數(shù)據(jù)顯示,奧密克戎變異株的感染癥狀更輕而且潛伏期更短。這一結(jié)果讓亞洲旅游勝地備受鼓舞,它們紛紛加速了重啟接納外國游客的計(jì)劃,希望從德爾塔病毒對其旅游行業(yè)的毀滅性打擊中恢復(fù)過來。
當(dāng)奧密克戎種首次于去年11月現(xiàn)世之時(shí),各國政府暫停了其重新向外國開放的計(jì)劃,叫停了免隔離的旅行方案,并再次實(shí)施了旅行禁令。
然而有鑒于更多的證據(jù)顯示奧密克戎感染者的住院率和死亡率更低——可能也意識到更加嚴(yán)格的策略也未能抑制奧密克戎病例的增長——亞洲各國政府如今才有底氣考慮對其策略進(jìn)行調(diào)整。
在過去幾周中,盡管泰國、馬來西亞、印尼和菲律賓還沒有面向國際游客重新開放其國界,但他們均承諾在未來幾個月實(shí)現(xiàn)這一點(diǎn)。這些國家的政府認(rèn)為,閉關(guān)鎖國的經(jīng)濟(jì)成本已經(jīng)超過了重新開放后的公共衛(wèi)生風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。他們寄希望于通過取消旅游限制來重振其重要的旅游行業(yè),但該行業(yè)的完全恢復(fù)無法得到保證,尤其是考慮到游客資源大國中國仍未開放。
重開國界計(jì)劃
泰國在2月1日重新推出了其免隔離旅游方案,該方案此前因奧密克戎而暫停了五周的時(shí)間。最初,重啟方案僅限于67個國家和地區(qū)。然而如今,限制甚至變得更加寬松。任何國家全部完成疫苗接種的游客均可前往泰國旅游,無需進(jìn)行隔離。該國政府預(yù)計(jì),僅2月份就將有30萬名游客前往泰國旅游,而且后續(xù)幾個月甚至?xí)瓉砀嗟挠慰汀?/p>
1月24日,印尼同意為全部完成疫苗接種的新加坡公民設(shè)立免隔離通道,以便于其訪問巴淡島和民丹島。同時(shí),直達(dá)巴厘島的國際航班已從2月4日開始正常起降。訪問巴厘島的游客必須完成全部的疫苗接種,并在酒店或海上船只進(jìn)行5-7天的隔離。
菲律賓于2月10日面向完成全部接種的外國游客開放,允許157個國家的公民入境旅游且無需隔離。
2月8日,馬來西亞負(fù)責(zé)幫助該國從疫情中恢復(fù)的國家復(fù)蘇理事會(National Recovery Council)承諾,在3月之前面向所有外國公民開放國界,不過該機(jī)構(gòu)并未提供相關(guān)具體信息。
國界重開計(jì)劃幕后的推手似乎是經(jīng)濟(jì)考量,因?yàn)槠渲卸鄠€國家出現(xiàn)了新一輪的病患激增現(xiàn)象。旅游是這些國家經(jīng)濟(jì)的重要組成部分。泰國銀行(Bank of Thailand)稱,2019年到訪泰國的游客量達(dá)到了4000萬,貢獻(xiàn)了該國約11%的GDP。旅游業(yè)對于馬來西亞來說甚至更為重要,2019年,其貢獻(xiàn)的GDP比例占到了該國的16%,也讓旅游業(yè)成為了自制造業(yè)和大宗商品之后的第三大產(chǎn)業(yè)。在巴厘島,旅游業(yè)占到了其經(jīng)濟(jì)的60%。
開放國界增加了新冠病例激增的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),然而,各國政府認(rèn)為,旅游業(yè)的枯竭導(dǎo)致的經(jīng)濟(jì)成本會帶來更大的威脅。
