Travel News

Unvaccinated People Facing More Travel Restrictions Across EU

With the introduction of the COVID-19 Passport, holding a certificate that proves vaccination or previous recovery from the virus has become a norm in order to be allowed restriction-free entry in several European Union countries.

Currently, the majority of the EU countries keep in place strict restrictions against travellers who have not been vaccinated or recovered from the COVID-19 disease in order to protect public health and avoid an upsurge of infection cases.

As such, in most cases, the strictest restrictions are imposed against those travelling from countries that are placed on the red and yellow list, SchengenVisaInfo.com reports.

Lithuania is one of the EU countries that has in place a double testing requirement for all travellers entering its territory from a country that is placed on the yellow list. This means that all unvaccinated and unrecovered travellers must take a test before entry and another one three to five days after their arrival.

Just recently, Lithuania imposed a double testing requirement for arrivals from Bulgaria, Liechtenstein and Slovenia.

As for unvaccinated and unrecovered travellers arriving from a country on the red list, Lithuania keeps even more stringent restrictions. Except for the testing requirement, those arriving from a red country need to stay self-isolated for ten days.

Similarly, the Czech Republic also keeps tightened entry rules for all persons who have not been vaccinated or recovered from the virus. – Advertisement –

According to the Ministry of Health of Czechia, all persons that arrive from a red country and who do not meet the vaccination and previous recovery requirements need to undergo testing before entry and follow quarantine rules as soon as they enter the latter’s territory.

From today, tightened rules apply to all unvaccinated travellers entering Czechia from Belgium, Denmark and several other countries.

Except for the two countries mentioned above, the Danish authorities have also announced that persons who have not been vaccinated or recovered from the virus arriving from several EU/Schengen Area, and third countries must follow testing and quarantine requirements.

Travellers arriving in Denmark from a country placed on the yellow list are obliged to undergo double testing, whereas those arriving from a country placed on the orange list need to stay self-isolated, apart from the testing requirement.

Yesterday, Denmark revealed that unvaccinated travellers from Italy and some regions of Switzerland are obliged to undergo double COVID-19 testing.

On the other hand, Finland has decided to ban unvaccinated travellers arriving from specific countries.

Source: https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/unvaccinated-people-facing-more-travel-restrictions-across-eu/

HTLibrary | Aug 22, 2021 | Comments 0

Full Story

Delta Variant Travel Restrictions Update

The Delta variant continues to spread across the United States and the world. As infection rates and hospitalizations increase to the highest levels since most places began reopening for nonessential travel, various destinations are reintroducing travel restrictions.

United States Travel Restrictions

So far, no United States state or territory is closing its borders to nonessential travel as they did in 2020. However, more places are introducing indoor mask mandates, limiting crowd capacity and requiring proof of vaccination to combat what’s becoming known as “the fourth wave.”

Proof of Vaccination For Indoor Activities

So far, four cities across the country require guests to show proof of vaccination to enter certain indoor facilities. The list of cities includes:

New York City
San Francisco
Los Angeles
New Orleans

Each city policy may have some variations regarding which business types must comply. There may be exemptions for qualifying circumstances in some cases, and a negative COVID-19 test result is necessary instead.

The Los Angeles mandate appears to be the most flexible of the four major cities. The current language allows the partially vaccinated with a single dose to enter.

Some of the venues requiring proof of vaccine can include:

Restaurants
Bars
Museums
Arenas
Concert halls
Theaters
Casinos

Businesses may also require proof of vaccination even if there isn’t a local mandate.

Hawaii Capacity Limits

Hawaii continues to have the strictest travel restrictions of the 50 states. Due to rising case counts, the state is reducing the maximum crowd capacity to 50% for high-risk indoor activities.

The maximum number of attendees is as follows:

Indoor activities: 10
Outdoor activities: 25

Affected businesses include restaurants, bars and gyms, among other activities.

The state requires proof of vaccination or a negative test result to waive the mandatory quarantine when flying to Hawaii.

There are currently no inter-island travel restrictions like in early 2021.

Indoor Mask Mandates

A growing number of cities across the United States have indoor mask mandates. While the fully vaccinated and unvaccinated can visit these cities, the high transmission risk can discourage travel.

Philadelphia is one of the most recent cities to require wearing masks indoors again. However, it is possible to waive the mask requirement by showing proof of vaccination at participating businesses. Some cities may have similar exemption policies.

National Park Service Mask Mandate

The National Park Service reinstated its mask mandate on August 16, 2021, for all indoor facilities and crowded outdoor spaces. This mandate remains in effect until further notice.

Canada

Canada requires travelers to be fully vaccinated for these commercial travel methods:

Air
Rail
Cruise

This requirement goes into effect as soon as September, according to the Canadian government.

The travel mandate is more likely to affect Canadian citizens than visiting Americans. United States citizens and lawful residents can only see the country quarantine-free when they have complete vaccination.

Fully vaccinated Americans can now fly to Canada or cross the land border for nonessential travel reasons. The travel policy became effective on August 9, 2021, after a total closure since the early weeks of the pandemic in 2020.

While Canada is again welcoming Americans, the United States continues to have travel restrictions for Canadians wishing to enter the U.S. by land. As a result, Canadian residents must continue flying to the United States to enter but do not have to quarantine.

Germany

Germany is the latest European country to require Americans to be fully vaccinated to enter the country.

Unvaccinated and partial vaccinated travelers must self-quarantine for the first ten days of their visit. It’s possible to waive the second half of the quarantine with a negative test result on day 5.

This policy also affects other countries on Germany’s high-risk list.

Iceland

Iceland was one of the first European countries to reopen international travel for Americans. The nation also continues to require all age-eligible visitors for the coronavirus vaccine to be fully vaccinated or show proof of a recent recovery.

