tourist bubble meaning

A Smithsonian magazine special report

Five Things to Know About Travel Bubbles

Neighboring countries are striking agreements that permit trips across their borders. Is this the future of travel?

Melissa Locker

Contributing Writer

As summer creeps closer and the coronavirus pandemic rages on, people are accepting the reality that vacations and travel as we knew it are not happening this year.

Would-be tourists with wanderlust are dreaming about travel returning to normal, but so are businesses. The U.N. World Tourism Organization estimates that international tourism could decline by up to 80 percent this year over 2019, putting at least 100 million jobs at risk.

While most people are sheltering in place and many countries have closed their borders to prevent the spread of the virus, some essential travel has been allowed. People travel for family emergencies, for instance, while doctors and nurses head to hotspots to help treat those in need.

For those who have embarked on international travel, it typically requires two weeks of self-isolation to see if any coronavirus symptoms appear. While that works for people returning home or staying in a destination long-term, spending 14 days inside is not an ideal vacation for most travelers.

There is one glimmer of hope: travel bubbles.

What is a “travel bubble?”

Travel bubbles, also called travel bridges or corona corridors, do away with that waiting period for a select group of travelers from certain countries where the coronavirus has been contained. “In a ‘travel bubble’ a set of countries agree to open their borders to each other, but keep borders to all other countries closed. So people can move freely within the bubble, but cannot enter from the outside,” says Per Block, an Oxford University researcher in social mobility and methodology. “The idea is to allow people additional freedom without causing additional harm.” Travel bubbles are an extension of one of Block’s research specialties —social bubbles, where people expand their quarantine zones to include more people they consider safe. Block is one of the authors of an Oxford study that suggests social bubbles could be an effective strategy to alleviating coronavirus isolation, although the findings have not yet been peer-reviewed.

How does it work?

Travel bubbles do require a certain amount of faith and trust in partner countries and their ability to contain the virus, including widespread testing, contact tracing and effective quarantining. That’s why Block notes that the easiest time to form a bubble “is when two countries have no more cases” and thus, very low risk in allowing travelers from the other country. Australia and New Zealand, for instance, are some of the nations close to coming to such an agreement.

The two nations both managed to contain the spread of COVID-19 within their countries, after almost completely shutting their borders in March. As both countries appear to have successfully brought their coronavirus outbreaks under control (currently Australia has just 15 new cases; New Zealand has zero, per Google’s virus tracker ) and so long as new infection numbers remain near zero, politicians are weighing options to safely ease open the border, just a little. In late April, they announced plans to form a travel bubble to allow residents to fly back and forth between the countries, sans quarantine; the countries are still determining when to implement it . “If there is any country in the world with whom we can reconnect with first, undoubtedly that's New Zealand," Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said last month.

Of course, zero transmitted cases is unlikely at this point in the pandemic, but that doesn’t mean low-risk travel has to wait. “A travel bubble can also make sense if neighboring countries have a similar number of cases and respond in the same way to the pandemic,” says Block. “In that case, for neither country there is a need to close the border to ‘protect’ their citizens from a higher incidence of cases due to travelers from another country.”

What are the economic benefits of a travel bubble?

A travel bubble would help both countries’ flagging tourism industries. As CNN points out , Australians make up almost 40 percent of international arrivals to New Zealand, with tourism being that country's biggest export industry . Chris Roberts, chief executive of New Zealand's tourist board Tourism Industry Aotearoa, told Justin Harper at the BBC that if the correct health safeguards are followed and the technology is in place, travel bubbles could be an effective means to opening up the country and could serve as a model for other countries to follow. “If New Zealand and Australia can show this can work, then it is likely to be adopted elsewhere,” he said, noting that otherwise “it could be 12 to 18 months before we return to open borders.”

If New Zealand can make their travel bubble work with Australia and keep new infections at zero, which appears to be their bar , they may expand the bubble to include other countries that are effectively containing the virus, including Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea, per the BBC . Fiji and other Pacific Island nations have also suggested they are open to joining in any expanded trans-Tasman bubble. Singapore may be in the mix, too, although they have said their borders will stay closed until a vaccine is found.

What other countries are considering bubbles?

The prime ministers of Australia and New Zealand have stated they will not open their borders “ until it is safe to do so ,” which may not be for months. Meanwhile, the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania opened their borders to one another on May 15. It’s a move that Lithuania's Prime Minister Saulius Skvernelis called "a glimmer of hope for the people that life is getting back to normal" in a statement, reported by the BBC . While citizens and residents can move freely between the three nations, anyone arriving from outside the zone will have to continue to self-isolate for 14 days.

If the virus levels stay low, Finland and Poland may be next to join the Baltic travel bubble, the BBC reports. Elsewhere in the European Union, France is allowing people traveling from other EU countries to skip the 14-day quarantine requirement, the editorial board at the Financial Times writes .

Czechia plans to open its borders on June 8 to residents of countries that are deemed safe, most likely Austria, Slovakia and Croatia. The specifics of that opening are still to be determined, as currently even Czech residents returning home from abroad must show a negative test result or quarantine on arrival, Reuters reports .

Germany is also planning to open its borders with France, Austria and Switzerland on June 15, so long as virus infection levels remain manageable. Other neighboring groups of countries, Austria, Czechia, Denmark, Greece, and even the non-EU country of Israel have been in talks to create a similar bloc, per the Wall Street Journal . While the EU has indicated it wants to establish universal criteria and standards before allowing free movement within the bloc, which would allow all members to lift their restrictions at once, things seem to be moving piecemeal with neighboring nations banding together. It’s a move that Block thinks makes sense. “This is very intuitive, because borders are more relevant for humans than for viruses,” says Block. “If you live in Germany near the Swiss border, why should you be forbidden to travel five miles to Switzerland but be allowed to travel 500 miles to the north of Germany if the policies for what you can or cannot do are the same in all places?”

In Asia, Beijing is considering expanding its “travel bubble” covering mainland China to include Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau as well as South Korea, the Asia Times reported. Ralph Jennings at Voice of America notes , Hong Kong is reportedly weighing opening a bubble with Macau, a popular recreation destination located just an hour away. Taiwan is also reportedly mulling opening travel to “low-risk” countries and exempting their visitors from 14-day quarantines. Chiu Cheng-hsun, a deputy director of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital near Taipei, told Voice of America , that to make such an arrangement work, visitors would be asked to take their temperatures daily and report any suspicious symptoms. Vietnam and Thailand are also reportedly considering creating a travel corridor over the next few months, Julia Hollingsworth and Kocha Olarn at CNN write .

Unfortunately for travelers coming from the U.S., the lack of unified response to the virus, combined with the low rates of testing and contact tracing, make it unlikely that the U.S. will be invited into a travel bubble any time soon.

Get the latest Travel & Culture stories in your inbox.

Simple Flying

What are travel bubbles and what they mean for you.

Travel bubbles have become a popular way to reopen borders for and could be the way you travel next. The arrangement allows for people to travel between countries, sometimes even foregoing the mandatory quarantines. While travel bubbles do sound great in principle, they have run into roadblocks. Let's find out more.

But what are they?

Travel bubbles have different names around the world and are also known as air bridges, air bubbles, and travel corridors. Regardless of the terminology, all travel bubbles aim to do the same thing: allow for international travel during this crisis. However, there can be a significant variance in the rules around travel bubbles depending on the agreements.

For the sake of simplicity, we'll divide travel bubbles into two categories: free bubbles and limited bubbles. Free bubbles allow for unrestricted travel between two or more countries, without any quarantine requirements. Limited bubbles allow travel only in limited circumstances and can come with the full 14-day quarantine procedure.

The agreements can either be bilateral or multilateral. For now, most countries are pursuing bilateral deals with low-risk countries to allow for limited travel. There are also some multilateral agreements such as the European Union's free travel which has been restarted recently.

Free bubbles

A free travel bubble is the dream for most travelers. Passengers can fly between countries as normal, with no lengthy quarantine measures. Some countries do require tests-on-arrival to ensure that passengers are not carrying the virus, which can help make these travel bubbles sustainable.

A notable example of a free travel bubble is the European Union. The EU is currently allowing for intra-EU travel (most countries) as well as travel from 14 low-risk countries . This effectively means that you can hop on a flight and travel anywhere in the EU without restriction, as many have been doing . Some countries are mandating tests on arrival or require a negative test before travel, but once you clear that, the borders are open.

However, outside of Europe, there are few such free bubbles. Europe has seen most countries within the continent have a similar COVID-19 spread, with cases falling around the same time and travel being allowed to open. However, other regions have seen different COVID-19 infection times, or a continued spread, preventing such bubbles from being formed.

A few major destinations have also opened doors to tourists recently. This includes Dubai, the home of Emirates, which is now allowing tourists from around the world with health protocols. While testing positive does mean you will have to quarantine in Dubai, Emirates is offering free travel insurance to protect travelers.

Limited bubbles

While traveling might a leisure activity for many, business travel is essential to companies and governments. To facilitate business travel, countries have opened their borders a crack, allowing in travelers from low-risk countries and reducing quarantine.

South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, and others have reopened their borders to allow business travel from select countries. The criteria for this travel remains high, it must be for important business work, requires testing, and even a week-long quarantine (for Taiwan). However, these bubbles do allow for global business to continue without risking a spike in COVID-19 cases.

Other countries have used travel bubbles to restart international flights, allowing for limited, bilateral travel. Mostly these agreements allow for the return of citizens and long-term residents, who may need to travel for employment or education. Since many countries are yet to restart scheduled international flights, these bubbles allow for essential until then.

India has led this kind of bubble, signing agreements with the UAE, US, France, Kuwait, and more to allow flights between the two countries. These travel bubbles have allowed India to restart international travel, allowing for thousands of expatriates to leave and return to the country. However, due to India's high COVID-19 case count, those traveling are required to quarantine for 14 days.

Are these sustainable?

While these kinds of travel agreements do sound great in theory, they have been difficult to implement and maintain. COVID-19 is notoriously difficult to track since people can spread the virus even before, or if, they show symptoms.

One patient can create an infection cluster , making it very important to meticulously test and trace anyone entering the country. However, with testing kits in short supply around the world, only few can be allocated to foreign travelers.

A number of travel bubbles have been put on hold following a rise in cases. The most prominent example is the trans-Tasman bubble between Australia and New Zealand, which has been put on hold due to a rise in cases in Victoria. Similarly, countries, such as Spain, have seen a second wave of cases, forcing canceled flights and quarantines for travelers.

As COVID-19 continues to spread and re-emerge around the globe, travel bubbles will remain on shaky ground. A rise in cases in any one country can pop the bubble and force border closures all over again. Until such time that we have a vaccine or treatment for this virus, it seems we will have to travel within these bubbles.

What do you think about travel bubbles? Have you made use of them yet? Could they become the future of travel? Tell us your thoughts in the comments

Advertisement

Supported by

Remember the ‘Travel Bubble’? Here’s How It Burst

To keep tourism afloat during the pandemic, some countries formed travel alliances with their neighbors. At summer’s end, the experiment has had mixed results.

• Share full article

By Julie Weed

One of the strategies for keeping international travel afloat during the pandemic was the creation of “travel bubbles”: alliances between neighboring nations with low infection rates that would allow travelers from those countries to freely visit.

But as the summer draws to a close and infections continue to pop up, it appears that, in many places, the travel bubble has burst.