香港城市大學(xué)(City University of Hong Kong)衛(wèi)生治理教授尼古拉斯·托馬斯表示:“任何公共衛(wèi)生威脅都需要在受影響人口的醫(yī)療必要性與社會經(jīng)濟(jì)需求之間進(jìn)行平衡。”這些國家都在“接納必然會逃脫最初篩查的新引入感染病例”,他們可能會認(rèn)定,“失去的游客以及由此導(dǎo)致的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益的缺失,會對民眾帶來更大的傷害?!?/p>
在宣布馬來西亞重開國界之時(shí),該國前副首相、國家復(fù)蘇理事會主席慕尤丁稱,重新開啟國境將意味著“游客和(投資者)都可以來了?!?/p>
放棄新冠歸零政策
澳大利亞和新西蘭因其異常嚴(yán)格的疫情入境管控政策遭到了詬病,甚至其公民都不得不排隊(duì)等候有限的航班座位以及隔離設(shè)施。這兩個國家也宣布了國界重開計(jì)劃,只不過其國門的開放尺度并沒有一些亞洲國家的大。
從2月21日開始,澳大利亞將允許至少接種過兩針疫苗的外國游客進(jìn)入國境。在此之前,也就是去年12月15日,澳大利亞曾公布了一項(xiàng)初期舉措,允許外國學(xué)生和高技能工人回歸該國。
重新開放國界是澳大利亞廢除其此前新冠歸零政策的最后舉措,但這里也有一個重要的限制性條件:澳大利亞各州仍可自行制定入境要求,包括某些人是否需要進(jìn)行隔離。各州在新冠疫情應(yīng)對舉措方面也存在著很大的差異:西澳大利亞州依然在嚴(yán)格限制入境人數(shù),包括從澳大利亞本土入境的人數(shù)。該州此前曾成功地抵御了奧密克戎,當(dāng)時(shí),其他各州的新增病例不斷創(chuàng)歷史新高。
鄰國新西蘭在重開國界方面亦十分緩慢,其首相杰辛達(dá)·阿德恩制定的目標(biāo)是,允許所有外國游客于今年10月份入境訪問。國際游客無需在該國的隔離設(shè)施中隔離,但他們依然需要居家隔離10天。
重開國界的反彈?
即便各個國家開始取消限令,但預(yù)測者對于游客的大量回流并不感到樂觀。香港理工大學(xué)(Hong Kong Polytechnic University)開展的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查顯示,亞太旅游協(xié)會(Pacific Asia Travel Association,PATA)預(yù)測,抵達(dá)亞太地區(qū)的國際游客到2024年才會恢復(fù)至疫情前水平,部分原因在于亞洲以及世界各國參差不齊的新冠疫情恢復(fù)情況。亞太旅游協(xié)會首席執(zhí)行官麗茲·奧蒂葛拉在一份聲明中表示,旅游業(yè)需求“在接下來的幾年中可能依然會呈現(xiàn)出跌宕起伏的趨勢。”
此前鼓勵旅游的舉措并未奏效,部分原因在于繁冗的防疫要求。巴厘島自去年11月便基本上對外國游客開放了,但游客必須為其簽證尋找一名當(dāng)?shù)氐膿?dān)保人,然后在雅加達(dá)隔離10天,然后才能前往該島。申請簽證的人并不多:10月15-1月28日期間,印尼僅為巴厘島和廖內(nèi)群島簽發(fā)了273個簽證。
即便按照當(dāng)前的旅行方案,游客也不能像過去一樣想飛就飛。例如,那些希望前往泰國旅游而且不愿隔離的游客需要提交一份申請,預(yù)支兩次新冠檢測的費(fèi)用,并購買保額5萬美元的旅游保險(xiǎn)。Minor International酒店創(chuàng)始人比爾·海內(nèi)克告訴彭博社(Bloomberg),泰國的旅游業(yè)恢復(fù)“在一段時(shí)間內(nèi)將充滿艱難和挑戰(zhàn),除非政府能改變其立場?!狈坡少e的要求要簡單一些,他們強(qiáng)制要求游客提供陰性離境檢測證明以及保額3.5萬美元的旅游保險(xiǎn)。
堅(jiān)持
