COVID - 19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS A GLOBAL

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

COVID - 19

RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS

A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

EIGHTH REPORT AS OF 2 December 2020

Acknowledgments

This eighth report COVID-19 Related Travel Restrictions – A Global Review

for Tourism was developed by the World Tourism Organization’s (UNWTO)

Sustainable Development of Tourism Department. The report was prepared

under the supervision of Dr. Dirk Glaesser with lead contributions from Lorna

Hartantyo, Marianna Stori and Cordula Wohlmuther. Virginia Fernández-

Trapa reviewed and provided feedback to the report.

We wish to thank Hernán Epstein, Chief of the UNWTO Statistics Department,

for the support in the analysis of outbound and inbound markets and Nury

Kim, Eun Ji Tae, and Li Yang, from the UNWTO Regional Department

for Asia and the Pacic, and Chenxu Wang, from the UNWTO Technical

Cooperation department, for the support provided in the analysis of travel

advice in selected source markets of the region.

We would like to express our special gratitude to Fiona Barron and Rodolfo

Losada from the World Food Programme for the clarications, insights and

continuous support provided.

We also would like to thank Martin Wolf, Ph.D., Principal Investigator of

the Environmental Performance Index at the Yale Center for Environmental

Law & Policy for the clarications provided related to the Environmental

Performance Index Report 2020.

Layout of the cover was provided by Alberto G. Uceda and layout of the

report by Javier P. Spuch.

Prepared by:

UNWTO

Sustainable Development of Tourism Department

COVID - 19

RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS

A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

EIGHTH REPORT AS OF 2 December 2020

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Table of contents

1. Key Facts ................................................................................................................................................................. 8

2. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 11

3. Rationale and focus of the analysis ......................................................................................................................... 12

4. Overview of COVID-19 related travel restrictions as of 1 November 2020............................................................. 13

4.1. Volume, severity and evolution of travel restrictions on international tourism ....................................................... 13

4.2. Characteristics of destinations which eased travel restrictions ................................................................................ 15

4.2.1. Characteristics of destinations that use the request for a negative PCR test as main measure ............................... 22

4.3. Characteristics of destinations that have their borders completely closed .............................................................. 24

4.3.1 Characteristics of the destinations with complete border closure since at least 27 April 2020 ............................... 27

5. Further analysis of travel restrictions ...................................................................................................................... 30

5.1. Travel restrictions in Small Island Developing States (SIDS) .................................................................................... 30

5.2. Travel restrictions in the Schengen Area

............................................................................................................. 31

5.3. Analysis of COVID-19 travel advice in the Top 10 source markets ......................................................................... 33

6. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................. 35

6.1. Key characteristics and features of travel restrictions .............................................................................................. 35

6.2. Proportionate and responsible opening of borders for international tourism ........................................................ 35

6.3. Timely, reliable, accessible and consistent communication .................................................................................... 36

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 1 Methodological note ............................................................................................................................................. 38

A1.1. The Environmental Performance Index 2020 (EPI) .................................................................................................. 39

A1.2. Health and Hygiene Indicator ................................................................................................................................. 40

A1.3. The Tourism Gross Domestic Product (T-GDP) ........................................................................................................ 41

A1.4. Mode of transport ................................................................................................................................................... 41

A1.5. International source markets .................................................................................................................................. 42

A1.6. The 14-day COVID-19 case notication rate per 100.000 population ..................................................................... 42

A1.7. Inbound and/or outbound destinations .................................................................................................................. 43

Annex 2 Overview on the different categories and applying destinations as of 1 November 2020 ..................................... 44

Annex 3 Clusters by economic importance of tourism ......................................................................................................... 46

Annex 4 Groups of international source market and corresponding destinations ................................................................ 47

Annex 5 Overview on destinations which have eased and lifted travel restrictions for international tourism

purposes as of 1 November 2020 ........................................................................................................................... 48

Annex 6 Overview on destinations which require negative PCR test for international tourism purposes

as of 1 November 2020 ........................................................................................................................................... 49

Annex 7 Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which eased or

lifted restrictions, by mode of transport, as of 1 November 2020 .......................................................................... 50

Annex 8 Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which eased or

lifted restrictions, by 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 inhabitants, as of 1 November 2020 .......... 51

Annex 9 Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which eased or

lifted restrictions, by Health and Hygiene indicator, as of 1 November 2020 ......................................................... 52

Annex 10 Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which eased or

lifted restrictions, by Environmental Performance Index, as of 1 November 2020 ................................................. 53

Annex 11 Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which eased or

lifted restrictions, by inbound and outbound, as of 1 November 2020 .................................................................. 54

Annex 12 10 Top source markets and their outbound departures .......................................................................................... 55

Annex 13 The relationship between Health and Hygiene and the Environmental Performance Index scores ........................ 56

Annex 14 Overview on COVID-19 and pandemic measures, including travel restrictions ...................................................... 57

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Table of Figures

Figure A Destinations that have eased COVID-19 related travel restrictions as of 1 November 2020 ................................ 8

Figure B Destinations with travel restrictions for international tourism as of 1 November 2020 .......................................... 10

Figure 1 Destinations that have eased COVID-19 related travel restrictions as of 1 November 2020 .................................. 14

Figure 2 Number of destinations with complete border closure April-November 2020 ....................................................... 14

Figure 3 Destinations with travel restrictions to international tourism as of 1 November 2020 ........................................... 15

Figure 4 Regional breakdown of travel restrictions as of 1 November 2020 ........................................................................ 16

Figure 5 Changes in type of travel restrictions over time ..................................................................................................... 16

Figure 6 Category of travel restrictions by destinations that have eased COVID-19 related travel restrictions ................... 17

Figure 7 Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per Health & Hygiene clusters ............. 17

Figure 8 Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per Environmental

Performance Index .................................................................................................................................................. 18

Figure 9 Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per clusters of 14-day COVID-19 ........

notication rate per 100.000 population 20 ........................................................................................................... 19

Figure 10 Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per Tourism GDP dependency ............. 19

Figure 11 Number of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per importance of modes of transport ..... 20

Figure 12 Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per tourism ow characteristics 28 ...... 21

Figure 13 Destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per economic status ................................................... 21

Figure 14 Destinations requiring negative PCR test for international tourism ........................................................................ 22

Figure 15 Percentage of destinations that have negative PCR test as main measure per Health & Hygiene clusters ............ 23

Figure 16 Percentage of destinations with complete border closure per Health & Hygiene clusters ..................................... 25

Figure 17 Percentage of destinations that have complete border closure per Environmental Performance Index clusters ... 25

Figure 18 Number of destinations that have complete border closure per clusters of 14-day COVID-19

notication rate per 100.000 population ................................................................................................................ 25

Figure 19 Number of destinations that have complete border closure per tourism GDP dependency .................................. 26

Figure 20 Number of destinations that have complete border closure per importance of mode of transport ....................... 26

Figure 21 Number of destinations that have complete border closure per tourism ow characteristics ................................ 26

Figure 22 Destinations that have complete border closure per economic status ................................................................... 27

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Figure 23 Number of destinations with complete border closure since 27 April 2020,

per region ............................................................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 24 Number of destinations with complete border closure since 27 April 2020,

per Health & Hygiene clusters ................................................................................................................................ 28

Figure 25 Number of destinations with complete border closure since 27 April 2020,

per Environmental Performance Index .................................................................................................................... 28

Figure 26 Number of destinations with complete border closure since 27 April 2020,

per 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population ............................................................................. 29

Figure 27 Global and regional breakdown of travel restrictions consisting of

complete border closures applied by SIDS as of 1 November 2020 ....................................................................... 30

Table A1.1 Destination clusters by Environmental Performance Index ..................................................................................... 39

Table A1.2 Destination clusters by health and hygiene standard ............................................................................................. 40

Table A1.3 Destination clusters by economic importance of tourism ....................................................................................... 41

Table A1.4 Groups of mode of transport and corresponding destinations ............................................................................... 41

Table A1.5 Groups of international source market and corresponding destinations ................................................................ 42

Table A1.6 Destinations clusters by 14-day notication rate of new COVID-19 cases per 100,00 population ......................... 42

Table A1.7 Inbound and outbound destinations ....................................................................................................................... 43

Figure 28 The relationship between Health & Hygiene and Environmental Performance Index scores.................................. 56

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

As of 1 November 2020

• 152 destinations (70% of all destinations

worldwide) have eased COVID-19 related

travel restrictions for international tourism.

This is an increase of 37 destinations

compared to 1 September 2020.

• 59 destinations (27% of all destinations

worldwide) keep their borders completely

closed for international tourism. This is a

decrease of 34 destinations compared to 1

September 2020.

• The following categories of COVID-19 related

travel restrictions are being applied across

destinations worldwide (total destinations are

217):

o Complete or partial closure of borders:

118 destinations (54% of all destinations

worldwide) have completely or partially

closed their borders (decrease from 161

destinations on 1 September 2020).

- Out of these, 59 destinations have

completely closed their borders for

international tourism, and

- 59 destinations have partially closed

their borders.

1. Key Facts

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

Figure A – Destinations that have eased COVID-19 related travel restrictions

as of 1 November 2020

COVID-19 Travel restrictions eased

COVID-19 Travel restrictions not eased

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

o Negative COVID-19 PCR test:

126 destinations (58% of all destinations

worldwide) are requesting Polymerase

Chain Reaction (PCR) tests upon

arrival from international tourists. In 67

destinations (31% of all destinations

worldwide) a negative PCR test is the

main measure, in the remaining 59

destinations, PCR tests are used as an

additional measure.

o Destination-specic travel restriction:

12 destinations (5%) are not allowing

passengers from specic countries of

origin to enter the destination.

o Quarantine:

10 destinations (5%) request quarantine

and/or self-isolation upon arrival in a

destination.

o Different measures:

6 destinations (3%) are applying

different measures that include visa

related measures and measures directed

to specic nationalities.

4 destinations have lifted all COVID-19

related restrictions.

• From a regional point of view, the 152

destinations that have eased travel restrictions

are:

o 49 destinations in Europe (91% of all

destinations in Europe), an increase of

44 destinations as of 1 September 2020.

1 destination has lifted all COVID-19

related restrictions.

1 Turkey.

2 Costa Rica, Dominican Republic and Haiti.

o 40 destinations in the Americas (78%

of all destinations in the Americas), an

increase of 13 destinations compared to

1 September 2020. 3 destinations have

lifted all COVID-19 related restrictions.

o 40 destinations in Africa (75% of all

destinations in Africa), an increase of 14

destinations compared to 1 September

2020.

o 15 destinations in Asia and the Pacic

(33% of all destinations in Asia and the

Pacic), an increase of 2 destinations

compared to 1 September 2020.

o 8 destinations in the Middle East (62%

of all destinations in the Middle East), an

increase of 3 destinations compared to 1

September 2020.

• From a regional point of view, the destinations

that apply complete closure of borders are:

o 27 destinations in Asia and the Pacic

(59% of all destinations in Asia), a

decrease of 1 destination compared to 1

September 2020.

o 13 destinations in Africa (25% of all

destinations in Africa), a decrease of 14

destinations compared to 1 September

2020.

o 10 destinations in the Americas (20%

of all destinations in the Americas), a

decrease of 11 destinations compared to

1 September 2020.

o 5 destinations in the Middle East (38%

of all destinations in Middle East), a

decrease of 3 destinations compared to

1 September 2020.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

o 4 destinations in Europe (7% of all

destinations in Europe), a decrease of 5

destinations compared to 1 September

2020.

• 35 SIDS (65% of all SIDS) have eased restrictions,

mostly in the Americas (23 destinations) and

17 SIDS (31% of all SIDS) maintain complete

border closure, the majority of those in Asia

and the Pacic (12 destinations).

Note: Destinations are coloured according to the dominating measure in place with

regards to the facilitation of international tourism:

- Complete closure of borders means that all air, land and sea borders are closed

for international tourism purposes.

- Partial closure of borders means that one or the combination of different

borders (air, land or sea) are closed, but not all of them; e.g. land borders are

closed while travellers can arrive by air. Or e.g. in the case of Schengen borders

are closed only towards third-countries.

- Destination-specic travel restriction means that a passenger arriving from a

specic destination cannot enter for international tourism purposes.

- Negative PCR test means that passengers intending to enter a destination for

international tourism purposes must present a negative PCR test taken no more

than usually 48 to 72 hours prior to arrival. In some cases, tests have to be

taken upon arrival.

- Different measures include restrictions applied to a lesser extent: a) Invalidation of visa when destinations are no longer visa-exempt or visa

upon arrival can no longer be obtained; b) Request for quarantine or self-isolation for 14 days; c) Nationality-directed measure when specied

nationalities cannot enter a destination.

- All COVID-19 travel restrictions lifted means that all measures that restricted the entry into a destination for international tourism purposes were

removed.

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

Figure B - Destinations with travel restrictions for international tourism

as of 1 November 2020

• 44 destinations (20% of destinations

worldwide) have had their border completely

closed for 27 weeks

: among them 14 SIDS,

9 LDCs and 6 LLDCs.

All COVID-19 travel restrictions lifted

Negative PCR test

Partial closure of borders

Different measures

Destination-specic travel restrictions

Complete closure of borders

3 Specic analysis of complete border closure in comparison to partial border closure is carried out since April 2020, which allows detailing

complete border closures since then.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

4 World Tourism Organization, Travel Facilitation reports, available online at: www.unwto.org/sustainable-development/travel-facilitation.

2. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused

unprecedented consequences for societies,

economies and tourism, which is especially

affected by the public health measures

introduced by governments since the World

Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19

a Public Health Emergency of International

Concern (PHEIC) on 31 January 2020 and a

pandemic on 11 March 2020.

