, Tarlow, & Bloom,
1997; Sonmez & Graefe, 1998). Researchers have shown the negative effects that
violence, crime and terrorism have on the success of tourist destinations (Bloom, 1996;
Cohen, 1984; Cohen 1987; Levantis & Gani, 2000; Pinhey & Iverson; 1994, Sonmez &
Graefe, 1998; Tarlow & Santana, 2002). Sonmez and Graefe (1998, p. 120) go so far as
to state that “if the destination choice is narrowed down to two alternatives which
promise similar benefits, i.e. one which is less costly and another that is safe from threat,
the safer, even if it is more costly is likely to be chosen”.
Tourist locations are often situated in scenically spectacular, high hazard areas.
Oceanfront locations can be subjected to hurricanes and tsunamis while mountain areas
24

are prone to avalanches and wild land forest fires (Eitzinger & Wiedemann, 2007).
Tourism publications rarely provide information to tourists about local hazards (Drabek,
1999). A reason that tourism operators often do not publish information on hazards is the
concern that this type of information will deter tourists from visiting a tourism area (Bird,
Gisladottir & Dominey-Howes, 2010; Drabek, 1999).
Researchers have surveyed tourists to better understand what they consider to be
risky or hazardous and whom they would assign blame to should something hazardous or
life threatening occur (Eitzinger & Wiedemann, 2007; Eitzinger & Wiedemann, 2008;
Lepp and Gibson, 2003; Sonmez & Graefe, 1998). These studies have concluded that
tourists typically consider natural hazard events as “acts of god” and do not assign blame
or responsibility to a single person or organization (Eitzinger, & Wiedemann, 2007).
However, when hazards result in the failure of infrastructure or industrial equipment the
blame and responsibility is usually assigned to the organization or corporation
responsible for managing the resource and/or equipment (Eitzinger & Wiedemann, 2007;
Lepp and Gibson, 2003; Sonmez & Graefe, 1998).
Tourists typically rely on the local community and tourism operators to provide
assistance and aid when a disaster occurs. The World Tourism Organization and the
White House Conference on Travel and Tourism have stated, “ that the protection and
organization of tourists prior to and during a disaster event is the joint responsibility of
the tourism industry and public sector” (White House Conference on Travel and Tourism,
1995 p.18).
Research has shown that tourists rely on tourism operators for information on
25

what actions they should take during an emergency or disaster event (Bird, Gisladottir &
Dominey-Howes, 2010; Drabek, 1999). Tourism research has shown that local residents
are made aware of an impending hazard much earlier than tourists (Bird, Gisladottir &
Dominey-Howes, 2010; Drabek, 1999). This is attributed to a number of issues, (1)
tourists are often unaware of local news and events, because of their inability to
understand the local language, (2) they are often physically separated from the media (i.e.
located on a beach, at a temple, or exploring local attractions), (3) the reluctance of
tourism operators to inform their guests about a hazard, and (4) tourists lack knowledge
and education with regards to their risk to a local hazard (Bird, Gisladottir & Dominey-
Howes, 2010; Drabek, 1999)
Tourist populations have more difficulty evacuating or sheltering in an area when
compared to local residents (Drabek, 1986). Tourists are often unaware of local transit,
do not know the location of shelters and often do not know what actions to take when
experiencing a hazard event (Drabek, 1986). Local residents forced to evacuate an area
will usually find shelter with friends or family (Auf Der Heide, 1989; Drabek, 1986).
However, tourists lack familial contacts in an area and will usually be dependent on
group sheltering. In addition, tourists often travel to a destination by air and do not have a
vehicle. As a result, their ability to either evacuate an area or get to shelters is further
exacerbated (Drabek, 1986).
When a tourist area suffers a disaster there is an increase in the presence of the
international media (Murphy & Bayley, 1989; Patterson, 2006). This occurs because an
international audience will want to know the scope of the disaster, which areas are
26

affected, and the number of injured people or fatalities. This can be problematic since
often the reported information can be erroneous and raise the anxiety levels of people
who have loved ones located in the area (Patterson, 2006). Sensationalized reporting can
also have residual negative long-term effects on an area (Murphy & Bayley, 1989).
Research has shown that disasters are not necessarily bad for tourism-based
communities. Post-disaster strategies can attract tourist back to an area (Coles, 2003). An
example of such a strategy is the Mount St-Helens visitor center that uses the disastrous
eruption of the 1980 volcano as an educational tool to draw in tourists (Murphy &
Bayley, 1989). The center capitalizes on people’s interest in disasters and also helps to
educate people on volcanic eruptions. Post-disaster marketing strategies can attract
customers to a disaster area by tapping into the publics’ curiosity for devastated areas
(Murphy & Bayley, 1989).
Summary
The literature review focused on several different key topics related to this MRP.
The first part of the literature review provided information on the theory of corporate
social responsibility. This theory provides an argument explaining why the private sector
might participate in emergency management. The second topic of the literature review
focused on teamwork. This topic focused on theories on the development of successful
teams and why teams are important in disaster management. The third topic established
the rationale for community based emergency management. This provided the argument
concerning why stake-holders such as tourism operators should be included in emergency
management. The final section provided information on the specific issues and concerns
27