A recent entry requirement change is needing a negative pre-arrival test, regardless of your vaccination status.

While the nation has a 90% vaccination rate, its infection rates are among some of the world’s highest at the moment. United States officials are discouraging leisure travel to Iceland until the situation improves.

France

Americans can fly to France and tour the country by showing vaccine proof or a negative COVID-19 test from the past 72 hours. A recent change is that citizens and visitors must use a digital health pass to visit bars, restaurants and tourist attractions.

Current laws require proof of vaccine or a negative test result for outdoor dining in addition to the indoor requirements most vaccine mandates impact.

Health pass users will present a QR-code the merchant can scan to verify their health status.

Caribbean Travel Restrictions

There are a couple of new travel restrictions for the Caribbean islands that can impact a tropical vacation.

Turks And Caicos

The Turks and Caicos will require eligible travelers aged 16 years or older to be fully vaccinated. This travel change goes into effect on September 1, 2021.

A negative pre-arrival test and health insurance covering Covid-19 remain necessary to enter restriction-free.

Martinique And Guadeloupe

The French islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe are currently in a 3-week lockdown beginning on August 7, 2021. Visitors and island residents cannot travel more than a half-mile from home.

Cayman Islands

The Cayman Islands are one of the last destinations to still prohibit nonessential travel.

Fully vaccinated can begin returning to the island by plane in September. Unfortunately, a mandatory 5-day quarantine is necessary for all guests so other nearby islands will remain a better travel option.

Starting October 14, 2021, fully vaccinated travelers will no longer need to quarantine upon arrival. Unvaccinated travelers over age 12 can also begin flying to the island in mid-October but must quarantine for 14 days.

Cruise travel to the Cayman Islands will not resume until January 27, 2022 or later.

New Zealand

New Zealand recently stated its borders would not open to tourists until 2022 under current circumstances. When tourists can again fly to the country, they will need to be fully vaccinated but can waive any mandatory quarantine.

Oceania remains to have some of the strictest travel restrictions in the world for nonessential travel. For example, New Zealand recently enforced a nationwide lockdown. Australia also has several lockdowns currently impacting the most popular tourist spots.

Summary

The Delta variant is discouraging domestic and international travel. Several popular tourist destinations are launching stricter entry requirements and health safety protocols to reduce transmission risk but are more lenient than the opening months of 2021 for most places.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffwhitmore/2021/08/18/delta-variant-travel-restrictions-update/?sh=71421aab3b62

HTLibrary | Aug 21, 2021 | Comments 0

Full Story

New publication ‘Visitors Count!’ launched to measure the value of tourism in protected areas

The new guidelines published by UNESCO and the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) put forward a standard methodology for evaluating the impact of protected areas on the local economy.

The guidelines aim to help national stakeholders, protected area managers and researchers count visitation and measure economic impacts consistently through a standardized approach. Developed by a team of international experts from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) Tourism and Protected Areas Specialist Group (TAPAS Group), the guidelines aim to help management authorities fulfil international reporting requirements to global conventions.

The guidelines outline how demonstrating the positive impact of protected areas can lead to greater buy-in and ownership of conservation practices, less poaching and land encroachment, and help offset human-wildlife conflict where it occurs. Once managers understand the number and behavior of visitors they host, and the revenues and costs they generate, informed decisions on management plans and tourism strategies can be made.

The publication provides information on the evaluation of economic effects of tourism in protected areas including visitor counting and economic evaluation of tourism. Guidance is outlined on how to do visitor counting and surveys effectively and consistently, and how to best report and communicate findings. The publication also shares how to use findings to adapt protected area tourism management strategies sustainably.

The publication’s methodological approaches were developed and tested in different protected areas around the world, including within protected areas including national parks, UNESCO World Heritage properties and UNESCO Biosphere reserves.

Visitors Count! was developed thanks to support from the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, and by authors and editors from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) and Tourism and Protected Areas Specialist Group (TAPAS Group).

Source: https://whc.unesco.org/en/news/2323

HTLibrary | Aug 19, 2021 | Comments 0

Full Story

Space Tourism Is a Waste

Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson, and Elon Musk want to make “space tourism” a thing. This could jumpstart a pointless industry that’s totally unsustainable.

Jeff Bezos, the richest man on Earth, will head into suborbital space on Tuesday. He’ll be the second billionaire to take such a journey this month, getting narrowly beat out by Richard Branson, who recently took an hour-long rocket trip to the edge of space. Next year, Elon Musk—who has traded the world’s-richest title with Bezos a few times this past year—will also head to space on Branson’s Virgin Galactic’s spaceplane.

If these billionaires get their way, there will be more of these flights in the future. Virgin Galactic has said it already has $80 million in deposits and sales plunked down for its flights. All three of these men are gunning to make “space tourism” a thing. But it comes with a major cost to the rest of us.

For the super-rich, a few minutes spent experiencing weightlessness and viewing the curvature of the Earth could leave humanity footing an ever-larger carbon pollution bill. It also reflects the increasingly unsustainable levels of inequality and concentration of power, which, coupled with the climate crisis, will lock in suffering for billions. That’s nothing to celebrate.

Neither Bezos nor Branson has been particularly forthcoming about the environmental impact of their flights. But then that’s precisely the problem. The initial climate impact of an individual space tourist flight may be comparatively small, but they will add up. And each flight signals something more ominous to come.

We know those impacts can be large in part because they emit pollution directly into the stratosphere. Studies show this can deplete the ozone layer that protects us from harmful ultraviolet rays and that the world has worked so hard to restore. (For its part, Blue Origin claims its effect on the ozone layer will be minimal.)