Travel restrictions are a widely used measure

being applied by destinations to limit the spread

of COVID-19. While in March 2020 restrictions

were observed mainly in Asia and the Pacic and

Europe, with the spread of the pandemic, soon

all destinations around the world had restrictions

in place. As of 18 May 2020, 75% of destinations

worldwide had their borders completely closed,

thus bringing international tourism almost to a

standstill. Since then, destinations have started

easing travel restrictions to progressively allow

the movement of people and reactivation of

economic activities, including tourism. Yet,

measures are being continuously adjusted taking

into account the evolving understanding of the

virus and the way it spreads.

This is the eighth issue of a series of Reports on

COVID-19 Related Travel Restrictions – A Global

Review for Tourism. These reports aim to support

the tourism sector address the global health

crisis of COVID-19 by providing an overview and

analysis of the travel restrictions implemented

by governments. The reports are updated on a

regular basis and aim to support mitigation and

recovery efforts of the tourism sector.

The monitoring of travel restrictions is carried out

mainly from the standpoint of travel facilitation

for tourism purposes (i.e. focusing on temporary

visitors/tourists) and therefore does not take into

account any measures directed at commuters,

diplomats and other categories of travellers.

This work is carried out by the World Tourism

Organization (UNWTO) Sustainable Development

of Tourism Department (SDT) that, inter alia,

monitors visa policies around the world since

2008 and produces the Visa Openness Reports,

which focus on entry requirements for tourism

purposes.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

5 IPBES (2020) Workshop Report on Biodiversity and Pandemics of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

Daszak, P., das Neves, C., Amuasi, J., Hayman, D., Kuiken, T., Roche, B., Zambrana-Torrelio, C., Buss, P., Dundarova, H., Feferholtz, Y.,

Foldvari, G., Igbinosa, E., Junglen, S., Liu, Q., Suzan, G., Uhart, M., Wannous, C., Woolaston, K., Mosig Reidl, P., O’Brien, K., Pascual, U.,

Stoett, P., Li, H., Ngo, H. T., IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany, available online at: https://ipbes.net/pandemics.

3. Rationale and focus of

the analysis

COVID-19 related travel restrictions are

being continuously adjusted by governments

according to the epidemiological situation within

the destinations as well as in neighbouring

destinations and source markets. A very few

destinations have completely lifted, others eased

travel restrictions for international tourism and

introduced new procedures, such as testing upon

arrival, and many continue to have their borders

partially or completely closed.

This eighth report provides the analysis of travel

restrictions in selected economic and political

blocs, in particular emerging and advanced

economies, Small Island Developing States

(SIDS) and the Schengen area. Travel restrictions

are also analysed in relation to the economic

importance of tourism in destinations and

the level of diversication of source markets.

Furthermore, travel restrictions are examined by

mode of transport and international tourism ow

characteristics of the destination.

With the aim to identify causalities and

correlations between factors that might have an

inuence on easing or lifting travel restrictions,

data on the 14-day notication rate of new

COVID-19 cases per 100.000 population was

collected at the time of analysing the travel

restrictions. Moreover, besides the health and

hygiene indicator that was used for the seventh

edition, this report also uses the Environmental

Performance Index (EPI), developed by the Yale

Center for Environmental Law & Policy of Yale

University, with the objective to explore the link

between health and environmental performance

and its potential connection to travel restrictions.

In addition, for the present report, travel

advisories issued by the governments of the

Top 10 source markets for their respective

citizens are analysed, as those measures have an

additional important inuence on the recovery of

international tourism.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

4. Overview of COVID-19 related travel restrictions

as of 1 November 2020

6 COVID-19 travel restrictions eased means that measures that inhibited the entry into a destination for international tourism purposes were

eased, but still some restrictions remain in place.

7 COVID-19 travel restrictions lifted means that all measures that restricted the entry into a destination for international tourism purposes were

removed.

8 Complete closure of borders means that all air, land and sea borders are closed for international tourism purposes.

9 Partial closure of borders means that one or the combination of different borders (air, land or sea) are closed, but not all of them; e.g. land

borders are closed while travellers can arrive by air. Or e.g. in the case of Schengen borders are closed only towards third-countries.

10 WHO Weekly epidemiological update- 10 November 2020. For more information please visit:

https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/weekly-epidemiological-update---10-november-2020

11 UNWTO endeavours to ensure, but does not guarantee the accuracy of the information on travel restrictions. If inaccuracies are observed,

please revert to [email protected]g.

4.1. Volume, severity and evolution

of travel restrictions on

international tourism

As of 1 November 2020, a total of 152 destinations

(70% of all destinations worldwide) have eased

travel restrictions (Figure 1). The rst easings

of measures were observed on 18 May 2020,

when a total of 6 destinations eased restrictions,

which became 48 destinations by 15 June 2020,

86 destinations by 19 July 2020 and 115 by 1

September 2020. The easing of measures aims to

progressively allow the movement of people and

the reactivation of economic activities. A total of

4 destinations have lifted

all COVID-19 related

restrictions (2% of destinations worldwide).

Consequently, the number of destinations with

complete border closure

has also decreased

over time. As of 1 November 2020, 118

destinations (54% of all destinations worldwide)

have completely (59 destinations) or partially

closed

(59 destinations) their borders. This

represents a decrease of 43 destinations (from

161 destinations) compared to 1 September

2020.

The peak of complete border closure was

observed in May 2020 when 163 destinations

(75% of destinations worldwide) were completely

closed. As of 1 November 2020, 59 destinations

(27% of all destinations) maintain their borders

closed. Out of these, two destinations have

closed their borders again and 44 destinations

have been closed for at least 6 months (Figure 2).

Research shows that measures are continuously

being adjusted, taking into account the evolving

understanding of the virus and the effectiveness

of public health measures. This is especially

reected by the increased use of Polymerase

Chain Reaction (PCR) testing, as well as quarantine

measures. At present, 67 destinations (31% of all

destinations worldwide) require the presentation

of a negative PCR test and 10 destinations (5%

of destinations worldwide) require quarantine

upon arrival as the main entry requirements. As

of 1 November 2020, limited reference to the

use of antigen rapid testing has been observed.

Other measures include destination-specic (12

destinations, 6% of destinations worldwide) and

visa-related restrictions (5 destinations, 2% of

destinations worldwide).

Other additional measures are observed to be

increasingly applied:

- Health declarations or “passenger

locator forms”, which are requested from

international tourists, are currently applied

by about 75 destinations worldwide (34%

of all destinations).

Some of them are still

paper-based forms while others make use of

modern technological solutions, with the aim

to facilitate the identication of potentially

affected travellers and their subsequent

tracing. 11 destinations, mainly from the

Caribbean, request international tourists to

obtain specic authorisations online before

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

arriving to the destination.

- Some destinations request from international

tourists a specic proof of health insurance

coverage when entering a destination, while

other destinations offer COVID-19 insurance

schemes for the duration of a traveller´s stay.

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

Figure 1 - Destinations that have eased COVID-19 related travel restrictions

as of 1 November 2020

COVID-19 Travel restrictions eased

COVID-19 Travel restrictions not eased

156

165

117

27/04/2020 18/05/2020 19/07/2020 01/09/2020 01/11/2020

Figure 2 - Number of destinations with complete border closure April-November 2020

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Figure 3 - Destinations with travel restrictions to international tourism

as of 1 November 2020

All COVID-19 travel restrictions lifted

Negative PCR test

Partial closure of borders

Different measures

Destination-specic travel restrictions

Complete closure of borders

4.2. Characteristics of destinations

which eased travel restrictions

From a regional point of view, the 152 destinations

that have eased travel restrictions are (Figure 4):

o 49 destinations in Europe (91% of all

destinations in Europe), an increase of 5

destinations compared to 1 September 2020.

o 40 destinations in the Americas (78% of all

destinations in the Americas), an increase of

13 destinations compared to 1 September

2020.

o 40 destinations in Africa (75% of all

destinations in Africa), an increase of 14

destinations compared to 1 September 2020

o 15 destinations in Asia and the Pacic (33%

of all destinations in Asia and the Pacic),

an increase of 2 destinations compared to 1

September 2020.

o 8 destinations in the Middle East (62% of all

destinations in the Middle East), an increase

of 3 destinations compared to 1 September

2020.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Europe is the region in which more destinations

(91%) have eased travel restrictions, mainly

because of easing restrictions among the

Schengen Member States and despite the fact that

they remain partially closed to third- countries.

Many easings are also observed in Africa (75%),

the Americas (78%) and the Middle East (62%).

In these three regions, many destinations have

shifted towards requesting negative PCR tests

upon arrival. Asia and the Pacic remains the

region with less easings (33%). This is of particular

interest as destinations in Asia and the Pacic

were among the rst that introduced travel

restrictions at the very beginning of the outbreak

of the virus.

27%

25%

20%

59%

38%

27%

21%

12%

67%

16%

11%

31%

36%

55%

13%

15%

46%

World

Africa

Americas

Asia and the

Pacific

Europe

Middle East

Complete closure of borders Partial closure of borders Destination-specific travel restriction

Negative PCR test Quarantine Different measures

COVID-19 travel restriction lifted

Figure 4 - Regional breakdown of travel restrictions as of 1 November 2020

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

Figure 5 - Changes in type of travel restrictions over time

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

72%

75%

65%

53%

43%

27%

10%

22%

30%

27%

12%

16%

31% 5%

11%

27 April 2020

18 May 2020

15 June 2020

19 July 2020

1 September 2020

1 November 2020

Complete closure of borders Partial closure of borders Destination-specific travel restriction

Suspension of flights, all or partial Negative PCR test Quarantine

Different measures

COVID-19 travel restriction lifted

72%

75%

65%

53%

43%

27%

10%

22%

30%

27%

12%

16%

31%

11%

27 April 2020

18 May 2020

15 June 2020

19 July 2020

1 September 2020

1 November 2020

Complete closure of borders Partial closure of borders Destination-specific travel restriction

Suspension of flights, all or partial Negative PCR test Quarantine

Different measures COVID-19 travel restriction lifted

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

12 Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Haiti and Turkey.

13 For more information on the methodology applied for the analysis of the 152 destinations that have eased restrictions see Methodological

Note in Annex 1.

14 Health clusters were built on the available data for 197 destinations. Out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions, the chart displays

those 139 destinations for which data was available.

Out of the 152 destinations that have eased

restrictions, 4 destinations

have lifted all

COVID-19 related travel restrictions, while

148 destinations continue to have certain

restrictive measures in place. These include

the partial closing of borders (56 destinations),

destination-specic travel restrictions allowing

only passengers originating from certain

source markets to enter (11 destinations), the

request for negative PCR test upon arrival

(66 destinations), quarantine upon arrival

(9 destinations), visa measures (5 destinations)

and nationality-directed measures (1 destination)

(Figure 6).

The analysis conrms the importance of health

and hygiene infrastructure for the easing of travel

restrictions as 87% of destinations with a very

high (39 destinations of 45 destinations in H&H

cluster 4) and 62% of destinations with a high

level (33 destinations of 53 destinations in H&H

cluster 3) have eased restrictions for international

tourism (Figure 7).

Figure 6 - Category of travel restrictions by destinations that have eased COVID-19 related travel

restrictions

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

43%

37%

Negative PCR test (43%)

Partial opening of borders (37%)

Destination-specific travel restrictions (7%)

Quarantine (6%)

Visa measure (3%)

All COVID-19 travel restrictions lifted (3%)

Other measures (1%)

Figure 7 - Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per Health &

Hygiene clusters

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

71%

64%

62%

87%

29%

36%

38%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

71%

64%

62%

87%

29%

36%

38%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

43%

37%

Negative PCR test (43%)

Partial opening of borders (37%)

Destination-specific travel restrictions (7%)

Quarantine (6%)

Visa measure (3%)

All COVID-19 travel restrictions lifted (3%)

Other measures (1%)

152

Destinations

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Moreover, when analysing destinations

according to their scores of the Environmental

Performance Index (EPI), which is an index that

focuses on environmental health and ecosystem

vitality and how countries are addressing

the environmental challenges,

15a

it has been

observed that destinations with a medium EPI

and above have a higher tendency to ease

restrictions than those with lower environmental

performance. Out of the destinations with a

very high score (36 destinations belonging to

the EPI cluster 5, 81% (29 destinations) have

eased restrictions. For those destinations with a

high EPI score (36 destinations belonging to EPI

cluster 4, 78% (28 destinations) have eased. In

the case of destinations with medium EPI score

(36 destinations belonging to EPI- Cluster 3,

86% (31 destinations) have eased restrictions.

Conversely, for destinations in the lower score

EPI clusters less easings have been registered

(53% of all destinations in EPI cluster 2 and 61%

of all destinations in EPI Cluster 1 (Figure 8).

It is also observed that half of the destinations

that have eased, i.e. 73 destinations, reported a

relatively high infection rate as of 1 November

2020.

In fact, 52 destinations (91% of all

destinations with high infection rates that eased

restrictions) reported more than 120 cases and

21 destinations (78% of all destinations with high

infection rates that eased restrictions) between

60 and 119 cases per 100.000 population in the

last 14-days) (Figure 9).

55% of these destinations with relatively high

infection rates are from Europe (40 destinations)

27% from the Americas (20 destinations), 8%

from the Middle East (6 destinations), 5% from

Asia and the Pacic (4 destinations) and 6% from

Africa (3 destinations).

It is interesting to note that these destinations

with higher infection rates have a signicant

dependence on tourism (10 destinations with

a high, 18 destinations with a considerable, 27

destinations with a moderate and 8 destinations

with a low dependence on tourism).