并非所有新冠歸零的國家制定了重開國境的計(jì)劃。盡管奧密克戎更短的潛伏期正在鼓勵中國香港、中國臺灣和日本等地減少對國際游客的隔離,但這一待遇依然僅限于長住居民,而外國商人和國際學(xué)生則對此感到不知所措。
中國是對防疫政策堅(jiān)持最長久的國家。中國疾控中心首席流行病學(xué)家吳尊友對《環(huán)球時(shí)報(bào)》說,即便是中國和全球的高接種率也不足以讓中國改變其做法。他稱,在控制新冠疫情方面“不存在簡單的做法”。
中國的新冠疫情歸零政策可能會影響希望重振其旅游行業(yè)的國家。即便中國游客無需隔離便可進(jìn)入其他國家,他們依然需要在回歸中國之后在一家酒店中隔離兩周的時(shí)間。這對于中國民眾來說是一個巨大的問題,而疫情前中國游客是諸多東南亞國家旅游行業(yè)的主力軍。2019年,泰國超過四分之一的游客都來自于中國。疫情前,中國是印尼第二大、馬來西亞第三大游客來源國。
香港理工大學(xué)酒店與旅游管理學(xué)院副主任宋海巖表示,這意味著中國游客“是這些旅游目的地維持長遠(yuǎn)發(fā)展的關(guān)鍵因素?!比欢袊慰筒⒉幌M诨貒筮M(jìn)行數(shù)周的隔離,因此會阻礙旅游行業(yè)的復(fù)蘇,直到中國開始放開其國界,但這一天可能至少要等到2022年年中,宋海巖說道。
泰國上周一宣布,希望圍繞“旅游相互開放”與中國進(jìn)行協(xié)商,以便讓中國游客無需在兩國進(jìn)行隔離。
托馬斯說,這種協(xié)議可能無法奏效,因?yàn)樗伴_啟了讓病例回流至中國的新通道”。因此,“從中國方面來看……此舉依然存在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)?!彼f,即便這種協(xié)議得以實(shí)施,也將受制于“持續(xù)的干擾”。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
譯者:馮豐
審校:夏林
數(shù)據(jù)顯示,奧密克戎變異株的感染癥狀更輕而且潛伏期更短。這一結(jié)果讓亞洲旅游勝地備受鼓舞,它們紛紛加速了重啟接納外國游客的計(jì)劃,希望從德爾塔病毒對其旅游行業(yè)的毀滅性打擊中恢復(fù)過來。
當(dāng)奧密克戎種首次于去年11月現(xiàn)世之時(shí),各國政府暫停了其重新向外國開放的計(jì)劃,叫停了免隔離的旅行方案,并再次實(shí)施了旅行禁令。
然而有鑒于更多的證據(jù)顯示奧密克戎感染者的住院率和死亡率更低——可能也意識到更加嚴(yán)格的策略也未能抑制奧密克戎病例的增長——亞洲各國政府如今才有底氣考慮對其策略進(jìn)行調(diào)整。
在過去幾周中,盡管泰國、馬來西亞、印尼和菲律賓還沒有面向國際游客重新開放其國界,但他們均承諾在未來幾個月實(shí)現(xiàn)這一點(diǎn)。這些國家的政府認(rèn)為,閉關(guān)鎖國的經(jīng)濟(jì)成本已經(jīng)超過了重新開放后的公共衛(wèi)生風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。他們寄希望于通過取消旅游限制來重振其重要的旅游行業(yè),但該行業(yè)的完全恢復(fù)無法得到保證,尤其是考慮到游客資源大國中國仍未開放。
重開國界計(jì)劃
泰國在2月1日重新推出了其免隔離旅游方案,該方案此前因奧密克戎而暫停了五周的時(shí)間。最初,重啟方案僅限于67個國家和地區(qū)。然而如今,限制甚至變得更加寬松。任何國家全部完成疫苗接種的游客均可前往泰國旅游,無需進(jìn)行隔離。該國政府預(yù)計(jì),僅2月份就將有30萬名游客前往泰國旅游,而且后續(xù)幾個月甚至?xí)瓉砀嗟挠慰汀?/p>