for tourists and tourism operators.
28

Research Conduct and Ethics
The primary research question for this MRP is: how can a tourism operator
support and assist the local community during an emergency or disaster event? To
conduct this research a qualitative, action research approach was used. Participants in this
research project were interviewed and asked a number of open-ended questions. The
interviews were informal and participants were encouraged to ask questions of the
researcher with regards to research findings from the researcher’s literature review. The
action research design was used because it provided the greatest opportunity for
participants to be engaged in the project and also allowed for information sharing
between the researcher and participants. In this chapter, I will discuss the theoretical
framework, research approach, project participants, data-gathering tools, data-analysis
strategies, and ethical considerations.
Theoretical Framework
A post-positivist framed research approach was used for this project. The
information gathered was from the participants’ perspectives. It is assumed that the
opinions of the participants have been influenced by their experiences, backgrounds, and
organizational contexts. A qualitative research approach was used, in that the
perspectives of participants could not be measured. This approach was chosen to allow
the opportunity to interact with the participants and understand the phenomena from their
point of view.
29

Research Approach
Overview. The purpose of this project was to better understand the resources and
aid that a tourism operator could provide to the local community during an emergency or
disaster event. To accomplish this, employees of first response agencies, local
government and the private sector were interviewed. Participants were asked during the
interviews, the hazards they considered to be significant for the community, the resources
that were available to manage hazard events, the resources that might be requested from
Whistler Blackcomb, past collaborations and interactions between Whistler Blackcomb,
the RMOW and local first response agencies, and what they believed Whistler
Blackcomb’s responsibility was to the local community during a disaster event. By
examining past interactions between Whistler Blackcomb, the RMOW and first response
agencies as well as by discussing how equipment and resources might be shared between
these agencies this study provides an understanding of how a tourism operator might
assist the local community to manage and mitigate the impact of future emergency or
disaster event.
A phenomenological study was used. “Phenomenological research is a strategy of
inquiry in which the researcher identifies the essence of human experiences about a
phenomenon as described by participants” (Creswell, 2008, p.13). In other words, the
researcher attempts to understand the phenomenon from the perspective of the study
participants. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with participants. The
semi-structured interviews were focused around a general set of prepared questions.
Because of the informal structure, conversation and two-way communication was
30

possible between the participants and researcher. This allowed the researcher to share
information and ideas during the interview. By conducting the research in this way both
the participants and the researcher were able to come to a better understanding of the
phenomenon being studied.
Qualitative Research. Qualitative research is a method of collecting data
through in-depth, verbal methods that allows for the interpretation of data for patterns and
meaning. In qualitative research, researchers gather in-depth information and details from
a small number of participants, as opposed to quantitative methods that focus on samples
from large populations (Ambert, Adler, Adler, & Detzner, 1995). Qualitative approaches
gather information focused on how and why people behave the way they do, and on
motivations and deterrents for certain behaviours (Ambert, Adler, Adler, & Detzner,
1995). “A particular strength of qualitative methods is their value in explaining what goes
on in organizations” (Avison, Lau, Myers, & Nielsen, 1999, p.94).
A qualitative research approach for this project was chosen because it allowed
participants to freely discus how they envisioned their agencies working with others
during a disaster event. Considering this project focused on many different
agencies/organizations it was necessary to use a research method that would assist in
investigating the beliefs of participants from these agencies, and also provide information
concerning how their respective agencies/organizations might work together.
Action Research. Action research was the method used in this study. Action
research is defined as a participatory method of collecting information that allows
researchers to interact with study participants to determine study problems and activities,
31

and to reflect on processes (Avison, Lau, Myers, & Nielsen, 1999, p.94). “Action
research combines theory and practice (and researchers and practitioners) through change
and reflection in an immediate problematic situation within a mutually acceptable ethical
framework” (Avison, Lau, Myers, & Nielsen, 1999). Action research is especially helpful
when solutions to problems are not clear or when answers to problems are not as simple
as yes or no (Avison, Lau, Myers, & Nielsen, 1999). Action research gives researchers
the opportunity to understand organizations and to understand the objectives and attitudes
of the participants from those organizations. Action research is “unique in the way it
associates research and practice, so research informs practice and practice informs
research” (Avison, Lau, Myers, & Nielsen, 1999, p.94).
Project Participants
The Supervisory Committee. The role of the supervisory committee was to
approve various stages of the project, provide consultation and guidance, and ensure that
the project met the pre-determined academic standards laid out by Royal Roads
University (RRU). My supervisory committee consisted of three individuals, all with
strong backgrounds in academia and in the field of EM. The Program Head of the Master
of Arts in Disaster and Emergency Management Program at RRU, Miss Jean Slick, was
the committee chair of the project, and approved the other committee members and
monitored the project for its academic integrity. Mr. Peter Anderson, Director,
Telematics Research Lab and Associate Professor, School of Communication Simon
Fraser University was the academic supervisor of the project. Mr. Anderson advised me
on how to meet academic standards and provided advice and feedback throughout the
32