62% (42 destinations) are inbound destinations,

22% (15 destinations) are both, inbound and

Figure 8 - Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per

Environmental Performance Index

15b

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

61%

53%

86%

78%

81%

39%

47%

14%

22%

19%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

EPI Cluster 1

EPI Cluster 2

EPI Cluster 3

EPI Cluster 4

EPI Cluster 5

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

15a For more information on the EPI Report 2020 and how the EPI dataset was used for this analysis please see Methodological Note in Annex 1.

15b EPI clusters were built on the available data for 180 destinations. Out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions, the chart displays those

129 destinations for which data was available.

16 Data on infection rates out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 147 destinations For more information on these

datasets see Methodological Note in Annex 1.

17 Data on infection rates and T-GDP out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 63 destinations of the 125 with 60 new

cases or above of 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population. For more information on these datasets see Methodological

Note in Annex 1.

71%

64%

62%

87%

29%

36%

38%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Figure 9 - Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per clusters of

14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

38%

67%

65%

78%

91%

62%

33%

35%

22%

0% 10% 20% 30%

40%

50%

60%

70% 80%

90%

100%

No new cases

< 20 new cases

>=20 and <60 new cases

>=60 and <120 new cases

>=120 new cases

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

Figure 10 - Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per Tourism

GDP dependency

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

79%

77%

69%

72%

21%

23%

31%

28%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

High: T-GDP >20%

Considerable: T-GDP >10% and <=20%

Moderate: T-GDP >5% and <=10%

Low: T-GDP <=5%

Have eased travel restrictions Have maintained travel restrictions

18 Data on infection rates and Inbound/Outbound destinations out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 68

destinations with 60 new cases or above of 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population. For more information on these

datasets see Methodological Note in Annex 1.

19 Data on infection rates and mode of transport out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 65 destinations with 60 new

cases or above of 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population. For more information on these datasets see Methodological

Note in Annex 1.

20 Clusters of 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population were built on the available data for 197 destinations. Out of the 152

destinations which have eased, the chart displays those 147 destinations for which data was available.

21 Data on T-GDP out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 132 destinations For more information on these datasets

see Methodological Note in Annex 1.

22 Clusters of T-GDP were built on the available data for 181 destinations. Out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions, the chart displays

those 132 destinations for which data was available. See for more information on T-GDP clusters Methodological Note in Annex 1.

outbound destinations, and 16% (11 destinations)

are outbound.

45% of these destinations are highly dependent

on air transport (29 destinations) and 26% highly

dependent on land transport (17 destinations).

This allows concluding that destinations that

have eased travel restrictions and currently report

high infection rates are mostly from Europe,

have a good health and hygiene infrastructure,

are inbound destinations and many of them are

highly dependent on tourism and on air transport.

For the 152 destinations that have eased

restrictions, the analysis shows that the economic

importance of tourism

did not signicantly

inuence whether destinations eased restrictions,

although destinations with both a considerable

and high economic importance of tourism have

slightly eased more often than destinations where

tourism has less economic importance (Figure 10).

71%

64%

62%

87%

29%

36%

38%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

71%

64%

62%

87%

29%

36%

38%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

38%

67%

65%

78%

91%

62%

33%

35%

22%

0% 10% 20% 30%

40%

50%

60%

70% 80%

90%

100%

No new cases

< 20 new cases

>=20 and <60 new cases

>=60 and <120 new cases

>=120 new cases

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Looking at the connection between the

dependence on mode of transport and the

easing of travel restrictions, it is observed that

78% of all destinations with a high dependence

on land transport (28 destinations) and 67%

of destinations with a high dependence on

air transport (67 destinations) have eased

restrictions for international tourism (Figure

11).

It is furthermore observed that 49% of

all destinations that have eased restrictions are

highly dependent on air transport.

23 Data on mode of transport out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 135 destinations. For more information on

these datasets see Methodological Note in Annex 1.

24 Clusters of mode of transport were built on the available data for 194 destinations. Out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions, the

chart displays those 136 destinations for which data was available. See for more information in Methodological Note in Annex 1.

25 Data on inbound and T-GDP out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 70 destinations. For more information on

these datasets see Methodological Note in Annex 1

26 Data on inbound and mode of transport out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 78 destinations. For more

information on these datasets see Methodological Note in Annex 1.

27 Data on inbound and health and hygiene out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions is available for 71 destinations. For more

information on these datasets see Methodological Note in Annex 1.

Figure 11 - Number of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per importance of

modes of transport

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

20 30 40 50

60 70

High dependence on air

Med dependence on air

High dependence on land

Med dependence on land

Med dependence on water

From the perspective of tourism ows, 79% of

all destinations (80 destinations) which have

a dominating inbound tourism structure have

eased restrictions (Figure 12). Of those 80

destinations, 67% (47 destinations)

have a high

or considerable dependence on tourism and

60% (47 destinations)

are highly dependent on

air transport and 52% have a good health and

hygiene infrastructure. Out of the latter, 25% (18

destinations) have a very high score and 27%

(19 destinations) a high score in the health and

hygiene infrastructure

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

28 Inbound and Outbound data is available data for 180 destinations. Out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions, the chart displays

those 128 destinations for which data was available. See for more information in Methodological Note in Annex 1.

29 Out of the 152 destinations which eased restrictions, the chart displays the share of emerging and advanced economies.

Figure 12 - Percentage of destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per tourism

ow characteristics

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

79%

61%

60%

21%

39%

40%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Inbound

Outbound

Both

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

Figure 13 - Destinations that have eased COVID-19 travel restrictions per economic status

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

79%

68%

21%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

Advanced economies

Emerging economies

Have eased travel restrictions Have maintained travel restrictions

When looking at destinations characterized as

Outbound and Both, most of those destinations

in the outbound category are advanced

economies (53%, 10 destinations) while in the

both category most are emerging economies

(79%, 23 destinations). However, in both

categories the majority of destinations have a

high Health and Hygiene infrastructure score (in

89% of destinations in Outbound vs 59% in Both

– 17 destinations in both cases) and a relatively

low tourism GDP (in 84% of destinations in

Outbound vs 79% in Both – 16 and 23 destinations

respectively).

Lastly, it is observed that 79% of destinations

classied as advanced economies of the world

have eased restrictions (33 of the 42 destinations),

maintaining the percentage registered on

1 September 2020. From the destinations

classied as emerging economies, 68% have now

eased restrictions (119 out of 175), registering an

increase of 37 destinations from 1 September

2020 (Figure 13).

71%

64%

62%

87%

29%

36%

38%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

71%

64%

62%

87%

29%

36%

38%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have eased travel restrictions Have not eased travel restrictions

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

4.2.1. Characteristics of destinations that use

the request for a negative PCR test as

main measure

As of 1 November 2020, 126 destinations (58%

of all destinations worldwide) are requesting

PCR tests from international tourists. In 67

destinations (31% of all destinations worldwide)

a negative PCR test is the main measure applied

to international tourists, who need to present the

negative result of the PCR test, usually taken 48

to 72 hours prior to arrival or in some cases upon

arrival.

30 For easy reference we will use the term “negative PCR test” in the text.

Figure 14 - Destinations requiring negative PCR test for international tourism

In the remaining 59 destinations, PCR tests are

used as an additional measure. 38 destinations

are partially closed (main measure) and request

from travellers, who are allowed to enter, a

negative PCR test upon arrival (subordinate

measure). 26 destinations apply a differentiated

approach by requesting a negative PCR test only

when arriving from a high-risk country (Figure 14).

From a regional point of view, the destinations

requesting a negative PCR test are:

o 28 destinations in the Americas (55% of all

destinations in the region)

Note: Destinations are coloured according to the requirement of a negative PCR test to be presented upon arrival as main measure or as accompanying

measure in place for international tourism, in particular:

- Negative PCR test as main measure means that passengers intending to enter a destination for international tourism purposes must present a

PCR test taken no more than usually 48 to 72 hours prior to arrival. In some cases, test have to be taken upon arrival.

- Negative PCR test as a subordinate measure means that a negative PCR test upon arrival is a secondary, third or fourth measure, e.g. a

destination might be partially closed (main measure) for international tourism purposes, while passengers, who are allowed to enter must

present a negative PCR test upon arrival (secondary measure).

- Negative PCR test as a main measure when arriving from a high-risk country means that that passengers intending to enter a destination for

international tourism purposes must present a PCR test taken no more than usually 48 to 72 hours prior to arrival only when coming from a

high-risk country, when coming from a low-risk country no test is required.

- Negative PCR tests as a subordinate measure when arriving from a high-risk country means that a negative PCR test upon arrival is a secondary,

third or fourth measure required only when coming from a high-risk country, while when coming from a low-risk country no test is required.

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

31 The research team has not analysed further but takes notice that i) the amount of maximum days during which tests have to be done before

the arrival into a destination ranges between 3 to 10 days, ii) the costs of such PCR tests can signicantly vary among regions and countries.

The research team also noticed that in few cases the destinations ask for PCR tests from registered laboratories, an indication for preventing

potential falsication of PCR tests.

32 UNWTO SDT refers to 54 Small Island Developing States, of which 38 are UN Member States and 16 are Non-UN Member States. For more

information please see: https://www.un.org/ohrlls/content/list-sids

33 UNWTO SDT refers to 47 Least Developed Countries. For more information please see at: https://www.un.org/ohrlls/content/proles-ldcs

34 UNWTO SDT refers to 32 Landlocked Developing Countries. For more information please see at: https://www.un.org/ohrlls/content/list-lldcs

35 H&H data is available for 57 out of the 67 destinations, which have negative PCR test as main measure.

36 H&H and T-GDP data are available for 53 out of the 67 destinations, which have negative PCR test as main measure.

o 19 destinations in Africa (36% of all

destinations in the region)

o 8 destinations in Europe (15% of all

destinations in the region)

o 6 destinations in Asia and the Pacic (13%

of all destinations in the region)

o 6 destinations in the Middle East (46% of all

destinations in the region)

Further analysis of the 67 destinations

that

require a negative PCR test as a main measure

shows that 93% (62 destinations) are emerging

economies. 30 of them are SIDS

(45% of

destinations asking negative PCR test and 56%

of all SIDS), 13 are LDCs

(19% and 28% of all

LDCs) and 9 are LLDCs (13% and 28% of all

LLDCs).

It is also observed that the share of destinations

requiring negative PCR test is especially high

(61%, 35 destinations) among those destinations

which have medium and low scores in health and

hygiene infrastructures, in comparison those with

a high score (39%, 22 destinations) in health and

hygiene infrastructures (Figure 15).

Focusing on the characteristics of these

destinations, it is observed that out of the 61%

with medium and low H&H, 97% are emerging

and 3% are advanced economies. Out of the 61%,

46% (16 destinations) are from Africa, 40% (14

destinations) from Americas, 9% (3 destinations)

from Asia and the Pacic and 6% (2 destinations)

from Middle East. It should be also noted that 14

of these destinations are SIDS representing 26%

of worldwide SIDS, 11 are LDC which is the 23%

of total LDCs and 7 are LLDCs which is the 22%

of total LLDCs. From the 39% having negative

PCR test as main measure and high H&H, 82%

are emerging and 18% are advanced economies.

When looking at the economic importance of

tourism, it is of particular interest that out of

the 39% with high H&H, 65% (13 destinations)

have a high or considerable dependence on

tourism while 35% (7 destinations) have low or

moderate tourism dependence.

Moreover,

68% (15 destinations) of these destinations

are mostly inbound destinations while 14% (3

Figure 15 - Percentage of destinations that have negative PCR test as main measure per Health &

Hygiene clusters

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

30% 31% 23% 16%

Negative PCR test

H&H Cluster 1 H&H Cluster 2 H&H Cluster 3 H&H Cluster 4

61%

39%

30% 31% 23% 16%

Negative PCR test

H&H Cluster 1 H&H Cluster 2 H&H Cluster 3 H&H Cluster 4

61%

39%

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

destinations) are outbound and the remaining

18% (4 destinations) have same share of inbound

and outbound.

For the 61% with low H&H, it

is noted that 58% (19 destinations) have a high

or considerable dependence on tourism while

42% (14 destinations) have a low or moderate

dependence on tourism. In this category, 65%

(17 destinations) are mostly inbound destinations

while 8% (2 destinations) are outbound and the

remaining 27% (7 destinations) have same share

of inbound and outbound.

With regards to the dependence on means of

transport, out of the 61% of destinations with

low H&H, 73% (24 destinations) depend mainly

on air transport and 27% (9 destinations) depend

on land transport for international tourism.

For the 39% destinations with high H&H, the

percentage of dependence on air transport is

67% (14 destinations) and the dependence on

land transport is 33% (7 destinations).

4.3. Characteristics of destinations

that have their borders

completely closed

As of 1 November 2020, 59 destinations (27%)

have their borders completely closed.

These are

34 destinations less than on 1 September 2020

(93 destinations, 43%). Two of these destinations

had previously already eased restrictions but

closed their borders again.

The region with

most border closings remains Asia and the

Pacic, where 59% of all destinations keep their

borders completely closed.

From a regional point of view, the 59 destinations

with complete border closure in place are:

o 27 destinations in Asia and the Pacic (59%

of all destinations in Asia), a decrease of 1

destination compared to 1 September 2020.

37 H&H and Inbound/Outbound data are available for 48 out of the 67 destinations, which have negative PCR test as main measure.

38 H&H and Mode of transport data are available for 54 out of the 67 destinations, which have negative PCR test as main measure.

39 For more information on the methodology applied for the analysis of the 59 destinations with border completely closed see Methodological

Note in Annex 1.