Then there are greenhouse emissions to worry about. The VSS Unity winged spaceship that Branson took to space runs on a combination of nitrous oxide andhydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB). HTPB is
made out of butadiene, which is a byproduct of using steam crackers to turn petroleum or natural gas into ethylene—a highly polluting process that releases emissions that are both toxic and planet-heating.

Bezos’ New Shepard rocket, made by his company Blue Origin, runs on a combination of liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen.Though neither of those emit carbon when they’re burned, producing liquid hydrogen usually does. Compressing and liquifying the oxygen for the fuel is also an energy-intensive process that, if not done using renewables, results incarbon pollution.

Refining and burning these fuels isn’t just the equivalent of a tank of gas for your car. They’re not even necessarily equal to using jet fuel to hop a coast-to-coast flight.

“The Virgin Galactic flight carried six passengers and reached an altitude of 53 miles [85.3 kilometers], and from information provided by Virgin Galactic, we can estimate that carbon emissions per passenger mile are about 60 times that of a business class flight,” Peter Kalmus, a climate scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said, adding that “more research is needed to understand the full climate impact.”

Branson has said that the emissions from his flight will be offset by investing in projects that suck up carbon elsewhere. But planting trees and encouraging regenerative agriculture doesn’t undo the damage of his joy ride. Forestry offset projects have also proven to be both ineffective and unjust. Blue Origin, meanwhile, has focused on how much less polluting Bezos’ flight will be than Branson’s was.

These flights to the edge of space will add to Bezos’ and Branson’s individual carbon impacts, which are already cartoonishly large thanks to their propensity for behavior such as regularly flying private. (A single private jet trip can emit nearly double the amount of carbon than the average American does in an entire year). But though infuriating, there aren’t that many of these flights taking off, so the overall environmental effects aren’t that big.

“Contemporary attempts to boost suborbital and orbital space tourism (such as those attempted by Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin) are still at an early stage of development,” said Nikolaos Iliopoulos, a doctoral candidate in sustainability at the University of Tokyo who researches space travel’s environmental impact. “Thus, as of today, space tourism presents limited socio-environmental impacts as space tourism vehicles travel to the orbit and back.”

But in the near future, Branson and Bezos as well as Musk want that to change. Branson’s Virgin Atlantic wants to “open space to everyone.” Bezos’ Blue Origin wants to “increase access to space.” And Musk’s SpaceX wants to “make humanity multi-planetary.”

Though these companies all make it sound like the missions are for the masses, the price tags say otherwise. A yet-unnamed person, for instance, paid $28 million to be a passenger on Bezos’ Tuesday trip up to space. (They subsequently and improbably had a scheduling conflict, and an investment firm CEO’s 18-year-old son will take the seat instead.) Future Virgin Galactic flights are priced between $200,000 and $250,000.

Rich people are already responsible for a disproportionate amount of carbon emissions. Just 1% of the global population is responsible for half of the world’s commercial flight emissions. That doesn’t even account for the even more elite select few who can fly private.

“When you look at the aviation sector, private jets are so much worse on a per passenger basis than a regular plane full of economy class passengers just because fewer people are traveling on each one,” said Clare Lakewood, senior legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “You put just one or two people in a rocket, and you’ve got something orders of magnitude worse that would supersize the carbon footprints of people that already have the largest ones.”

Globally, individuals in the richest 1% are already responsible for 175 times more greenhouse gas pollution than the average person in the bottom 10%. If space tourism takes off, it could make these disparities even worse.

Don’t get me wrong, there are good reasons for space travel. Without it, we wouldn’t have satellites that help us track dangerous weather and our changing climate. Learning about other planets is important, too, not only for its own sake but also because it helps us understand our own. Observing Venus and Mars has helped scientists better understand the climate crisis on Earth. The search for life beyond Earth also can’t happen without sending probes out into the solar system. Space exploration can even help us understand the beginning of the universe, allowing us better understand our place in it.

But space exploration is not the same as space tourism. While the former is conducted for the worthy goal of understanding what’s beyond our atmosphere, the latter only serves the interest of the super-rich who want a thrill and the billionaires who own the companies that can provide it. It’s one of the most glaring illustrations of rising inequality. What’s more, it could widen the gap further by worsening the climate crisis and forcing the most vulnerable to suffer the impacts while the rich snap space selfies.

Even if we create truly clean fuels someday, using them for space tourism to enriches billionaires is still not sustainable. Concentrated wealth is concentrated power, and concentrated power is bad for the Earth. We’ve seen the democratic decay and the planetary danger posed by putting so much money in the hands of the few. Musk has ignored labor regulations and bullied California officials during the pandemic. (Hundreds of his employees got covid-19.) Bezos has pretended to give a damn about the climate with his venture capital fund—which will inevitably enrich him further—even as Amazon helps oil companies more efficiently extract fossil fuels. Lining the pockets of these men through space tourism will further corrode what we hold dear.

But couldn’t space tourism be the beginning of space colonization, helping us to ensure we have a livable future even if the climate crisis makes Earth uninhabitable? These billionaires want us to think so. SpaceX wants to colonize Mars as a space outpost for when life on Earth is no longer tenable.Bezos wants to build colonies orbiting Earth to support billions of people. But put simply, these proposals are absurd. They’re not going to come to fruition, and they’re certainly not going to create a sustainable alternative to life on Earth, a planet that has all the life support systems we need if billionaires would just stop wasting them.

“We are not going to build large-scale sustainable human civilization on Mars anytime soon, certainly not on any timescale remotely relevant to stopping climate breakdown,” said Kalmus. “It will be far easier to stop climate breakdown on Earth than it would be to build large-scale civilization on Mars, where there isn’t even air to breathe.”