project. The third committee member was Mr. Joel Chevalier, Director of Employee
Experience for Whistler Blackcomb. Mr. Chevalier assisted me by providing interview
contacts as well as by providing feedback throughout the project.
The Researcher. The researcher was responsible for completing all aspects of
the study, including interviewing, data analysis, and final report writing. The researcher
the measurement instrument since most of the data depended on direct contact with the
participants.
Participants. A total of eight participants contributed to this project. These
consisted of four participants from first response agencies and local government and four
participants from Whistler Blackcomb. Participants were given a copy of the questions
and the project’s literature review prior to being interviewed. Interview lengths ranged
from 20 to 45 minutes. Participants also agreed that they could be contacted by either e-
mail or phone for clarification about any information gathered during the interview.
Participants were chosen based on pre-selected criteria. All participants were either of a
senior level within their respective organization or had worked within their organization
for a period no less than two years. The reason for this condition was that the study was
designed to better understand what aid or assistance Whistler Blackcomb might be able to
provide during a emergency or disaster event. To succeed in this endeavor it was
assumed that employees who had worked for a period longer than two years might have a
better understanding concerning the mandate of their respective organizations, could
comment on resources that might be required, and have had responded to past emergency
events. Interviews were arranged by invitation via email messages or phone calls. Joel
33

Chevalier assisted by providing contact information for the participants and advising
participants about the project. The researcher provided all participants with an invite
letter detailing the purpose and the focus of the project. (Appendix A).
Data Gathering Tools
Interviews. In-depth semi-structured interviews were used to collect data in this
project. The same open-ended questions were asked in each interview and although
similar topics were discussed, conversation evolved differently with each participant.
This format gave a structure to the interviews, but also allowed enough flexibility so that
other topics could be discussed as they arose. This ensured that information was complete
and that no emphasis was placed on certain questions versus others. “Asking questions is
widely accepted as a cost-efficient (and sometimes the only) way of gathering
information about past behaviors and experiences, private actions and motives, and
beliefs, values, and attitudes (i.e., subjective variables that cannot be measured directly)”
(Foddy, 1994, p.1).
Each participant was interviewed once. Interview questions were based on themes
discovered from the literature review and approved by both the project sponsor and
supervisor. In the interview, participants were asked a series of questions related to local
hazards, the communities ability to respond to these hazards and what additional
resources were available or might be required. Participants were also asked to comment
on whether they believed that Whistler Blackcomb has a responsibility to the community
and if so what that responsibility might be (See Appendix C for the full set of interview
questions).
34

This project is considered an action research method, since the practitioners
helped to identify issues and barriers, by way of the interview process. The interview
process was structured so that both researcher and participant shared information and
knowledge. As a result, both the researcher and the participant benefited from being
involved in the study.
Project Site. Data was collected at the participants’ places of employment, which
allowed for the observation of the participants in their regular work environment and
organizational contexts. However, this was not always achieved due to participants
schedules and workloads. Two of the interviews were conducted at other locations.
Tools for Data collection. The tools for data collection included pen, paper, and
a digital audio-recorder. The interviews were recorded, with permission from the
participants, to allow for easier data analysis after the interviews. I transcribed the raw
data following the interviews and prior to formal data analysis.
Data Analysis Strategies
Overview. The goal of the data analysis was to extract meaning from the large
amount of collected data. Before analysis began, the data was processed from the digital
recording into text format. This allowed for greater familiarization with the data. Prior to
formally analyzing the data some of the commonalities and differences in the different
interviews were identified. A data analysis spiral (as described by Leedy and Ormond,
2005) was used to organize and interpret the collected data during the interview process.
Step 1 – The data was examined for commonalities between all participants.
Step 2 – The data was then organized into two different subgroups: subgroup A
35

