LAUSR

PurposeDifferent countries have responded to the pandemic with distinct domestic and international travel restrictions. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the stringency of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) countermeasures in Japan against their G20 cohorts. Primary data were monitored at a ski resort in Kyushu regarding the social acceptance of initial COVID-19 countermeasures, ranging from hygiene and local “lockdowns” to border control measures.Design/methodology/approachThe stringency of the COVID-19 countermeasures was examined using data from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) and triangulated with the early stage social acceptance of survey respondents in Aso Kuju National Park in February 2020 that consisted of 165 valid Japanese language questionnaires.FindingsAn one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) identified significant differences in social acceptance for countermeasures, with more-concerned respondents agreeing more strongly with “low-tech” health protocols, such as washing hands (M = 3.7) or wearing a mask (3.4). More concerned visitors were significantly more likely to modify their travel plans (2.9) or cancel their trip altogether (2.7). Male day trippers were less likely to be concerned by the COVID-19 pandemic.Originality/valueThis paper's originality is derived from a triangulation of the stringency of Japan's initial COVID-19 countermeasures via a combination of comparison with G20 cohorts and social acceptance of domestic snowboarders and skiers. Moreover, by shining a light on the trade-off between public health and human rights, the paper provides a current review of the ethical dimension of a travel restriction debate that is often overlooked in the ongoing pandemic.