1月24日,印尼同意為全部完成疫苗接種的新加坡公民設(shè)立免隔離通道,以便于其訪問巴淡島和民丹島。同時(shí),直達(dá)巴厘島的國際航班已從2月4日開始正常起降。訪問巴厘島的游客必須完成全部的疫苗接種,并在酒店或海上船只進(jìn)行5-7天的隔離。
菲律賓于2月10日面向完成全部接種的外國游客開放,允許157個國家的公民入境旅游且無需隔離。
2月8日,馬來西亞負(fù)責(zé)幫助該國從疫情中恢復(fù)的國家復(fù)蘇理事會(National Recovery Council)承諾,在3月之前面向所有外國公民開放國界,不過該機(jī)構(gòu)并未提供相關(guān)具體信息。
國界重開計(jì)劃幕后的推手似乎是經(jīng)濟(jì)考量,因?yàn)槠渲卸鄠€國家出現(xiàn)了新一輪的病患激增現(xiàn)象。旅游是這些國家經(jīng)濟(jì)的重要組成部分。泰國銀行(Bank of Thailand)稱,2019年到訪泰國的游客量達(dá)到了4000萬,貢獻(xiàn)了該國約11%的GDP。旅游業(yè)對于馬來西亞來說甚至更為重要,2019年,其貢獻(xiàn)的GDP比例占到了該國的16%,也讓旅游業(yè)成為了自制造業(yè)和大宗商品之后的第三大產(chǎn)業(yè)。在巴厘島,旅游業(yè)占到了其經(jīng)濟(jì)的60%。
開放國界增加了新冠病例激增的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),然而,各國政府認(rèn)為,旅游業(yè)的枯竭導(dǎo)致的經(jīng)濟(jì)成本會帶來更大的威脅。
香港城市大學(xué)(City University of Hong Kong)衛(wèi)生治理教授尼古拉斯·托馬斯表示:“任何公共衛(wèi)生威脅都需要在受影響人口的醫(yī)療必要性與社會經(jīng)濟(jì)需求之間進(jìn)行平衡?!边@些國家都在“接納必然會逃脫最初篩查的新引入感染病例”,他們可能會認(rèn)定,“失去的游客以及由此導(dǎo)致的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益的缺失,會對民眾帶來更大的傷害。”
在宣布馬來西亞重開國界之時(shí),該國前副首相、國家復(fù)蘇理事會主席慕尤丁稱,重新開啟國境將意味著“游客和(投資者)都可以來了?!?/p>
放棄新冠歸零政策
澳大利亞和新西蘭因其異常嚴(yán)格的疫情入境管控政策遭到了詬病,甚至其公民都不得不排隊(duì)等候有限的航班座位以及隔離設(shè)施。這兩個國家也宣布了國界重開計(jì)劃,只不過其國門的開放尺度并沒有一些亞洲國家的大。
從2月21日開始,澳大利亞將允許至少接種過兩針疫苗的外國游客進(jìn)入國境。在此之前,也就是去年12月15日,澳大利亞曾公布了一項(xiàng)初期舉措,允許外國學(xué)生和高技能工人回歸該國。
重新開放國界是澳大利亞廢除其此前新冠歸零政策的最后舉措,但這里也有一個重要的限制性條件:澳大利亞各州仍可自行制定入境要求,包括某些人是否需要進(jìn)行隔離。各州在新冠疫情應(yīng)對舉措方面也存在著很大的差異:西澳大利亞州依然在嚴(yán)格限制入境人數(shù),包括從澳大利亞本土入境的人數(shù)。該州此前曾成功地抵御了奧密克戎,當(dāng)時(shí),其他各州的新增病例不斷創(chuàng)歷史新高。
鄰國新西蘭在重開國界方面亦十分緩慢,其首相杰辛達(dá)·阿德恩制定的目標(biāo)是,允許所有外國游客于今年10月份入境訪問。國際游客無需在該國的隔離設(shè)施中隔離,但他們依然需要居家隔離10天。
重開國界的反彈?