40 Czech Republic and Uruguay.

o 13 destinations in Africa (25% of all

destinations in Africa), a decrease of 14

destinations compared to 1 September 2020.

o 10 destinations in the Americas (20% of all

destinations in the Americas), a decrease of

11 destinations compared to 1 September

2020.

o 5 destinations in the Middle East (38% of all

destinations in Middle East), a decrease of 3

destinations compared to 1 September 2020.

o 4 destinations in Europe (7% of all

destinations in Europe), a decrease of 5

destinations compared to 1 September 2020.

The breakdown of destinations which have their

borders closed (Figure 16) shows that among this

group, there is a higher number of destinations

with a weaker health and hygiene infrastructure

than in destinations that have eased. In particular

destinations with closed borders represent 27%

of H&H cluster 1 (13 destinations out of total 49

destinations in this cluster) 34% of H&H cluster

2 (17 destinations out of total 50 destinations

in this cluster) and36% in H&H cluster 3 (19

destinations out of total 53 in this cluster) and

only 9% of H&H cluster 4 (4 destinations out of

total 45 in this cluster).

Similarly, destinations with border closures are

characterized by lower EPI scores. In particular

the share of destinations with border closure

within EPI cluster 1 and cluster 2 reach 39% (14

destinations out of 36 destinations) and 44% (16

destinations out of 36 destinations) respectively.

While the share of destinations with border closed

in EPI 3, 4, 5 does not reach 20% (5 destinations

in EPI cluster 3, 7 destinations in EPI cluster 4, 5

destinations in EPI cluster 5). (Figure 17).

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

41 Health clusters were built on the available data for 197 destinations. Out of the 59 destinations with complete border closure, the chart

displays those 53 destinations for which data was available.

42 Clusters of EPI, divided in quintiles of 36 destinations, were built on the available data for 180 destinations. Out of the 59 destinations with

complete border closure, the chart displays those 47 destinations for which data was available.

43 Clusters of 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population were built on the available data for 197 destinations. Out of the 59

destinations with complete border closure, the chart displays those 48 destinations for which data was available.

Figure 16 - Percentage of destinations with complete border closure per Health & Hygiene clusters

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

27%

34%

36%

71%

64%

62%

87%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

80%

90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have complete border closure Have eased travel restrictions

Have maintained travel restrictions

Figure 18 - Number of destinations that have complete border closure per clusters of 14-day

COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

No new cases < 20 new cases >=20 and <60 new cases >=60 and <120 new cases >=120 new cases

Figure 17 - Percentage of destinations that have complete border closure per Environmental

Performance Index clusters

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

39%

44%

14%

19%

14%

61%

53%

86%

78%

81%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

EPI Cluster 1

EPI Cluster 2

EPI Cluster 3

EPI Cluster 4

EPI Cluster 5

Have complete border closure Have eased travel restrictions Have maintained travel restrictions

Moreover, 65% of those destinations with

their borders closed (31 destinations out of 48

destinations with data available) are reporting

low infection rates with not more than 20 new

COVID-19 cases per 100 000 inhabitants.

27%

34%

36%

71%

64%

62%

87%

10% 20% 30% 40%

50%

60%

70%

80% 90% 100%

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Have complete border closure Have eased travel restrictions Have maintained travel restrictions

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

It is furthermore observed that destinations with

complete border closure are characterized by

having a low or moderate dependence on tourism

with no more than 10% of T-GDP (7 destinations

with T-GDP lower or equal than 5%, and 22

destinations with T-GDP above 5% and lower or

equal to 10%). As such, 66% of the destinations

with closed borders have a T-GDP lower or equal

When analysing the importance of international

arrivals by mode of transport in the 52 destinations

with complete border closure, it is noticed that in

58% (30 destinations) air transport plays a crucial

role for international tourism (Figure 20).

than 10%. In addition, 17% of destinations (5 of 29

destinations) with high T-GDP keep their borders

closed while this amounts to 21% of destinations

(10 of 47 destinations) with considerable T-GDP,

28% of destinations with a moderate T-GDP,

28% of destinations with moderate (22 of 80

destinations) and 28% of destinations (7 of 25

destinations) with low T-GDP (Figure 19).

Furthermore, it is observed that the majority

of destinations are characterized as inbound

destinations (43%, 20 destinations) or having

both, inbound and outbound ows (33%,

15 destinations). The minority are outbound

destinations (24%, 11 destinations) (Figure 21).

Figure 19 - Number of destinations that have complete border closure per tourism GDP

dependency

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

0 5 10 15 20 25

High: T-GDP >20%

Considerable: T-GDP >10% and <=20%

Moderate: T-GDP >5% and <=10%

Low: T-GDP <=5%

Figure 20 - Number of destinations that have

complete border closure per importance of

mode of transport

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

High dependence

on air

Med dependence

on air

High dependence

on land

Med dependence

on land

Figure 21 - Number of destinations that have

complete border closure per tourism ow

characteristics

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

InboundOutboundBoth

44 Clusters of T-GDP were built on the available data for 181 destinations. Out of the 59 destinations with complete border closure, the chart

displays those 44 destinations for which data was available.

45 Clusters of mode of transport were built on the available data for 194 destinations. Out of the 59 destinations with complete border closure,

the chart displays those 52 destinations for which data was available.

46 Inbound and Outbound data is available for 46 out of the 59 destinations with complete border closure.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Figure 22 - Destinations that have complete border closure per economic status

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

14%

30%

86%

70%

20%

40% 60% 80%

100%

120%

Advanced economies

Emerging economies

Have complete border closure Other measures

Figure 23 - Number of destinations with complete border closure since 27 April 2020, per region

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

0 5 10 15 20

Africa

Americas

Asia and Pacific

Europe

Middle East

47 Out of the 59 destinations with complete borders closure, the chart displays the share of emerging and advanced economies.

48 The analysis started as from April 2020 to distinguish between partial and complete closure of borders. This implies that the duration for

which destinations might have had their borders completely closed might be even longer. For more information on the methodology applied

for the analysis of the 44 destinations with border completely closed since 27 April, see Methodological Note in Annex 1.

In addition, 90% of all destinations with complete

border closure (53 of 59 in total) are emerging

economies, leading to a percentage of complete

border closure among emerging destinations

that is twice as high as among advanced

economies. Out of all emerging economies, 30%

have borders closed while it is 14% of advanced

economies that have borders closed (Figure 22).

In addition, 17 destinations are SIDS (29% of

destinations with complete border closure and

31% of all SIDS), 15 are LDCs (25% of destinations

with complete border closure and 32% of all

LDCs) and 9 are LLDCs (15% of destinations with

complete border closure and 28% of all LLDCs).

4.3.1 Characteristics of the destinations with

complete border closure since at least

27 April 2020

Out of the 59 destinations with complete border

closure as of 1 November 2020, 44 destinations

have had their borders completely closed for

international tourism since at least 27 April 2020,

representing a period of at least 27 weeks.

From a regional point of view, the 44 destinations

with complete border closure in place since 27

April 2020 are (Figure 23):

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

o 22 destinations in Asia and the Pacic (48%

of all destinations in Asia and the Pacic)

o 8 destinations in the Americas (16% of all

destinations in the Americas)

o 7 destinations in Africa (13% of all

destinations in Africa)

o 3 destinations in Europe (6% of all

destinations in Europe)

o 4 destinations from the Middle East (31%

of all destinations in the Middle East)

Analysis shows that 39 are emerging economies

(22% of all emerging economies) and 14 are

SIDS (32% and 26% of all SIDS worldwide). 9

destinations are LDCs (20% and 19% of all LDCs)

and 6 destinations are LLDCs (14% and 19% of

all LLDCs).

Focusing on the H&H infrastructure, it is

observed that only two destinations have a very

high H&H score (Figure 24). Similarly, 67% of the

destinations have a very low or low EPI score

(namely 24 destinations, 8 in cluster 1 and 16 in

cluster 2 - out of 36 for which data is available)

(Figure 25).

0 2 4 6 8

16 18

H&H Cluster 1

H&H Cluster 2

H&H Cluster 3

H&H Cluster 4

Figure 24 - Number of destinations with complete border closure since 27 April 2020, per Health &

Hygiene clusters

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Cluster 1

Cluster 2

Cluster 3

Cluster 4

Cluster 5

Figure 25 - Number of destinations with complete border closure since 27 April 2020,

per Environmental Performance Index

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

49 Health clusters were built on the available data for 197 destinations. Out of the 44 destinations with complete border closure since 27 April,

the chart displays those 39 destinations for which data was available.

50 EPI clusters were built on the available data for 180 destinations. Out of the 44 destinations with complete border closure since 27 April, the

chart displays those 36 destinations for which data was available.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

23 destinations (52%) of the 44 destinations

with complete border closure in place since 27

April 2020 have as of 18 October 2020

no or

low infection rates with less than 20 per 100.000

population in the last 14-days (Figure 26).

Figure 26 - Number of destinations with complete border closure since 27 April 2020, per 14-day

COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

No new cases

< 20 new cases

>=20 and <60 new cases

>=60 and <120 new cases

>=120 new cases

51 Data for the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control was collected for 197 destinations as of 18 October 2020. For more

information see Annex 1, Methodological Note.

52 Clusters of 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000 population were built on the available data for 197 destinations. Out of the 44

destinations with complete border closure since 27 April, the chart displays those 37 destinations for which data was available.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

5. Further analysis of travel restrictions

53 54 SIDS in total. Please see at: https://www.un.org/ohrlls/

54 Data on the contribution of tourism to SIDS economies and source markets is available for 29 destinations out of the 35 SIDS which have

eased travel restrictions.

55 7 February 2020 is the date when UNWTO SDT started collecting systematically information on travel restrictions worldwide with a view to the

outbreak of COVID-19.

5.1. Travel restrictions in Small Island

Developing States (SIDS)

As of 1 November 2020, 35 SIDS (63% of

all SIDS

) have eased travel restrictions for

international tourism. This is an increase of 10

SIDS compared to 1 September 2020.

The majority of SIDS which have eased travel

restrictions (30 SIDS) are requesting a negative

PCR test upon arrival as the main measure for

international travellers. Most of these destinations

have a high (16 destinations) and considerable

(7 destinations) contribution of tourism to their

economies and also a high dependence on 1 or

2 source markets (17 destinations).

It is furthermore observed that among the 35

SIDS that have eased restrictions, 19 SIDS have

low and no infection rates as of Mid-October

2020.

At the same time, 17 SIDS (31% of all SIDS)

continue to have their borders completely closed

(Figure 28), out of which 63% (12 destinations) are

from Asia and the Pacic and 18% (5 destinations)

from the Americas. This is a decrease of 9 SIDS

compared to 1 September 2020.

It is interesting to note that 22 SIDS (41% of all

SIDS) have travel restrictions in place since at

least 7 February 2020, representing a period of

38 weeks

In fact, many SIDS (41% of all SIDS) were among

the rst destinations that introduced travel

restrictions at the very beginning of the COVID-19

outbreak, some as early as January 2020.

Figure 27 - Global and regional breakdown of travel restrictions consisting of complete border

closures applied by SIDS as of 1 November 2020

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

31%

18%

63%

69%

100%

82%

37%

100%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

120%

SIDS

Africa

Americas

Asia and the Pacific

Middle East

Complete border closure Other measures

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

5.2. Travel restrictions in the

Schengen Area

The external borders of the European Union

(EU) have been closed to many non-EU citizens

for more than 8 months.

On 11 June 2020, the

European Commission invited Member States

to prolong the temporary restriction on non-

essential travel in the EU until 30 June 2020.

On 30 June 2020, the European Council agreed

to start easing travel restrictions for residents

of 15 “third-countries”.

For this purpose,

specic criteria and conditions set out in

recommendations

were elaborated, including

the assessment of the epidemiological situation

in such countries, which shall show a similar or

lower number of new COVID-19 cases over the

last 14 days than the EU average, as well as the

ability to apply containment measures during

travel and reciprocity considerations”.

Based

on these recommendations, most Schengen

countries have permitted entry of those “third-

countries” into their destinations. On 16 July

2020, the European Council reviewed the initial

list of the 15 “third-countries” and adjusted

it to 12 destinations.

On 7 August 2020, the

European Council reviewed again this list and

further reduced the number of destinations to

11 destinations.

The criteria applied in this

context are based on epidemiological situation

and containment measures, including physical

distancing, as well as economic and social

considerations

For the internal borders in the Schengen area,

various restrictive measures have been applied

during the last months by each Member State.

Such measures have signicantly limited the

movement of tourists between destinations of the

region and subsequently brought international

intraregional tourism

almost to a complete

standstill during April and May 2020. On 11 June

2020, the European Commission recommended

to its Member States partial and gradual lifting of

such restrictions by 15 June 2020.

On 15 June

2020, 92% (24 destinations) of the 26 Member

States of the Schengen Area had partially

opened their borders to other EU countries.

This was of particular relevance towards the

restoration of intraregional tourism within the EU

Area, and in view of the summer holiday season.

In addition, a specic website “Re-open EU” was

established that contains all the information on

travel restrictions within the EU Area

On 4 September 2020, the European Commission

proposed more clarity and predictability for any

measure restricting free movement in the EU

This proposal

was elaborated for a European

Council Recommendation and includes the

56 The Schengen area covers 26 countries (“Schengen States”) without border controls between them, for more information see:

https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/visa-policy/schengen_visa_en.

57 On 16 March 2020, the European Commission proposed the temporary restriction of all non- essential travel from third countries to the EU+

area for 30 days. For more information see: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0115&from=EN. This

restriction was extended by another 30 days on 8 May 2020. See at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_823.

