Lesson Learned: Shaping Collaboration Among Tourism Stakeholders During Mount Agung Eruption

The purpose of this study is to investigate the situation during the eruption of Mount Agung and the roles played by tourism stakeholders during the crisis. The findings of the study provide a more in-depth understanding of the lessons acquired by tourism stakeholders in Bali when dealing with catastrophic events, particularly natural disasters. For the purpose of this study, this research included interviews with 19 informants from a variety of tourist stakeholders, as well as those in charge of coping with natural catastrophes. According to the findings of the research, there are several lessons that can be learned from the eruption of Mount Agung, which will help tourism stakeholders be better prepared in dealing with all of the crises that may arise in the future.


INTRODUCTION Background
Indonesia is greatly exposed to natural disasters by being located in one of the world's most vigorous disaster hot spots, where numerous types of disasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, floods, landslides, droughts and forest fires often occur. The average annual cost of natural disasters, over the last 10 years (2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010), is approximately at 0.3 percent of Indonesian GDP, while the economic effect of such disasters is mostly much greater at local or regional levels (Skoufias et al. 2017). There were two recent disasters occurred in Indonesia, Bali's Mount Agung eruption in November 2017 and Lombok Earthquake in August 2018.
Indonesia is a country that prone to natural disasters. Bali and Lombok as part of Indonesia is also highly vulnerable to these natural events. This becomes more complicated because Bali and Lombok are a famous tourist destination and it means that special handling and guarantees are needed for tourists during their vacation in Bali and Lombok where natural disasters and crises can be minimized. The Bali's Mount Agung volcano eruption has affected a number of international tourists visiting Bali Island. In November 2017, when the eruption occurred, number of international tourist arrival in Bali were 361.006, compared to 413.232 in November 2016and 407 213 in November 2018(BPS 2019. Nevertheless, the solid evidence that this natural disaster has affected tourism industry is the amount of tourist visiting Bali in December 2017. There is a steady number of international visitors to Bali in December from the year of 2012-2016 which account 9 percent of total visitors in each year, however, there is anomaly found in December 2017 where the number of visitors declining into 5 percent of total number of tourists in 2017 (BPS 2019). It is not surprising since many potential tourists cancelling their trips and diverted their vacation to neigbouring countries or similar tourist destination. Meanwhile, Indonesian Minister of tourism stated that Lombok is losing 100,000 tourists in 2018 because of a series of earthquakes that hit the resort island (Edoardo 2018).
The natural event such as Mount Agung great volcanic eruption is a proof that, a natural disaster causing a chaos to tourism industry. Tourists were stranded and misguided in Ngurah Rai Airport and Gili Trawangan island while Tourism providers in Bali were overwhelmed by the closure of the Ngurah Rai Airport. This research is going to offer a solution through an approach in using integrated and holistic disaster management framework related to tourism.

Natural Disasters in Indonesia
According to the Indonesian National Disaster Management Authority (BNPB) there were more than 19,000 natural disasters in the period 1815 -2018 (BNPB, 2019), making Indonesia a useful country for any natural disaster analysis. Floods, landslides and tornadoes are the three most frequent natural disasters in Indonesia, with amount of 8910, 5981, 4946 events respectively. Although these types of natural disasters are the most frequent, however the most fatalities are tsunamis and volcanic eruptions. Tsunami casualties recorded 174071 died, followed by volcanic eruption 78641. Tsunamis in Indonesia only occurred 23 times in the period 1815-2018 but caused the most fatalities. Meanwhile, earthquake is the main cause for severely damaged houses and the second cause is flood. The most prone province for natural disasters in Indonesia is Central Java account for 5575 events and the least prone is North Borneo. From 1815 to 2018, the highest number of natural disasters occurred in Indonesia is in the year 2017. In Bali and Lombok, 2013 is the highest occurrence of natural disaster for the last decade (2008-2018) (BNPB 2019).

