The importance and maintenance of the Clean & Safe seal in the travel decision-making of residents in Portugal in the post-COVID-19-pandemic period

The theory of perceived risk was proposed by American psychologist Paul Slovic in 1980. The theory is based on the idea that the perception of risk is influenced both by the objective nature of the hazard and by the subjectivity of the individual who evaluates it.

Slovic proposed that perceived risk is composed of three factors: the perception of the danger itself; the uncertainty associated with the danger; and the degree of control one has over exposure to the danger. These factors influence how people perceive and evaluate risk, and how they make decisions around it.

The theory of perceived risk has been applied in several areas, including environmental risk management, occupational safety, and public health. Understanding risk perception can help identify the most important concerns for people regarding a given hazard, and how communication and risk management strategies can be adapted to address these concerns effectively.

Slovic et al. (1982) explained that people, in most cases, use their intuitive judgment to assess risk situations, and this is commonly referred to as risk perception. The theory of perceived risk is based on two distinct assessments carried out by the individual. The first evaluation is related to the severity of the negative result that would result from the action, and the second is related to the probability of this negative result occurring (Rayner & Cantor, 1987). In this context, Slovic (1987) states that individuals tend to be more sensitive and apprehensive the more unknown the risks that may occur.

The perception of risk is also influenced by the trust that individuals have in the authorities that play preponderant roles in these contexts; by familiarity with said contexts; by the feeling of control that individuals think they have of the situation (Slovic et al., 1981); and by their confidence in their innate abilities to circumvent risk (Slovic et al, 1978). Regarding self-control, Brun (1994) found that less risk is perceived in situations in which the individual believes they have personal control. In this sense, Weinstein et al. (2020) also considers how an individual’s perception of risk may determine their behaviour.

Tourists’ risk perception consists of their assessment of the risk when making decisions about travelling to a particular tourist destination (Neuburger & Egger, 2021). Tourism activity is very sensitive to the perception of safety for tourists (Yozcu & Cetin, 2019). According to Sönmez and Graefe (1998), tourists avoid destinations and contexts when they detect a perceived risk in relation to them. In the same sense, Loureiro and Jesus (2019) and Quan et al. (2022) found that the perception of risk by tourists in relation to a tourist destination will also negatively affect the demand for that destination. In the same vein, Joo et al. (2020); Kongoley-MIH (2015); and Wilder-Smith (2006) found that when there are travel restrictions to a tourist destination, the demand for that destination is affected.

There are several categories of perceived risk in tourism. Sönmez (1998) classifies them as financial, psychological, satisfaction-related, and time-related. More specifically, Maser and Weiermair (1998) address natural disasters, civil unrest, and violent crime. In addition, Richter (2003) highlights the importance of considering issues related to hygiene, diseases and health issues in general.

Regarding this last factor, outbreaks of infectious diseases often lead tourists to curb their impulses and opt for other destinations, to the detriment of those who are involved in any of the risk situations mentioned. In this context, Roselló et al. (2017) argue that infectious diseases are one of the perceived risks with the greatest impact on tourists’ decisions to travel. The World Health Organization lists the following disease outbreaks from 2000 to the present day: the West Nile Virus, between 1999 and 2002; anthrax in 2001; SARS-CoV in 2003; mumps in 2006; e. coli and salmonella, also in 2006; H1N1 virus (swine flu) in 2009; whooping cough in 2012; MERS-CoV, also in 2012; Ebola in 2014; Zika virus in 2016; Ebola again, from 2018-2020, when it reappeared in the conflict-stricken Democratic Republic of the Congo; and COVID-19 in 2020.

The pandemic caused by Covid-19, with its negative repercussions and effects across the world, is an example of how an infectious disease can jeopardise the functioning of a large proportion of the economic activities in the world — namely, tourism.

Risk perceptions are the factor with the greatest observed conditioning effect on tourists’ decisions to travel (Teeroovengadum et al., 2021). Carr (2001) and Seddighi et al. (2001), however, believe that a tourist’s perception of risk is likely to change according to their individual and demographic characteristics. Cultural aspects and past experiences, as well as external factors — such as information sources, and the various groups of belonging and influence of which the individual is a part — become important aspects to be taken into account, according to Lepp & Gibson (2003) and Sönmez (1998). Pennington-Gray et al. (2011) add that psychographic data and knowledge also have an effect.

In the same sense, Adam (2015) finds that a tourist’s level of personal knowledge and their degree of exposure to risk, as well as their level of risk acceptance, are all factors that will influence the way they understand the risk in question. Reisinger and Mavondo (2006), Turnšek et al. (2020) and Ragbir et al. (2018) also point to nationality, religion, culture, and psychographic characteristics as predictors of how tourists face risk.

Another external factor that may influence an individual’s perception of risk is information in the media. Beyond the actual probability of an individual contracting a disease, McKercher and Chon (2004) found that an individual’s perception of risk is influenced by the media and by public opinion in general.