Consider that at any given time, there are a handful of people in low Earth orbit on the International Space Station. Unlike, say, Mars, it’s a relatively protected part of space, located firmly within Earth’s magnetic fields, which makes it comparably safe from the radiation produced by gamma rays and cosmic rays as well as destructive solar winds. But it still takes thousands of workers on Earth and regular restocking trips to the ISS just to keep those few people alive.

“We don’t even pretend that the International Space Station is an independent system, and it’s protected by our magnetic fields. It’s got easy delivery to and from Earth, and it’s still hard to live there. We certainly couldn’t just cut it off and have the astronauts live there without a constant stream of resupplies,” Mika McKinnon, a field geophysicist (and former writer for Gizmodo), said. “This idea that we can colonize other places is just bullshit. Earth is easy mode, and we can’t even maintain livable conditions here.”

Leading climate scientists have made it clear that if we’re going to have a shot in hell at repairing Earth’s deteriorating conditions, we’re going to have to restructure society. As Sarah Diamond, associate professor of biology at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland and an author of one recent landmark report told me, that will require “a profound collective shift of individual and shared values concerning nature.”That means not wasting Earth’s resources on pointless spectacles that only serve the rich. It means not organizing our whole society in a way that enables a handful of people to accumulate stratospheric wealth, while everyone else suffers in economic and ecological disparity. We should be focusing all our efforts on securing a livable future on this planet—not celebrating flashy indulgences of billionaires at the edge of space.

Source: https://gizmodo.com/space-tourism-is-a-waste-1847285820

HTLibrary | Aug 16, 2021 | Comments 0

Full Story

We urgently need to kickstart tourism’s recovery but crisis offers an opportunity to rethink it

With vaccination advancing in most developed economies, we would have expected the tourism situation today to be significantly better than this time last year. Sadly, it is not.
Less than 10 years away from our global goal of ensuring shared prosperity by 2030, we need to kickstart tourism’s recovery for the millions who have been left struggling.
We must look beyond the immediate restart of tourism – this crisis is an opportunity to rethink tourism policies and management.

This should be the time of year when people are packing suitcases and travel documents for their summer holidays – at least in the northern hemisphere. For many economies, these months are critical, and millions of businesses and workers are eager for tourists to return, especially given how badly the sector has already been hit.

Last year was catastrophic for tourism and the millions of people who depend on it. After six decades of extraordinary growth, the sector was brought to a near-complete standstill by the COVID-19 pandemic.

International tourist arrivals fell to levels not seen since 1990. We estimate that the crisis has cost the world about $4 trillion and placed over 100 million direct tourism jobs at risk. The impact is so big because of the numerous suppliers and businesses that are linked to the core sector. To put these numbers into perspective, the impact is almost equivalent to the GDP of France.

Slow progress

With vaccinations being rolled out in most developed economies, we would have expected the situation today to be significantly better than this time last year. Unfortunately, it is not.

So, what has happened? On the one hand, relatively slow progress in vaccination puts many tourism workers at risk, thus affecting the supply side. Tourism workers in developing economies, including destinations such as small island developing states, where tourism is a lifeline and a key driver of development, are particularly at risk.

On the other hand, travellers’ confidence is affected by the ever-changing travel restrictions that cannot be eased or lifted right now, particularly in light of new variants of the virus emerging and in the absence of sufficient roll-out of vaccinations.

Added to that, we have the costs of tests, a lack of coordination and clarity over regulations in place at destinations, limited international cooperation, the cancellation or rescheduling of flights, and general uncertainty about the evolution of the virus. It is small wonder so many people remain wary of travelling.

But tourists – and their money – are so needed right now. International tourism is a vital source of income for many countries. The foreign exchange earned through tourism is in many places a critical source for funds to finance public spending, investment for much-needed payment of relief and recovery measures, and for servicing debt repayments that have been piling up.

Tourism’s impact goes beyond economics. The sector is a key pillar of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, with a unique ability to contribute to most – if not all – of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, including through providing opportunities for youth and women, and helping preserve and promote natural and cultural heritage.

Kickstarting the recovery

We are now less than 10 years away from our global goal of ensuring shared prosperity by 2030. The pandemic has put our joint progress on hold. We thus need urgent action. We need to kickstart tourism’s recovery for the millions who, for more than a year now, have been left struggling.

First and foremost, we need to collectively ensure that vaccination is equitably available across the world. One key concern is that developing countries, many of which are highly dependent on international tourism, are bearing the heaviest brunt of the uneven vaccination roll-out. Addressing this will require unprecedented levels of cooperation. However, while leaders have pledged their commitment to international solidarity, their words are yet to be backed up by actions.

On our side, the UN Conference on Trade and Development and the UN World Tourism Organization are leading the way in providing clear, updated and trusted data and analysis used by governments and businesses to inform recovery policies and decision-making.

Countries should also ensure that their tourism businesses of all sizes can survive the current crisis so that the power of the sector can be tapped when tourists return. This requires measures such as credit lines for tourism businesses and the provision of social protection for tourism workers.

In addition, digital technologies need to be used to increase security and boost travellers’ confidence. It is also time to step up digitalization among companies and the tourism workforce, upskilling the sector to become more resilient. Aviation

What is the World Economic Forum doing to reduce aviation’s carbon footprint?

As other sectors proceed to decarbonize, the aviation sector could account for a much higher share of global greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century than its 2%-3% share today.

Sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) can reduce the life-cycle carbon footprint of aviation fuel by up to 80%, but they currently make up less than 0.1% of total aviation fuel consumption. Enabling a shift from fossil fuels to SAFs will require a significant increase in production, which is a costly investment.