and subgroup B. Subgroup A consisted of the participants that worked for
Whistler Blackcomb. Subgroup B consisted of the participants that either worked
for first response agencies or local government.
Step 3 – Each subgroup was examined for meaningful patterns.
Step 4 – Theoretical and practical guidelines were established (as shown later in
this paper).
Research Ethics
“Ethical issues are present for any kind of research” (Eisenhauer, Orb, &
Wynaden, 2001, p.93). Ethics is concerned with avoiding harm to study participants
(Eisenhauer, Orb, & Wynaden, 2001). In this project, data was collected through
interactions with human subjects in the form of interviews. The project research was
guided by the RRU Research Ethics Policy (2007) and the RRU Policy on Integrity and
Misconduct in Research and Scholarship (2000). The RRU Research Ethics Policy has
established guidelines to ensure that research is conducted in a manner that is ethically
responsible. Because this project involved human subjects, it followed pre-determined
guidelines set out by RRU, as follows: (1) Respect for Human Dignity; (2) Respect for
Free and Informed Consent; (3) Respect for Vulnerable Persons; (4) Respect for Privacy
and Confidentiality; (5) Respect for Justice and Inclusiveness; (6) Balancing Harms and
Benefits, Minimizing Harm; and (7) Maximizing Benefit (RRU Academic Council, 2007,
Section D). A complete ethical review was required for this project and was submitted to
the RRU Ethical Review Board for review and approval prior to the commencement of
data collection.
36

All of the ethics guidelines were followed throughout the project, and particularly
the guidelines for respect for free and informed consent, respect for privacy and
confidentiality, and minimizing harm and maximizing benefit. To ensure that all
participants understood their rights for respect for free and informed consent, all
participants read and signed a consent form prior to their participation (see Appendix B).
The consent form clearly outlined that participants could withdraw from the study at any
time without judgment and any data collected prior to their withdrawal would be
destroyed. To ensure respect for privacy and confidentiality, all information was kept
confidential throughout the study and no names, including personal names, or any
identifying characteristics would appear in the final report. The Royal Roads University
Research Ethics Board approved questions used in this study. Participants were also
provided a copy of the MRP before it was submitted to Royal Roads University and
asked to read and review the document before it was submitted. Participants were
informed that after reading the MRP any changes they requested concerning information
that might be attributed to them or their agency/organization in the research paper would
be made.
Summary
This chapter provided the research approach, why it was chosen and how the
project was conducted. It explained the role of the supervisory committee. It provided
information on the number of participants and the criteria for selecting them. It included
a section on the manner the data was gathered and organized. Finally, the chapter
included a section on how the research process was guided by the RRU Research Ethics
37

Policy (2007) and the RRU Policy on Integrity and Misconduct in Research and
Scholarship (2000) to ensure that the project was completed in an ethically responsible
manner.
38

Project Findings and Conclusions
The purpose of this project was to determine how a tourism operator could support
and assist the local community during an emergency or disaster event. Participants
representing local first response agencies, local government and Whistler Blackcomb
were asked the following questions:
1) What hazards would you consider significant in this community? Why are these
hazards significant? Are there plans in place to mitigate or respond to these
hazards?
2) What hazards could overwhelm the community and require additional resources.
What resources could it require?
3) Has Whistler Blackcomb worked with first response agencies or local government
in past emergencies or disasters? If so, could you describe the scenario and what
the company did?
4) Is there a process in place for Whistler Blackcomb to interface and collaborate
with local first responder agencies and local government during an emergency or
disaster? If so, how does it work? If not, what can be done to facilitate this
process.
5) How can Whistler Blackcomb enhance first responder agencies ability to respond
to an emergency or disaster event?
6) What aid or resources can Whistler Blackcomb provide to the community during
an emergency or disaster event?
7) Are there additional ways in which Whistler Blackcomb could assist the
39

community that has not been used in the past? If so, what are the ways?
8) Does Whistler Blackcomb have a responsibility to the local community during an
emergency or disaster event? If so, what is its responsibility?
As stated in chapter 3 – Research Conduct and Ethics, the collected data was
divided into two different subgroups (subgroups A and B). Subgroup A (n=4) consisted
of participants who worked for first responder agencies or local government, and
Subgroup B (n=4) consisted of employees who worked for Whistler Blackcomb. For the
purpose of data analysis participants in subgroup A were labeled A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4; and
the participants of subgroup B were labeled B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4.
The data was reviewed from subgroup A and subgroup B and the following
themes became evident: (a) the importance of interagency communication, (b) the
importance of interagency teams, (c) familiarity of people within the local community,
(d) the benefit of public-private partnerships and (e) the responsibility of the corporate
sector to the community. This chapter will discuss the results from the data analysis. It
provides quoted statements from participants that illustrate the themes and also includes a
section that provides the reader with a summary of each theme.
Participant Background. It is assumed within the research that the participants’
professional experiences would have affected their interview responses, and ultimately,
the research findings. The views of the participants represent their personal views and
may not necessarily represent the views of their respective agencies. The following
paragraphs provide brief backgrounds of the participants. Participants have provided
consent to having the following information included in this document.
40