The theory of protective motivation, developed by Rogers (1975), describes how individuals are motivated in contexts or situations that threaten their health or that actually represent a danger to life. This theory has been applied to disease prevention, occupational safety, and environmental sustainability. According to this theory, an individual protects themselves based on their perception of the seriousness of the threat and the probability of it occurring; their perception of whether said protection strategies will or will not be effective; and the cost of adopting these same strategies.

According to Kozak et al. (2007), on the basis of the information they have collected, tourists try to mitigate the perceived risks that impact the realization of their trips. In the context of a pandemic, information regarding the destination is often decisive for whether or not the trip is completed (Leggat et al., 2010). Hassan and Salem (2021) report that when tourists anticipate a high perceived risk, they either give up the trip or tend to adopt adaptation strategies, which might include altering consumption behaviour to reduce the impact of this perceived risk, and the collection of data and information that aims to minimise the risk (Adam, 2015).

To address the collection of information as a strategy used by individuals, Anderson (1981) developed Information Integration Theory, which establishes that an individual evaluates information from different sources; that both the relevance and the reliability of these sources are evaluated; and that they are later integrated into a set of information accepted as correct. Among other conceptions of adaptation strategies, Uncertainty Prevention Theory has also emerged, which suggests that in situations of uncertainty, individuals seek reliable information and perform a selective search for information that tends to meet their beliefs and preexisting ideas (Williams & Baláž, 2015).

The perceived risk in tourism activities leads tourists to adopt overprotective behaviours, and this prevents them from meeting their needs, exploring new markets, and making the most of intense and varied new experiences. Thus, tourism companies have shown increasing interest in understanding how perceived risk is formed and determined, with the hope of more specifically addressing consumer anxieties through their marketing.

This process of understanding allows companies to identify tourists’ main concerns and perceived risks and formulate appropriate responses and strategies aimed at mitigating them. In this way, companies can build feelings of trust in consumers through the transparent provision of information, effective security measures, and solutions that meet individuals’ concerns. This procedure on the part of companies tends to reduce perceived risk and increase the likelihood that tourists will feel safer and less worried when choosing their activities.

Over the years, there have been several public health crises that have stimulated important advances in the public health system, and with these have come inherent transformations in education and social practices and procedures (Foss, 2020). The milestone that paved the way for health certifications was the first vaccine, which was developed by Edward Jenner in 1796. Vaccines have allowed for countless public health breakthroughs, such as the eradication of smallpox around 1980.

The World Health Organization, which was founded in 1948, developed the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), a standardised system for diagnosing and monitoring diseases. The ICD has become extremely relevant for health certifications during public health emergencies (Edgar et al., 2020).

Health certification policies are of particular importance in the management of public health crises. They ensure that the prevention measures and the implementation of responses are effective. In addition, access to robust and reliable data systems is also crucial to tracking the spread of diseases, identifying critical points, and efficiently distributing resources (Parsons et al., 2023).

Health certifications have played a key role in managing the public health crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. As reactivating tourism activity became a priority, it was essential that tourists felt safe. To reestablish tourists’ confidence, protocols were created and adopted by political and public health authorities in several countries and regions that integrated hygiene and safety guidelines, the adoption of which can be certified with safety seals. These seals attest to the sanitary compliance of hotels, accommodations, and other tourist infrastructures. Terms such as “clean,” “safe,” and “responsible,” among others, appear on these stamps, with the aim of conveying positive messages to reestablish tourists’ confidence and safety.

According to Wojcieszak-Zbierska et al. (2020) and Hu and Cheng (2022), these certifications assume crucial functions, including conveying trust to the public, especially regarding public indoor spaces; establishing guidelines in accordance with certified standards, which help ensure that companies comply with health and safety requirements; promoting health practices and encouraging their implementation and maintenance; and supporting economic recovery by restoring public confidence in the demand for tourism activities and allowing for a “new normal.”

This “new normal,” in turn, will contribute to the relaunch of economic activity and enhanced worker productivity. Implementing effective health and safety measures not only promotes the return of tourists; it also ensures a safe working environment for employees, which will lead to an increase in their motivation, and thus a likely increase in their productivity (Sudiarno et al., 2021).

In this regard, the implementation of guidelines for certifying hygiene and safety standards was promoted by various responsible authorities around the world as an important step toward strengthening public trust. For example, Singapore’s authorities wasted no time in launching a scheme to audit hotels across the country and give them a health safety certificate — “SG Clean.” If the hygiene and safety standards determined by the authorities were met at a given establishment, the “SG Clean” label would be displayed prominently to provide “peace of mind” for patrons (Ramli & Zawawi, 2021).