即便各個國家開始取消限令,但預(yù)測者對于游客的大量回流并不感到樂觀。香港理工大學(xué)(Hong Kong Polytechnic University)開展的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查顯示,亞太旅游協(xié)會(Pacific Asia Travel Association,PATA)預(yù)測,抵達(dá)亞太地區(qū)的國際游客到2024年才會恢復(fù)至疫情前水平,部分原因在于亞洲以及世界各國參差不齊的新冠疫情恢復(fù)情況。亞太旅游協(xié)會首席執(zhí)行官麗茲·奧蒂葛拉在一份聲明中表示,旅游業(yè)需求“在接下來的幾年中可能依然會呈現(xiàn)出跌宕起伏的趨勢?!?/p>
此前鼓勵旅游的舉措并未奏效,部分原因在于繁冗的防疫要求。巴厘島自去年11月便基本上對外國游客開放了,但游客必須為其簽證尋找一名當(dāng)?shù)氐膿?dān)保人,然后在雅加達(dá)隔離10天,然后才能前往該島。申請簽證的人并不多:10月15-1月28日期間,印尼僅為巴厘島和廖內(nèi)群島簽發(fā)了273個簽證。
即便按照當(dāng)前的旅行方案,游客也不能像過去一樣想飛就飛。例如,那些希望前往泰國旅游而且不愿隔離的游客需要提交一份申請,預(yù)支兩次新冠檢測的費(fèi)用,并購買保額5萬美元的旅游保險(xiǎn)。Minor International酒店創(chuàng)始人比爾·海內(nèi)克告訴彭博社(Bloomberg),泰國的旅游業(yè)恢復(fù)“在一段時(shí)間內(nèi)將充滿艱難和挑戰(zhàn),除非政府能改變其立場?!狈坡少e的要求要簡單一些,他們強(qiáng)制要求游客提供陰性離境檢測證明以及保額3.5萬美元的旅游保險(xiǎn)。
堅(jiān)持
并非所有新冠歸零的國家制定了重開國境的計(jì)劃。盡管奧密克戎更短的潛伏期正在鼓勵中國香港、中國臺灣和日本等地減少對國際游客的隔離,但這一待遇依然僅限于長住居民,而外國商人和國際學(xué)生則對此感到不知所措。
中國是對防疫政策堅(jiān)持最長久的國家。中國疾控中心首席流行病學(xué)家吳尊友對《環(huán)球時(shí)報(bào)》說,即便是中國和全球的高接種率也不足以讓中國改變其做法。他稱,在控制新冠疫情方面“不存在簡單的做法”。
中國的新冠疫情歸零政策可能會影響希望重振其旅游行業(yè)的國家。即便中國游客無需隔離便可進(jìn)入其他國家,他們依然需要在回歸中國之后在一家酒店中隔離兩周的時(shí)間。這對于中國民眾來說是一個巨大的問題,而疫情前中國游客是諸多東南亞國家旅游行業(yè)的主力軍。2019年,泰國超過四分之一的游客都來自于中國。疫情前,中國是印尼第二大、馬來西亞第三大游客來源國。
香港理工大學(xué)酒店與旅游管理學(xué)院副主任宋海巖表示,這意味著中國游客“是這些旅游目的地維持長遠(yuǎn)發(fā)展的關(guān)鍵因素?!比欢?,中國游客并不希望在回國后進(jìn)行數(shù)周的隔離,因此會阻礙旅游行業(yè)的復(fù)蘇,直到中國開始放開其國界,但這一天可能至少要等到2022年年中,宋海巖說道。
泰國上周一宣布,希望圍繞“旅游相互開放”與中國進(jìn)行協(xié)商,以便讓中國游客無需在兩國進(jìn)行隔離。
托馬斯說,這種協(xié)議可能無法奏效,因?yàn)樗伴_啟了讓病例回流至中國的新通道”。因此,“從中國方面來看……此舉依然存在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)?!彼f,即便這種協(xié)議得以實(shí)施,也將受制于“持續(xù)的干擾”。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
譯者:馮豐
審校:夏林
Data showing that the Omicron variant has more mild symptoms and a shorter incubation period is encouraging tourism hotspots in Asia to accelerate plans to restart foreign travel in hopes of recovering from the devastating blow COVID-19 dealt to their business.
