VFR Travel: A Viable Market for Tourism Crisis and Disaster Recovery?

Abstract

Rebuilding tourist arrivals after crises/disasters is important. However, tourism may have negative impacts in terms of interfering with the destination recovery efforts, and adding distress to local residents. Therefore, consideration should be placed on timing tourism marketing as well as the market segments most suitable to target. This paper integrates both medical literature and tourism literature to consider whether Visiting Friends and Relatives (VFR) travel may be viable for destinations to consider after crises/disasters. The authors conclude that VFR travel offers both benefits and risks and recommends that only domestic VFR travellers are targeted to aid destination recovery. Future research avenues are also outlined. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

COVID-19 and African tourism research agendas

“…Researching such a transition from economic and socio-cultural perspectives will be vital in helping to understand these challenges. In addition, the observed positive benefits of leveraging VFR travel in post-disaster recovery situations (Backer & Ritchie, 2017) reinforces the importance of extending African scholarship on VFR travel.…”

“…Localism and the development of a more localised form of travel is likely to be a significant theme within successful tourism recovery strategies (Peters et al, 2020;Higgins-Desbiolles, 2020a). Encouragement of VFR travel is viewed as an early recovery post-disaster tourism strategy for destinations (Backer & Ritchie, 2017). In a strong endorsement of this stance Peters et al (2020:13) stress that an early focus on this segment is warranted as 'the Visiting Friends and Relatives market is ideally placed to address the social disconnect and tourism challenges resulting from COVID-19'.…”

Identifying active resident hosts of VFR visitors

“…VFR visitors are often guided by locals, engaging and contributing to culture, and should therefore be “considered as an important and organic element in the experience‐centric destination management, as it assures the local original and inimitable essence of the destination” (Zátori et al, 2019, p. 1454). Moreover, the core human desire to belong and interact in relationships of mutual care means VFR demand is less susceptible to seasonality or external factors (Gössling et al, 2018; Young et al, 2007), making it a useful and appropriate strategy for development, including after a disaster or crisis (Backer & Ritchie, 2017). VFR should also be considered by community institutions more broadly as one of many links with other places.…”

Familiar tourists, their behaviours and place attachments: an empirical framework

“…Jackson, 1990) academic attention. Constituent sub-topics include VFR typologies and core distinctions between VFR as sole motivation versus hybrid forms (Moscardo, Pearce, Morrison, Green & O'Leary, 2000), VFR use of commercial accommodation and destination spend (Backer, 2010;Griffen & Nunkoo, 2016), and the role of VFR in crisis amelioration (Backer & Ritchie, 2017). Shani & Uriely (2012) examine host loss of privacy and psychological stress when sharing their place with their VFR, focusing on guest-orientated and host-orientated styles of hosting and the predominance of either home-related activities or visits to commercial attractions.…”