The Forum’s Clean Skies for Tomorrow (CST) Coalition is a global initiative driving the transition to sustainable aviation fuels as part of the aviation industry’s ambitious efforts to achieve carbon-neutral flying.

The coalition brings together government leaders, climate experts and CEOs from aviation, energy, finance and other sectors who agree on the urgent need to help the aviation industry reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

The coalition aims to advance the commercial scale of viable production of sustainable low-carbon aviation fuels (bio and synthetic) for broad adoption in the industry by 2030. Initiatives include a mechanism for aggregating demand for carbon-neutral flying, a co-investment vehicle and geographically specific value-chain industry blueprints.

At the same time, we must look beyond the immediate restart of tourism. This crisis is an opportunity to rethink tourism. For instance, so-called “overtourism” had been a concern in many places prior to the pandemic.

Now is the moment to redesign and adjust tourism policies and management, including through greater diversification, more innovative products and the revitalisation of rural areas. Across the world, people have started to rediscover their own countries through domestic tourism and this offers an opportunity to spread the sector’s benefits more widely.

As we enter another peak travel season with the COVID-19 pandemic ongoing, we need to face up to the fact that the crisis confronting tourism is far from over.

Last year, we set out three possible scenarios for the pandemic’s expected impact on the sector. The worst-case scenario turned out to be too optimistic. And this year, even in the most optimistic scenario, we will still be 60% below the levels of 2019.

But again, this should be seized as an opportunity to realign the sector towards greater sustainability and inclusivity rather than simply going back to the way we were before. Tourism is the sector with the broadest economic value chain and the deepest social footprint. Herein lies the opportunity to rethink, restart and to grow back better. But first, we need to restart tourism.

Source: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/08/tourism-still-in-deep-trouble/

HTLibrary | Aug 15, 2021 | Comments 0

Full Story

The COVID-19 travel shock hit tourism-dependent economies hard

The COVID crisis has led to a collapse in international travel. According to the World Tourism Organization, international tourist arrivals declined globally by 73 percent in 2020, with 1 billion fewer travelers compared to 2019, putting in jeopardy between 100 and 120 million direct tourism jobs. This has led to massive losses in international revenues for tourism-dependent economies: specifically, a collapse in exports of travel services (money spent by nonresident visitors in a country) and a decline in exports of transport services (such as airline revenues from tickets sold to nonresidents).

This “travel shock” is continuing in 2021, as restrictions to international travel persist—tourist arrivals for January-May 2021 are down a further 65 percent from the same period in 2020, and there is substantial uncertainty on the nature and timing of a tourism recovery.

We study the economic impact of the international travel shock during 2020, particularly the severity of the hit to countries very dependent on tourism. Our main result is that on a cross-country basis, the share of tourism activities in GDP is the single most important predictor of the growth shortfall in 2020 triggered by the COVID-19 crisis (relative to pre-pandemic IMF forecasts), even when compared to measures of the severity of the pandemic. For instance, Grenada and Macao had very few recorded COVID cases in relation to their population size and no COVID-related deaths in 2020—yet their GDP contracted by 13 percent and 56 percent, respectively.

International tourism destinations and tourism sources

Countries that rely heavily on tourism, and in particular international travelers, tend to be small, have GDP per capita in the middle-income and high-income range, and are preponderately net debtors. Many are small island economies—Jamaica and St. Lucia in the Caribbean, Cyprus and Malta in the Mediterranean, the Maldives and Seychelles in the Indian Ocean, or Fiji and Samoa in the Pacific. Prior to the COVID pandemic, median annual net revenues from international tourism (spending by foreign tourists in the country minus tourism spending by domestic residents overseas) in these island economies were about one quarter of GDP, with peaks around 50 percent of GDP, such as Aruba and the Maldives.

But there are larger economies heavily reliant on international tourism. For instance, in Croatia average net international tourism revenues from 2015-2019 exceeded 15 percent of GDP, 8 percent in the Dominican Republic and Thailand, 7 percent in Greece, and 5 percent in Portugal. The most extreme example is Macao, where net revenues from international travel and tourism were around 68 percent of GDP during 2015-19. Even in dollar terms, Macao’s net revenues from tourism were the fourth highest in the world, after the U.S., Spain, and Thailand.

In contrast, for countries that are net importers of travel and tourism services—that is, countries whose residents travel widely abroad relative to foreign travelers visiting the country—the importance of such spending is generally much smaller as a share of GDP. In absolute terms, the largest importer of travel services is China (over $200 billion, or 1.7 percent of GDP on average during 2015-19), followed by Germany and Russia. The GDP impact for these economies of a sharp reduction in tourism outlays overseas is hence relatively contained, but it can have very large implications on the smaller economies their tourists travel to—a prime example being Macao for Chinese travelers.

How did tourism-dependent economies cope with the disappearance of a large share of their international revenues in 2020? They were forced to borrow more from abroad (technically, their current account deficit widened, or their surplus shrank), but also reduced net international spending in other categories. Imports of goods declined (reflecting both a contraction in domestic demand and a decline in tourism inputs such as imported food and energy) and payments to foreign creditors were lower, reflecting the decline in returns for foreign-owned hotel infrastructure.

The growth shock

We then examine whether countries more dependent on tourism suffered a bigger shock to economic activity in 2020 than other countries, measuring this shock as the difference between growth outcomes in 2020 and IMF growth forecasts as of January 2020, just prior to the pandemic. Our measure of the overall importance of tourism is the share of GDP accounted for by tourism-related activity over the 5 years preceding the pandemic, assembled by the World Travel and Tourism Council and disseminated by the World Bank. This measure takes into account the importance of domestic tourism as well as international tourism.