There was a lot riding on the alliances. The pause on international tourism doesn’t just spoil family vacations; it affects the global economy in profound ways, too. The World Travel and Tourism Council estimates that about one in 10 jobs are related to tourism and travel. For popular destinations like Greece, where the tourism sector is responsible for about 40 percent of jobs , the effect is even more significant.

Where have the bubbles burst?

In May, New Zealand and Australia garnered attention when they announced a plan to create one of the first travel partnerships during the pandemic. The “Trans-Tasman bubble” would allow citizens of each country to travel to the other without a quarantine or a test. The hope was to enact it by early September, but in early August, a coronavirus outbreak in the Australian state of Victoria put those plans on hold .

For a while, Europe seemed to represent the best hope for getting tourism going, and it began with the bubble concept. On May 15, the Baltic States of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania created the first travel bubble in Europe; later that month, Hungary and Slovenia agreed that their citizens could continue to travel between the two countries.

Soon, much of Europe became a giant bubble. The European Commission created “ Re-open EU ,” a site listing travel rules within European countries. Each member country began easing restrictions at its own pace. Italy and Germany for example, opened quickly to travelers arriving from inside the European Union or the border-free Schengen zone. Britain also began opening up to its neighbors.

The welcome mat wasn’t rolled out long, though. Flare-ups of the virus caused borders to shut on short notice, disrupting travelers’ plans. In late July, Britain abruptly announced that travelers returning from Spain would have to self-quarantine for 14 days , just a few weeks after it had opened restriction-free travel to the country. In mid-August, British vacationers in France had to either rush home to beat newly announced restrictions, or face two weeks of quarantine when they returned.

Asia, too, has had its burst travel bubbles. Thailand had hoped to invite travelers from nearby countries with low virus rates, such as Japan, Hong Kong and South Korea, to visit without requiring self-quarantines on arrival. New waves of the virus canceled those plans.

While some countries jointly announced agreed-upon travel bubbles with neighbors, others created de facto ones by publishing lists of which nearby countries’ residents were allowed in and under what circumstances.

In the United States, which accounts for about 25 percent of the world’s cases, some states like New York, New Jersey and Connecticut have created their own de facto bubbles, stipulating that travelers coming from a long list of states with a seven-day rolling average of positive tests greater than 10 percent, or number of positive cases over 10 per 100,000 residents, self-isolate on arrival for 14 days.

From bubble to corridor

The idea of bubbles created between neighboring countries has given way in recent months to “travel corridors” and safe lists, sets of countries and territories around the world whose residents, depending on their destinations, don’t have to self-isolate, unless they are showing symptoms of the virus or have recently been exposed. These travel regulations are posted on government websites, such as Re-Open EU and the Centers for Disease Control website , and change as new information is received.

For example, as of Aug. 21 at midnight, travelers arriving in Norway from newly named “red” status places, including Austria, Greece, Ireland and Britain, were required to go into quarantine . Britain’s website, which lists more than 60 countries and territories from which travelers can visit without self-isolating, removed Croatia and Austria from that list last week and added Portugal. Belgium’s foreign affairs website updates the list of restrictions for travelers from various countries each day at 4 p.m.

The sites also list countries’ virus-testing requirements for travelers. Some nations recommend arriving with evidence of a negative result and offer tests at the airport or 14-day self-quarantines as an alternative. Others, like the United States, which recently dropped its advice that newly arrived travelers quarantine for two weeks, don’t require testing to enter the country.

Rather than prohibit all travelers from higher risk countries, Greece recently began requiring that people entering from a specified list of locations arrive with a negative test result for Covid-19, performed within three days of their entry.

What could go wrong?

The risk is high both for travelers and the countries they are visiting, said Dr. Brad Connor, the New York City site director for the GeoSentinel emerging infectious disease surveillance network of the C.D.C. and a longtime travel medicine and infectious disease specialist.

Asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic travelers carrying the virus can inadvertently bring it into an area undetected and cause an outbreak for which there is no vaccine and no reliable treatment, Dr. Connor said. “We all want to travel again in a safe way,” he said. “Unfortunately, the approaches so far have not worked.”

Regional approaches

Infection waves can be local and some countries’ restrictions get down to regional specifications. Belgium’s list recommends testing and quarantine for travelers arriving from certain areas within other European Union countries, like the southwest regions of Bulgaria. Norway declared that the region of Norrbotten in Sweden, which has fewer Covid cases than most other areas in the country, will be changed on its list from “red” to “yellow,” and anyone entering Norway from there will not be required to go into quarantine.

Cordoning off an area of the country for international tourists is the latest idea aimed at preserving a portion of this year’s tourism revenues. Thailand is considering a new program where international travelers who are willing to stay for 30 days are allowed into Phuket, where they will quarantine in specified resorts and undergo two Covid-19 tests.

The island of Anguilla in the Caribbean, which said it had no current virus cases, recently announced it would begin welcoming travelers who must apply to visit, giving preference to those from countries with lower infection rates and those who plan an extended stay. Travelers must arrive with evidence of a recent test showing they do not carry the virus. They will also need to quarantine for 10 to 14 days when they arrive, undergo two more virus tests and pay a fee for these services. The web portal states that “Anguilla is open for approved visitors from certain countries.”

What’s next?

Most countries now realize that they can’t plan too far in advance. The government website of Norway advises citizens that it “is not possible for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to say when the travel advice for countries outside Europe will be changed.”

Travelers can continue to minimize risk to themselves and others with masks, hand-washing and social distancing — “but at this point we can’t completely eliminate the risk,” Dr. Connor said. “And therein lies the problem.”

Follow New York Times Travel on Instagram , Twitter and Facebook . And sign up for our weekly Travel Dispatch newsletter to receive expert tips on traveling smarter and inspiration for your next vacation.

What you should know about 'travel bubbles' -- and why they're so important to the industry

When you think of a "bubble," particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic , the NBA's use of so-called bubbles to sequester players, coaches and members of the media in Orlando might come to mind. People in the bubble were able to move about freely, albeit with some restrictions, such as daily testing and, of course, not being allowed to leave. It functioned as a veritable city: Meals were catered by on-hand chefs and the bubble even had its own barbershops .

Travel is much more widespread than even the largest basketball organization, of course, but several countries are considering adopting a similar model to restart the industry.

Here's what you need to know about travel bubbles around the world.

For more TPG news delivered each morning to your inbox, sign up for our daily newsletter .

What is a travel bubble?

You might be hearing much more about travel bubbles (also called travel corridors, green zones, air bridges or green lanes) in the weeks and months to come as travel begins to reopen in destinations around the world.

Basically, travel bubbles are agreements between countries believed to have controlled the spread of COVID-19. They allow travel — including nonessential trips — across otherwise closed borders, often without lengthy quarantines or other significant restrictions such as mandatory testing.

Travel bubbles to watch

United States-United Kingdom

Right now, non-U.S. citizens from China, Iran, the European Schengen Area, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Brazil, South Africa and India are banned from entering the United States.

Of those countries, none is perhaps more critical to the travel industry right now than the U.K.

The travel industry has clamored for a travel corridor between the U.S. and U.K., and even made its case during the G7 meeting, mounting pressure on the respective governments to open a long-awaited corridor between the two countries. CEOs of each of the airlines that offer nonstop service between the U.S. and the U.K. as well as travel organizations joined forces in support of the corridor.

Why do travel providers so badly want a corridor between the U.S. and the U.K.? The answer is mainly financial.

According to Skift , the airlines said that reopening the corridor would boost the U.S. economy by $4 billion this summer alone. Domestic air travel has picked up recently, with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screening more than 2 million flyers for the first time since March of 2020 -- but business and long-haul international travel remain depressed.

For two economies still reeling from the effects of the pandemic, it seems as though U.S. and U.K. leaders listened. President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Boris Johnson this week quickly agreed to work toward reopening transatlantic travel.

"We're pleased to announce a joint [taskforce] to help facilitate the reopening of transatlantic travel," the U.K.'s secretary of state for transport, Grant Shapps, said in a tweet .

The travel industry reacted positively to the news.

"The travel industry enthusiastically applauds the Biden administration and U.K. government for being responsive to the calls to advance a bilateral travel corridor, and hopes to see it implemented by early July," the U.S. Travel Association , an organization that represents the travel industry, said earlier this month.

Even with travel officials on both sides of the Atlantic pushing for a travel corridor between the two nations, however, there are still hurdles. It's clear that both countries are still in the early stages of discussions, with Britain's foreign secretary telling a news station that a travel corridor was "not something we'll be announcing imminently."

Both nations also have several restrictions -- or outright bans -- on travelers from the other country.

Most U.S. travelers are still required to quarantine for 10 days upon landing in the U.K. And even with nearly half of its population fully vaccinated , the Delta variant, which accounts for a significant portion of new COVID-19 cases in the U.K. has posed concerns. England also delayed lifting lockdown restrictions by an additional month due to the variant.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also still lists the U.K. as a Level 3 "high risk" nation, even following last week's advisory update . The U.S. State Department on June 16 listed the United Kingdom at its second-highest designation, " Level 3: Reconsider Travel ," due to COVID-19. And while 55% of U.S. adults have been fully vaccinated against the coronavirus, experts have said widening gaps between rural and urban vaccination rates could extend the pandemic.

U.S.-European Union

Not to be confused with the U.S.-U.K. corridor in talks, as the U.K. is no longer a European Union member, the EU added the United States to its so-called travel "white list" this week. The list will allow vaccinated visitors to skip quarantine requirements and move freely between the 27 EU nations.

The EU agreed to add the U.S. and seven other countries or territories — Albania, Hong Kong, Lebanon, Macao, North Macedonia, Serbia and Taiwan — to the list of nations from which travel is allowed. It remains unclear if the addition of the U.S. to the list will take effect immediately, though the approval is a promising sign for Americans.

But, as noted in the section above, for a full corridor to be possible, the EU is still looking for the U.S. to relax its travel restrictions on EU countries before the transatlantic corridor fully reopens.

Hong Kong-Singapore

Singapore and Hong Kong serve as significant financial and travel hubs in Asia, so a corridor between the two destinations seemed inevitable. But the launch has been postponed several times.

The travel bubble between the two cities was initially set to launch in November of 2020. However, it was delayed because of a spike in cases in Hong Kong. It was then pushed to May 26, though that has indefinitely been delayed again. According to the South China Morning Post , the travel bubble was put on hold for a second time in mid-May amid a rise in untraceable cases in Singapore. Now, the two countries will review the travel bubble again in July.

St. Lucia-Caribbean

St. Lucia has a travel bubble with 11 Caribbean countries. Travelers moving within the bubble can skip quarantine, but they must still present a negative COVID-19 PCR test taken no more than five days before arriving in St. Lucia.

The U.S. is not included in the bubble, and international visitors from outside the St. Lucia travel bubble will be required to remain at their COVID-19-certified property and only participate in certified tours and activities for the duration of their stay.

Australia-New Zealand

Australia and New Zealand launched their long-awaited travel bubble for quarantine-free journeys between the two countries in April.

People looking to travel in the bubble must have spent the previous 14 days in Australia or New Zealand only. However, travelers who have been to Victoria, New South Wales or Queensland cannot travel to New Zealand from anywhere in Australia until at least 14 days after being in those destinations. This pause is expected to last through June 22 .