Natural Disaster Management Framework in Indonesia
The Indonesian government has issued a number of legitimate documents regarding Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR). The most significant one is Law Number 24 Year 2007 on Disaster Management (GoI 2007 in Djalante andThomalla 2012). This law acknowledges the need to intensify hazard awareness and to improve a more organized and cohesive method to DRR. It introduces fundamental paradigm shifts on DRR from reactive to proactive approaches, formally acknowledges that DRR is an important part of the people's basic right to protection and needs to be mainstreamed within government administration and development (UNDP Indonesia, 2008a, b).
The basic principles addressed in this legislation include public participation, public-private partnership, international collaboration, a multi-hazards approach, continuous monitoring, national and local dimensions, financial and industrial dimensions, an incentive system, and education (ADPC, 2008;UNDP Indonesia, 2008a, b). Key guiding documents for DRR in Indonesia include the first National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction published in 2006(BNPB, 2006. This was followed by the National Guidelines for Disaster Management 2010-2014 and the National Action Plan. Nowadays, when natural disaster occurred, BNPB is responsible for facilitating and helping the affected area through three stages, consisted of pre-disaster phase, emergency phase and post-disaster phase. Prepared Phase, in the pre-disaster stage, BNPB carried out four main activities, namely prevention, mitigation, preparedness, early warning and community empowerment. Stage of Emergency is a series of activities carried out immediately at the time of the disaster to deal with the adverse effects, which include rescue and evacuation of victims, property, fulfilment of basic needs, protection, handling refugees, rescue and restoring facilities and infrastructure.
Emergency response is a stage of emergency status that starts from emergency alert, emergency response, and emergency transition to recovery. Post-Disaster Phase, Availability BNPB Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Toolkit which has a post-disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction implementation tool, namely General Guidelines for Post-Disaster Rehabilitation and Reconstruction, Technical Guidelines for Budget Implementation for Post-Disaster Regional Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Activities, Guidelines for Settlement Sector Rehabilitation and Reconstruction, Implementation Guidelines Monitoring and Evaluation.

Tourism and Natural Disaster
For several years, the tourism industry has been affected by disasters such as the 1980 eruption of Mount Helens in the United States (Murphy and Bayley 1989), the 1991 Typhoon Val in Western Samoa (Fairbairn 1997), the 1995 eruption of the Soufrie`re Hills volcano in Montserrat (Kokelaar 2002), 1998 Australia Day Flood in Katherine (Faulkner and Vikulov 2001), the 1999 Taiwan Earthquake (Huang and Min 2002), the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami in East Japan (Nguyen et al. 2017) and recently The Eruption of Mount Agung in Bali (Bhaskara 2018) and Lombok Earthquake in Indonesia (Gayle andBannock 2018, Schneider 2018). The disruptive e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857 nature, inevitability and unpredictable occurrence of disasters has manifold implications for the tourism industry.
Firstly, disasters destroy the tourism infrastructure at destination, thus making them unable to receive tourists in the immediate aftermath. For example, the eruption in 1995 on Soufrie`re Hills volcano destroyed the capital, Plymouth, airports and seaports (Kokelaar, 2002). Almost all tourism infrastructure in Montserrat was paralyzed and access to the site was devastated. Secondly, disasters impact transit routes and source markets, by changing perception of destinations as being safe. For example, the impact of the Taiwan earthquake resulted in the number of international tourists visiting the island falling 15% (Huang and Min, 2002) after the eruption of Mt. Helens in the United States, the tourism industry in that area affected by the eruption, experienced a 30% decline in revenues (Murphy and Bayley 1989). Typhoon Val in 1991, consequently, tourist arrivals in Western Samoa fell sharply (Fairbairn, 1997).
Secondly, media play an essential role in intensifying this impact on tourist perception (Handmer and Dovers 2007), thus creating a 'ripple effect' (Ritchie 2004), which spreads the detrimental effects of disasters geographically and across economic sectors. Importantly, in the context of tourism, the 'ripple effect' hinders destination recovery as negative public perception of a disaster-affected destination hampers injection of foreign exchange, thus increasing the amount of time needed for the destination to be restored (Ritchie 2004).

Natural Disaster Framework for Tourism
The effects disasters can have on a destination, many tourism businesses and governmental organisations fail to develop Disaster Management strategies as part of their business plans, since in some cases they consider the duty is not their own (Drabek 2000;Ritchie 2009). Hence highlighting the necessity for a formal response by destinations to develop Disaster management plans is indispensable (Prideaux 2004). The disaster management plans were normally created as a framework to manage the crisis and disaster, not merely for natural disaster incidents, however in order to fit in this study, these frameworks are used and applied to accommodate solely for natural disasters. Developed from approaches in Fink's and Robert's emergency management framework, Faulkner (2001) created a framework, namely Tourism Disaster Management Framework (TDMF).
This disaster management framework covers and outlines the lifecycle of a disaster from pre-event to resolution and assigned approaches and strategies to each phase of the event. It can be applied in a variety of tourism related disasters. His work later adapted by Prideaux (2004) in order to accommodate massive scale disasters and capable to address single or multiple disasters/crises. Nevertheless, the precursor; reconstruction and reassessment review and risk assessment component of the framework is modified by Prideaux (2004). The modification suggested to take further action to the original framework.
Study by Ritchie 2004 creates an approach called Crisis and Disaster Management Framework (CDMF) which based on the work of Faulkner 2001 and the strategic management literature. His work focused is on the development of strategy for monitoring and handling crisis or disasters in the tourism industry. Stressed on some stages prevention and planning, implementation and evaluation and feedback as attributes for strategic management of crisis or disasters Ritchie's framework later adapted Novelli et al. (2018) adapted in order to suit for developing countries which include Involvement of public sector/ multiple stakeholders in prevention and planning, Inclusion of emergency fund to be administered by the Ministry of Tourism. Another disaster management framework is developed by Hystad and Keller 2008. They named their approach as Destination Disaster Management Framework (DDMF). This was created based on two case studies by the authors targeting tourism business in order to understand level of preparedness. Four stages are delineated from this framework such as 1) pre-disaster, 2) disaster, 3) post disaster, 4) resolution with defined roles, responsibly and communication channels for emergency organisations, tourism organisations and tourism businesses.