Among the 40 countries with the largest share of tourism in GDP, the median size of growth shortfall compared to pre-COVID projections was around 11 percent, as against 6 percent for countries less dependent on tourism. For instance, in the tourism-dependent group, Greece, which was expected to grow by 2.3 percent in 2020, shrunk by over 8 percent, while in the other group, Germany, which was expected to grow by around 1 percent, shrunk by 4.8 percent. The scatter plot of Figure 2 provides more striking visual evidence of a negative correlation (-0.72) between tourism dependence and the growth shock in 2020.

Of course, many other factors may have affected differences in performance across economies—for instance, the intensity of the pandemic as well as the stringency of the associated lockdowns. We therefore build a simple statistical model that relates the “growth shock” in 2020 to these factors alongside our tourism variable, and also takes into account other potentially relevant country characteristics, such as the level of development, the composition of output, and country size. The message: the dependence on tourism is a key explanatory variable of the growth shock in 2020. For instance, the analysis suggests that going from the share of tourism in GDP of Canada (around 6 percent) to the one of Mexico (around 16 percent) would reduce growth in 2020 by around 2.5 percentage points. If we instead go from the tourism share of Canada to the one of Jamaica (where the share of tourism in GDP approaches one third), growth would be lower by over 6 percentage points.

Measures of the severity of the pandemic, the intensity of lockdowns, the level of development, and the sectoral composition of GDP (value added accounted for by manufacturing and agriculture) also matter, but quantitatively less so than tourism. And results are not driven by very small economies; tourism is still a key explanatory variable of the 2020 growth shock even if we restrict our sample to large economies. Among tourism-dependent economies, we also find evidence that those relying more heavily on international tourism experienced a more severe hit to economic activity when compared to those relying more on domestic tourism.

Given data availability at the time of writing, the evidence we provided is limited to 2020. The outlook for international tourism in 2021, if anything, is worse, though with increasing vaccine coverage the tide could turn next year. The crisis poses particularly daunting challenges to smaller tourist destinations, given limited possibilities for diversification. In many cases, particularly among emerging and developing economies, these challenges are compounded by high starting levels of domestic and external indebtedness, which can limit the space for an aggressive fiscal response. Helping these countries cope with the challenges posed by the pandemic and restoring viable public and external finances will require support from the international community.

Source: https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-covid-19-travel-shock-hit-tourism-dependent-economies-hard/

HTLibrary | Aug 14, 2021 | Comments 0

Full Story

Six Tourist-Dependent Countries That Would Benefit Most From ‘Regenerative Travel’

Sustainable tourism, aiming to counterbalance social and environmental impacts associated with travel, has morphed into “regenerative travel,” or leaving a place better than you found it.

Regenerative Travel — the next big trend for conscious travelers —tries to ensure that the benefits contributed by visitors outweigh the resources they consume: it’s intentional tourism, to create positive contributions to the quality of life.

Regenerative travel could help reverse the harm the COVID-19 pandemic has caused tourist-dependent countries, by supporting local economies and cultures around the world in a more balanced way.

Nonprofit organizations, including the Center for Responsible Travel and Sustainable Travel International, have joined together as the Future of Tourism coalition, which aims to “build a better tomorrow.” Travel groups, including tour operators and trade associations have signed on to the coalition’s 13 guiding principles, including “demand fair income distribution” and “choose quality over quantity.”

According to the IMF, tourism accounted for 10 percent of global GDP and 320 million jobs worldwide in 2019. Some destinations, like U.S. National Parks and Croatia, are over-touristed, post-pandemic. And some countries are suffering more than others from the lack of tourism.

A recent study by global luggage storage network, Stasher, reveals the ultimate regenerative travel destinations. The shortlist is based on where in the world had a high reliance on tourism before the pandemic, but are now not thriving, according to TikTok and Instagram data.

Whenever you travel, check the latest guidelines and COVID-19 restrictions. Some areas are not ready for tourists. But others are; and if so, perhaps consider their need as part of your decision.

Also consider the most eco-friendly way of getting to your chosen destination. For example, if you fly, you can sign up for a carbon reduction platform, like Treepoints, to help offset your flight’s carbon footprint by donating to certified eco projects on your behalf.

You can explore the full list of regenerative travel destinations here. Below is a shortlist:

Cambodia

% of GDP from tourism: 32.7%; TikTok and Instagram tags/views: 502,013

In 2019, tourism made up over a third of Cambodia’s GDP, yet it’s clearly not a tourist social media hot spot.

You can enjoy R&R on one of its deserted white sandy beaches; hike off-the-beaten track in its jungles and national parks; or explore its ancient past at Angkor Wat, Ta Prohm and Bayon Temple. And in return, you’ll be supporting the future sustainability of this historic place and its charming people.

Best time to visit: The dry season (November to April), where you’ll enjoy average temperatures of 30°C / 86°F. Explore what Cambodia and other top picks in Southeast Asia have to offer the conscious traveler here.

Uruguay

% of GDP from tourism: 17.4%; TikTok and Instagram tags/views: 4,909

Uruguay benefits from a combination of open space and low population density; over half of Uruguayans live in the capital, Montevideo — a city blending old and new.

Beyond the city’s skyline, you’ll discover countryside with ranches, rustic beaches and vineyards.

Best time to visit: November to March, when the average temperature is 27°C / 80.6°F. Explore what Uruguay and other top picks in South America have to offer the conscious traveler here.

Albania

% of GDP from tourism: 27%; TikTok and Instagram tags/views: 197,858

Albania may be Europe’s enigma, but with over 27% of its GDP coming from tourism pre-pandemic, your visit will have a positive impact. The country boasts rugged mountain scenery, Ionian and Adriatic coastlines, fortress towns and ancient Greek and Roman sites.