And don't expect the U.S. to be added to the bubble. It may still be some time before New Zealand and Australia open their borders to other tourists. New Zealand has indicated that its borders may remain shut for 2021, while Australia says its borders will be closed until 2022.

Have there been travel bubbles before?

Still reeling from the effects of the coronavirus pandemic worldwide, the travel industry has experimented with travel bubbles on a much smaller scale.

These bubbles still aim to accomplish the same task: controlling who is or is not allowed into the bubble.

For instance, multiple U.S.-based airlines now offer COVID-19-tested flights. Delta Air Lines, for example, announced last month that Italy would reopen to any Americans who travel on specific flights . American Airlines and United Airlines also made similar announcements.

And Hawaii earlier this year launched an "enhanced movement quarantine," or " resort bubble " program. Guests participating in the resort bubble program can move about the property and access pools, dining and beaches during the 72-hour quarantine period. During the three days of mandatory quarantine , however, guests can't leave the resort except for medical care and must have their movements monitored by a bracelet. Travelers who arrive in the country without a negative test can't participate in the program.

Travelers must proceed directly to their resort bubble either by hotel transport or a car service type of ground transportation. No rental cars are allowed until the traveler is released from the bubble program.

Even though travel bubbles have been in the works since last year, they will still clearly play a crucial role in safely restarting travel all over the world — and even facilitating easier trips much closer to home.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Is the Travel Bubble under COVID-19 a Feasible Idea or Not?

1 Department of Marine Leisure Management, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung 811532, Taiwan; wt.ude.tsukn@yrneh

Hsiao-Hsien Lin

2 Department of Leisure Industry Management, National Chin-Yi University of Technology, Taichung 41170, Taiwan; wt.moc.oohay@10021emohsirhc (H.-H.L.); wt.ude.tucn@hihcuyol (Y.-C.L.)

Kuan-Chieh Tseng

3 MA Program in Social Enterprise and Cultural Innovation Studies, College of Humanities & Social Sciences, Providence University, Taichung 43301, Taiwan; wt.ude.up@27tkcaj

Chin-Hsien Hsu

Associated data.

No data support.

The present study aimed to understand Taiwanese people’s willingness to participate in the travel bubble policy. A mixed research method was used to collect 560 questionnaires, and SPSS 22.0 software was used for the statistical validation and Pearson’s performance correlation analysis. Expert opinions were collected and the results were validated using multivariate analysis. Findings: People were aware of the seriousness of the virus and the preventive measures but were not afraid of the threat of infection. They looked forward to traveling to heighten their enthusiasm, relieve stress, and soothe their emotions. However, the infection and death rates have been high, there have been various routes of infection, and it has been difficult to identify the symptoms. The complex backgrounds of people coming in and out of airports, hotels and restaurants may create pressure on the participants of events. In addition, the flawed policies and high prices resulted in a loss of confidence in the policies and a wait-and-see attitude toward tourism activities. Thus, travel decisions (0.634), physical and mental health assessment (0.716), and environmental risk (−0.130) were significantly ( p < 0.05) related to travel intentions, and different issues were affected to different degrees, while health beliefs had no significant effect ( p > 0.05).

1. Introduction

Tourism is one of the major economic sources for all countries. The year 2020 has been the toughest year for the global tourism industry [ 1 ]. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak in China in December 2019, the outbreak has not yet been resolved despite the start of vaccination measures [ 2 ]. To date, country-to-country travel has been suspended around the world due to the risk of infection [ 3 , 4 ]. Even though governments around the world are trying to find a solution to the current situation of the tourism industry in their countries, hoping to resume tourism activities in order to revive the tourism market and business opportunities in the tourism industry [ 5 ], people’s willingness to travel is still decreasing [ 6 ] and the tourism industry is shrinking and still suffering from the impact [ 7 , 8 , 9 ]. According to the UNWTO Confidence Index, there was no sign of recovery in the tourism industry from January to April 2021, and although the birth of the vaccines has given hope [ 2 , 3 , 10 ], tourism activities are not expected to fully recover until at least after 2024 [ 11 ]. At present, it is more feasible to resume short-distance tourism trips than long-distance ones [ 12 ].

Taiwan’s is one of the closest locations to the initial COVID-19 outbreak in China. Considering the effectiveness of the outbreak control in tourist destinations, the local government in Taiwan is temporarily not recommending or opening travel to medium to high-risk areas, such as China and Vietnam, unless the destination country is assessed as a low-risk area [ 13 ]. Due to the experience in epidemic prevention, there has been no local outbreak in Taiwan and the situation is well controlled [ 14 ]. Domestic tourism activities have slightly increased [ 15 ], and the epidemic prevention measures are trusted by the general public [ 16 ]. However, there are unknown factors in the transmission of the disease, in addition to oral droplets and infectious agents, coupled with a high risk of death after infection [ 17 , 18 ]. At the same time, the follow-up media reports emphasize the severity of the global epidemic and reinforce fear in people’s minds [ 19 ]. Therefore, it is difficult to change people’s travel expectations in the short term [ 6 ], resulting in a significant decrease in the number of Taiwanese travelers entering and leaving the country [ 12 , 15 ]. The current epidemic situation in Palau is good [ 20 ], and is the same as that in Taiwan. Both governments have achieved effective results in controlling the epidemic in their territories [ 20 , 21 ], and both expect to recover the domestic tourism market and the overall economic situation as soon as possible [ 5 ]. The tourism bubble policy proposed by the Taiwanese government in March 2021 refers to the implementation of conditional tourism activities when the outbreak is under control and quarantine measures are mutually trusted, with the aim of shortening the quarantine period, which can also be interpreted as safe group travel [ 20 , 21 ]. Because the Republic of Palau (hereafter referred to as Palau) has good control of the epidemic and has diplomatic relations with Taiwan, the Taiwanese government has made it a target destination for short-haul intercountry tourism activities [ 20 ]. The travel itinerary planning includes the requirements that the participants travel in groups, that no individual itineraries are allowed, that appropriate stopping points and itineraries must be selected in advance in order to avoid crowds or specific areas and local residents, that the entire trip must be connected at designated stops, that transportation must be cleaned and disinfected daily, that hotels must have government safety and epidemic prevention certification, and that there must be a dedicated dining area for meals, a divided entry and exit route, and appropriate social distance. Participants were required to have no history of travel to or from the country within 6 months, to have not been isolated at home for the past 2 months, to have not been diagnosed with COVID-19 within 3 months, to undergo independent health management with home quarantine for 14 days after returning to the country, and to obtain a negative report for nucleic acid (PCR) testing at the airport before departure [ 22 ]. As a result, the governments of both sides have been communicating with each other in order to advocate their policies, expecting to gain public support, increase the willingness to travel, restart the development of the tourism industries in both places, and revitalize the overall economy [ 23 ]. Therefore, this study considered that the level of policy awareness can be used to estimate the public’s approval of the travel bubble policy and further estimate the willingness to participate in tourism activities.

However, even if the policy is perfect, the environmental risks of tourism still exist. The rapid scientific progress after the industrial revolution has led to the emission of large amounts of waste, resulting in an abnormal climate and more disasters, such as heatwaves, rainstorms, high temperatures, extreme cold, haze, and a proliferation of infectious diseases [ 24 ]. In addition, the unresolved COVID-19 epidemic can be transmitted by droplets and contact with infectious agents, and by other unknown routes of infection such as asymptomatic individuals, and the lethality rate is quite high [ 17 , 18 , 25 ]. Tourism activities make use of the natural landscape as well as the ecological and human–social resources to improve the physical and mental health of the participants through human planning [ 26 ]. However, the current epidemic is still unclear, and the side effects and uncertainties arising from the external risks of travel, man-made hazards, and factors such as the epidemic and climate change will increase the risk of travel and affect people’s willingness to travel [ 27 ]. Therefore, this study assumed that the awareness of environmental risks in travel can be used to estimate people’s willingness to travel.

Travel behavior originates from an idea that arises from various physical or psychological needs of an individual [ 28 ]. The idea of travel occurs when people have a need for travel. However, because of the risk of infection due to the epidemic, people’s willingness to travel has been diminished [ 6 ]. Therefore, in order to motivate individuals to travel, strong health beliefs are needed to overcome the psychological barriers. Travel health beliefs refer to an individual’s psychological state of understanding his or her own health, the assessment of his or her health alertness to the travel environment, the self-testing of healthy behaviors, and participation in healthy activities [ 29 ]. This is used by tourists to determine the risk of upcoming tourism activities and is the basis for the determination of an individual’s willingness to participate in tourism [ 30 ]. Therefore, by predicting personal behavioral intentions through health beliefs [ 31 , 32 ], we can analyze the degree of personal beliefs about disease control and health maintenance when traveling abroad, which can help to explore the degree of travel intentions.

Furthermore, the main purpose of tourism activities is to provide participants with a situation and behavior that improves their physical and mental health [ 28 ]. However, under the threat of an epidemic-infected environment, people’s participation in tourism behavior will constitute a risk [ 6 ]. For the public, the risk of travel is the risk of physical and mental health [ 33 ], which is contrary to the purpose of travel. Failure to protect physical and mental health will affect the willingness to participate in travel [ 34 ] and further affect travel intentions and behaviors [ 35 ]. Therefore, it is believed that conducting personal physical and mental health assessments can anticipate tourists’ willingness to participate in upcoming tourism activities and people’s confidence in travel policies.

Although travel policies are made to improve the domestic economy, the public is the main subject in generating tourism activities and promoting industry development [ 36 ]. If there is no public approval, the policy will still not be able to gain support and promote its operation [ 37 ]. Therefore, it is important to understand people’s perceptions of policies in order to obtain more in-depth answers [ 38 , 39 ]. Currently, there have been many studies on policy-making and environmental risk perceptions [ 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ], and a number of studies on physical and mental health perceptions [ 37 , 40 ], as well as health beliefs [ 27 ]. Although there are studies related to decision making, environmental risks and travel intentions [ 41 , 42 ], there are not many studies focusing on policy-making and environmental risk cognition, health beliefs, and physical and mental health cognition related to travel intentions for international travel during an epidemic.

Furthermore, Taiwan is in line with the rest of the world in facing the threat of COVID-19 to the national economy, industry and people’s health. As a result, people’s physical and mental health are commonly affected by stress and emotions, which can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) [ 43 ]. Compared to other countries around the world that have begun to call for social distancing and cover-up [ 44 ], Taiwan still has some advantages in terms of actual outbreak control [ 10 ]. Therefore, the investigators believed that taking Taiwan as a case study and the local people as the target population, exploring people’s perceptions of policymaking in relation to the impact of environmental risk perception, health beliefs, and physical and mental health perceptions on travel intentions would help improve foreign travel policy planning, rebuild people’s confidence, enhance travel intentions, and restore business opportunities in the tourism industry.

2. Literature Discussion

2.1. decision-making cognition.

Cognition refers to the impressions received by an individual’s own perceptions, whereby a viewpoint is assigned to an environment or an object through a mental process [ 45 ]. Policy cognition is the perception of the system and the process of policy-making, as well as the perception of its promotion [ 10 , 46 , 47 ], which allows people to respond to the environment by using some basic innate behavioral patterns [ 45 ] to gain a sense of the effectiveness of policy development through the mental process in which the consciousness recognizes and understands things, such as perception, imagination, recognition, reasoning, and judgment [ 48 , 49 ].

