NEWS

(Lebanon, N.H. — April 7, 2026) — Most US travelers are well aware of REAL ID requirements, but fewer feel fully prepared for airlines’ stricter enforcement of carry-on size and weight limits, according to the Global Rescue Winter 2026 Traveler Sentiment and Safety Survey. The findings highlight important differences in awareness, compliance strategies and real-world experience across gender and geography.

Awareness of Stricter Carry-On Enforcement Is Mixed

Airline carry-on size limits haven’t changed in general, but enforcement has. Gate agents are now measuring full exterior bag dimensions at the gate including; wheels, handles and protruding pockets, and if the bag doesn’t fit the sizer, it gets checked.

Overall, awareness of airlines’ stricter enforcement of carry-on size and weight limits is moderate. About 27% of travelers say they are not at all aware of the tighter rules, while 25% report being slightly aware. Another 27% say they are moderately aware and 19% say they are very aware.

Women demonstrate higher awareness than men. Nearly 35% of women say they are moderately aware of stricter carry-on enforcement, compared to 25% of men. Men are more likely to say they are not at all aware, at 29%, compared to 20% of women.

Geographically, non-US travelers show greater awareness. About 31% of non-US respondents say they are not at all aware, compared to 25% of US travelers, but US travelers cluster more in the moderate awareness category, reflecting more frequent exposure to domestic airline policy changes.

“Airlines are enforcing carry-on rules more aggressively, and many travelers are still catching up,” said Dan Richards, CEO of The Global Rescue Companies and a member of the US Travel and Tourism Advisory Board at the US Department of Commerce. “These policies may seem minor, but they can cause significant disruption if travelers are unprepared.”

How Travelers Plan to Comply with Carry-On Rules

When asked how they would comply if airlines strictly enforce carry-on limits, a majority of travelers (52%) say they would obtain or use luggage that meets airline requirements. About 23% say they would forgo a carry-on and check their bag, while 18% say they would pay additional fees if necessary.

Women are far more likely to adapt proactively. More than 68% of women say they would obtain compliant luggage, compared to 47% of men. A fifth of men are more willing to pay additional fees compared to 10% of women.

REAL ID Awareness Is Extremely High

Awareness of the fully enforced REAL ID requirement is nearly universal. Overall, 87% of travelers say they are very familiar with REAL ID rules, while fewer than 5% say they are not at all or only slightly familiar. Awareness is consistent between men and women.

“REAL ID messaging has clearly reached travelers,” Richards said. “The challenge now is ensuring travelers consistently carry compliant identification, especially as enforcement becomes routine.”

Few Travelers Personally Impacted, but Many Have Observed Issues

Actual disruption due to non-compliant identification remains limited. Only 2% of travelers say they personally experienced additional screening, and less than 1% report travel delays. Most travelers (68%) say the issue is not applicable because they always carry compliant identification.

Observation of problems among other travelers is more common. About 16% say they have seen another traveler undergo additional screening, 10% have observed delays and 4% have seen someone denied access to security or boarding. Nearly 74% say they have not observed any disruption.

“These issues may affect a small percentage of travelers, but the consequences can be severe when they occur,” Richards said. “Preparation remains the most effective way to avoid airport stress and missed flights.”

About the Global Rescue Traveler Sentiment and Safety Survey

Global Rescue, the leading travel risk and crisis response provider, surveyed more than 1,400 current and former members between January 13 - 17, 2026. Respondents shared their attitudes, behaviors and preferences related to travel safety, technology and global mobility.

About Global Rescue

Global Rescue is the world’s leading provider of medical, security, evacuation and travel risk management services to enterprises, governments and individuals. Founded in 2004, Global Rescue maintains exclusive relationships with the Johns Hopkins Emergency Medicine Division of Special Operations and Elite Medical Group. The company has provided medical and security support during every major global crisis over the past two decades. For more information, visit www.globalrescue.com.

(Lebanon, N H – March 31, 2026) – Most travelers expect artificial intelligence to play a limited and carefully controlled role in travel planning in 2026, with human judgment, personal experience and independent verification continuing to dominate decision-making, according to the Global Rescue Winter 2026 Traveler Sentiment and Safety Survey.