Similarly, the Safe Tourism Certificate was implemented in Turkey by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism together with the Ministry of Health. Protection, hygiene, and safety guidelines dictated that the practices be applied to accommodation facilities with more than 50 rooms. The Safe Tourism Certificate attests to an entity’s compliance with 166 high-level health and hygiene conditions, and the certificate symbol is put in a prominent place with a QR code so that customers can check the details of the inspections (Çetin & Coşkuner, 2021).

For its part, in Brazil, the Ministry of Tourism has implemented the Responsible Tourism seal, which aims to reestablish the confidence of consumers while traveling. The seal defines best practices in safety and hygiene for organizations and entities in the tourism sector and signifies that a given place has complied with the guidelines enumerated in the Program.

To increase the confidence of tourists, the Swiss Tourism organization launched the “Clean and Safe” seal. This certificate is intended for companies in the tourism segment that comply with the hygiene and safety guidelines established by the responsible entities. By the end of 2020, around 4,000 companies in the tourism sector had already signed up for the “Clean and Safe” label (Hu & Cheng, 2022).

In Malaysia, the Malaysian Hotel Association, together with the government and the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture, created the “Clean & Safe Malaysia” seal, which aimed to certify hotels and resorts that met the hygiene and safety requirements determined by authorities (Hu & Cheng, 2022).

All these certifications had as their main objective that tourists should feel safe when using tourist establishments, infrastructures, equipment, and means of transport, as well as when engaging in any other related activities.

In this context, the first research question of this study arises: Did the Clean & Safe seal, so widely used in Turismo de Portugal’s marketing campaigns, fulfil its purpose of reducing the risk perceived by tourists, and did it positively influence travel decisions, as well as the choice of establishments, equipment and services ? Our first research question was the following:

• Question 1: Does the fact that we are in P (2021-22) or PP (2022-23) cause the Clean & Safe certification to influence tourists’ choices of establishments, equipment, and services?

Regarding the first research question, the following hypotheses emerged and were tested:

• H0: There is no association between the different time periods in the face of the development of the pandemic (P and PP) and the influence of the Clean & Safe seal on consumers’ choice of establishments, equipment, and services.

• H1: There is an association between the different periods during the development of the pandemic (P and PP) and the influence of the certification by the Clean & Safe seal on consumers’ choice of establishments, equipment, and services.

Since it was implemented by Turismo de Portugal, the Clean & Safe seal has been awarded to more than 22,200 hotels, restaurants, travel agencies, and entertainment companies in the tourism sector. The seal is awarded based on a self-declaration by companies that they are acting on specific measures recommended by health authorities to prevent the spread of the Covid-19 disease, thus protecting the health of customers and employees. These measures include the implementation of more demanding hygiene protocols, such as disinfection of materials, equipment and spaces; the provision of personal protective equipment; adequate training for employees on hygiene and safety protocols; and adequate space, services and equipment to ensure proper social distancing amongst customers and employees.² In May of 2021, the Clean & Safe seal was updated to reflect the requirements and guidelines of the General Directorate of Health as they evolved with the pandemic’s course in Portugal.

Also in May 2021, the European Tourism Covid-19 Safety Seal, which was created by the European Committee for Standardization in partnership with the European Commission, appeared, and accepted tourism companies adhering to the Clean & Safe seal as also meeting its requirements.

On a global level, in May 2020, the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC, 2021), with the support of the World Tourism Organization and in cooperation with governments, health professionals and associations, launched the “Safe Travels” seal to reestablish standards of safety and hygiene in destinations and tourism companies in an effort to combat the Covid-19 pandemic. “Safe Travels” also aims to recognise companies and tourist destinations that advocate the implementation of the hygiene and safety protocols established by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic (WTTC, 2021). In a similar manner to the European Tourism Covid-19 Safety Seal, companies that are recognised by the Clean & Safe seal in Portugal will also be recognised by the Safe Travels seal.

In a post-Covid-19 context, after observing the tremendous impact of the pandemic on tourist activity, it is to be expected that hygiene and disinfection procedures, as well as the reliability of and quality of the health system, are now the subject of great scrutiny in tourist destinations. These factors will be prioritised by individuals when choosing destinations, as they seek a sense of security and to reduce their risk of contracting infectious diseases.

Several studies have verified changes in the behaviour of tourists as it relates to hygiene procedures and measures at various destinations. In the study developed by Ivanova et al. (2020), it was found that Bulgarian tourists value hygiene, disinfection, and the existence of a reliable health system, into their level of comfort and feeling less at risk.

Kourgiantakis et al. (2021) were also able to verify significant changes in travellers’ behaviour patterns. The authors found that Greek tourists showed a preference for hotel units where issues related to privacy and security — specifically, security issues related to hygiene standards that aim to combat the Covid-19 pandemic and minimise the risks of contagion of the disease — are addressed. Travellers are increasingly demanding that they be assured of the strict enforcement of these hygiene standards of good hygiene and safety practices adopted at the unit in question, a procedure that came to weigh heavily on travel decisions in the period after the pandemic outbreak.