Policy-making is aimed at improving the plight of local and industrial development, and is most profoundly experienced by the people whose situation is expected to improve; their feelings are usually apparent only after the policy has been implemented [ 10 , 48 ]. Policy cognition can be discussed in terms of the cognition of policy regulations and connotations, government planning and support measures, industry measures, personal policy recognition, and expected policy effectiveness [ 10 , 37 , 49 ]. The higher the level of policy recognition, the higher the chance of participation in the policy [ 10 , 37 ].

2.2. Environmental Risk Perception

Environmental risk refers to the process of understanding the unpredictable but potentially far-reaching potential problems that arise when people or society as a whole are exposed to environmental hazards [ 50 ], which deviate from, or even contradict, everyday knowledge, i.e., risk [ 51 ]. The degree to which an individual reacts to risk is their environmental risk perception [ 52 ].

The three elements of uncertainty, the possibility of loss, and a futuristic nature are required for a risk to be established [ 53 ]. The higher the uncertainty about the future outcome, the higher the risk [ 54 ]. This can be explored in terms of the surrounding living and transportation environment, indoor or outdoor places, dining and consumption moments, and personal feelings [ 53 , 54 , 55 ].

2.3. Health Beliefs

Health consciousness refers to an individual’s heightened concern for health, increased search for health information, devotion to health concerns and the importance of health status [ 56 ]. It involves self-concern similar to self-awareness, provides motivation for self-monitoring and health awareness, and induces a sense of health engagement [ 57 ]. In contrast, behavioral responses based on health awareness for individuals to accept preventive measures, which can be considered as intervention indicators [ 58 , 59 ], are called health beliefs [ 60 ].

Health beliefs can determine behavioral intentions related to medical products or related activities by the severity, susceptibility, barriers, and benefits of engaging in behaviors that may be health-related [ 60 ]. The level of risk can influence people’s behavior in engaging in activities [ 61 ].

2.4. Physical and Mental Health

Physical and mental health refers to a state of wellbeing in physical, mental and social aspects [ 62 ]. Physical and mental health can be analyzed by means of self-perception assessment [ 63 ], and can be presented in practice through scientific evidence from tests such as self-assessment [ 64 ].

The investigation of individual physical and mental health phenomena according to personal feelings can present the impact of the current environment on people [ 10 ]. Physical and mental health can be divided into three dimensions: psychological, spiritual, and attitudinal [ 10 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 ], which are evidenced by feelings of anxiety, competence, enthusiasm, headaches, abdominal pain, insomnia, stomach pain, an abnormal diet, and death-seeking ideation [ 66 , 67 , 68 ]. How good one feels about the current state of one’s physical and mental health affects one’s willingness to act and make judgments [ 10 , 48 ].

2.5. Travel Intentions

The intention is an individual’s tendency to anticipate, plan, or intend whether a future behavior will be performed [ 69 ], and can be used as a predictor of future behavior [ 70 ]. It can be seen as the degree to which people have the tendency to want to travel in order to fulfill their travel beliefs [ 71 ], which can be used to determine the degree to which an individual is inclined to participate in travel behavior for a particular future travel activity [ 72 ]. Hence, the focus on tourists’ travel intentions can help us to adjust the current strategies for better tourism policies for countries which are trying to revive their tourism industry [ 73 ].

Travel intention is an indicator that aims to understand the extent to which individuals travel and consider traveling [ 74 ], and to explore the degree of behavioral propensity to travel to a place [ 75 ]. It can be examined in terms of the individual’s intention to travel, the level of information learned, and the personal behavior and necessary expertise required to prepare for the travel behavior in advance [ 75 , 76 ].

3.1. Study Design, Population and Setting

The present study examines the relationship among travel decisions, environmental risk perceptions, health beliefs, physical and mental health perceptions, and the willingness of the public to participate in tourism bubble policies, so as to predict people’s perceptions of the policies and provide suggestions for the government and tourism-related industries to improve their current decisions or future measures, as shown in Figure 1 .

The research structure.

According to the research framework description, 9 research hypotheses were proposed:

It is assumed that people have the same cognition on tourism decision-making .

It is assumed that the public has the same perception of environmental risks .

It is assumed that people have the same perception of health beliefs .

It is assumed that the people’s personal physical and mental health assessment is consistent .

It is assumed that the people’s travel intentions are the same .

Tourism decision-making cognition and tourism willingness have a significant impact .

It is assumed that environmental risk perception and travel intentions have a significant impact .

It is assumed that health beliefs and travel intentions have a significant impact .

It is assumed that physical and mental health and travel intentions have a significant impact .

Adequate theoretical support is needed for research studies. However, rare or novel research directions have a weak theoretical foundation. This study, therefore, adopted a complex approach, complementing the breadth of the study with quantitative research [ 77 , 78 ] and adding depth to the study with qualitative research [ 79 ], in order to compensate for methodological or theoretical shortcomings [ 80 ]. Using an online questionnaire platform, the researchers selected an initial sample of 1000 people who signed up for the first travel bubble event on 1 April 2021, between 20 March and 5 April 2021, through intentional sampling [ 81 ]. As it is difficult to accurately estimate the population size, this study concluded that the sample size should be at least 272 questionnaires (α = 0.05, sampling error 3%) [ 82 ]. Due to the constraints of the respondents’ willingness to be interviewed, the researcher expanded the sample by random sampling, targeting Taiwanese individuals who had experience abroad and were willing to participate in travel bubble activities. Of the 600 questionnaires obtained by the random sampling method, 560 valid questionnaires were finally analyzed after eliminating the invalid ones [ 83 ]. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) statistical software was used to inspect the reliability and validity of the questionnaire, and then the data were analyzed by statistical validation, Pearson’s correlation method, and regression analysis. Interviews were then conducted in order to obtain insights on the analysis results. Subsequently, the information was compiled, organized and analyzed to construct the content of the report [ 84 ]. Finally, the multivariate verification analysis method was used to integrate the information of different research subjects, research theories and methods, and obtain accurate knowledge and meanings by comparing the research results from multiple perspectives and multiple points of data [ 85 , 86 ].

3.2. Measurements

The questionnaire was administered on a 5-point Likert scale, with a score of 1 being very dissatisfied and 5 being very satisfied. After the content was prepared with reference to the literature, three experts were sought to examine the content, IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. statistical software was used to determine the topic, and then a statistical validation was performed. When the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) was greater than 0.05 and the p -value in Bartlett’s test was less than 0.01 ( p < 0.01), the scale was considered suitable for continuous factor analysis [ 85 ]. Questions with good reliability [ 87 ] with an alpha greater than 0.60 were adopted for subsequent analysis.

There were 7 questions on travel decision cognition, and the results of the statistical analysis showed that the KMO was 0.860, Bartlett’s approximate χ 2 value was 1249.956, and the df was 21, with a significance of p < 0.001, which was suitable for factor analysis. The explained variance of the scale was 63.07%, and the total explained variance was 63.07%. After the factor analysis, all of them were retained. The questionnaire was named Tourism Decision Making Awareness, with 7 questions, of which the alpha coefficients were 0.903–0.915, and the alpha coefficient of the total scale was 0.921. The above analysis results showed that this questionnaire had good reliability.

There were 6 questions on environmental risk perception, and the results of the statistical analysis showed that the KMO was 0.880, and Bartlett’s approximate χ 2 value was 1161.964 with a df of 15, which was significant at p < 0.001 and suitable for factor analysis. The explained variance of the scale was 67.59%, and the total explained variance was 67.59%. After the factor analysis, all of them were retained. The questionnaire was named the Environmental Risk Awareness Questionnaire, with a total of 6 questions, of which the alpha coefficients were 0.897–0.919, and the alpha coefficient of the total scale was 0.922. Based on the results of the above analysis, this questionnaire had good reliability.

There were 11 questions on health beliefs, and the results of the statistical analysis showed that the KMO was 0.735, Bartlett’s approximate χ 2 value was 932.114, and the df was 66, with a significance of p < 0.001, which was suitable for factor analysis. The explained variances of the scales were 27.18% and 19.12%, and the total explained variance was 46.3%. All of them were retained after the factor analysis. The questionnaires were named Perceived Susceptibility and Seriousness (5) and Self-efficacy (6), with a total of 11 questions, of which the alpha coefficients were 0.699–0.720 and 0.725–0.754, and the alpha coefficient of the total scale was 0.760. Based on the above analysis results, this questionnaire had good reliability.

There were 9 questions on physical and mental health assessment, and the results of the statistical analysis showed that the KMO was 0.927, Bartlett’s approximate χ 2 value was 3476.010, and the df was 36, with a significance of p < 0.001, which was suitable for factor analysis. The explained variances of the scales were 46.07%, 41.61% and 2.54%, and the total explained variance was 90.2%. All of them were retained after the factor analysis. The questionnaires were named Psychological Feelings (3), Mental State (3), and Attitude toward Life and Health (3), with a total of 9 questions, of which the alpha coefficients were 0.974, 0.972 and 0.973, and the overall scale alpha coefficient was 0.980. Based on the above analysis results, this questionnaire had good reliability.

There were 4 questions on travel intention, and the results of the statistical analysis showed that the KMO was 0.845 and Bartlett’s approximate χ 2 value was 860.021, with a df of 6, and the significance was p < 0.001, which was suitable for factor analysis. The explained variance of the scale was 81.74%, and the total explained variance was 81.74%. After the factor analysis, all of them were retained. The questionnaire was named the Travel Intention questionnaire, with 4 questions, of which the alpha coefficients were 0.904–0.935 and the alpha coefficient of the total scale was 0.940. Based on the above analysis results, this questionnaire had good reliability. As shown in Table 1 .

Analysis of the questionnaire tools.

Nevertheless, a more deliberate and sound approach is needed to examine national public health issues. Using a hybrid research approach which collects additional information in a variety of ways for comparison or corroboration can yield more accurate and in-depth knowledge [ 10 , 37 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 ]. Therefore, after obtaining the questionnaire sample data for the analysis, the present study used video software or telephone interviewing to obtain the views of in-service tour guides or scholars with expertise in tourism and public health-related fields. The information was compiled, organized, and analyzed in a rigorous sequence in order to construct this paper [ 84 ], and the final analysis and study were conducted by multivariate validation [ 86 , 87 ].

3.3. Study Scope and Limitations

The study was conducted to investigate the water literacy of people in Taiwan. During the sampling period, the study was faced with the threat of the COVID-19 epidemic, as well as funding, manpower and material constraints. Therefore, the questionnaires on travel decision making and environmental risk perception, health beliefs, and the physical and mental health assessment were developed and distributed through an online questionnaire platform and an intentional sampling method to separate respondents, and then the random sampling method was used to expand the sampling scope. After the data were collected and analyzed, video conferencing and telephone interviews were conducted with the consent of the respondents, including tour leaders and guides, as well as experts in leisure, tourism, medical and public health, to provide insights into the analysis and results. Finally, all of the data were compiled and examined using a multivariate verification approach. The shortcomings of the study will be used as research recommendations, and we expect that follow-up researchers will conduct investigations to improve the shortcomings. As shown in Table 2 .

Background analysis and topics of the interview.

3.4. Ethical Considerations

The data for this study were collected by the intentional sampling of island residents in Taiwan, combined with a random sampling method. All of the study procedures and data results were in accordance with ethical standards [ 88 , 89 ]. The respondents were people living in Taiwan, as well as their relatives and friends. In addition, all of the surveys and interviews were conducted after the respondents understood the purpose of the study and agreed to be interviewed. The interview results and related data were also provided on site for analysis with their permission.

