Ritchie (2009, p.44-45) states that “in both crisis and disaster definitions there is a belief that disasters and crises are temporary and that they have certain lifecycles which could last hours, days, months or even years. (…) Prescriptive models (…) provide managers with ideas on how to plan and attempt to manage crises and disasters.”
Muskat et al. (2015, p.100) propose “a conceptual model of ‘integrated natural disaster risk management life cycle’ comprising: the pre-disaster stage; emergency risk management during disaster; and risk management of response and rehabilitation/reconstruction in the post-disaster stage. Although the three components of the life cycle (mitigation, response and recovery) are recognized as the ‘norm’ from the literature, [this] model utilizes all four temporal phases: Pre-disaster; disaster (emergency); short term (post-disaster temporary); and long term (recovery)”.
A study by Muskat et al. (2015, p.110), which examined The Case of the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami 2011, showed that “tourism made a major contribution to all stages of the disaster recovery cycle and, therefore, needed to be integrated into the disaster management process”. Muskat et al. (2015, p.111) then developed an updated disaster life cycle model from the Japanese data that integrates tourism: “The inner wheel remains the same, but there are now two outer wheels. The middle wheel identifies the direct tasks and activities undertaken by tourism entities and individuals during each phase. The outer wheel indicated the role that tourism plays in enabling those involved in the disaster recovery, especially the community, to move on to the next stage”.
The study by Muskat et al. was published in Tourism Crisis and Disaster Management in the Asia-Pacific.