58 Algeria, Australia, Canada, Georgia, Japan, Montenegro, Morocco, New Zealand, Rwanda, Serbia, South Korea, Thailand, Tunisia, Uruguay

and China. See at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2020/06/30/council-agrees-to-start-lifting-travel-restrictions-for-

residents-of-some-third-countries/

59 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-9208-2020-INIT/en/pdf

60 European Commission, Travel and transportation during the coronavirus pandemic, see section “Temporary non-essential travel restrictions”,

online page available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work-travel-eu/health/coronavirus-response/travel-and-transportation-during-

coronavirus-pandemic_en.

61 Schengen Visa Info News, available online at: https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/council-updates-list-of-epidemiologically-safe-third-

countries/

62 Council of the European Union, Press Release, 7 August 2020, available online at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-

releases/2020/08/07/lifting-of-travel-restrictions-council-reviews-the-list-of-third-countries/

63 EU Council Recommendation amending Council Recommendation 2020/912 on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU

and the possible lifting of such restriction available at: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10095-2020-INIT/en/pdf

64 Intraregional tourism refers to tourist movements from one country to another country within the same region.

65 Ibid.

66 https://reopen.europa.eu/en/

67 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_20_1555

68 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/les/council-proposal-coordinated-approach-restriction-movement_en.pdf

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

request of a coordinated approach in the event

that a Member State decides to introduce

further restrictions. The latter is of particular

importance as the Freedom of Movement is a

fundamental right enshrined in Article 45 of the

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, which

can only be restricted to protect certain public

interests, namely the protection of public health,

public policy and public security. The proposal

species four key points for a coordinated

approach: i) the application of common criteria

and thresholds to decide whether to introduce

restriction to free movement; ii) the mapping of

common criteria using an agreed colour code;

iii) the adoption of a common approach for the

measures to be applied to persons moving to

and from areas identied as higher-risk, and; iv)

providing the public with clear, comprehensive

and timely information about any restrictions and

accompanying requirements.

Consequently, on 13 October 2020, the European

Council adopted this Recommendation with

common criteria and common framework that

shall help Member States to take proportionate

decisions on the further development of travel

restrictions.

Accordingly, a common colour-coded map

broken down by region is produced weekly by

the European Centre for Disease Prevention

and Control (ECDC) with the data provided by

member states on the following criteria:

• Number of cases per 100 000 population in

the last 14 days;

• Number of tests per 100 000 population

carried out in the last week (testing rate);

• Percentage of positive tests carried out in the

last week (test positivity rate).

Member States also agreed on a common

framework for possible measures for travellers:

• They should not restrict the free movement

of persons travelling to or from green areas;

• If considering whether to apply measures,

they should respect the differences in the

epidemiological situation between orange

and red areas and act in a proportionate

manner, and take into account the

epidemiological situation in their own

territory;

• They should in principle not refuse entry to

persons travelling from other Member State,

but they could require persons travelling

from non-green areas to:

o undergo quarantine;

o undergo a test after arrival.

• They may offer the option of replacing this

test with a test carried out before arrival;

• They could also require persons entering their

territory to submit passenger locator forms (a

common European passenger locator form

should be developed for possible common

use).

Currently, discussions on common testing

procedures, as well as passenger locator forms

are taking place and shall further help to ensure

coordination. In addition, tracing apps have been

launched on a national level by Member States

and the EU is working on linking these apps and

making them interoperable. On 19 October 2020,

the national applications of Germany, Ireland and

Italy were linked based on a new service, called

the European Federation Gateway Service

As of 1 November 2020, the Schengen Member

States have partial closure as the main travel

restriction in place, as the external borders are

closed to most Non-EU countries. At the same

time, out of the 26 Schengen States, 8 countries

69 ºSee more information at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/coronavirus/covid-19-travel-and-transport/

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

request a negative PCR test upon arrival from

high- risk areas as a secondary measure and 4

destinations as third measure, while 9 destinations

request quarantine as a secondary measure.

5.3. Analysis of COVID-19 travel

advice in the Top 10 source

markets

Travel advice issued by governments for their

citizens is increasingly inuencing tourism ows

during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the following

paragraphs, travel advice from the Top 10

source markets

, which generated 49% of all

international tourist arrivals in 2018, is analysed

with the aim to better understand its impact

on the restoration of mobility of people across

international borders and subsequently on the

recovery of tourism.

Besides having a variety of COVID-19 related

travel restrictions in place for (inbound)

international tourism, it has been observed that

the source markets as part of travel advice also

include measures for citizens when returning back

home such as negative PCR tests, quarantine and

self-isolation.

China

, Hong Kong SAR

, Canada

and the

Russian Federation

currently apply a global

travel advice for their citizens which recommends

to avoid all non-essential travels abroad and

overseas. This advice affects all international

travel of those 4 source markets, which

represented 19% of all outbound trips in 2018.

The United States of America

, Germany

, United

Kingdom

, France

, Italy

and Netherlands

are applying a more differentiated approach and

allow travel to some specic destinations that are

determined through specic risk assessments

Information on such risk assessments is either

included in each country´s travel advice (United

States of America and France), used to cluster

countries according to different risk categories

such as medium and high (Germany, United

Kingdom and Italy), or including a coloured

system (the Netherlands). This differentiated

70 The 10 Top source markets ranked in accordance with the numbers of generated outbound trips in 2018 are: United States of America,

Germany, China, Hong Kong SAR, United Kingdom, France, Canada, the Russian Federation, Italy and the Netherlands (in order of decreasing

numbers). Source: UNWTO Statistics

71 China issued a renewed travel safety reminder on 28 September 2020 that recalls avoiding unnecessary overseas travels. More information

at: http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2020-09/28/content_5547855.htm Translation and interpretation kindly provided by the UNWTO Regional

Department of Asia and the Pacic.

72 “Members of the public are strongly urged to avoid non-essential travel outside Hong Kong.” More information at:

www.coronavirus.gov.hk/eng/travel-advice.html

73 “Avoid non-essential travel outside Canada until further notice.” More information at: https://travel.gc.ca/

74 Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 16, 2020, Number 635-p. and Order of 27 March, 2020 Number 763-p outline

restrictions of inbound and outbound movements of foreign nationals and citizens of the Russian Federation. More information at:

http://ps.fsb.ru/general/info/covid.htm

75 From March to October 2020 the US had a global travel warning of Level 4 “Do not Travel” in place. This has been replaced by warnings on

individual countries based on risk assessments. More information available at:

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories.html/.

76 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Germany issued a warning to avoid unnecessary and touristic travels in a majority of countries. More

information available at: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/de/ReiseUndSicherheit/reise-gesundheit/gesundheit-fachinformationen/

reisemedizinische-hinweise/Coronavirus

77 “The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Ofce of the United Kingdom currently advises British nationals against all but essential

international travel, but exempts destinations that do not pose an unacceptably high risk for British travellers”. More information available at:

https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice.

78 There is a limited number of specic COVID-19 related travel advisories concerning destinations, e.g. for Catalonia and Aragon from October

2020. More information at: https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/conseils-aux-voyageurs/conseils-par-pays-destination.

79 Categorization of destinations ranging from A (no risk and no limitation to travel) to E (to undertake only essential travels). More information

at: http://www.viaggiaresicuri.it/.

80 “Travelling to countries with an orange or red travel advisory is discouraged because of the risks”. More information available at:

https://www.government.nl/topics/coronavirus-covid-19/tackling-new-coronavirus-in-the-netherlands/travel-and-holidays

81 The risk assessment is usually based on data provided by the WHO, regional Centers for Disease and Disaster Prevention (like the European

Center for Disease and Disaster Prevention) or local health institutions (like the Robert-Koch Institute in Germany) and include data such as the

14-days infection rates per 100.00 population and replication rates.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

approach is affecting signicantly international

travel of those 6 source markets, which generated

30% of all outbound trips in 2018.

According to the travel advice of these 6 source

markets, citizens returning home to the United

States of America and France can expect

increased screening when arriving from a high-

risk country. In the remaining 4 source markets,

namely United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and

the Netherlands, citizens need either a negative

PCR test and/ or observe a certain period of self-

isolation or quarantine upon return into the home

country, depending on the originating destination

and its assessed risk. For this purpose, the lists of

high-risk destinations are regularly updated and

communicated on respective websites.

As travel advice is changing fast and constantly,

international travellers are currently challenged

in multiple ways as they need to understand on

one hand the restrictions in the destination they

wish to visit, as well as the implications of their

Government´s travel advice in all their aspects,

ranging from insurance issues to the costs of

potential PCR tests and/or quarantine-related

implications.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

6. Conclusions

6.1. Key characteristics and features

of travel restrictions

The research conrms the trend of destinations

to continue easing travel restrictions and

identies various factors that are inuencing

this development, namely health and hygiene

infrastructure, overall environmental performance

and tourism considerations.

Destinations with higher scores in the health and

hygiene indicator as well as in the environmental

performance index are among those which have

eased restrictions faster. These destinations are

increasingly applying a more differentiated,

evidence and risk-based approach in the

implementation of travel restrictions, enabled

by the increasing understanding of the virus and

non-pharmaceutical intervention possibilities.

For instance, as part of the shift towards health

screenings at airports and other points of arrival,

the request of a negative PCR test is being

integrated in a growing number of destinations.

It is interesting to note that many destinations

with increasing COVID-19 cases are among the

destinations that have eased restrictions, which

points at infection rates within a destination are

currently playing a less important role than at the

beginning of the pandemic.

However, many destinations still have their

borders completely closed for international

tourism. These destinations are in general

emerging economies with relatively low scores

in their health and hygiene infrastructure and

environmental performance. The majority of

destinations which borders remain closed are in

Asia and the Pacic. Furthermore, a signicant

part of these destinations belong to SIDS, LDCs

or LLDCs. It is interesting to note that the majority

of these destinations have reported very low and

low infection rates.

There are signicant differences among the

world regions regarding the easing of travel

restrictions for international tourism purposes.

The analysis conrms that Europe continues to

be the region where travel restrictions are eased

most. Africa, the Americas and the Middle East

are following next. Asia and the Pacic continues

to be the region with less travel restrictions eased

and more complete border closures in place for

international tourism.

Another important factor that has gained inuence

on international tourism is travel advice issued by

governments for their citizens, especially as all

Top-10 source markets, which represented 49%

of all international tourism arrivals in 2018, have

now introduced travel advice for their citizens to

refrain from all but essential travel or to refrain

from travel to high-risk areas.

6.2. Proportionate and responsible

opening of borders for

international tourism

Knowledge on the virus has improved signicantly

over the past nine months supported by scientic

research as well as by trial and error. Lessons

learned from non-pharmaceutical interventions,

such as national lockdowns, quarantine measures,

82 Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) are public health measures that aim to prevent and/or control COVID-19 transmission in the

community. As long as there is no effective and safe vaccine to protect those at risk of severe COVID-19, NPI are the most effective public

health interventions against COVID-19. For more information see Guidelines for the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions

against COVID-19 of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), available online at:

www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/covid-19-guidelines-non-pharmaceutical-interventions

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

83 One Planet Sustainable Tourism Programme (2020) - One Planet Vision for a Responsible Recovery of the Tourism Sector, available online at:

https://webunwto.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2020-06/one-planet-vision-responsible-recovery-of-the-tourism-sector.pdf.

border closures, testing and tracing, social

distancing and increased hygiene measures (like

hand washing and wearing of masks), as well as

the introduction of sanitary protocols both in

general and for tourism, help to better manage

the pandemic on a global level and allow for the

lifting and easing of travel restrictions to take

place.

In fact, destinations can now apply a more

differentiated approach to such interventions

and base decisions on risk assessments and

available evidence. Travel restrictions can

be adjusted with the objective of facilitating

international travel and complete border closure

might be replaced by less severe measures, such

as partial closure and/or testing upon arrival and

related quarantine measures. It is nevertheless of

utmost importance that border openings occur

in a proportionate and responsible manner with

a clear communication strategy for citizens and

tourists and visitors alike.

6.3. Timely, reliable, accessible and

consistent communication

Considering the continuous evolution of

the epidemiological situation worldwide,

governments continue to indicate that

travel restrictions can be eased, adjusted or

tightened at any time. These fast-changing

entry requirements, remain a major challenge as

immigration procedures and requirements will

differ from destination to destination, depending

on the necessary procedures and requirements

across the different national authorities, namely

health, foreign affairs, immigration and tourism

authorities of a country.

Providing reliable, consistent and easy-to-access

information on immigration procedures for

international tourists has proved a successful

approach in the past to avoid unnecessary

burdens for travelers. It is now, especially in

view of the fast-changing procedures and

requirements, even more important that national

authorities ensure that immigration procedures

and requirements are provided in a consistent

manner across all information systems and

platforms, to maintain condence and trust.

The same applies to travel advice issued by

governments for their citizens.

This is in line with the recommendations made by

the One Planet Vision for a Responsible Recovery

of the Tourism Sector which was released on

5 June 2020 and calls for the integration of

epidemiological indicators in tourism monitoring

as “strengthening monitoring mechanisms in

this direction has the potential to lead the way

for tourism to recover as an economic activity,

ensuring that the easing of travel restrictions is

based on evidence”.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

aNNEXES

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 1

Methodological note

All reports in this series are based on desk

research carried out since the end of January

2020. They contain the results of monitoring

travel restrictions that have been implemented

during this period by destinations worldwide.

For the rst two reports in this series, the

International Air Transport Association (IATA) Travel

Centre

was the main source of information. In

addition, websites such as International SOS

and

the World Health Organization (WHO) Extranet

were consulted for destinations that were not

featured on the IATA website.

For the third report, in order to gain a better

understanding of the different categories of

travel restrictions, and further insights on the

distinction between complete and partial closure

of borders, the information from IATA and

International SOS were analysed, compared and

validated for all destinations.