4. Analysis and Discussion

The present study analyzed Taiwanese people’s willingness to participate in the travel bubble policy in terms of decision-making and environmental risk perception, health beliefs, and physical and mental health. In total, 560 samples were collected for analysis. The subjects’ perceptions were tested using basic statistical tests with SPSS 26.0 software (M = mean, Rank = mean rank). The data were analyzed by Pearson’s correlation test and a linear regression test to verify whether there is an interaction between travel decisions, environmental risk, physical and mental health, and travel intention perception. Six experts and scholars were interviewed to provide their insights based on the analysis. All of the data were then compiled for categorization, generalization and comparison [ 83 ], and were explored in a multivariate approach [ 84 , 85 ].

4.1. Background

The sample background was analyzed by statistical analysis. The majority of the respondents were male (61.1%) and the lowest number of respondents were female (38.9%). The age of the respondents was 51–60 (21.7), followed by 21–30 (20.5%), 41–50 (19.7%), 31–40 (19.3%), under 20 (12.7%) and over 61 (6.1%), in descending order. In terms of marital status, the largest number of the respondents were married (55.7%), followed by unmarried (40.6%), and the lowest number were others (3.7%). It was found that men were more willing to travel abroad, and most of the respondents were 51–60 years old and married.

4.2. Analysis of Travel Decisions, Risk Perception, Health Beliefs, Physical and Mental Health, and Travel Intentions

The main purpose of policy development is to solve problems, and the feelings of the public can truly reflect its effectiveness [ 10 , 48 ]. Although tourism can improve physical and mental health [ 37 , 40 ] and personal health beliefs, which can enhance the effectiveness of personal prevention [ 55 ], the risk of infection still exists [ 48 ] and may still affect travel intentions [ 6 ]. Therefore, we analyzed and verified the consistency of people’s perceptions of travel decisions, risk perceptions, health beliefs, physical and mental health, and travel intentions using statistical tests, as shown in Table 3 . It was found that, in terms of travel decision making, the greatest number of people agreed that it was a good travel planning decision (3.46) and the lowest number agreed with the government’s policy of promoting travel bubbles (3.00), which was different from Hypothesis 1. As shown in Table 3 .

Analysis of travel decisions, risk perception, health beliefs, physical and mental health, and travel intentions. Analysis of intentions.

The respondents said:

Respondent 1 said, “The tourism industry has been stagnant for a long time due to the epidemic. The government’s promotion of tourism bubbles at this time should help the industry recover.”

Respondent 3 said, “The government’s promotion of the tourism bubble will help the industry recover, but the price is too high.”

Respondent 2 said, “The promotion at this time is the right time. If the promotion is good, it should be able to activate the economy, but the price is too high to be affordable by the general public.”

Respondent 4 said, “I believe that the policies are well planned, especially in this environment, but exaggerated prices will reduce people’s willingness.”

After analyzing people’s perceptions of the environmental risk of participating in travel bubble activities, it was found that the possibility of infection in airport transit (4.05) was the highest, and the possibility of infection in entering and leaving outdoor places (3.75) was the lowest, which was different from Hypothesis 2.

Respondent 1 said, “The objects entering and leaving the airport are too complicated, the method of epidemic transmission is currently not very certain, and the risk of infection is high.”

Respondent 2 said, “Chinese people have a strong awareness of epidemic prevention and are afraid of being infected.”

Respondent 3 said, “Under the threat of the epidemic, outing activities have been reduced, and group activities have been reduced.”

Respondent 5 said, “The spread of COVID-19 has not yet been controlled, and there is still a risk of asymptomatic infection. Fear of infection, keep a safe distance when going out.”

Respondent 4 said, “At present, the anti-epidemic policies of various countries have been gradually improved. They can be controlled by measures such as body temperature and disinfection. Individuals are encouraged to wear masks in and out of public places, and to maintain awareness of distance and other awareness.”

In terms of health beliefs, the knowledge of infection prevention behaviors (3.93), the infectiousness and lethality of individuals with positive test results (3.63), and the ability to recognize symptoms of viral infection (3.36) were the highest, and “I would die if diagnosed” (2.70) was the lowest, which was different from Hypothesis 3.

Respondent 3 said, “After many influenza and virus crises, Taiwanese people have taken a highly subconscious approach to epidemic prevention.”

Respondent 4 said, “The epidemic prevention behavior of the Taiwanese people has become a lifestyle habit.”

Respondent 5 said, “The epidemic has not yet been resolved, and infections have appeared one after another, even the virus has mutated, and fatal cases have spread frequently. So far, it is impossible to accurately grasp the route of infection.”

Respondent 2 said, “Tourists who travel abroad know the severity and risks of the epidemic abroad, and few people will travel abroad at this time.”

Respondent 6 said, “Taiwan’s public health education has been promoted for many years, coupled with the experience of SARS crisis, the people know the seriousness of the epidemic.”

Respondent 1 said, “After many epidemic preventions, the current epidemic control in Taiwan is stable. However, it may also be stable for a long time and begin to relax, leading to actions that violate the code of conduct for epidemic prevention one after another.”

Regarding the physical and mental health components, being enthusiastic (2.62), relieving headaches or stress in the head (2.57), the cessation of anxiety, and temper tantrums (2.45) were the highest, while increasing job performance satisfaction (2.53), relieving back pain (2.39), and the cessation of stomach pain and indigestion (2.35) were the lowest, with results which were dissimilar to Hypothesis 4.

Respondent 4 said, “Traveling can help relieve stress. I haven’t traveled for a long time. However, the risk of transmission of asymptomatic infected persons in the current epidemic is worrying.”

Respondent 2 said, “At the airport, there are many people or citizens from different countries returning to Taiwan, and they are worried about their health and the risk to the current situation in Taiwan.”

Respondent 3 said, “Traveling can improve physical and mental health. At this time, the epidemic environment, coupled with work pressure, is more looking forward to travel to revitalize the body and mind (A4).”

Respondent 1 said, “If you travel out, you still worry about the epidemic, especially now that the world has not completely suppressed the virus, and the airport has tourists from different countries entering and leaving the airport.”

Respondent 6 said, “The fatality rate of the epidemic has soared, and the risk of asymptomatic infections and other issues will cause pressure on the public. The pressure will affect life behavior and judgment.”

Respondent 5 said, “Sensitive moments can create a sense of oppression. This is invisible, subconscious pressure. Apart from worry, it is impossible to obtain a regular and proper lifestyle.”

Finally, when analyzing people’s willingness to participate in the travel bubble campaign, it was found that the highest intention was to continuously collect relevant information in the future (2.91) while the lowest was to have a high likelihood of participation in the future (2.61), which is different from Hypothesis 5.

Respondent 3 said, “Tourism can help people improve their physical and mental health, especially at this time of the epidemic environment, coupled with work pressure, the people are looking forward to it.”

Respondent 1 said, “The epidemic cannot be resolved, and there are multiple ways of infection, and there are tourists from other countries entering and leaving the airport.”

Respondent 5 said, “Sensitive moments can create a sense of oppression. This is invisible, subconscious pressure. Apart from worry, it is impossible to obtain regular and proper travel behaviors. This will make the public still maintain a wait-and-see attitude.”

Respondent 2 said, “Many people still remain highly skeptical about the safety of traveling.”

4.3. Analysis of the Correlation among Travel Decision Making, Risk Perception, Health Beliefs, Physical and Mental Health, and Travel Intentions

The effectiveness of a policy decision is best demonstrated by the public’s response [ 10 , 48 ]. The ability to accurately predict risk [ 60 ], the possession of sound health beliefs and behaviors [ 56 ], and obtaining positive physical and mental health perceptions [ 10 ] should increase the willingness to participate in a policy [ 37 , 54 , 55 , 64 ]. Therefore, Pearson’s test was used to analyze and verify the effects of travel decision making, risk perception, health beliefs, physical and mental health, and travel intentions, as shown in Table 4 . The analysis revealed that travel decisions (0.634) were moderately positively correlated with travel intentions ( p < 0.001); physical and mental health assessment (0.716) was highly positively correlated with travel intentions ( p < 0.001); and environmental risk (−0.130) was negatively correlated with travel intentions ( p < 0.05), with consistent results with Hypotheses 6, 7 and 9. Health beliefs, on the other hand, had no significant effect on travel intentions ( p > 0.05), which is inconsistent with Hypothesis 8. As shown in Table 4 .

Correlation analysis of travel decisions, risk perception, health beliefs, physical and mental health, and travel intentions.

* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

Respondent 3 said, “Although I am worried about the risk of infection, I think the tourism decision planned by the government is a proper measure, which can actually improve the industry and people’s livelihood issues, and should be trusted by the public.”

Respondent 1 said, “As the epidemic cannot be resolved and the infection methods are diverse, there are tourists from other countries entering and leaving the airport. If the risk can be reduced, the willingness of passengers to sign up should be improved.”

Respondent 4 said, “Although the infection route of the epidemic is clear, asymptomatic infected persons are also at risk of spreading the virus.”

Respondent 2 said, “The risk of infection is indeed one of the factors to consider participating in activities.”

Respondent 5 said, “Many people still remain highly skeptical about the safety of traveling. No matter how perfect the epidemic prevention is, the unpredictable risk of infection will still affect the willingness to travel.”

Further analysis of the travel decisions revealed significant correlations ( p < 0.001) between the willingness to improve the overall domestic economy of travel (0.580), the willingness to participate in leisure time (0.584), the high likelihood of future participation (0.533), the continuous collection of relevant information in the future (0.464), and the ability to improve one’s ability to travel (0.541).

In terms of environmental risk, there was a low negative correlation between possible infection at the airport and the willingness to use leisure time to participate (−0.127), a high likelihood of future participation (−0.146), and a significant correlation ( p < 0.001) between possible infection in accommodation and meals (−0.156) and the willingness to use leisure time to participate.

In terms of physical and mental health, there was a significant correlation between enthusiasm and the willingness to travel (0.741), the willingness to participate in leisure time (0.698), a high likelihood of future participation (0.738), and efforts to improve one’s ability to travel (0.676). There was a significant ( p < 0.001) relationship between increased work efficiency and the continued collection of relevant information in the future (0.603). As shown in Table 5 .

Analysis of the correlation between travel decisions, risk perception, health beliefs, physical and mental health, and travel intentions.

* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

Respondent 1 said, “The epidemic has affected the tourism industry for a long time, and policy promotion has helped the industry recover. However, the airport is complicated to enter and exit, the method of infection is uncertain, and the risk of infection is high. If the risk is reduced, it should increase the willingness of passengers to sign up.”

Respondent 2 said, “The promotion should be able to activate the economy, but the price is too high to be affordable by the general public.”

Respondent 4 said, “The policies are believed to have been properly planned, especially in this environment, but exaggerated prices will reduce the willingness of the people. At present, epidemic prevention policies in various countries have been improved, and measures such as body temperature and disinfection can be used to control and encourage individuals to enter and leave the public. Wear masks in places and keep a distance, and the Chinese people are more aware of epidemic prevention.”

Respondent 3 said, “Traveling helps people improve their physical and mental health, especially at this time of the epidemic environment, coupled with work pressure, people look forward to traveling to revitalize their physical and mental health. Improving measures can actually improve the problem and make the people trust.”

