Biosecurity, tourism and mobility: institutional arrangements for managing tourism-related biological invasions

Biosecurity, crisis management, automation technologies, and economic performance of travel, tourism and hospitality companies – a conceptual framework

“…A flurry of scholarly works came out of that experience, linking how destinations were impacted by the SARS outbreak and how they reacted to ensure recovery (Cooper, 2005;Hung, et al, 2018;McKercher, 2004;Zeng, et al 2005). There is also an occasional reference to other viral outbreaks (Ebola, H1N1 swine flu, MERS) and discussions of how these viruses have threatened or impacted upon the tourism industry, and what can be done to recover following such outbreaks (Hall, 2010(Hall, , 2011(Hall, , 2015a(Hall, , 2015b(Hall, , 2020Hall & James, 2011;Hung et al, 2018;Joo et al, 2019;Maphanga & Henama, 2019;Novelli et al, 2018). One of the major concerns is that diseases can cross borders and that this is a threat to public health as well as tourists and tourism professionals (Jamal and Budke, 2020;Hanrahan and Melly, 2019;Sönmez et al, 2019).…”

Tourism and biological exchange and invasions: a missing dimension in sustainable tourism?

“…Many of the international regulatory structures that have been developed to manage cross-border biological invasions are only partial measures that rely on voluntary implementation and there are no sanctions for regulatory failure (Hall, 2011b). For example, under the Convention on Biological Diversity only 62 countries have established mechanisms to assess, monitor and measure the impact of tourism on biodiversity (Hall, 2010d) and the capacities to limit international tourism mobility on the basis of biosecurity concerns are limited (Hall, 2011a).…”

“…For example, under the Convention on Biological Diversity only 62 countries have established mechanisms to assess, monitor and measure the impact of tourism on biodiversity (Hall, 2010d) and the capacities to limit international tourism mobility on the basis of biosecurity concerns are limited (Hall, 2011a). Indeed, one of the challenges for the Convention as well as for the tourism industry and the destinations that it affects is to find institutional arrangements, policies and economic approaches that actually value biodiversity above other economic and political policy demands and institutional arrangements, such as world trade law, that serve to restrict biosecurity procedures (Hall, 2010d(Hall, , 2011b. Such issues also typically occur at national and regional jurisdictional levels.…”

“…Although it is impossible to prevent the introduction of alien and invasive species, appropriate biosecurity risk management and reduction measures can be undertaken (Beale et al, 2008). However, the governance of biosecurity is often at odds with the desire to open up trade and tourism (Hall, 2011b;Maye, Dibden, Higgins, & Potter, 2012), while the majority of countries do not have effective biosecurity procedures with respect to tourism. Tourism is a major pathway for species invasion and biological exchange with potentially serious ecosystem, economic and human health risks.…”

Is Vietnam ready to welcome tourists back? Assessing COVID-19’s economic impact and the Vietnamese tourism industry’s response to the pandemic

“…The global nature of tourism means that tourism is affected and influenced by many interrelated industries, political decisions, and cultural systems across the world (Sigala, 2020). Previous studies have shown how outbreaks of contagious disease can impact tourism (Hall, 2011;Scott & Gössling, 2015;Timothy & Hall, 2019) and how tourism itself contributes to the spread of such diseases (Hall, 2011;Nicolaides et al, 2020;Renaud, 2020). Therefore, the relationship between tourism and outbreaks of contagious disease has significant social and economic consequences (Bakar & Rosbi, 2020;McKibbin & Sidorenko, 2006;Sigala, 2020;Siu & Wong, 2004).…”