As from the fourth edition, reports build on data

received from the UN World Food Programme

(WFP)

. For each report, the information was

further analysed and validated by UNWTO using

additional online sources that allowed ne-

tuning of the data and focussing on the situation

for international tourism. In addition, the website

“Reopen Europe”

was used for validating

information for travel within Member States of

the European Union (EU).

The eighth report on COVID-19 Related

Travel Restrictions – A Global Review for

Tourism presents travel restrictions in place for

international tourism in destinations worldwide

as of 1 November 2020.

For this edition analysis on destinations that

a) have eased travel restrictions , b) use PCR

tests as the main entry requirement, c) maintain

complete border closure and d) have complete

border closure in place for a long period of time,

has been carried out.

As for the previous reports for the purpose

of identifying common characteristics among

destinations with such measures, the following

aspects have been taken into account: i)

dependence on tourism looking at tourism

GDP (T-GDP), ii) mode of transport, and iii)

dependence on amount of international source

markets. For the eighth report a new aspect

has been added, namely the iv) inbound and

outbound characteristics of a destination.

In order to better understand commonalities

and patterns that help to form decisions of

governments regarding the implementation

of specic travel restrictions and their easings,

the present report looks at health and hygiene

infrastructure and the environmental performance

of a destination. The Environmental Performance

Index (EPI) published in 2020 by the Yale Center

for Environmental Law & Policy

uses data from

2017 or 2018.

For the present report the index

84 For more information on the previous ve editions of the Report COVID-19 Related Travel Restrictions – A Global Review for Tourism, visit:

https://www.unwto.org/covid-19-travel-restrictions.

85 IATA Travel Centre, available online at: https://www.iatatravelcentre.com/.

86 International SOS is a medical and travel security services company, for more info on Travel restrictions, ight operations and screening see:

https://pandemic.internationalsos.com/2019-ncov/ncov-travel-restrictions-ight-operations-and-screening.

87 World Travel Restrictions - UN World Food Programme, available online at: https://unwfp.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/

db5b5df309ac4f10bfd36145a6f8880e.

88 For more information visit the ofcial website of the European Union: https://reopen.europa.eu/en/.

89 Wendling, Z. A., Emerson, J. W., de Sherbinin, A., Esty, D. C., et al. (2020). 2020 Environmental Performance Index. New Haven, CT: Yale

Center for Environmental Law & Policy, available online at: https://epi.yale.edu/.

90 The analysis does not reect recent developments, including the dramatic drop in air pollution in 2020 in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic

or the huge increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the extensive Amazonian res in 2019.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

scores were grouped in ve clusters, quintiles

with 36 destinations according to EPI report

rankings that indicate the level of scoring from

cluster 1 being the lowest to cluster 5 being the

highest (Table A1.1).

In this context available datasets were analysed,

further developed and used as follows:

A1.1. The Environmental Performance

Index 2020 (EPI)

The Environmental Performance Index was

analysed specically for this eighth report.

The index provides a data-driven summary of

the state of sustainability in 180 countries. It

uses 32 performance indicators across 11 issue

categories grouped in two policy objectives:

environmental health - which measures threats

to human health, and ecosystem vitality - which

measures natural resources and ecosystem

services. The two policy objectives are grouped

in the overall index which provides an assessment

at a national scale of how close countries are to

established environmental policy targets. The

metrics on which the 2020 scores are based

come from a variety of sources and represent the

most recent published data, often from 2017 or

2018.

The EPI is issued on a biannual basis by

the Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy

and Columbia Universities.

For the present report, the index scores were

grouped in ve clusters, quintiles with 36

destinations according to EPI report rankings

that indicate the level of scoring from cluster 1

being the lowest to cluster 5 being the highest

(Table A1.1).

Table A1.1 - Destination clusters by

Environmental Performance Index

Environmental

Performance

Index

Number of destinations

and regional breakdown

Cluster 1:

Very Low

36 destinations:

24 in Africa, 10 in Asia

and the Pacic and 2 in

the Americas.

Cluster 2:

Low

36 destinations:

17 in Africa, 14 in Asia

and the Pacic, 2 in the

Americas, 2 in the Middle

East and 1 in Europe.

Cluster 3:

Moderate

36 destinations:

13 in the Americas, 9 in

Europe, 7 in Africa, 4 in

the Middle East and 3 in

Asia and the Pacic.

Cluster 4:

High

36 destinations:

15 in the Americas, 10 in

Europe, 5 in Asia and the

Pacic, 4 in the Middle

East and 2 in Africa.

Cluster 5:

Very high

36 destinations:

30 in Europe, 4 in Asia

and the Pacic and 2 in

the Americas.

91 The analysis does not reect recent developments, including the drop in air pollution in 2020 in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic or the

increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the extensive Amazonian res in 2019.

92 Wendling, Z. A., Emerson, J. W., de Sherbinin, A., Esty, D. C., et al. (2020). 2020 Environmental Performance Index. New Haven, CT: Yale

Center for Environmental Law & Policy, available online at: https://epi.yale.edu/.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

A1.2. Health and Hygiene Indicator

The Health and Hygiene Indicator was created

specically for the purpose of the travel

restrictions reports. The indicator is based on the

Health and Hygiene Pillar used in the Tourism and

Travel Competitiveness Index (TTCI) prepared

by the World Economic Forum (WEF) for 140

destinations.

This Health and Hygiene pillar is

one of the 14 pillars that comprise the TTCI. It

is composed of 6 different indicators, namely: i)

Physician density, ii) Use of basic sanitation, iii)

Use of basic drinking water, iv) Hospital beds,

as well as v) HIV prevalence and vi) Malaria

incidence. For the present report the same

methodology was applied, excluding the HIV

and Malaria indicators, in order to focus mainly

on the health infrastructure of destinations.

Indicators were normalized to a 1-to-7 scale

following WEF TTCI methodology. In addition,

data available from the World Bank Data Bank

beyond the 140 destinations that are included

in the WEF TTCI, was used to gather data on

the four selected indicators for destinations not

included in WEF report. As a result, a health and

hygiene indicator, obtained as an average of the

four component indicators, was prepared for 197

destinations. The quartiles of the index score

were used to form 4 clusters (Table A1.2).

Table A1.2 - Destination clusters by health

and hygiene standard

Health and

Hygiene

Indicator

Number of destinations

and regional breakdown

Cluster 1:

Low

49 destinations:

39 in Africa, 8 in Asia

and the Pacic, 1 in the

Americas and 1 in the

Middle East.

Cluster 2:

Moderate

50 destinations:

23 in the Americas, 19 in

Asia and the Pacic, 5 in

Africa and 3 in the Middle

East.

Cluster 3:

High

53 destinations:

17 in Europe, 12 in Asia

and the Pacic,11 in the

Americas, 9 in the Middle

East and 4 in Africa.

Cluster 4:

Very high

45 destinations:

36 in Europe, 5 in the

Americas, 4 in Asia and

the Pacic.

93 World Economic Forum, Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2019, available online at:

https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-travel-tourism-competitiveness-report-2019

94 The World Bank data bank, available online at: https://data.worldbank.org/

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

A1.3. The Tourism Gross Domestic

Product (T-GDP)

The Tourism Gross Domestic Product (T-GDP)

clusters relate to the importance of tourism in the

economy of a destination as percentage of the

overall GDP. For this purpose, destinations were

grouped in four clusters of economic importance,

namely: low, moderate, considerable and high.

Clusters were aligned with the World Bank

report on “Rebuilding tourism competitiveness,

Tourism response, recovery and resilience to the

COVID-19 crisis”.

Information is available for

181 destinations (Table A1.3).

A1.4. Mode of transport

The mode of transport of international tourism

to destinations was analysed and organized in

six groups. The different modes of transport

are air, land, water. Each mode was divided

into high, when arrivals make more than 70%

of International Tourist Arrivals and medium,

when arrivals make between 40% and 70% of

ITA. Information is available for 194 destinations

(Table A1.4).

95 World Bank Group, Rebuilding tourism competitiveness,

Tourism response, recovery and resilience to the COVID-19

crisis, July 2020, available online at:

https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/34348

Table A1.3 - Destination clusters by

economic importance of tourism

Economic

Importance of

Tourism

Number of destinations

and regional breakdown

Very Low:

T-GDP <=5%

25 destinations:

10 in Africa, 5 in the

Americas, 5 in Europe, 4

in Asia and the Pacic, 1

in the Middle East.

Moderate:

T-GDP >5%

and <= 10%

80 destinations:

28 in Europe, 19 in Africa,

14 in the Americas, 11 in

Asia and the Pacic, and

8 in the Middle East.

Considerable:

T-GDP >10%

and <=20%

47 destinations:

12 in Africa, 11 in Asia

and the Pacic, 10 in the

Americas, 10 in Europe, 4

in the Middle East.

High:

T-GDP >20%

29 destinations:

14 in the Americas 6 in

Asia and the Pacic, 6 in

Europe, 3 in Africa.

Table A1.4 - Groups of mode of transport

and corresponding destinations

Mode of

transport

per share of

International

Tourist

Arrivals

(ITA) in a

destination

Number of destinations

and regional breakdown

AIR High:

>70% of ITA

100 destinations:

36 in the Americas, 30 in

Asia and the Pacic, 17 in

Africa, 12 in Europe, 5 in

the Middle East

AIR Medium:

>40% and

<=70% of ITA

22 destinations:

11 in Africa, 5 in the

Americas, 3 in Asia and

the Pacic, 2 in Europe, 1

in the Middle East.

LAND High:

>70% of ITA

36 destinations:

18 in Europe, 9 in Africa,

5 in Asia and the Pacic,

2 in the Americas, 2 in the

Middle East.

LAND

Medium:

>40% and

<=70% of ITA

35 destinations:

12 in Europe, 9 in Africa, 8

in the Americas, 3 in Asia

and the Pacic, 3 in the

Middle East.

WATER

Medium:

>40% and

<=70% of ITA

1 destination:

1 in Europe.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Table A1.5 - Groups of international source

market and corresponding destinations

Dependence

on source

markets that

make 60% of

International

Tourist Arrivals

(ITA) in a

destination

Number of destinations

and regional breakdown

Group A:

1-2

International

source markets

make 60% of

the total ITA to

a destination

57 destinations:

28 in the Americas, 14 in

Asia and the Pacic, 7 in

Europe, 5 in Africa, 3 in

the Middle East.

Group B:

3-5

International

source markets

make 60% of

the total ITA to

a destination

64 destinations:

19 in Asia and the Pacic,

16 in the Americas, 13 in

Africa, 13 in Europe and 3

in the Middle East.

Group C:

6-9

International

source markets

make 60% of

the total ITA to

a destination

51 destinations:

24 in Europe, 11 in Asia

and the Pacic, 10 in

Africa, 5 in the Americas,

1 in the Middle East

Group D:

10+

International

source markets

make 60% of

the total ITA to

a destination

35 destinations:

16 in Africa, 10 in Europe,

2 in the Americas, 6 in the

Middle East, 1 in Asia and

the Pacic.

Table A1.6 - Destinations clusters by

14-day notication rate of new COVID-19

cases per 100,00 population

Clusters as of 18

October 2020

Number of destinations

and regional breakdown

Cluster 0:

No new cases

reported

8 destinations:

4 in the Americas and 3

in Asia, 1 in Africa.

Cluster 1:

< 20 new cases

reported

83 destinations:

44 in Africa, 20 in Asia

and the Pacic, 12 in the

Americas, 4 in the Middle

East and 3 in Europe.

Cluster 2:

>=20 and <60

new cases

reported

23 destinations:

9 in the Americas, 7 in

Europe, 4 in Asia and the

Pacic and 3 in Africa.

Cluster 3:

>=60 and

<120 new

cases reported

27 destinations:

12 in Europe, 9 in the

Americas, 2 in Asia and

the Pacic, 2 in the

Middle East, 1 in Africa.

Cluster 4:

>=120 new

cases reported

57 destinations :

31 in Europe, 14 in the

Americas, 7 in the Middle

East, 3 in Asia and the

Pacic, 2 in Africa.

A1.5. International source markets

International source markets that make 60%

of total International Tourist Arrivals (ITAs) in

a destination were collected and analysed.

Subsequently, four groups of destinations were

formed according to the diversication of their

source markets. Information is available for 207

destinations (Table A1.5).

A1.6. The 14-day COVID-19 case

notication rate per 100.000

population

Data from the European Centre for Disease

Prevention and Control

was collected for

197 destinations as of 18 October 2020 and

subsequently grouped into ve clusters. This

corresponds to the same clusters as used by

the World Health Organization. In addition,

notication rates from April 2020 onwards have

been analysed in relation to the time of easings

of restrictions, meaning reported COVID-19

cases per 100.000 population at the moment

when travel restrictions were lifted (Table A1.6).

96 European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, more

information available online at:

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-19-pandemic

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

A1.7. Inbound and/or outbound

destinations

For the purpose of this report and for further

understanding the importance of tourism in a

destination The categorization of destinations

according to their main international tourism

ows has been introduced to the analysis for

this present edition with the objective to further

understand the importance of tourism in a

destination.

As such, a destination is considered an inbound

destination, if the total of international tourist

arrivals is 20% greater than the average between

its total international arrivals and departures.

A destination is considered an outbound

destination, if the total of international tourist

arrivals is 20% greater than the average between

its total international arrivals and departures.

A destination is considered both an inbound and

an outbound destination, if the total international

arrivals and the total departures are not greater

than 20% of the average between it’s total arrivals

and total departures.

Table A1.7 – Inbound and outbound

destinations

Inbound,

Outbound and

both

Number of destinations

and regional breakdown

INBOUND

destinations

101 destinations:

32 in the Americas, 23 in

Africa, 23 in Europe, 16 in

Asia and the Pacic, and

7 in the Middle East.