Tourist Destination Resilience
According to Tyrrell and Johnson (2008, p.16) tourism resilience is "the ability of social, economic or ecological systems to recover from tourism induced stress" through anticipating fluctuations through their capability to adjust and revolutionize (Peterson et al. 2017). It is vital to building a resilient destination is the resilience of the whole systems (Hall et al. 2018) which covers proper planning and engagement, fair sharing of resources, reducing risk, a strong economy and stakeholder collaboration (Norris et al. 2008;Buultjens et al. 2017). There are some scholars have developed tourist destination resilience such as Cochrane (2010); Ruiz-Ballesteros (2011); Buultjens et al. (2017) and Hall et al. (2018). Cochrane (2010) outlines awareness and control of market forces; stakeholder cohesion; strong and clear leadership and ability to learn, adapt and be flexible. Ruiz-Ballesteros 2011 focuses on capacity to learn and endure unexpected changes; ability to nurture changes for renewal; combining knowledge and sharing resources and developing opportunities for self-organization.
Meanwhile, Buultjens et al. 2017 mentions ability to synthesize the tourism industry into the Disaster Management stages and developing of collaborative networks. Hall et al. 2018 stresses on awareness of the destination vulnerabilities to disasters/stressor; generating opportunities that helps both the vulnerable and invulnerable stakeholders; capability to develop strategic long-term strategy Capacity to adjust processes and collaborate and ability to operate at appropriate regional and local scales. Nevertheless, within the tourism literature, scarce have been studied specifically on destination resilience in the context of Disaster Management (Pyke et al. 2016;Hall et al. 2018). Researchers are becoming more concern of the importance of linking Destination Management, risk alleviation and resilience, thus the importance of this study to address this gap in the literature.

Interview
Semi-structured (or open-ended) interviews ensuring a participant serves more as an informant than a participant (Bryman 2002). In semi-structured interviews, researchers usually produce some pre-determined questions asked in a systematic and consistent order. Interviews are conducted in a more conversational style and questions are answered in an order, which is more natural to the flow of general conversation (Berg 2006;O'Leary 2009). Semistructured interviews help obtain the informant's viewpoint, rather than the viewpoint of the researcher. Another advantage of semi-structured interviews is that they provide both interviewers and interviewees with sufficient freedom whilst concurrently ensuring all relevant themes are addressed (Burns 2000). They ensure that all necessary information can be freely expressed and that any themes arising during the interview will be fully understood (Corbetta 2003). e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

Secondary Data
Secondary Data can be used to enhance the reliability and validity of the findings from primary data collection (interviews and observation). The secondary data in this study include photos of disasters linked to tourism or activities taken by government and other stakeholders, video clip/footage, maps containing geographical information; blog, Instagram, social media and headlines from newspapers.

Sampling
A non-probability/purposive sampling technique is most frequently applied in case studies (Burns 2000). A specific case is chosen because it facilitates fulfilling the purpose and achieving the objectives of the research and aims at discovering, obtaining insights and understanding the selected phenomenon (ibid). In other words, researchers' sample because they need to interview people directly related to the research questions (Bryman 2008). The primary limitation of purposive sampling is the difficulty in establishing at the very beginning how many participants are required for interviews and how many participants make the research representative (ibid). Warren (2002 in Bryman 2008) stated that, for a qualitative interview study to be publishable, a minimum number of 20-30 interviews are necessary. This suggests that, although purposive sampling is important in qualitative research, the minimum size sample requirements apply. Informants that are going to be interviewed are such as:

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Researcher divide these findings into several parts such as initial reactions, impact, action/lesson learned from the perspective of tourism stakeholders in order to understand the situation of volcanic eruption in relation to tourism stakeholder.

Initial reactions
As seen on the news on TV and the internet, the Balinese government and tourism stakeholders were not well prepared and equipped to deal with the crisis cause by the eruption of Mount Agung which led to the closure of the Ngurah Rai airport.

