Arctic Yearbook 2014 - Page 513

Arctic Yearbook 2014 513 According to its broader understanding, safety and security is based on human beings and is constructed “bottom-up” (see Kerr 2010) by being based on grass-roots level basic needs. The social security system, health care and other welfare services and associations represent this agenda as producers of safety and security. According to Campbell (1998), we live in societies where safety and security are the utmost virtues. However, these virtues are always, at least, partly out of reach. No individual or state can reach absolute safety and security. This poses a challenge to all in the safety and security research and development community due to the high demands for safety and security in modern society – with its multiple risks and uncertainty. In the sparsely populated Arctic region this issue is even more challenging, though positive developments are taking place (see e.g. Heininen 2005). As a concept, tourism safety and security is broad and it combines state-centric, traditional security with more individual-focused, softer safety theories. In the tourism safety definition, process-thinking takes into account the safety and security needs of the customer, company and operative environment. According to the broader thinking on the issue, safety and security is formulated bottom-up – from people and local community needs and the grass-roots level. Social groups, such as ethnic minorities, define their safety and security needs between the individual and state and also across state borders. Similar to this broader thinking on safety and security, social security, health care systems and other well-being services and associations also represent safety and security policies. Actor that defines safety and security Main safety and security questions Producers of safety and security 1. State Security of state, national security Military organisation, police force 2. Group Communal security-safety, environmental safety and security Associations, 3rd sector 3. Individual Personal safety and security, work related Local community, (safety) municipality Figure 1: Typology of safety and security frameworks (source: Iivari & Niemisalo 2013). Together with the several scholars that we have cooperated with on this theme, we have noticed that research on tourism safety and security requires broader safety and security thinking. Furthermore, it is multidisciplinary work. Several initiatives to proceed with the topic have been made already (see e.g. Botterill & Jones 2010; Mansfield & Pizam 2006). The initiative developed in Finnish Lapland, i.e. Tourism Safety and Security System in Lapland, builds a holistic approach based on the previous work and research that has been already implemented. Our home organisation, the Multidimensional Tourism Institute, provides an excellent environment for this development as it combines academic education and research (University of Lapland), applied science (Lapland University of Applied Sciences) and vocational education (Lapland Tourism College) on tourism studies into a unique combination of research, education and innovation (see: http://matkailu.luc.fi/Hankkeet/Turvallisuus/en/Home). Tourism Safety & Security