OUTBOUND

destinations

31 destinations:

15 in Europe, 10 in Asia

and the Pacic, 3 in

Africa, 3 in the Americas.

BOTH

outbound

and inbound

destinations

48 destinations:

14 in Asia and the Pacic,

14 in Europe, 10 in the

Americas, 7 in Africa, and

3 in the Middle East.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 2

Overview on the different categories

and applying destinations as of 1

November 2020

Complete closure of borders

Applied by 59 destinations (27% of all

destinations worldwide)

Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, China, Cook

Islands, Czech Republic, Fiji, French Guyana,

India, Indonesia, Israel, Korea (Democratic

People’s Republic of), Laos, Libya, Malaysia,

Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia,

Montserrat, Myanmar, New Caledonie, New

Zealand, Niue, Oman, The Philippines, Qatar,

Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname,

Syrian Arab Republic, Taiwan Province of

China, Tajikistan, Timor Leste, Tonga, Trinidad

and Tobago, Turkmenistan , Tuvalu, Uruguay,

Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam, Virgin Islands

British, Yemen.

Partial closure of borders

Applied by 59 destinations (27% of all

destinations worldwide)

Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Argentina,

Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh,

Belarus, Belgium, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil,

Bulgaria, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland,

France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany,

Ghana, Greece, Guinea (Republic of), Hungary,

Italy, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia,

Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg,

Macao SAR, Malawi, Malta, Mexico, Moldova,

Montenegro, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway,

Poland, Portugal, The Russian Federation, San

Marino, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia,

Somalia, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland,

Togo, United States of America

Negative PCR test

Applied by 67 destinations (31% of all

destinations worldwide)

Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas,

Bahrain, Barbados, Belize, Bermuda, Bonaire,

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cabo Verde, Central

African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Comoros

Islands, Congo (Democratic Rep. of), Cote

D’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Curaçao, Cyprus, Djibouti,

Dominica, Egypt, El Salvador, Eswatini, French

Polynesia, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Guatemala,

Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica,

Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, Korea (Republic of),

Lebanon, Maldives, Mali, Martinique, Monaco,

Namibia, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Panama, Papua

New Guinea, Puerto Rico, Reunion, Rwanda,

Sao Tome and Principe, Serbia, Slovenia, South

Sudan, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Maarten,

St Vincent and Grenadines, Tanzania, Turks and

Caicos, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates,

Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe.

Destination-specic travel restrictions

aimed at passengers from specic

countries

Applied by 12 destinations (5% of all

destinations worldwide)

Hong Kong SAR, Japan, Madagascar, Morocco,

Nauru, Senegal, Seychelles, Singapore, South

Africa, St Eustatius, Thailand, Tunisia.

97 Some destinations apply more than one measure, in this case the measure affecting tourists most is used for the purpose of this analysis.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Quarantine or self-isolation related

measures

Applied by 10 destinations (5% of all destinations

worldwide)

Ethiopia, Iceland, Ireland, Mauritius, Palau,

Paraguay, Peru, Romania, Saba, United Kingdom.

Visa measures - Visa are invalidated or

no longer visa exempt or visa cannot be

obtained any longer upon arrival

Applied by 5 destinations (2% of all destinations

worldwide).

Cambodia, Iran, Mozambique, Nepal, Zambia.

Nationality-specic travel restrictions

aimed at passengers from specic

countries

Applied by 1 destination (1% of all destination

worldwide)

North Macedonia.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 3

Clusters by economic importance of

tourism

HIGH T-GDP >20% (29 destinations)

Albania, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba,

Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Cabo Verde,

Cambodia, Cayman Islands, Croatia, Dominica,

Fiji, Georgia, Greece, Grenada, Iceland, Jamaica,

Macao SAR, Maldives, Montenegro, The

Philippines, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles,

St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and

Grenadines, Vanuatu, Virgin Islands British.

CONSIDERABLE T-GDP >10% and <=20%

(47 destinations)

Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bermuda,

Botswana, Bulgaria, China, Comoros Islands,

Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus,

Dominican Republic , El Salvador, Estonia,

Gambia, Honduras, Hong Kong SAR, Italy,

Jordan, Kiribati, Lebanon, Lesotho, Madagascar,

Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco,

Namibia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Panama,

Portugal, Rwanda, Singapore, Solomon Islands,

Spain, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Thailand, Tonga,

Tunisia , Turkey , United Arab Emirates, Uruguay.

MODERATE T-GDP >5% and <= 10% (80

destinations)

Algeria, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Benin,

Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei

Darussalam, Cameroon, Canada, Central African

Republic, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark,

Ecuador, Egypt, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Finland,

France, Germany, Guadeloupe, Guatemala,

Haiti, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq,

Israel, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait,

Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg,

Malawi, Mali, Martinique, Moldova, Mongolia,

Mozambique, Nepal, The Netherlands, Niger,

North Macedonia, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Peru,

Qatar, Reunion, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Senegal,

Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Sudan,

Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic,

Taiwan Province of China, Tajikistan, Togo,

Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Ukraine, United

Kingdom, United States of America, Venezuela,

Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

LOW T-GDP <=5% (25 destinations)

Angola, Bangladesh, Belgium, Burkina Faso,

Burundi, Chad, Colombia, Congo, Gabon,

Ghana, Guinea (Republic of), Guyana, Ireland,

Korea (Republic of), Libya, Myanmar, Nigeria,

Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Poland, Puerto

Rico, The Russian Federation, Sierra Leone,

Suriname, Uzbekistan.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 4

Groups of international source market

and corresponding destinations

GROUP A: 1-2 international source

markets (57 destinations)

Botswana, Comoros Islands, Lesotho,

Mozambique, Rwanda, Anguilla, Antigua and

Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize,

Bermuda, Bonaire, Canada, Cayman Islands,

El Salvador, French Guyana, Guadeloupe,

Guatemala, Haiti, Jamaica, Martinique, Mexico,

Paraguay, Puerto Rico, Saba, St Eustatius, St Kitts

and Nevis, St Lucia, Suriname, Turks and Caicos,

Uruguay , Virgin Islands British, Bangladesh,

China, Cook Islands, Fiji, Hong Kong SAR, Laos,

Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of), Macao

SAR, Myanmar, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa,

Tonga, Vanuatu, Andorra, Belarus, Kazakhstan,

Kyrgyzstan, San Marino, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan,

Bahrain, Iraq, Oman.

GROUP B: 3-5 international source

markets (64 destinations)

Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia,

Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Cabo Verde, Cambodia,

Chile, Costa Rica, Curaçao, Cyprus, Denmark,

Djibouti, Ecuador, Eritrea, Estonia, Eswatini,

French Polynesia, Grenada, Guyana, Honduras,

Iran, Ireland, Japan, Korea (Republic of), Kuwait,

Libya, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malawi,

Malaysia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mongolia,

Montserrat, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, New

Caledonie, New Zealand, Pakistan, Palau, Peru,

The Philippines, The Russian Federation, Sao

Tome and Principe, Solomon Islands, South

Africa, St Maarten, St Vincent and Grenadines,

Syrian Arab Republic, Taiwan Province of China,

Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan,

Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United States of

America, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

GROUP C: 6-9 international source

markets (51 destinations)

Angola, Australia, Bhutan, Bulgaria, Congo,

Cote D’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic,

Dominica, Dominican Republic, France, Gambia,

Georgia, Greece, Guinea (Republic of), Guinea-

Bissau, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Israel, Italy,

Kenya, Kiribati, Latvia, Lithuania, Maldives,

Mali, Mauritius, Micronesia, Moldova, Monaco,

Montenegro, Nepal, Norway, Panama, Poland,

Portugal, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles,

Singapore, Slovakia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden,

Switzerland, Thailand, Timor Leste, United

Kingdom, Venezuela.

GROUP D: 10+ international source

markets (35 destinations)

Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Benin, Bosnia and

Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central

African Republic, Colombia, Congo (Democratic

Rep. of), Egypt, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany,

Ghana, India, Jordan, Lebanon, Madagascar,

Morocco, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, North

Macedonia, Qatar, Reunion, Senegal, Serbia,

Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Tanzania, Togo, Turkey,

United Arab Emirates, Yemen.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 5

Overview on destinations which have

eased and lifted travel restrictions for

international tourism purposes as of 1

November 2020

Destinations which have eased travel

restrictions for international tourism

purposes

Applied by 148 destinations

Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Anguilla, Antigua

and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Austria,

Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh,

Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bermuda, Bhutan,

Bolivia, Bonaire, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil,

Bulgaria, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Central African

Republic, Chad, Colombia, Comoros Islands,

Congo (Democratic Rep. of), Cote D’Ivoire,

Croatia, Cuba, Curaçao, Cyprus, Denmark,

Djibouti, Dominica, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,

Estonia, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Finland, France,

French Polynesia, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia,

Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guadeloupe,

Guatemala, Guinea (Republic of), Guinea-Bissau,

Guyana, Honduras, Hong Kong SAR, Hungary,

Iceland, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica,

Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea (Republic

of), Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon,

Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg,

Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Malta,

Martinique, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova,

Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique,

Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua,

Nigeria, North Macedonia, Norway, Pakistan,

Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru,

Poland, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Reunion, Romania,

The Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saba, San

Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia,

Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone,

Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South

Africa, South Sudan, Spain/Schengen, St Kitts

and Nevis, St Eustatius, St Lucia, St Maarten,

St Vincent and Grenadines, Sudan, Sweden,

Switzerland, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia,

Turks and Caicos, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab

Emirates, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan, Zambia,

Zimbabwe.

Destinations which have lifted travel

restrictions for international tourism

purposes

Applied by 4 destinations

Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Turkey.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 6

Overview on destinations which

require negative PCR test for

international tourism purposes as of 1

November 2020

Applied by 126 destinations

Afghanistan, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda,

Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Austria, Azerbaijan,

Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados,

Belize, Bermuda, Bolivia, Bonaire, Bosnia and

Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cabo Verde, Cambodia,

Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia,

Comoros Islands, Congo (Democratic Rep.

of), Cote D’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Curaçao,

Cyprus, Djibouti, Dominica, Ecuador, Egypt,

El Salvador, Eswatini, Ethiopia, France, French

Polynesia, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany,

Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guadeloupe,

Guatemala, Guinea (Republic of), Guinea-

Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Hong Kong SAR,

Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Iraq, Italy, Jamaica, Japan,

Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Korea

(Republic of), Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon,

Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi,

Maldives, Mali, Malta, Martinique, Mauritius,

Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique,

Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan,

Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay,

Portugal, Puerto Rico, Reunion, The Russian

Federation, Rwanda, Saba, San Marino, Sao

Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal,

Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore,

Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa,

South Sudan, Spain, St Kitts and Nevis, St

Lucia, St Maarten, St Vincent and Grenadines,

Sudan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turks

and Caicos, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab

Emirates, Uzbekistan, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

98 Destinations in bold show those that require a negative PCR test as main measure.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 7

Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which

eased or lifted restrictions, by mode of transport, as of 1 November 2020

Borders completely closed Eased or lifted restrictions

High dependence on air transport (air share > 70%)

Angola, Australia, Burkina Faso, Cayman Islands,

Cook Islands, Fiji, French Guyana, India, Israel,

Marshall Islands, Montserrat, New Caledonie, New

Zealand, Niger, Niue, The Philippines, Qatar, Samoa,

Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Taiwan Province

of China, Timor Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago,

Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam, Virgin Islands

British.

Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas,

Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bermuda,

Bonaire, Cabo Verde, Central African Republic,

Chad, Colombia, Comoros Islands, Costa Rica, Cuba,

Curaçao, Cyprus, Dominica, Dominican Republic,

Egypt, Ethiopia, French Polynesia, Gabon, Greece,

Grenada, Guadeloupe, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana,

Haiti, Iceland, Ireland, Jamaica, Korea (Republic

of), Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Madagascar, Maldives,

Mali, Malta, Martinique, Mauritius, Monaco, Nepal,

Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Puerto Rico,

Reunion, Saba, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia,

Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, St Kitts

and Nevis, St Eustatius, St Lucia, St Maarten, St

Vincent and Grenadines, Thailand, Turkey, Turks and

Caicos, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom.

Medium dependence on air transport (air share > 40% and <= 70%)

Algeria, Canada, Congo, Eritrea, Indonesia,

Turkmenistan.

Bhutan, Brazil, Cambodia, Congo (Democratic Rep.

of), Guinea (Republic of), Honduras, Kenya, Kuwait,

Morocco, Norway, Peru, Senegal, Sudan, Tanzania,

Togo.

High dependence on land transport (land share > 70%)

Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, China, Laos, Lesotho,

Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan.

Albania, Andorra, Austria, Bahrain, Bosnia and

Herzegovina, Croatia, Eswatini, Georgia, Hong Kong

SAR, Hungary, Iran, Kazakhstan, Malawi, Namibia,

Nicaragua, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Romania, The

Russian Federation, Rwanda, San Marino, Slovenia,

South Africa, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Medium dependence on land transport (land share > 40% and <= 70%)

Benin, Burundi, Cameroon, Chile, Libya, Malaysia,

Myanmar, Uruguay, Yemen.

Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bolivia, Bulgaria,

Cote d’Ivoire, Ecuador, El Salvador, Finland, France,

Gambia, Germany, Guatemala, Italy, Jordan, Latvia,

Lithuania, Mexico, Mozambique, Netherlands,

Nigeria, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Uganda.

Medium dependence on water transport (land share > 40% and <= 70%)

Estonia.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 8

Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which

eased or lifted restrictions, by 14-day COVID-19 notication rate per 100.000

inhabitants, as of 1 November 2020

Borders completely closed Eased or lifted restrictions

Cluster 0: No new cases reported

Fiji, Laos, Montserrat, New Caledonie, Virgin Islands

British.