Participant A-1 has worked for the RMOW for three years in a management
position and presently works with Emergency Social Services. Prior to working for the
RMOW Participant A-1 worked for Whistler Blackcomb. Participant A-2 has worked for
the WFRS for ten years as a firefighter. Participant A-3 has worked at the upper
management level for the BCAS in Whistler for over 15 years. Participant A-4 has
worked for 4 years at the upper management level of the Whistler/Pemberton RCMP.
Participant B-1 has worked at Whistler Blackcomb for over 25 years. Participant
B-2 has worked for Whistler Blackcomb for over 10 years and also volunteers as a
Search and Rescue leader for Whistler Search and Rescue. Participant B-3 has worked
for Whistler Blackcomb for over 10 years. Participant B-4 has worked for Whistler
Blackcomb for over 10 years and volunteers for Pemberton Search and Rescue.
Project Findings
Interagency Communication. All project participants stressed the importance of
interagency communication when responding to emergency and/or disasters. Project
participants felt that poor communication was often the problem that hampered
coordination, response and resource sharing during large events. Project participants
noted that initial communication between agencies were often difficult but improved over
the duration of the response. Remarking on this issue participant A-1 stated, “There is
always confusion about who is the lead… We need to develop plans and training to
improve this”.
Subgroup A noted that many strategies have been adopted to improve interagency
communication such as using a combined events radio channel for first response
41

agencies. However, participants of subgroup A did remark that communication plans and
strategies often failed to stay operational over time and did not usually include Whistler
Blackcomb. Participant A-3 stated that:
If you want a cohesive community that has access to all your resources at that
given time, that one moment, you need great communication. Communication is
the issue that you always need to work on… We all received an integrated pager
in the past linking everyone together. The problem is that it never lasted… The
intent was good; the idea was good but it did not last.
Another communication problem mentioned was that Whistler Blackcomb responders do
not have access to the combined events radio channel used by police, fire and ambulance.
As a result, while first responders had a strategy to communicate among themselves, they
did not have a strategy of communicating with Whistler Blackcomb’s first responders.
This was considered a significant issue for the safety of people working at an incident site
and for those managing or directing activities at the site.
Subgroup B participants noted that it was often difficult during an emergency
event to collaborate and communicate with first response agencies. Participant B-3 stated,
“It is hard for us to be heard. It is difficult sometimes to tell others what we have. All I
can really do is show them what we have and make them realize that we have resources”.
Many of subgroup B participants stated that though Whistler Blackcomb had trained
professional staff and resources that could assist during an incident it was often difficult
for them to be viewed as a resource and included in the incident response team.
Participant B-1 reinforced this issue by stating:
42

The only challenge we get is the sometimes-rigorous chain of command of some
first response agencies… The chain of command is there to ensure that resource
use is optimized… and a dog like me can recognize that the egos sometimes get in
the way of them wanting to listen to an outsider like me about our resources.
Interagency Communication – Summary. In summary all participants
remarked that communication between agencies and Whistler Blackcomb was
problematic during large events. Participants from subgroup A noted that first response
agencies could communicate amongst themselves by using the combined events channel,
It was stated by both subgroup A and subgroup B participants that communication
strategies need to be further developed to create a means for Whistler Blackcomb
responders to communicate with first response agencies. Subgroup B also made the
observation that because Whistler Blackcomb is not a traditional first response agency
it’s resources were often overlooked.
Interagency Teams. A solution to improve interagency communication and
response was proposed by many of the participants from both subgroups. The solution
was to create interagency teams consisting of staff with either specialized skills or
resources to respond to specific hazards. Participant A-3 stated “you need to have people
who are part of your team that are aware of local resources. They need to be connected;
they need to know one another well”. Participant A-4 provided an example of an
interagency team that responds to lost people in the backcountry or people involved in
avalanches. Participant A-4 stated that:
Whistler Blackcomb have staff that has greater skills, expertise and ability to
43

respond to certain types of backcountry or mountain hazards. We will call upon
Whistler Blackcomb to respond to events that require mountain skills. Whistler
Blackcomb will provide staff to respond to these types of events…RCMP is
responsible for missing people and part of our interagency response plan to look
for missing people is a partnership between RCMP, Whistler Blackcomb and
SAR. Whistler Blackcomb will provide both staff and equipment to search for
missing people or to search for people buried in avalanches. They will respond to
events beyond their tenure and boundary and have done this in the past. In this
way we capitalize on the skills of each agency.
Participants from both subgroup A and subgroup B stated that there would be a
benefit in creating small teams or “strike forces” to respond to specific hazards. Another
example given would be the creation of an interagency response team to respond to local
interface or forest fires. This team could consist of staff from Whistler Blackcomb, first
response agencies and local government. Participant B-4 stated:
The forest fire is significant because we are an interface community. There are
plans, whether the plans would be effective is another matter. The fires I have
recently seen rage through the area move through so fast that by the time you start
to respond to the fire, the fire has gone through. An idea that we might need to
look into is a fire force. A group of people that can come together very quickly to
build firebreaks and respond to an interface fire event.
Participant A-2 further endorsed the idea of an interagency fire-fighting team by stating:
First off the top of my head, we could use people from Whistler Blackcomb.
44