Best time to visit Albania: June to August, when the average temperature is 24°C / 75.2°F. Explore what Albania and other top picks in Europe have to offer the conscious traveler here.

Jordan

% of GDP from tourism: 19.8%; TikTok and Instagram tags/views: 187,995

The most popular destinations in the Middle East for travelers pre-COVID-19 included Turkey, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates, with tens of millions of tourists visiting annually.

Jordan offers sand-dune surfing at Wadi Rum, floating in the Dead Sea, diving in the Red Sea or exploring ancient civilizations at UNESCO World Heritage sites, most famously the treasured city of Petra.

Best time to visit Jordan: Between March and June, when you can enjoy the spring sunshine and cooler nights. The average temperature for this time of year is 30.3°C / 86.5°F. Explore what Jordan and other top picks in the Middle East have to offer here.

Grenada

% of GDP from tourism: 55.8%; TikTok and Instagram tags/views: 2,466

The Caribbean archipelago features more than 7,000 individual islands across a million square miles.

Grenada, dubbed the spice isle, relies on tourism for over half of its national GDP each year. It is also relatively undiscovered on social media, with just over 2,000 tags and views.

This island boasts Annandale Falls, Concord Falls, and the Royal Mount Carmel Falls; locally produced rum and chocolate; pretty harbors and soft-sand beaches; and a mountainous lush interior – perfect for hiking.

Best time to visit Grenada: December to April when you can expect an average temperature of 31°C / 87.8°F. Explore what Grenada and other top picks in North and Central America have to offer here.

The Seychelles

% of GDP from tourism: 65.8%; TikTok and Instagram tags/views: 15,050

The islands of the Seychelles, with coral reefs and white sand beaches, has been hit hard by the pandemic, with previously 65% of its GDP coming from tourism.

Once a pirate hideout, the Seychelles now caters to guests looking for luxury. Hiking trails, nature reserves, coral reefs and primeval forests are abundant, and with under 16,000 tags and views on social media, you’ll have the space to enjoy.

Best time to visit the Seychelles: December to April when you can expect an average temperature of 31°C / 87.8°F. Explore what the Seychelles and other top picks in and near Africa have to offer here.

Macau

% of GDP from tourism: 72%; TikTok and Instagram tags/views: 393,376

Macau is the only location in China where gambling is legal. Known as the “Las Vegas of the East”, pre-pandemic Macau’s economy relied heavily on tourism, making up 72% of the country’s GDP.

Macau is working to diversify its economy beyond tourism, but it remains a vital industry for the small nation for many years to come.

The old city is a mix of its Portuguese and Chinese heritage, with cathedrals and historic ruins, and local food markets – with treats such as Pastel de Natas or Dim Sum.

Best time to visit Macau: October to November and March to May, where temperatures average 22°C / 71.6°F. Explore what Macau and other top picks in Asia have to offer here.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/lealane/2021/08/12/six-tourist-dependent-countries-that-would-benefit-most-from-regenerative-travel/?sh=65bb5ce62c11

HTLibrary | Aug 13, 2021 | Comments 0

Full Story

Opportunities for Sustainability in Wine Tourism

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah — As communities struggle to find normalcy after COVID-19, the much-neglected tourism industry desperately needs revenue. Estimated losses could reach “$3.3 trillion, or 4.2% of global GDP” in just one year. Moreover, because tourism involves multiple industries, a $1 million decrease in tourism revenue signals a net loss of $2 to $3 million to national economies. However, this crisis is also an opportunity to redress past shortcomings and to foster new perspectives. Specifically, there are myriad opportunities for sustainability in wine tourism to combat intractable rural poverty.

Role of Tourism

Previously, in a $7 trillion market by 2011, roughly one in 10 workers were employed in tourism-related industries, equating to 260 million jobs. Most of these service-oriented jobs require fewer skills and have enormous potential to gainfully employ uneducated rural populations. Additionally, tourism is highly infrastructure-dependent; therefore, active investment in tourism could bring much-needed resources and utilities to underserved communities.

Developing nations experienced a sixfold increase in international tourism income between 1990 and 2007. In fact, tourism became the “first, second or third-largest sector” in the world’s 50 poorest economies. Totaling $260 billion, the direct foreign investment had a multiplying effect on domestic markets as other industries profit from increased revenue as well. At its highest, tourism represents 40% of GDP in developing nations. Access to this market is a strategic component of poverty alleviation among developing economies.

Sadly, economic growth does not correlate with income equality as a tiny fraction of the global population increasingly consolidates revenue. Some African nations lose 85% of potential tourism income because it is funneled elsewhere. In the Gambia, the poor only receives “14% of in-country spending.” In Ethiopia, the poor receive almost none. Despite 30% tourism growth in Cambodian tourism in 2001, the absence of reliable domestic production sent $0.75 cents of every dollar went back to Thailand to purchase food, flowers and furniture.

Sustainable Wine Tourism

Opportunities for sustainability in wine tourism abound. In 2016, France alone drew 10 million visitors, generating €5.2 billion. Moreover, these direct sales bypass global supply chains, drastically increasing profit margins and providing access to new markets. Categorized as both rural and agricultural tourism, the industry is particularly well-suited to fight poverty as 65% of low-income populations in developing nations depended on farming as the primary source of income in 2016.

In 2019, $278.9 billion in tourism expenditures went to food services; this directly impacts jobs in hotels, restaurants and farms. Wine tourism also creates permanent employment in the notoriously seasonal industry. Most importantly, wine is a ‘territorial intensive product’ as it is deeply intertwined with the culture and region. This allows communities to protect their local heritage and identity in the face of globalism’s homogenizing influence.