Regarding air transport, Hassan and Salem (2021) found that even though tourists using aircraft have scientific data on the contagion methods of Covid-19, as well as on the procedures and ways of acting about how to avoid it, it is still crucial to analyse how tourists see the possibility of travelling by plane again. The perception of the effectiveness of safety measures in air travel will directly influence the choices they will make. The authors emphasise that it is important for air passenger tourists to recognise airlines’ efforts to avoid contagion — whether it is through the use of masks, temperature measurement, presentation of negative test results before the flight, social distancing, and filtration and air renewal systems, among other methods of reducing tourists’ risk of contracting the virus.

Recent studies of different populations in the Middle East have shown that the existence of effective infection control measures and a reliable health system at the destination, as well as the use of hand sanitisers and face masks, were the most significant factors affecting travellers’ decisions.

Changes in tourists’ travel behaviour in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic has been verified by many authors (Ivanova et al., 2020; Hassan & Salem, 2021; Kourgiantakis et al., 2021). However, these studies were carried with very little temporal distance from the epicentre of the effects caused by the Covid-19 disease. Our study aims to understand whether the (greater) temporal distance from the peak of the events caused by Covid-19 works as a mitigating factor in relation to the perception of risk, or if in fact tourists consider it important to continue the hygiene and safety measures adopted during the period of the pandemic.

Faced with this uncertainty, our second research question arises:

• Question 2: Does the time period in question, P (2020-2021) or PP (2022-2023), influence the decision to maintain the Clean & Safe label?

Regarding the second research question, the following hypotheses emerged and were tested:

• H0: There is no association between the different of the development of the pandemic (P and PP) and the decision to maintain the Clean & Safe seal.

• H1: There is an association between the different periods of the development of the pandemic (P and PP) and the decision to maintain the Clean & Safe seal.

The objective of our study is to understand the travel behaviour of Portuguese tourists at two different times in the post-pandemic period. Our questionnaires were applied to understand the importance of the Clean & Safe seal in tourists’ decision to travel, as well as authorities’ decision to maintain the seal over time.

The online questionnaire prepared in the Google Forms application and distributed through social networks, Instagram, Facebook and Whatsapp during two different time periods to Portuguese tourists who had travelled since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic. The first time period was from December 2020 to January 2021, and the second time period was from December 2022 to February 2023. A total of 393 questionnaires were collected, with 23 excluded because they were incomplete, leaving us with a total of 370, with 207 valid questionnaires from the first time period and 163 from the second.

The questionnaire was divided into three parts: part A – characteristics of the trip – was composed of 10 questions, one of which had 21 items for possible answers; part B – the importance of the Clean & Safe seal – consisted of four questions, one of which was evaluated using a five-point Likert scale, in which 1 indicated “not at all relevant” and 5 indicated “extremely relevant” (Eutsler and Lang, 2015); and part C – demographic characteristics – which consisted of five questions related to the respondent.

Initially, before circulating the questionnaire, a pilot test was conducted for a limited number of participants to gauge any inconsistencies and necessary adjustments.

The data collected were processed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software (version 28.0). The first phase of processing analysed the respondents’ demographic characteristics.

In the second phase, the Chi-Square test was used to determine the significance of the differences found between the two time periods analysed (2020-2021 and 2022-2023) with regard to the reported influence that the Clean & Safe seal had on respondents’ decisions to travel.

Later, the Chi-Square test was used to determine the significance of the differences in behaviour found between the two time periods analysed (2020-2021 and 2022-2023), with regard to the decision to maintain the aforementioned seal after the Covid-19 restrictions were lifted.

The demographic characteristics of the individuals are presented in Table 1. Most of the respondents (33%) were between 18 and 24 years old, and 72% of the study’s participants were women.

Almost half (42.2%) of the participants had a Bachelor’s degree, and slightly more than half were employees (52%). Most participants (25%) earned an income of up to €760, with the next highest percentage (24.3%) earning an income between €760 and €1000.

Regarding qualitative travel characteristics, there was a predominance of equal responses to visiting family and friends in period 1. There was also a significant difference in travel company between period 1 and period 2, with more of a predominance of trips with spouses and children in period 1 and traveling with friends and family in period 2. Regarding the type of accommodation, it was found that the hotel was the most popular option chosen for accommodation both periods. However, it should be noted that in the 2020-21 period, three types of accommodation — Rural Tourism (TER), Local Accommodation (AL) Apartment, and Local Accommodation (AL) House — were chosen two or three times more often than in the 2022-2023 period. It was also found that the time period in question — P or PP — significantly influenced the frequency of catering services. Thus, while only 18% of respondents in period P reported having used these services, 96% did so in in period PP.