They do not necessary need fire training. A lot of fire-work is grunt work. We
could use people to lug hose, build fire lines, etc. We might need people to assist
with managing and evacuating people once outside of the buildings. We could
use Whistler Blackcomb personnel and equipment.
Interagency Teams – Summary. All respondents felt that there was value in
having Whistler Blackcomb assist and respond to emergencies and disasters. An idea
that was frequently mentioned was the creation of interagency teams that would respond
to specific types of hazards. These teams would capitalize on the different skill sets and
resources from both Whistler Blackcomb and each first response agency. These
interagency teams would not respond to all hazards but would respond to specific hazard
events.
Familiarity between Agencies. All participants stated that since the RMOW was
a small community that there were strong familial connections between first response
agencies and Whistler Blackcomb employees. Participant A-3 stated the “The size of the
community lends well to everyone knowing one another. Not only do we work together
we play together and everyone has a general respect for one another”. This sentiment was
further reiterated by Participant B4 who stated, “We are lucky, because guys we ski and
hang out with work for the other response agencies. I can contact people that are my
friends for help; I can call an agency and say I want to talk to John”.
Participant A-4 further elaborated on the interconnectedness within the RMOW
between first response agencies and Whistler Blackcomb. Participant A-4 stated that:
There is so much cross-contamination of emergency personnel in Whistler.
45

People know one another. You have firefighters that are volunteer ski patrollers,
professional ski patrollers that are volunteer firefighters. You have EHS people
that are volunteer auxiliary police officers, you have police officers that have
patrolled the mountain and for the most part they all know and like one another.
There is a really good working relationship. The interface is really good. It is a
small town and it has a really well knit community.
The linkages between first response agencies and Whistler Blackcomb were also
highlighted by Participant B-4 who stated:
Whistler Blackcomb works with emergency response organizations everyday,
multiple times a day. We interface with fire and ambulance every day, ten times a
day, we know their truck numbers, and we know their staff by name. We have
even trained our staff in the same manner as the provincial emergency health
services are with regards to terminology and technique so that we can interface
more smoothly with them.
Participant B-2 did provide a unique perspective concerning how the
interconnectedness between Whistler Blackcomb and first response agencies could
hamper the ability to respond to large events. Participant B-2 stated that:
When does the valley run-out of resources due to the interagency work that
people do? For instance when someone is working for the mountain and
volunteering for the fire department, it means that at some point one agency takes
precedence even though both might be in need of personnel to respond to events.
While it is great for everyone to be familiar with everyone due to work
46

relationships, at some point this also affects us in a bad way. When one person is
working for three agencies you lose staff for two agencies when they are tasked
with any single agency response.
Familiarity between Agencies – Summary. Participants stated that there was
familiarity between first response agencies employees and Whistler Blackcomb
employees. A number of reasons were provided for why this familiarity existed. Stated
reasons were that (1) the RMOW is a recreational area and people often recreate together,
(2) the small size of the community lends to people knowing one another, (3) people
within the first response community often work or have worked for the various different
agencies and Whistler Blackcomb, and (4) the frequent daily interaction between first
response agencies and Whistler Blackcomb employees. It was generally agreed that this
familiarity facilitated team-work between the various agencies. One issue was mentioned
with regards to interagency employment. This issue had to do with the potential inability
of employees who had commitments to more than one response agency to respond to
incidents when already tasked by another agency.
Public-Private Partnerships in Emergency Response. All project participants
felt that there were resources and skills that Whistler Blackcomb could provide that
would assist local government and first response agencies during an emergency or
disaster event. Many examples were given with regards to present agreements and
partnerships. Both subgroups noted that Whistler Blackcomb had lots of skilled staff,
equipment and infrastructure that could be used to help respond to emergency or disaster
events. Equipment resources that were commonly mentioned were vehicles, machinery,
47

and first aid equipment. Infrastructure resources that were commonly mentioned were
buildings and restaurants. Personnel resources that were mentioned included employees
with specialized skills and employees willing to assist with heavy labor. Examples of the
resource sharing are provided in the following paragraphs.
Participant A-1 stated that ESS regularly requests aid from Whistler Blackcomb
to help provide lodging for people who have either been evacuated from an area or when
a home is impacted in some way that prevents it from being occupied.
They (Whistler Blackcomb) know what they are doing. It is easier for us (ESS) to
rely on them (Whistler Blackcomb) to set up group lodging. They (Whistler
Blackcomb) have experience in setting up staff housing for their staff every year
during the start of the winter season. As a result they know how to register people
and set up rooms for people. They have a process that occurs every year to
provide lodging for their staff. It is much easier for us to rely on Whistler
Blackcomb to set up lodging then to try and set it up at a local school or
recreation center.
Participant A-1 also provided an example of Whistler Blackcomb providing assistance to
ESS. Participant A-1 stated:
This summer during the fires we were planning on taking on a large number of
evacuees. Whistler Blackcomb has the capacity of housing four hundred people.
They were willing to bring in staff during the night to set up the staff housing
buildings. Fortunately, we only received six people and we were able to find
places for them to stay… We will call Whistler Blackcomb before we even call
48