"The government of Bali Province cannot guarantee in providing transportation to the airport or neighbouring airport so no one keen to execute or to ascertain whether or who pays the cost of this transportation. The chain of command was not clear. Transportation only arrives at the nearest bus stations without bringing tourists to the neighbouring airports The chaos in November in the provision of transportation was caused because the mitigation team did not exist at that time" (Head of Bali Tourism Task Force).
This is in line with statements by Drabek (2000) and Ritchie (2009) where despite the devastating consequences that catastrophes can have on a destination, many tourism enterprises and governmental organizations fail to incorporate Disaster Management techniques into their business planning, as they believe the responsibility is not theirs.
However, after chaos in handling tourists occurred in dealing with airport closure, eventually the minister of tourism came to Bali and formed an organisation called Bali tourism Hospitality under which there was a special mitigation team call Bali Tourism Task Force. Nevertheless, there are 22 to 23 groups in the Bali Tourism Hospitality Task Force, although they operate independently due to the lack of a clear flow of commands. After doing the simulation several times the mitigation team conducted focus group discussions so the readiness was not only limited to Mount Agung but if there was an earthquake or other natural disasters, this Task Force are well prepared.
Furthermore, the Bali Tourism Hospitality Task Force is not only divided by the department section but also divided by the stage at which the disaster occurs hence there is a mitigation team then there is also other team such as an information team. This is similar to Faulkner (2001) and Ritchie (2004) work that divided the stage at which the disaster occurs.

Lesson Learned
We benefit from this disaster because we have SOPs on how to handle medium or guest guests when the disaster occurs or when the airport is closed" (Head of Bali Tourism).
Based on the experience in handling of Mount Agung eruption, the Bali Tourism Task Force were finally able to help 2000 guests from Lombok who were affected by the earthquake at Gili Terawangan, Gili Air, Gili Meno. They helped to evacuate tourist from those Gilis and brought then to Benoa harbour and giving them food and drink and providing free transportation to these tourists when they wanted to stay at the hotel book for before leaving Bali.
The Bali Task Force is also able to handle an estimation of 16,000 foreign tourists enter Bali every day and 20,000 domestic tourists enter Bali daily. Evacuation the 16000 foreign tourists are divided into several days. When airports in Bali close, neighbouring airports such as Lombok and Surabaya will be ready to accommodate tourists in Bali or divide these tourists at the two airports.
From the perspective of lesson learned in conjunction with safety and security, an assistant manager from a fivestar hotel, giving his statement as below: "We've spent hundreds of millions to buy the reeds. We have 31 villas, and all of the roof's material are from reeds, if there is a volcano erupting there will be ashes, if the ash gets into the reeds the treatment is really tedious. Finally, the policy of the company to buy a special tarpaulin. If eruption happens, can later close the roof made of reeds. So, we are ready, because of the previous experience at our sister Hotel during the eruption of Mount Merapi" (Assistant manager a five-star Hotel).

The use of Information and Technology
The information is indispensable during crisis, thus tourists must be kept informed about the danger of the possible volcanic eruption.
"In conjunction with the Tourism service during Mount Agung eruption, the most frequent activity is to provide information to tourists that the area is a dangerous area and they should not attempt to enter there. If by chance a tourist is already there, they must know the path to where they assembly if it happened and the volcano erupted. To avoid risk" (Local TV reporter).
It is not merely the information to the end user, in this case, the tourist but the information circulated among tourism service providers are also crucial as it is shown at the below statement. In this era of revolution 4.0, the information and technology help tourism stakeholders in distributing information and organising the possible acts that need to be conducted in relation to the natural disaster such as volcanic eruption. The information from WhatsApp group helps them to know the real time situation about the issued policy from the government and real time situation in handling tourists who affected by this disaster.
Below table is the timeline of eruption and tourism stakeholders related activities during the mount agung eruptionbased triangulation between interviews with participants and secondary data from balitourismboard.com. President of Indonesia posted a vlog (video blog) on Friday night stating that Bali is Safe. This vlog was taken during the afternoon when he visited Kuta Beach, this afternoon, I'm on the Island of the Gods, Bali Island," said the president, adding that Bali is safe. Jokowi then explained that he was on Kuta Beach and repetitively said to the camera,"Ramai sekali (it's so crowded)." the President's visit to Bali proved that the island was totally safe.
Source: Modified from Bali Tourism Hospitality and adopted some interviews with participants (2018).

CONCLUSION
The volcanic eruption of Mount Agung has taught tourism stakeholders a valuable lesson about the value of working together and the necessity of collaboration between various tourism stakeholders as well as the government in coping with a natural disaster. This experience serves as a valuable lesson, and it has been demonstrated that it can help stakeholders become more vigilant while dealing with the natural catastrophes following the eruption of Mount Agung, such as the earthquake in Lombok. There are some similarities between the natural disaster situation experienced by Bali with the previous research about natural disaster and tourism, specifically, unresponsiveness and the stages of the natural disaster and stakeholder involement.
Prideaux, B., 2004. The need to use disaster planning frameworks to respond to major tourism disasters.