4.4. Validation of the Regression Analysis of the Effects of Travel Decisions, Environmental Risk Perception, Health Beliefs, and Physical and Mental Health Perceptions on Travel Intention

Based on the above analysis, it was found that travel decisions, environmental risks, and physical and mental health perceptions were significantly correlated with travel intentions. Then, regression analyses were conducted to identify the fitness of the model for the effects of travel decisions, environmental risks, and physical and mental health perceptions on travel intentions. The analysis showed a df value of 4, an F value of 98.392, and an explanatory power of 61.6% (corrected R2). Travel decisions (0.361) and physical and mental health perceptions (0.533) were significantly and positively associated with travel intentions ( p < 0.01). There was no significant effect of environmental risk perceptions and health beliefs ( p > 0.01). As shown in Figure 2 .

Results of the regression analysis of travel decisions, environmental risk perceptions, health beliefs, and physical and mental health perceptions on travel intentions. * p < 0.05.

Among them, the issues of improving the overall domestic economy (0.247), physical and mental health awareness to increase motivation (0.379), and the reduction of headaches and stress (0.251) had a significant positive effect on travel decisions ( p < 0.01), with an explanatory power of 65.6% (modified R2).

Respondent 4 said, “The policies are believed to be properly planned, especially in this environment.”

4.5. Discussion

4.5.1. research samples and limitations.

We believe that although women like to travel, they are cautious and avoid the risks of travel. People over the age of 51 are more likely to have families and jobs, and to have worked for many years, accumulating enough wealth to provide the time and money to travel abroad in order to broaden their horizons and improve their quality of life. Therefore, men are more willing to travel abroad, especially those who are aged 51–60 years old and married.

4.5.2. Travel Decisions, Risk Perceptions, Health Beliefs, Physical and Mental Health, and Travel Intentions

The study concluded that although policy-making can help government agencies solve development challenges [ 10 , 48 ], policy formulation is flawed and price setting is not in line with the market demand, resulting in the low public recognition of the policy. As a result, the public perceives that travel policy planning is better, while policy promotion is not effective.

Although countries are gradually improving their epidemic prevention measures by implementing such measures as body temperature screening and alcohol disinfection in public places or hotels, the risk and the lethality of virus infection is high [ 17 , 18 ], and the airport is full of miscellaneous people entering and leaving the country. Therefore, the public perceives a high risk of infection in airports but a low risk when entering and leaving outdoor public places.

The epidemic is still unresolved, and there is still a risk of infection and even death among those with asymptomatic infection, but increased searching for health information and attention to personal health [ 55 ] can reduce the risk of accidents among individuals [ 57 , 58 ]. In addition, the national epidemic prevention measures and experience are sufficient, and the individuals have sufficient experience in epidemic response measures. As a result, people are aware of the virus, are not afraid of the high transmission and mortality rates or the threat of death from confirmed diagnosis, and understand how to prevent the disease, but are unable to recognize the symptoms of the infection with certainty.

Although travel is expected to stimulate the passion for life, relieve stress, and relax the body and mind [ 28 ], the global epidemic has not yet subsided, the airport is full of people with complex backgrounds, and there are multiple routes of virus transmission and high mortality rates, so it is still risky to engage in travel behaviors at this time [ 6 ]. Therefore, people believe that participating in travel may increase their passion, relieve headaches and stress, and relieve their emotions, but it still does not improve back pain, resolve indigestion, improve work efficiency, or increase satisfaction.

In an epidemic environment and under work pressure, people look to tourism to improve their physical and mental health [ 28 ]. Moreover, promoting people’s participation in tourism activities can promote industrial development [ 36 ]. However, the complex background of people entering and leaving the airport, the unresolved epidemic, and the multiple modes of transmission create an invisible sense of oppression at sensitive times, leading to a wait-and-see attitude toward participation in tourism activities. As a result, people indicated that they would continue to collect information but would not be very willing to participate.

4.5.3. Correlation between Travel Decisions, Risk Perception, Health Beliefs, Physical and Mental Health, and Travel Intentions

People who highly agree with the policy, and have the ability to assess risks, maintain high health beliefs, and maintain positive feelings of physical and mental health should have an increased willingness to participate in the policy implementation [ 10 , 37 , 48 , 54 , 55 , 60 , 64 ]. However, unresolvable epidemic problems, high risk, and the high price of activities promoted by travel policies are all factors that affect travel intentions. This resulted in significant correlations between travel decisions, physical and mental health assessments, environmental risks, and travel intentions.

Furthermore, countries are gradually improving their epidemic prevention mechanisms, and the monitoring and epidemic prevention measures in public places such as hotels and restaurants are becoming more and more stringent. People also expect tourism to promote their physical and mental health and revitalize the economy. However, factors such as long airport routes, diverse tourist backgrounds, the mixed backgrounds of hotel and restaurant diners, as well as multiple modes of virus transmission, the high risk of infection, and high death rates still affect people’s willingness to travel abroad and lead to a negative impact on their physical and mental health. This has resulted in a wait-and-see attitude of the people toward short-haul cross-country travel policies and an inability to effectively improve their physical and mental health. Therefore, issues such as the overall improvement of the economy, the possibility of infection at airports, the possibility of infection in accommodation and restaurants, passion, and increased work efficiency have a relevant impact on the desire to travel.

4.5.4. Regression Analysis of Travel Decisions, Environmental Risk Perceptions, Health Beliefs, and Physical and Mental health Perceptions on Travel Intentions

The investigators concluded that travel activities can relieve stress [ 28 ] and enable people to achieve some degree of health improvement. The travel bubble decision is a short-haul, country-to-country overseas travel activity planned by the Taiwanese government in cooperation with low-risk countries, and tourists must comply with the epidemic prevention measures for departure and return. Moreover, Taiwanese people are highly aware of epidemic prevention, and the epidemic in Taiwan remains under control, which makes people trust the “Travel Bubble” decision.

However, the current epidemic has multiple routes of infection, high mortality [ 17 , 18 ], and increased uncertainties such as variant viruses and asymptomatic patients [ 17 , 18 , 25 ]. The public’s willingness to plan outdoor activities or to travel abroad has varied. Nevertheless, due to the prolonged depression generated by the epidemic [ 43 , 44 ], safe and reliable tourism opportunities certified and planned by the government [ 28 ] are expected to alleviate the depression of the epidemic, promote tourism, and revitalize the domestic economy through tourism.

In contrast to general travel plans and needs, the uncertainty of the infection risk and the differences in levels of expertise led to the belief in the government decisions and the effectiveness of the epidemic prevention, hands-on travel experiences, and the expectation of rapid improvements in physical and mental health as the main key factors influencing travel intentions. As a result, environmental risk perceptions, health beliefs, and travel intentions do not have a significant impact. However, travel decision-making and physical and mental health perceptions have a significant impact on travel intentions, with factors such as increasing enthusiasm, reducing headaches and stress, and improving the overall domestic economy having the greatest impact.

5. Conclusions

The study found that travel bubble events were successful because participants were aware of the seriousness of the infection, understood how to prevent it, did not fear the threat of death if diagnosed, and looked to travel to boost their personal enthusiasm, relieve headaches and stress, and soothe emotions. However, the transmission rates and mortality rates are high, the transmission modes are diverse, and there is no way to clearly identify asymptomatic patients. The background of people entering and leaving airports, hotels, and restaurants is complex. Participation in travel activities may create a sense of oppression. The policy is flawed, and the prices are not in line with the market demand. These factors reduce public acceptance of the travel bubble policy, leading to a wait-and-see attitude about participating in the next travel bubble event. Factors such as increasing enthusiasm, reducing headaches and stress, and improving the overall domestic economy will be key predictors of people’s decisions to participate in travel bubbles.

Based on the above, the following suggestions are offered:

In addition to incorporating epidemic prevention measures, travel policies can utilize cell phone applications for locational control. Vaccinations and screenings must be designed to meet the needs of consumers. Without proper planning, decisions will stagnate and administrative resources will be wasted. Therefore, we suggest that the government should establish a consensus with the tourism industry and design a price level that is in line with the market mechanism and the cost in order to increase the willingness to participate.

It is a basic consideration for travel agencies to plan their itineraries based on cost, but it is important not to discourage consumers by killing the goose that lays the golden egg. Therefore, it is suggested that travel itineraries should be planned with cost in mind, and that prices should be adjusted or travel itineraries should be suspended in a timely manner in order not to affect the image of the company by causing poor perceptions.

The study was conducted with Taiwanese people as the target population in order to explore the willingness to participate in the promotion of the travel bubble policy. Due to the limitations of the study, there are shortcomings in the research method and sample size. It is suggested to expand the sample size of the questionnaire and use additional validation software or computational methods to investigate the correlation between travel decisions, risk perception, physical and mental health, and other issues that can fill the research gap.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization and project administration, J.-H.Y.; data curation, funding acquisition, supervision, Y.-C.L.; validation, visualization, writing—original draft, H.-H.L.; funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, K.-C.T.; resources, writing—review & editing, C.-H.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Asia Regional Integration Center

• Cross-border Infrastructure
• Trade and Investment
• Money and Finance
• Regional Public Goods
• AEIR Data Catalogue
• International Investment Agreements
• Economic and Financial Indicators
• Financial Stress Index
• Asia-Pacific Regional Cooperation and Integration Index
• Integration Indicators database
• Daily Market Watch
• Publications
• Infographics
• Integration Dashboard
• Economic Calendar
• RCI-POD Webinar
• Spotlight archives
• Kyrgyz Republic
• Turkmenistan
• China, People’s Republic of
• Hong Kong, China
• Korea, Republic of
• Taipei,China
• New Zealand
• Afghanistan
• Brunei Darussalam
• Lao People’s Democratic Republic
• Philippines
• Timor-Leste
• Cook Islands
• Fiji Islands
• Marshall Islands
• Micronesia, Federated States of
• Papua New Guinea
• Solomon Islands

What is a travel bubble?

Featured Publications

• aric_info[at]adb.org

Why a trans-Tasman travel bubble makes a lot of sense for Australia and New Zealand

Senior Lecturer in Tourism Management, University of South Australia

Professor of Tourism, University of Otago

Disclosure statement

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of South Australia and University of Otago provide funding as members of The Conversation AU.

University of Otago provides funding as a member of The Conversation NZ.

View all partners

We are hearing increasing talk about a trans-Tasman “travel bubble” , which could see Australia and New Zealand open their borders to each other.

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was a special guest at Australia’s national cabinet meeting on Tuesday, which discussed the possibility of setting up a travel safe zone.

Both Ardern and Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison have cautioned a travel bubble will not happen immediately. After the meeting, Morrison said a safe zone is “still some time away”. But he also stressed, “it is important to flag it, because it is part of the road back”.

Read more: Reclaiming the streets? We all can have a say in the 'new normal' after coronavirus

What would a travel bubble mean in practice for Australia and New Zealand?

As tourism researchers in both countries, we see a travel bubble as a great opportunity to kick-start the post-COVID economic recovery, while also focusing on more sustainable tourism.

Why the trans-Tasman bubble makes sense

A travel bubble would see quarantine-free travel allowed between Australia and New Zealand.

The two neighbours have a unique opportunity to do this. Not only are they geographically isolated, both have so far had success containing - perhaps even eliminating - COVID-19 cases within their borders.