South Moravia

For nearly two millennia, South Moravia produced the majority of Czech wine. However, lagging agricultural production prevents the region from entering global markets. A public-private marketing collaboration between CzechTourism and Moravia-based travel agency Znovin Znojmo promoted wine tourism, increasing cellar visits by approximately 20%. This active marketing and branding also helped Šobes Vineyard become a UNESCO world heritage site.

At the international level, the Ministry for Rural Development, in partnership with the European Union, financed Moravian Wine Trail’s 1200-km infrastructure investment for cycling or walking tours in culturally and gastronomically significant wine-producing regions. These various initiatives drastically impacted economic activity, leading 15% of all Czech adults to participate in regional wine tourism.

Spain

Spain is the third-largest global producer of wine but lacks the international recognition and branding of Italy and France, first and second on the list respectively. Without sustained international commerce, Spanish wine-producing regions cannot create opportunities for sustainability in wine tourism. For the ‘deseasonalization of demand,’ the Spanish Association of Wine Cities, consisting of 2000+ companies, develops regionally specific programs. Nationally, viticulture-related visits increased 3.9% in 2019, creating a 5.68% growth in revenue, helping communities transition from overreliance on agriculture to tourism as the primary source of income. Specifically, ‘transversal territorial discourse’ promoted La Axarquia producers hand-harvesting and traditional agriculture as a uniquely marketable brand. In as much, vineyards avoided expensive infrastructure modernization while simultaneously protecting cultural heritage.

Greece

The Peloponnesian wine region of Greece was slow in responding to the international wine trade. As the impacts of globalization progressed, however, the survival of the region’s 180 small wineries was imperiled. Producers pivoted to opportunities for sustainability in wine tourism while financing from the EU lessened the burden of expensive modernization.

Furthermore, subsequent increases in productivity created reliable and high-quality wine essential for global trade. A consolidated focus on sustainable agriculture practices for soil management and irrigation transitioned 48% of wineries to organic certification, an increasingly important certification for global trade. To further protect cultural identity, 66% of wineries pair local gastronomy during wine tastings.

South Africa

Surveys of wine regions in South Africa before and after active tourism initiatives credited the creation of 300,000 permanent positions attributed to growth in wine tastings and food-related services. By decreasing volatility, 68% of wineries encouraged investment in social development projects. The Solms-Delta vineyard created the Wijn de Caab Trust in 2005, allowing employees to purchase adjacent farms with 33% equity in the company. By providing housing and subsidizing education costs, Solms-Delta breaks the poverty cycle of child labor, preventing the all-too-familiar traditional agrarian dependent income for the rural poor. Employee ownership helped the vineyard thrive, resulting in the Delta Trust in 2007, an initiative promoting community development through social programs and culturally significant activities.

Countries around the world are taking strides to ensure sustainable wine tourism. Besides reducing negative effects on the environment and local communities, it continues to boost tourism revenue. As the world’s citizens increasingly receive vaccinations and travel starts to return, the benefits of these efforts will compound.

Source: https://www.borgenmagazine.com/wine-tourism/

HTLibrary | Aug 12, 2021 | Comments 0

Full Story

Green passes are being introduced in these 13 European countries – even if you’re a tourist

Hospitality vaccination passes are being used to curb the spread of new COVID-19 variants.

A growing number of countries in Europe are planning to make it illegal to enter bars and restaurants without proof of a COVID-19 vaccination.

A rise in cases in countries including France, Italy and the Netherlands means ‘green passes’ will be required to enter all indoor hospitality venues.

Each country has a slightly different plan for how the passes will work. So make sure you are informed of the rules before travelling to any of these countries.

Here’s a guide to what a hospitality vaccine pass could mean for your next trip.

What is a hospitality green pass and why is it needed?

Thirteen countries across Europe have laid out plans to legally enforce a hospitality green pass.about:blank

This will take the form of either paper documentation or an app that proves visitors to indoor dining and entertainment venues have been fully vaccinated and are allowed to enter, restriction-free.

It is not expected to affect each country’s rules on outdoor hospitality and gatherings.

These measures are being taken to ensure visitors to bars, restaurants, museums, indoor sports venues, and other cultural/entertainment sites are kept safe from infection and not limited to restrictions like mask-wearing or social distancing.

Some nations are still in the process of legally verifying how the passes will work. Others have had this in place with their own apps since COVID-19 related travel restrictions started lifting across Europe earlier this year.

Is a green pass different from the European Covid Digital Certificate (EUDCC)?

In some cases, no. The EUDCC currently operates as a travel pass across EU member nations, verifying a person’s vaccination status in order to facilitate trips across the continent.

Some countries are using their own apps or paper documentation created before the existence of the EUDCC. Other countries are happy to utilise the benefits of this certificate as the vaccination data is already present and available, streamlining the process.

Why is it so controversial?

The introduction of these measures hasn’t exactly been welcomed with open arms. Some people believe a hospitality green pass is an infringement on civil liberties and will allow bars and restaurants to “discriminate” against those that don’t wish to receive the vaccine.

Business owners are also conscious these measures are being enforced with little time for them to vaccinate themselves and their staff members.

“I am not fully vaccinated myself, my sister and a few other staff are not fully vaccinated, so we just cannot take the chance,” Irish publican Kevin Kavanagh told the BBC upon hearing the news of the Republic’s plans to implement a green pass with just a few days’ notice.

What countries are using a green pass and how can you get one?

The current guidance is that visitors should go through the same process as residents or citizens to obtain their green pass. We will update this article if different rules are announced.

Austria

Entry to eateries, theatres, hotels, sports facilities and places for personal grooming requires proof of vaccination, a negative test, or certificate of recovery from COVID-19.