Anguilla, St Kitts and Nevis, Tanzania.

Cluster 1: <20 new cases reported

Algeria, Angola, Australia, Benin, Brunei Darussalam,

Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, China, Congo,

Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Lesotho, Mauritania,

Mongolia, New Zealand, Niger, Solomon Islands,

Sri Lanka, Syrian Arab Republic, Taiwan Province of

China, Tajikistan, Timor Leste, Uruguay, Vietnam,

Yemen.

Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh,

Barbados, Bermuda, Bhutan, Cambodia, Central African

Republic, Chad, Comoros Islands, Congo (Democratic

Rep. of), Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Djibouti, Dominica, Egypt,

Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea

(Republic of), Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Kazakhstan, Kenya,

Korea (Republic of), Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali,

Mauritius, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan,

Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe,

Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone,

Singapore, Somalia, South Sudan, St Lucia, St Vincent

and Grenadines, Sudan, Thailand, Togo, Turks and

Caicos, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Cluster 2: >=20 and <60 new cases reported

Cayman Islands, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar,

The Philippines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago,

Venezuela.

Azerbaijan, Bolivia, El Salvador, Estonia, Eswatini,

Finland, Greece, Guatemala, Jamaica, Mexico,

Namibia, Norway, Serbia, South Africa, Turkey.

Cluster 3: >=60 and <120 new cases reported

Botswana, Canada, Chile, India, Qatar. Albania, Bonaire, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Dominican

Republic, Ecuador, Germany, Guyana, Honduras, Iran,

Iraq, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Monaco, Morocco,

Saba, San Marino, St Eustatius, Sweden.

Cluster 4: >=120 new cases reported

Czech Republic, Israel, Libya, Oman. Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Austria, Bahamas,

Bahrain, Belgium, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina,

Brazil, Cabo Verde, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia,

Curaçao, France, French Polynesia, Georgia, Hungary,

Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon,

Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Moldova,

Montenegro, Nepal, Netherlands, North Macedonia,

Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Puerto Rico,

Romania, The Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia,

Spain, St Maarten, Switzerland, Tunisia, Ukraine, United

Arab Emirates, United Kingdom.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 9

Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which

eased or lifted restrictions, by Health and Hygiene indicator, as of 1 November

2020

Borders completely closed Eased or lifted restrictions

Cluster 1 (indicators scoring from 0 to 2,4)

Fiji, Laos, Montserrat, New Caledonie, Virgin Islands

British.

Anguilla, St Kitts and Nevis, Tanzania.

Cluster 2 (indicators scoring from 2,5 to 3,4)

Botswana, Cayman Islands, Fiji, India, Indonesia,

Laos, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Myanmar, The

Philippines, Samoa, Suriname, Syrian Arab Republic,

Tonga, Tuvalu, Venezuela, Vietnam.

Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Cabo

Verde, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic,

Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Gabon, Grenada,

Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica,

Morocco, Nauru, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Panama,

Paraguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, South Africa, St Lucia, St

Vincent and Grenadines, Thailand.

Cluster 3 (indicators scoring from 3,5 to 4,2)

Cayman Islands, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar,

The Philippines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago,

Venezuela.

Azerbaijan, Bolivia, El Salvador, Estonia, Eswatini,

Finland, Greece, Guatemala, Jamaica, Mexico,

Namibia, Norway, Serbia, South Africa, Turkey.

Cluster 3: >=60 and <120 new cases reported

Algeria, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, China,

Israel, Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of), Libya,

Malaysia, Mongolia, New Caledonie, New Zealand,

Oman, Qatar, Sri Lanka, Taiwan Province of China,

Tajikistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan.

Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia,

Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Barbados, Bermuda, Bosnia and

Herzegovina, Brazil, Colombia, Cyprus, Hong Kong

SAR, Ireland, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon,

Maldives, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro,

North Macedonia, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles,

Singapore, St Kitts and Nevis, Tunisia, Turkey, United

Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan.

Cluster 4 (indicators scoring from 4,3 to 7)

Australia, Czech Republic, Uruguay, Virgin Islands

British.

Argentina, Aruba, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia,

Cuba, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, French

Polynesia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary,

Iceland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Korea (Republic of), Latvia,

Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands,

Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, The Russian

Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia,

Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 10

Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and

which eased or lifted restrictions, by Environmental Performance Index, as of 1

November 2020

Borders completely closed Eased or lifted restrictions

Cluster 1 (destinations scoring from 0 to 32,7)

Angola, Benin, Burundi, Congo, Eritrea, India,

Lesotho, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mongolia,

Myanmar, Niger, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu.

Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Chad, Comoros Islands,

Cote D’Ivoire, Djibouti, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala,

Guinea (Republic of), Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Liberia,

Madagascar, Mali, Nepal, Nigeria, Papua New

Guinea, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Togo.

Cluster 2 (destinations scoring from 32,8 to 39)

Burkina Faso, Cameroon, China, Equatorial

Guinea, Fiji, Indonesia, Laos, Micronesia, Oman,

Philippines, Qatar, Samoa, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan,

Timor Leste, Vietnam.

Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Central African Republic,

Congo (Democratic Rep. of), Ethiopia, Guyana,

Honduras, Kenya, Malawi, Maldives, Mozambique,

Pakistan, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Sudan,

Eswatini, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Cluster 3 (destinations scoring from 39,1 to 46,4)

Algeria, Botswana, Suriname, Tonga,

Turkmenistan.

Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia

and Herzegovina, Dominica, Dominican Republic,

Egypt, El Salvador, Gabon, Georgia, Grenada,

Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Mauritius,

Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, Namibia,

Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Saudi Arabia, South

Africa, St Lucia, Thailand, Turkey, Uzbekistan.

Cluster 4 (destinations scoring from 46,5 to 60,9)

Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Malaysia, Taiwan

Province of China, Trinidad and Tobago,

Uruguay, Venezuela.

Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia,

Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Brazil, Bulgaria, Colombia,

Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, Iran, Jamaica,

Jordan, Kuwait, Mexico, North Macedonia,

Panama, Poland, The Russian Federation, Serbia,

Seychelles, Singapore, St Vincent and Grenadines,

Tunisia, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates.

Cluster 5 (destinations scoring from 61 to 100)

Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, New

Zealand.

Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark,

Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,

Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Korea (Republic of),

Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands,

Norway, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia,

Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 11

Overview of destinations, which have their borders completely closed and which

eased or lifted restrictions, by inbound and outbound, as of 1 November 2020

Borders completely closed Eased or lifted restrictions

Inbound destinations

Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cayman Islands,

Congo, Cook Islands, Czech Republic, Fiji,

Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Montserrat, Niger,

Oman, Qatar, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sri

Lanka, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Virgin Islands British.

Albania, Andorra, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda,

Armenia, Aruba, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain,

Barbados, Belize, Bermuda, Bhutan, Cabo Verde,

Cambodia, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Croatia,

Cuba, Curaçao, Cyprus, Dominican Republic,

Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, France,

French Polynesia, Gambia, Georgia, Greece,

Grenada,, Guadeloupe, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana,

Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Italy, Jamaica,

Jordan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Madagascar,

Maldives, Mali, Malta, Martinique, Mauritius,

Mexico, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco,

Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru,

Portugal, Puerto Rico, Reunion, San Marino, Sao

Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone,

Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, St Kitts and Nevis,

St Lucia, St Maarten, St Vincent and Grenadines,

Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turks

and Caicos, United Arab Emirates.

Outbound destinations

Angola, Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada,

China, Lesotho, Mongolia, Myanmar, Taiwan

Province of China, Tajikistan, Timor Leste.

Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Comoros Islands, Finland,

Germany, Hong Kong SAR, Korea (Republic of),

Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Netherlands, North Macedonia,

Norway, Papua New Guinea, Serbia, Sweden,

Switzerland, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan.

Equally inbound and outbound destinations

Algeria, Chile, India, Indonesia, Israel, Laos,

Micronesia, New Caledonie, New Zealand,

The Philippines, Syrian Arab Republic, Tonga,

Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Vietnam.

Azerbaijan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina,

Bulgaria, Colombia, Denmark, Dominica, El

Salvador, Eswatini, Guatemala, Honduras,

Ireland, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania,

Luxembourg, Malawi, Mozambique, Paraguay,

Poland, Romania, The Russian Federation, Saudi

Arabia, Singapore, Sudan, Ukraine, Zambia,

Zimbabwe.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 12

10 Top source markets and their outbound departures

10 Top source markets Outbound departures (2018)

United States of America 116 millions

Germany

107 millions

China 96 millions

Hong Kong, China 88 millions

United Kingdom 72 millions

France 51 millions

Canada 38 millions

The Russian Federation 36 millions

Italy 33 millions

The Netherlands 32 millions

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 13

The relationship between Health

and Hygiene and the Environmental

Performance Index scores

Figure 28 shows the relations between H&H

scores and EPI for 177 destinations for which

data was available. The H&H score has a range

from 1 to 7, with 1 being the lowest and 7 the

highest. The EPI score ranges from 0 to 100,

with 0 the lowest and 100 the highest score. The

graph shows a strong correlation between Health

and Hygiene infrastructure of a destination and

its environmental performance.

Figure 28 - The relationship between Health & Hygiene and Environmental Performance Index

scores

Source: Data compiled by UNWTO as of 1 November 2020.

100

0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 7,0

EPI

H&H

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

Annex 14

Overview on COVID-19 and pandemic

measures, including travel restrictions

On 31 December 2019, a pneumonia of unknown

cause was detected rst in Wuhan, China and

reported to the local WHO ofce. Four weeks

later, on 30 January 2020 the WHO declared

the outbreak of this virus, initially named 2019-

nCoV, a Public Health Emergency of International

Concern (PHEIC). At that stage WHO referred to

83 cases in 18 countries

and did not recommend

any travel or trade restriction. In a joint

statement by UNWTO and WHO released on 26

February 2020, it was indicated that “Tourism’s

response needs to be measured and consistent,

proportionate to the public health threat and

based on local risk assessment, involving every

part of the tourism value chain”.

100

While from December 2019 until end of February

2020 China reported the largest amount of

COVID-19 cases, by February 2020 the virus had

already spread almost all over the globe. When

WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 11

March 2020, 114 countries had reported 118,000

cases with Europe becoming the worst-affected

region. In the following weeks all destinations

around the world reported cases of COVID- 19

and as of the date of this report, a second wave

is hitting in particular the European region. WHO

reported for the week ending on 10 November

2020 over 3,6 million new COVID-19 cases and

54 000 new deaths. This brings the total to nearly

50 million reported cases and 1,2 million deaths

since the start of the outbreak.

101

Based on the WHO Pandemic Inuenza

Preparedness and Response guidance document

for governments

102

, a variety of measures have

been implemented worldwide in order to reduce

the spread of the virus. These include individual

measures, such as the promotion of hand and

respiratory hygiene, as well as societal level

measures, such as protocols related to social

distancing which include the suspension of school

classes, adjusting work patterns, the reduction

of unnecessary travel and overcrowding of mass

transport systems as well as the development

of frameworks for cancellation/restriction of

mass gatherings.

103

Moreover, with regards

to international travel, measures to “develop

capacities for emergency public health actions

at designated points of entry in accordance with

International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005)

Annex 1 B.2.”, which include relevant control

mechanisms for arriving and departing travellers,

have been implemented.

Furthermore, additional provisions of the IHR

104

have guided the introduction of measures. For

instance, under Chapter III on special provisions

for travellers, the treatment of suspected

travellers when entering a destination is outlined,

ranging from medical examination to providing

the person with food and water.

105

Also under

IHR Article 43, it is stated that additional health

99 World Health Organization (2020), Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee

regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), 30 January 2020, available online at: www.who.int/news-room/detail/30-01-2020-

statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-

coronavirus-(2019-ncov).

100 World Tourism Organization, World Health Organization (2020), Joint statement on tourism and covid-19: UNWTO and WHO call

for responsibility and coordination, 26 February 2020, available online at: https://webunwto.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-

public/2020-03/31012020%20Coronavirus_Feb_2020%20EN_3.pdf.

101 World Health Organization, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), Weekly epidemiological Update on COVID-19 as of 10 November 2020,

available online at: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/weekly-epidemiological-update---10-november-2020

102 International Health Regulations (2005), Third Edition, WHO, pp. 40-42, available online at: www.who.int/ihr/publications/9789241580496/en.

103 International Health Regulations (2005).

104 International Health Regulations (2005).

105 International Health Regulations (2005), pp. 23-24.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM

measures shall be based on scientic principles,

available scientic evidence and available

specic guidance of WHO. In this context, the

implementation of additional health measures

that signicantly interfere with international

trafc shall be reported to WHO within 48

hours, including the public health rationale

and relevant scientic information. Signicant

interference means “refusal of entry or departure

of international travellers, baggage, cargo,

containers, conveyances, good, and the like, or

their delay, for more than 24 hours”. The IHR

stipulates that WHO shall share this information

with other governments and request that the

measure is reviewed within three months.

Furthermore, WHO may request a government

that implemented such measure to reconsider its

application.

106

Article 23 on Health Measures on

arrival and departure indicate that with regard

to the traveller, a “State Party may require for

public health purposes, information concerning

the traveller´s destination so that the travellers

may be contacted; information concerning

the traveller´s itinerary to ascertain if there was

any travel in or near an affected area or other

possible contacts with infection…”, as well as “a

non-invasive medical examination.”

107

106 International Health Regulations (2005), pp. 29.

107 International Health Regulations (2005), pp. 20.

COVID-19 RELATED TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS – A GLOBAL REVIEW FOR TOURISM