It is not yet known when international flows of tourists will be possible again. But it is understood that global tourism as we once knew it will not be possible until a COVID-19 vaccine is widely available.

Historically, limited travel circuits have been associated with former and current Communist states. Nevertheless, for Australia and New Zealand in 2020, the idea of a travel safe zone makes a lot of sense.

In 2018, New Zealand was Australia’s second largest inbound market for visitor arrivals and fourth largest market for visitor nights and total visitor spend . Australia is New Zealand’s largest visitor market , generating 1.5 million visitors a year as of 2017.

The beauty of our shared travel markets is our visitors are generally repeat visitors who head to diverse regions. Because more than 70% of Australians book self-drive holidays , for example, their spending spreads more widely than some other visitors.

Australians seek skiing and adventure in Queenstown, wine in the Martinborough or Waiheke Island regions. They also support Australian sports teams competing in Auckland, Wellington and Dunedin. In reverse, lots of Kiwis head to the Gold Coast but also visit the Hunter Valley for wine or Melbourne, Sydney or Brisbane for sports events.

Starting to rebuild these markets while the rest of the world remains in lockdown would represent a huge boost to both economies.

What is needed to make a bubble work?

After the national cabinet meeting, Ardern stressed “there is still a lot of work to be done” before the travel safe zone idea can progress.

The key to a successful trans-Tasman travel arrangement will be sound planning and implementation.

Rigorous public health measures to facilitate safe travel will be essential, including being prepared for all travel to be halted again if the situation changes.

Read more: New roadmap gives Australia two paths out of COVID-19 lockdown: elimination or adaptation

Broad stakeholder involvement and coordination will be necessary, including between tourism commissions, airlines and airports, industry associations and a range of government agencies, to ensure any reopening is managed well.

Local councils and businesses must also be involved to ensure that the tourism restart is planned, coordinated and controlled.

A chance for greener travel

A trans-Tasman travel bubble could also lead to a change in both countries’ tourism strategies.

Like other countries, Australia and New Zealand have historically prioritised international tourists, particularly “high value travellers”, who spend more and stay longer .

A COVID-era focus on domestic and trans-Tasman travel will likely result in lower yield but could also lead to a more sustainable tourism future. Trans-Tasman travel is the least carbon emitting of our international markets, because it does not rely on long-haul flights.

Trans-Tasman visitors also tend to have a lower carbon footprint at their destinations. In 2018, more than half of all Australian visitors to New Zealand (57%) were repeat visitors . Repeat visitors tend to spend more of their time at regional destinations, and less time incurring the carbon costs of transporting themselves around the country.

New Zealand has already begun to rethink its tourism economy to establish greater sustainability. A trans-Tasman bubble presents an opportunity to foster tourism with a lighter footprint.

Could the bubble be expanded?

There is a call for an extension of this travel bubble to the Pacific neighbourhood , where there are also low infection numbers.

Such a move would not only provide economic support to the Pacific community, it would also represent another step in the long process of restoring normality in different regions of the world.

Read more: The coronavirus survival challenge for NZ tourism: affordability and sustainability

Ardern has kept the door open on this aspect, but noted “at the moment, we are focused on Australia”. She has also cautioned about not introducing COVID-19 to parts of the Pacific untouched by coronavirus.

Even if it remains just Australia and New Zealand, any travel bubble will obviously elevate the risk of COVID-19 reinfection. So, public health priorities must trump the desire to kick-start economies, to make sure we don’t squander our success against coronavirus so far.

But if the governments and tourism industries can find the right balance between public health and economic needs, then Australia and New Zealand stand to benefit from a head start on the long road to economic recovery.

• New Zealand
• Jacinda Ardern

Project Offier - Diversity & Inclusion

Senior Lecturer - Earth System Science

Sydney Horizon Educators (Identified)

Deputy Social Media Producer

Associate Professor, Occupational Therapy

4 Ways to Escape the Tourist Bubble

February 25, 2010 by aelyth savage.

The act of stepping through a gateway is generally unremarkable. You move from one room to another, from inside to outside or vice versa, from one humiliating security station to the next. Rarely does the thought that you’re crossing a threshold actually cross your mind. That metaphorically stepping over the line allows you to mentally shift your behaviors and attitudes.

Travel functions as a convenient method for this transformative experience. Compare your recent travels to your everyday life: did you feel like a different person on those trips? Were you doing different activities, eating different food, or being more outgoing? You might notice a discrepancy now that you didn’t observe then, one that seems integral to the act of traveling. Of course you’re going to be more active, more adventurous, more loquacious while you travel, right? That’s partly why we love to travel! To escape our often less active, less adventurous, and dour livelihoods.

Many treat travel as an escape from the “real world,” and the tourism industry helps us binge by serving up pre-set menus of country highlights. I’m not attacking the industry, just stating facts here. Even with a so-called “menu,” these travels are bursting with memorable and unique experiences. But it won’t be long before your eyes start roving elsewhere, and if you’re reading this you’re probably ready to try something different.

Over the last couple of months I’ve met loads of people looking for more from their travels than fancy hotels, tourist-bedecked beaches, and thronged monuments. While these are worthwhile pursuits in their own rights, the experience can be lackluster especially when you’re seeking something deeper or more challenging. Maybe it’s just sitting in a cottage reading a book as Scandinavian snow softly falls, or working rough rocks from untilled vineyards in Chile, or scrubbing mussels off a boat’s hull in Half Moon Bay.

Mundane? Unglamorous? Perhaps. Buoying? Meaningful? Absolutely.

The highlights are easy to find; experiencing how other cultures live, well, that can feel a bit like getting to Mount Doom. I’m talking about experiential travel, a term that implies an interest and engagement in the cultural milieu. It’s a delightfully loose definition by any standard, but one way to look at it is: “doing as the locals do.”A common epithet that’s much easier to parrot than to practice. Here are four ways to help you set the stage for experiential travels of your own, broaden your trip narrative, and put that parrot back in its cage.

Sleep with Neighbors

No, not actually; you should get your own place. Ideally, pick one that allows you to get to where you want to go without causing too much hassle. The key is to kick hotels, hostels, and sometimes B&Bs from your traveling diet. These are places tourists stay and they effectively create a bubble in which the native culture is scarce. Unless, that is, your goal is to hang out at the hotel – then by all means enjoy your all inclusive holidays. You’re far better off renting an apartment (for long stays) or couchsurfing or doing a home stay (for shorter stays). There are all kinds of interesting and telling daily routines you can pick up on in residential neighborhoods that can be totally absent in hotels, hostels, etc. These neighborhoods also very quickly fill you with the sense of living in the place because the pace of life has a tendency to remind you of your daily routines back home.

Eat Off the Street

You don’t eat at a restaurant every night when you’re not traveling do you? I just heard one of you say “I do…” but the fact is most people don’t. Eating out all of the time is a fantastic way to see a bunch of other tourists, especially if you’re booking out of guidebooks. The reality is that many upscale restaurants are more reflective of the chef’s creativity than of the local cuisine. Treat eating out as a special and rare occasion. Instead, dive into the local street food, markets, and grocers. Understanding a culture’s food goes a long way toward understanding the culture, and these venues act like veins to its heart. To get really hands-on, take a local cooking class and see how the availability of local ingredients has shaped the country’s national dishes.

Party with the People

What do Mardi Gras in New Orleans, Semana Santa in Sevilla, Hogmanay in Edinburgh, and Pukllay in the Andes all have in common? Hordes of locals enjoying the good life would be correct. Participating in cultural celebrations provides insights into the inner workings of the people – what makes them tick – and it’s also a hell of a good time. Celebrations reflect a culture’s origins and values, and they make chance encounters many times more common. Be sure to check out the celebrations that will be happening during your visit.

Mix Some Work With All That Play

An aspect of experiential travel that really interests me is the inclusion of work to complement all the toasting to the good life at night. Shearing sheep, manning a fishing boat, picking crops – many of these opportunities exist for the enterprising traveler willing to donate some elbow grease. There’s nothing like putting in a hard day’s work and relaxing in the evening to highlight the differences and similarities of your cultures.

Follow me as I look into each of these overarching ideas in more depth in future articles. They represent fundamental principles for my own future travels.

What do you do to better understand a culture?

Listening to: Kings of Convenience – Declaration of Dependence Drinking: Highland Park 12-Year Old Single Malt

Aelyth Savage

Article comments.

Great stuff. Part of it is also in selecting the destination. I’m planning on visiting towns off the beaten path and learning about the culture without the sites you might read about. As much as I love all things Parisian, my favorite experiences have been in small towns along the bike routes I’ve taken on long distance tours. .-= Joel´s last blog .. 12 Things I’m Looking Forward to While Traveling RTW =-.

Some of my favorite travel experiences have been in small towns throughout Scotland and Portugal. With all of the tourist trappings stripped away, it’s much easier to get a sense of what normalcy means there.

Excellent tips. I plan to explore all of these in depth as well. Meanwhile, I’ll let you sweat brow over the fantastic writing and reach understanding through your upcoming articles.

The one I’m most fascinated with are the homestays or couchsurfing. I’ve yet to try it on a long term basis, but somehow intuit that it will be enriching in a different way than hostel hopping has in the past. .-= Nomadic Chick´s last blog .. Gypsy Wednesday – Passion Board =-.

Yes, I think being welcomed into someone’s house will put a different twist on your experience. Seems like a great way to make friends, too.

Great post Keith! I couldn’t help but giggle though when you said “Maybe it’s just sitting in a cottage reading a book as Scandinavian snow softly falls..”.

The snow falls all but softly at the moment in Scandinavia. They have had to evacuate and close down schools, swimming halls and other public buildings because the roofs are crashing down because of the snow..! I just thought I would mention it as it’s pretty funny 🙂 .-= Sofia – As We Travel´s last blog .. NZ Road Trip – Day 7: Wellington – Kapiti Coast – Eltham: 320kms =-.

Ah, that’s funny in an ironic way. I feel a little sheepish but what can I say? I’ve always been prone to romantic imagery.

I like the last suggestion about work. While I probably won’t need to work while away I plan to either work or volunteer to meet people and bring some sanity back into my life. I just need to brush up on my sheep shearing skills… .-= ayngelina´s last blog .. Saving for Long Term Travel =-.

Too few of us are proficient in sheep shearing 🙂 Meeting people is one of the main reasons why I’d sign on for some work. Working with others in a typical job is a bee line to getting to know how the people think, play, live.

Couchsurfing really is a great way to get to know what local life is really like and to find the places that aren’t in the guide books but are (often) a better experience.

I’d also suggest learning a bit of the local language, it opens up a whole new world of experiences and makes your suggestions much easier and far more rewarding. .-= Catia | Vagabond Roots´s last blog .. How to Stay Healthy While Travelling =-.

Hey Catia – I agree 100% that having some handle on the language is really important. Good suggestion!

Well done, Keith. You offer some good ideas for getting beyond the usual tourist experience. The other plus of all of these is that you should save (and perhaps even earn!) some money by going this route. .-= Gray´s last blog .. Snapshot of San Juan: Cat City =-.

Yep, that hasn’t escaped my attention 🙂

Building on your work suggestion we have found here in Camnodia that the expat community is a great way to connect and get outside the tourist bubble. They take you to great local restaurants, inform you on local prices and have great insight on the culture. Cambodia is unique with it’s many NGOs and Private Sector businesses, but we plan on reaching out to other expat communities as we travel. As one last benefit they often have opportunities for you to volunteer your professional skills. Many need help with marketing or other professional skills. Sometimes it feels good to work your mind when trave traveling.