hotels to assist us with finding group lodging. We have always had a great
relationship with Whistler Blackcomb and their staff housing people. Many of
our volunteer staff work for Whistler Blackcomb in senior positions which helps
when we need to get help from Whistler Blackcomb.
Participant A-4 stated that the RCMP has many responsibilities to the local community
and that there are numerous situations in which they interact and work with Whistler
Blackcomb to manage or respond to an event. Participant A-4 stated that:
Whistler Blackcomb has staff that have greater skills, expertise and ability to
respond to certain types of backcountry or mountain hazards. We will call upon
Whistler Blackcomb to respond to events that require mountain skills. Whistler
Blackcomb will provide staff to respond to these types of events…RCMP is
responsible for missing people and part of our interagency response plan to look
for missing people is a partnership between RCMP, Whistler Blackcomb. and
SAR. Whistler Blackcomb will provide both staff and equipment to search for
missing people or to search for people buried in avalanches. They will respond to
events beyond their tenure and boundary and have done this in the past
Participant A-4 also stated that they have used Whistler Blackcomb for traffic control in
the past during emergency situations.
Participant A-3 reiterated the role Whistler Blackcomb plays in local Search and
Rescue operations stating that:
Whistler Blackcomb is used by SAR now. They (Whistler Blackcomb) are
helping out the community. The local SAR and Provincial group (PEP) cannot
49

provide the necessary immediately response to local events that is needed. They
(Whistler Blackcomb) can provide this service. They (Whistler Blackcomb) are
an asset to the community. I imagine that without them many past rescues that
needed a quick and efficient response would have turned out poorly
Participant A-3 also stated that they would contact Whistler Blackcomb for
assistance should they need additional first aid attendants to respond to a major event.
Participant A-3 stated that part of planning and preparation for the 2010 Winter Olympic
Games involved analyzing the capacity for health to respond to major events. Participant
A-3 stated that:
When I was creating the package for the Olympics one of the things we did was
profile the resources available within the community. We found out that Whistler
Blackcomb could supply up to 75 professional patrollers that had medical
expertise. This is a great resource. Should we have an event requiring medical
care there are many medical care type professionals that could assist us via the
mountain (Whistler Blackcomb).
While all respondents believed Whistler Blackcomb would respond to an event,
an issue that was mentioned by subgroup B participants had to do with cost recovery.
Presently, Whistler Blackcomb does provide staff and resources to assist in response
activities. During these activities Whistler Blackcomb incurs some of the operational
costs for staff time as well as equipment use. However, Participant B-4 stated, “if it was
something classified as a disaster and we were asked to assist, we would. We would also
have to find a way to get our money back”. Participant B-4 also specified that cost-
50

recovery was an issue for disaster type events and not for smaller emergency events. The
reason was that the loss of personnel and resources for a significant period of time could
potentially affect Whistler Blackcomb’s daily operations and its business.
Public-Private Partnerships in Emergency Response – Summary. All
participants noted that Whistler Blackcomb frequently contributed resources and/or
personnel to assist in responding to emergency events. Participants also stated that there
were many resources that Whistler Blackcomb had that could be used to help respond to
events. It was also noted that due to the complexity and size of Whistler Blackcomb’s
operations that resources, employees and infrastructure were available to the community
that are not typically available within other communities. One issue that did come up had
to do with cost-recovery for Whistler Blackcomb. This was only considered significant if
Whistler Blackcomb was requested to provide personnel and resources for an extended
period of time and when this might negatively impact daily mountain operations.
Corporate Responsibility to the Community. All project participants were
asked “Does Whistler Blackcomb have a responsibility to the local community during an
emergency or disaster event? If so what is its responsibility?” The goal for asking this
question was to investigate the concept of corporate social responsibility. All respondents
stated that they believed that Whistler Blackcomb was a “good” corporate citizen and
gave freely to the community.
One of the reasons commonly put forward by subgroup A as to why Whistler
Blackcomb had a responsibility to the community had to do with the idea of it acting “as
a good host”. It was remarked that because Whistler Blackcomb is reliant on tourism and
51