When the Omicron variant first emerged last November, governments paused their plans to reopen to the rest of the world, freezing quarantine-free travel schemes and reimposing travel restrictions.
But with greater evidence that the Omicron variant has lower rates of hospitalization and death—and perhaps recognizing that its increased transmissibility makes a stricter strategy untenable—Asian governments now have the confidence to consider a change in strategy.
Over the past few weeks, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines have all pledged to reopen their borders—if they haven’t already—to international visitors in the next several months. The governments are concluding that the economic costs of staying closed outweigh the public health risks of reopening. They are hopeful that dropping restrictions will resuscitate their vital tourism sectors, but a full rebound isn’t guaranteed, especially when a large source of tourists—mainland China—remains sealed.
Plans to reopen
Thailand relaunched its quarantine-free travel scheme on Feb. 1 after a five-week pause owing to Omicron. Originally, the reopening scheme was limited to just 67 countries and territories. But now, restrictions are even looser. Fully vaccinated visitors from any country can to travel to Thailand without quarantine. The government expects nearly 300,000 tourists to travel to Thailand in February alone, and even more to arrive in following months.
Indonesia agreed to establish a quarantine-free lane for fully vaccinated Singaporeans to visit the islands of Batam and Bintan on Jan. 24, and direct international flights started landing on the resort island of Bali on Feb. 4. Tourists visiting Bali must be fully vaccinated, and spend five to seven days in quarantine in hotels or offshore vessels.
The Philippines opened to fully vaccinated foreign tourists on Feb. 10, with nationals from 157 countries allowed to travel without needing to quarantine.
And on Feb. 8, the Malaysia National Recovery Council—the body charged with helping the country recover from the pandemic—pledged to open borders to all foreign nationals by March, though it didn’t provide full details.
Economic concerns appear to be driving reopening plans, given that several of the countries are in the midst of new COVID surges. Tourism is a significant part of the countries’ economies. In 2019, 40 million tourists visited Thailand, generating approximately 11% of its GDP, according to the Bank of Thailand. Tourism is even more important to Malaysia, where the sector generated almost 16% of the country’s GDP in 2019, making it the third largest sector after manufacturing and commodities. In Bali, tourism drives 60% of the economy.
Opening up to the outside world increases the likelihood of ballooning COVID case counts, but governments have determined that the economic costs of tourism droughts pose a greater threat.
“Any public health threat requires a balance to be struck between medical necessity and the socioeconomic needs of the affected population,” says Nicholas Thomas, a health governance professor at the City University of Hong Kong. Countries are opening “themselves up to new imported infections that will, inevitably, escape the initial screening,” yet may decide that “a greater harm is being inflicted on their populations by the withdrawal of the tourists and the economic benefits that they bring in.”
In announcing Malaysia’s reopening, former Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, who chairs the National Recovery Council, said that reopening the borders would mean that “tourists can visit [and] investors can come in.”
Moving away from COVID-zero
Australia and New Zealand—infamous for pandemic border policies so strict that even citizens had to queue for limited space on flights and in quarantine facilities—have also announced plans to reopen, though they are not throwing their doors open as widely as some of their Asian peers.