Great point! Are you finding that expat communities also help you to understand the local culture? Do you feel expats contribute to “doing as the locals do” or insulate you from it?

i think working could definetly help you mixed with the locals except if you are doing so in a hostel where i guess a lot of foreign would work there, maybe better consider another place of work or volunteer

Hey Marta – I’m considering working in some of the locally-common professions. It might be more of a job shadow in some places.

I like the comment about party with the people. I noticed when I traveled to SE Asia that many travelers treated the locals like their personal waiters and never really tried to get to know the locals. Many do take the next step to getting off the beaten path and “live like the locals”, but then curiously make no attempt to get to actually know the locals. For me the most enriching part of travel is meeting people from different areas and getting to know them for a short time. It is interesting because after awhile you find that they are not much different from you. We are all human and have the same fears, wants, hopes and it is a comfort to find for some reason that people in Thailand or Cambodia although very different in some ways are the same.

Thanks for stopping by, Ted. That’s a keen insight. Perhaps we travel as an attempt to dispel the feelings of fear and unknown that shroud distant places. Ultimately, we feel more connected to other cultures around the globe when we’ve had the opportunity to find our common ground.

Leave Me A Comment Cancel reply

Scotland's calling.

• Your Name *
• Email Address *
• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

© 2024 Traveling Savage. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Resources

Enclave tourism: A simple explanation

Disclaimer: Some posts on Tourism Teacher may contain affiliate links. If you appreciate this content, you can show your support by making a purchase through these links or by buying me a coffee . Thank you for your support!

Enclave tourism is a popular tourism form found all over the world. But what is it? What is the meaning of enclave? What are the positive and negative impacts of enclave tourism? In this post I will explain what the deal is with enclave tourism. 

Enclave meaning

What is enclave tourism, types of enclave tourism, positive impacts of enclave tourism, negative impacts of enclave tourism, enclave tourism.

In order to understand the concept of enclave tourism, we must first understand the meaning of the term ‘enclave’.

An enclave is essentially an area that is cordoned off from the rest of society. In that area, the people are usually different from those outside. This may be due to cultural or ethnicity differences, for example.

I like to describe as it ‘being in a bubble’. Whilst inside you might be able to look out into a world that is different, but you are safe and secure inside this artificial community that has been created.

So lets put this into the context of tourism.

Enclave tourism is essentially tourism that takes place in a space that is segregated from the community outside. It is in its own ‘bubble’, so to speak.

Enclave tourism implies a conscious decision to segregate tourists from the general population. This is usually in the context of an all-inclusive environment such as a cruise ship, hotel or resort complex.

Enclaves are enclosed and self-contained physically, socially, and economically. This means that tourists have hardly any reasons to leave the enclave.

Enclave tourism is commonly found in areas that are popular amongst Western, package tourists. Destinations such as Sharm el Sheikh, the Costa Blanca and southern Turkey are popular enclave tourism destinations.

When tourists purchase an all-inclusive package holiday product they are typically segregated from the local community. They will likely be collected at the airport by a Western Holiday Representative and transported to their hotel in a bus. Here they will have access to a range of facilities such as swimming pools, spas, beaches and gyms as well as food and drink establishments and entertainment (kids, sport, evening etc).

For the tourist, there is no need to leave the confines of their enclave, as everything is provided for them inside.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpqVuB9ijf8

Likewise, the  cruise industry  is one of the biggest culprits of enclave tourism. 

Cruise tourists have everything provided for them onboard the ship. Whilst they will disembark to make use of the features offered to them at various destinations, such as beaches or tourist attractions, they will spend minimal money and and minimum interaction with members of the local community.

Enclave tourism is designed to keep tourist communities and the local population apart.

In some ways this is a good thing. Separating tourists and indigenous populations in this way can help to limit offence that could be caused. For example, if the tourism is taking place in a strict Muslim country, it might not be appropriate for tourists to walk around in their swimwear. The enclave offers a separate environment where this can occur without any issues.

Enclave tourism in this way also provides the opportunity for tourists to have a holiday where they are free from judgement. The community created is likely to consist of like-minded individuals who have similar interests and behaviours. Social drinking or smoking, for example, may not be acceptable outside of the enclave, but is perfectly welcome behaviour inside the enclave.

https://www. instagram .com/p/BzM9yGhB-cL/

The negative impacts of enclave tourism, however, far outweigh the positive impacts in most circumstances.

Enclave tourism results in very little financial benefit being directed towards the host community. Local people give up their land and their resources and in return will have very few benefits.

In some cases, in places like the Maldives and the Caribbean, as much as 95% of income from tourism leaves the country again through  economic leakage . In other words, the destination makes very little money. In fact, enclave tourism is one of the biggest contributors to the negative  economic impacts of tourism . 

Many examples of enclave tourism operate only to suit the needs of the profit-making organisation . They will often employ foreign people and import foreign goods. This reduces the economic benefit of tourism to the destination even further.

Typically associated with package holidays, all-inclusive holidays and cruises, enclave tourism is a populate tourism form the world over. However, it is not as great as it may seem and there are many disadvantages of enclave tourism, particularly to the local community. This is why I do not take part in any form of all-inclusive tourism (you can read more about that in  this post ). 

Liked this article? Click to share!

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Meaning of tourist in English

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

• I must look like the typical tourist with my shorts and my camera .
• My dad has a cottage which he rents out to tourists.
• The Caribbean is a popular tourist destination .
• Bus-loads of tourists pour into this place in the summer .
• A year after the hurricane , tourists are gradually beginning to come back to the region .
• air corridor
• amenity kit
• high season
• phrase book
• post-holiday
• put something up
• ranger station
• tourist trap
• trailer park
• youth hostel

You can also find related words, phrases, and synonyms in the topics:

tourist | American Dictionary

Tourist | business english, examples of tourist, translations of tourist.

Get a quick, free translation!

Word of the Day

relating to the scientific study of animals, especially their structure

Dead ringers and peas in pods (Talking about similarities, Part 2)

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists
• English    Noun
• American    Noun
• Business    Noun
• Translations
• All translations

Add tourist to one of your lists below, or create a new one.

{{message}}

Something went wrong.

There was a problem sending your report.

Orlando Magic | Strong start major key for Magic to protect…

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)

Daily e-Edition

Evening e-Edition

• Mike Bianchi Commentary

Orlando Magic

• Orlando City SC
• Orlando Pride
• UCF Knights
• FSU Seminoles
• UM Hurricanes
• High School Sports

Orlando Magic | Strong start major key for Magic to protect homecourt vs. Cavs

The last time the Magic hosted a playoff game in front of Orlando fans, four-year pro Cole Anthony was a senior in high school.

Although Orlando reached the postseason in 2020, they played inside the NBA bubble at Disney. The year prior, the Magic hosted the Raptors in the first round but lost both home contests at Kia Center (then known as Amway).

In fact, it’s been 13 years since the franchise has won a home playoff game (2011 vs. Atlanta) despite three postseason appearances since then.

“The city’s hungry,” Anthony said after practice Wednesday ahead of Thursday’s Game 3 against Cleveland. “I know we’re definitely hungry, especially being down 0-2.

“So it’s going to be some fun.”

In order for the Magic to have that fun in front of a home crowd, however, Jamahl Mosley’s squad will have to figure out a way to open Game 3 off stronger compared to the first pair of contests at Cleveland that they lost after slow starts (Bally Sports Florida, 7).

The No. 4-seeded Cavs average the most first-quarter points (31.5) among all playoff teams and the fourth-most (55.5) in the first half. The No. 5 Magic’s 42.5 first-half points are the second-fewest.

“For us, we’ve just got to get off to a better start [and] not let them get off to this hot start,” Anthony said. “Obviously, we’ve got to control Donovan Mitchell.

“If we do that, we’ll have a great chance to get a win.”

Slowing down Mitchell is easier said than done for Orlando. Through two playoff games, the All-NBA guard is averaging the third-most points (12.0) in the 1st quarter among all players in the postseason behind only 76ers center Joel Embiid (13.5) and Bucks guard Damian Lillard (17.0).

If the Magic can crack the code to starting off on the right foot and limit Mitchell from the jump, Orlando could give itself a chance to extend the best-of-seven series.

Magic’s shooting woes pronounced in postseason vs. Cavs

Cleveland’s 41.0 second-half points are the fewest in the postseason. The problem for the Magic is that they’re only two spots higher than the Cavs with 42.0 points after halftime.

A lot of that has to do with shot-making — or lack of — for Orlando.

So far, the Magic have shot 11 of 44 (league-worst 25%) from 3-point range when the closest defender was 6-plus feet away (meaning they’re wide-open looks), according to the NBA.

Even with a defender just 4-6 feet away, Orlando still shot 6 of 25 from distance (24%).

Those open shots, however, could be deceiving. While the Magic might run certain set plays in the half-court to create space, some of those shots could actually be what the Cavs want Orlando to take.

That’s because the Magic shot 33.3% on open 3-pointers where the closest defender was 4-6 feet away during the regular season — the seventh-worst percentage in the league entering the playoffs.

But the Magic like the looks they’re getting.

“Because it’s the shot we’ve taken and stepped in with confidence all year,” Mosley said. “If we weren’t generating other things within the offense, there would be an area of concern but the things that we’ve done with a strength all year, we’re still doing them at a high clip.

“It’s just the ability to step into our shots with confidence, which all of these guys will continue to do.”

And to their credit, they’ve held Cleveland to 3 of 24 (or 12.5%) on 3-pointers with the closest defender 4-6 feet away.

“We’re all capable of making shots,” Anthony said. “We’ve just got to do it now.”

Down 2-0 to Cavs, now we get to see how resilient Magic really are | Commentary

One player who could help is Jalen Suggs , who’s expected to be available for Game 3 after exiting Monday’s loss at Cleveland due to a left knee strain. Although he’s struggled from 3 through two playoff games (1 of 10), Suggs shot 39.7% from 3 in the regular season, which was second-best for Orlando.

He returned to Game 2 in the second half after suffering the leg injury in the first quarter but Mosley said post-game that the Magic guard was in quite a bit of pain at the time.

“I do expect Jalen to be able to play,” said Mosley who shared that Suggs is doing better and was able to practice Wednesday.

A boost from the fans inside Kia Center could help the Magic as well — the same way the electric atmosphere inside Rocket Mortgage FieldHouse boosted the Cavs to a 2-0 lead with the series headed to Orlando.

“I’m sure they’re really hungry,” forward Franz Wagner said of Magic fans. “Not hungrier than us though. We’ve got to come out ready to go and have some fun too.”

Added Mosley: “The support that they give and the atmosphere in the building is absolutely incredible. That gives our guys so much energy and the ability to know that we have to take care of homecourt.”

Jason Beede can be reached at [email protected]

If you go …

Cavaliers at Magic, Game 3

When: Thursday, 7

TV: Bally Sports Florida

More in Orlando Magic

What’s wrong with Magic’s offense vs. Cavs? | Analysis

Orlando Magic | Magic’s shooting woes pronounced in postseason vs. Cavs

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

Orlando magic | beede’s breakdown: how magic couldn’t catch up to cavaliers in game 2 loss.

Columnists | Mike Bianchi: Down 2-0 to Cavs, now we get to see how resilient Magic really are