its success is dependent on attracting tourists; it had an added responsibility of providing
care for tourists. It was also stated that the success of Whistler Blackcomb was
dependent on tourists and therefore, it was in the company’s best interest to mitigate the
impact of emergency or disaster events as a means to lessen any negative affect on the
community and its business interests. Participant A-3 stated, “I would say that they have
to accept part of the responsibility because they are the reason why the tourists are here”.
Participant A-4 reiterated this sentiment by stating:
I think they do have a responsibility and they step up to it. They are the draw in
the community. They are what bring people here… They have a responsibility to
be a good corporate citizen and they act on that responsibility. They act as a good
host.
Another reason that was expressed concerning why Whistler Blackcomb had a
responsibility to the community had to do with the size of the company in relation to the
community. Whistler Blackcomb is the largest employer in the community. As a result,
members of subgroup A stated that Whistler Blackcomb had a responsibility to care for
its employees and that that care would naturally extend to the community.
Participants from both subgroups stated that there was no clear boundary between
Whistler Blackcomb’s organization and the community. The reason stated for this belief
was that employees for Whistler Blackcomb live in the community and have a vested
interest in mitigating the impact of an emergency or disaster event within the community.
As a result, Whistler Blackcomb employees would want to provide Whistler Blackcomb
resources and staff to mitigate the impact of an emergency or disaster event within the
52

community because these events would also impact them, their loved ones and possibly
their homes.
A member of sub-group A did express a dissenting view concerning Whistler
Blackcomb’s responsibility to respond to local emergencies or disasters. Participant A-2
stated that:
They (Whistler Blackcomb) do not have a responsibility to the community
because that is why we have fire departments and search and rescue and that kind
of thing. They are not responsible unless they create the hazard. As a business
move it makes sense for W/B (Whistler Blackcomb) to respond and aid the
community. I do not believe that this should be bound by law.
Participant A-2 also stated that because no laws require Whistler Blackcomb to respond
that it should not be viewed as a responsibility but as something done out of goodwill.
Participant A-2 also felt that the community should not have expectations of Whistler
Blackcomb to respond to an event nor should there be any repercussions should the
company choose not to respond. Participant A-2 stated that first response agencies have
a responsibility to the community because they are required by law to respond to events
and it is part of their mandate to respond.
Participants of subgroup B believed that Whistler Blackcomb should provide aid
to the community. Participant B-1 stated, “We have a responsibility to provide
everything within our capacity to respond to the event”. A theme that differed between
subgroup A and subgroup B had to do with the added responsibility to tourists. As stated
earlier in this section, participants of subgroup A believed that Whistler Blackcomb had a
53

responsibility as a “good host” and that responsibility extended specifically to the care of
tourists. However, subgroup B did not view the tourist population as a subgroup within
the local population nor did they view this as a group that Whistler Blackcomb had an
additional responsibility to. Instead, the participants stated that they were prepared to
assist whomever was in need. Participant B-1 mentioned the idea of “guest” but noted
that all public should be viewed as guests and that those most in need should be cared for.
Participant B-1 stated “We certainly have an obligation to our guests. I find it difficult to
separate guests from residents. Whomever, needs help should get it. The public is the
public and should not be differentiated”. This view was also shared by participant B-4
who stated, “We have a responsibility to the community. We have a responsibility to not
just the Whistler community (i.e. residents), but we have a responsibility to the recreation
community (i.e. people who recreate in the area) Whistler is built on”.
Subgroup B participants also stated that they felt that Whistler Blackcomb acted
in a socially responsible manner within the community. Participant B-2 stated,
I see the commitment of the mountain to the community through SAR. I see it
with the charities that they (Whistler Blackcomb) fund and donate to… They try
to be a good corporate citizen… The company (Whistler Blackcomb) goes
forward and offers assistance even when they are not asked. They are proactive
in trying to help. It is in the mountains best interest to keep the community going.
Corporate Responsibility to the Community – Summary. The view of acting
in the best interest of the community reflects ideals of corporate social responsibility.
The comments of participants of subgroup B illustrate that Whistler Blackcomb
54

employees believe the company acts in a socially responsible manner and is willing to
provide assistance and aid to the community. The comments provide evidence that
Whistler Blackcomb’s is a socially responsible company. Participants of subgroup A
also stated that they believed Whistler Blackcomb has willingly provided assistance in
the past and would provide assistance in the future to respond to community emergency
or disaster events. Respondents also stated that there was no true division between the
community and Whistler Blackcomb because employees of Whistler Blackcomb were
residents of the community.
Summary of the Findings
Participants agreed that there was value in having Whistler Blackcomb work with
local government and first response agencies to assist in the response to emergency and
disaster events. Both subgroups provided insights with regards to how their agencies
worked with one another and how this could be facilitated in the future. All participants
provided evidence of past work collaborations and provided insights into how to improve
future interagency collaborations. Participants also provided numerous reasons why they
believed that Whistler Blackcomb would be willing to assist the community respond to
emergency or disaster events.
Project Conclusions
The primary goal of this project was to answer the question of “how can a tourism
operator support and assist the local community during an emergency or disaster event?”
To answer this question interviews were conducted in the Resort Municipality of
55

Tourism - Public and Private Partnerships during Disasters

Tourism - Public and Private Partnerships during Disasters

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Tourism - Public and Private Partnerships during Disasters

Ähnlich wie Tourism - Public and Private Partnerships during Disasters (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (15)

Tourism - Public and Private Partnerships during Disasters