Australia will allow foreign visitors with at least two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine to enter the country from Feb. 21, following an earlier measure to allow foreign students and skilled workers back into the country on Dec. 15.
Reopening the border is the final step in Australia’s repeal of its previous COVID-zero policy, but there’s a major caveat: The country’s individual states can still set their own entry requirements—including whether or not someone needs to quarantine. Different states have had wildly different approaches to COVID-19: Western Australia—which warded off Omicron even as the rest of the country suffered record waves of COVID—still strictly limits how many people enter the state, including from elsewhere in Australia.
Neighboring New Zealand is also slowly reopening, with Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern setting an October target to allow all foreign visitors into the country. International arrivals would not have to stay in the country’s quarantine facilities, but they would still need to isolate at home for 10 days.
Reopening rebound?
Even as countries drop restrictions, forecasters are not optimistic that tourists will come flooding back. In a study conducted with Hong Kong Polytechnic University, the Pacific Asia Travel Association predicts that international arrivals into Asia-Pacific will only reach pre-pandemic levels by 2024, in part owing to an uneven recovery from the COVID pandemic across Asia and the rest of the world. Tourism demand “will most likely still remain volatile over the next few years,” PATA CEO Liz Ortiguera said in a statement.
Previous efforts to encourage travel stumbled in part because of burdensome requirements. Bali has technically been open to foreign tourists since last November, but visitors had to find a local sponsor for their visa, and then quarantine for 10 days in Jakarta before continuing on to the resort island. There were few takers: Indonesia only issued 273 visas for Bali and the Riau Islands between Oct. 15 and Jan. 28.
Even under current travel schemes, tourists can’t hop on planes as freely as they used to. For example, those wishing to travel to Thailand without quarantine need to submit an application, prepay for two COVID tests, and hold $50,000 in travel insurance. Bill Heinecke, founder of hotel group Minor International, told Bloomberg that Thailand’s tourism recovery is “going to be tough and challenging for a while until the government changes its position.” The Philippines’ requirements are less onerous; they mandate a negative predeparture test and travel insurance covering $35,000.
The holdouts
Not every COVID-zero country has a path to reopen. While Omicron’s shorter incubation period is encouraging places like Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Japan to reduce quarantine for international arrivals, entry is still restricted to long-term residents, leaving foreign businesspeople and international students in limbo.
The biggest holdout is China, which has firmly rejected efforts to shift away from the COVID-zero strategy. Wu Zunyou, chief epidemiologist with the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, told the Global Times that even a high vaccination rate in China and the rest of the world may not be enough for China to change course, saying, “There’s no simple method to control” COVID.
China’s COVID-zero policy may hamper countries hoping to revive their tourism sectors. Even if Chinese tourists can enter other countries without needing to quarantine, they would still need to quarantine for two weeks in a hotel upon their return to China. It’s a significant deterrent for a population that was the foundation for the tourism sectors of several Southeast Asian countries before the pandemic. Over a quarter of tourists visiting Thailand in 2019 came from China. China was Indonesia’s second-largest and Malaysia’s third-largest source of visitors before the pandemic.
That means Chinese tourists are “key for these destinations to be sustainable in the long run,” says Haiyan Song, associate dean of Hong Kong Polytechnic University’s School of Hotel and Tourism Management. But China’s tourists are unlikely to want to suffer through weeks of quarantine upon their return. That will dampen the recovery of the tourism industry until China starts to open its border, which may not happen until at least “the middle of 2022,” says Song.
Thailand announced on Monday it was hoping to start negotiations with China on a travel bubble that would allow Chinese visitors to avoid quarantine in both countries.
Such an agreement may be unworkable because it “opens up a new route for the infections to flow back into China” says Thomas, which “from a Chinese perspective…still presents a risk.” Even if the bubble got off the ground, he says, it would be subject to “constant disruption.”