Overall, 36% of travelers say they expect to use AI in some capacity when planning travel in 2026, whether to generate inspiration, narrow options or, in rare cases, make decisions on their behalf. However, a clear majority remain cautious: 36% say they will not use AI for travel planning at all, while 25% plan to rely mostly on human recommendations.

“Travelers are interested in AI, but they are not ready to hand over control,” said Dan Richards, CEO of The Global Rescue Companies and a member of the US Travel and Tourism Advisory Board at the US Department of Commerce. “AI is viewed as a helpful assistant, not a trusted authority, particularly when safety, cost and risk are involved.”

Gender differences highlight varying levels of comfort with AI. Men are more likely than women to use AI as a decision-support tool, with 25% of men saying AI will help narrow options before they make final decisions, compared to 19% of women. Women are more inclined to avoid AI altogether, with 36% saying they will not use AI for travel planning, slightly higher than men at 35%. Women are also more likely to rely mostly on human recommendations (26%) versus 23% of men.

Geographic differences reveal distinct patterns in how travelers approach AI rather than differing levels of resistance. US and non-US travelers are equally likely to avoid AI altogether, with 37% in both groups saying they will not use AI for travel planning. However, non-US respondents show a stronger preference for human guidance, with 31% relying mostly on human recommendations compared to 22% of US travelers. US travelers are more inclined to use AI as a decision-support tool, with 24% saying AI will help narrow options before they make final decisions, more than double the 11% reported by non-US travelers.

Reluctance grows when AI suggests destinations travelers have never considered. Overall, 41% say they would be unlikely to travel to a destination recommended by AI. Another 30% say they would be somewhat likely, depending on cost and safety considerations, while 20% would consider an AI-recommended destination only after independent verification. Just 1% say they would be very likely to trust the recommendation outright.

“Trust and verification are essential,” Richards said. “AI may introduce travelers to new ideas, but it rarely closes the deal without human confirmation.”

Women express slightly higher levels of skepticism than men, with 43% saying they would be unlikely to follow an AI destination recommendation, compared to 39% of men. Men are more willing to independently verify AI suggestions, with 29% saying they would consider a destination after verification, versus 18% of women.

US and non-US travelers show similar levels of caution. Forty-two percent of US travelers and 43% of non-US travelers say they would be unlikely to travel to an AI-recommended destination. US travelers are slightly more likely to independently verify recommendations, while non-US travelers show a marginally higher tendency to weigh cost and safety factors before deciding.

“AI will influence how travelers discover destinations, but it will not replace human judgment,” Richards said. “For travelers focused on safety and resilience, technology must support informed decisions, not substitute for them.”

About the Global Rescue Traveler Sentiment and Safety Survey

Global Rescue, the leading travel risk and crisis response provider, surveyed more than 1,400 current and former members between January 13 - 17, 2026. Respondents shared their attitudes, behaviors and preferences related to travel safety, technology and global mobility.

About Global Rescue

Global Rescue is the world’s leading provider of medical, security, evacuation and travel risk management services to enterprises, governments and individuals. Founded in 2004, Global Rescue maintains exclusive relationships with the Johns Hopkins Emergency Medicine Division of Special Operations and Elite Medical Group. The company has provided medical and security support during every major global crisis over the past two decades. Learn more at globalrescue.com.

(Lebanon, NH – March 23, 2026) – Ongoing conflict in the Middle East and broader geopolitical instability are significantly influencing how Americans think about international travel, according to new data from a Global Rescue SNAP survey of more than 1,000 of the world’s most experienced travelers.

The survey reveals that concern about how Americans are perceived abroad has entered the mainstream. More than half of American travelers (53%) report being moderately or highly concerned about being targeted or experiencing anti-American sentiment when traveling internationally. Only 12% say they are not concerned at all.

“Concern about anti-American sentiment is no longer fringe, it’s mainstream. That signals a meaningful shift in how travelers are evaluating personal risk tied to global perception,” said Dan Richards, CEO of The Global Rescue Companies and a member of the US Travel and Tourism Advisory Board at the US Department of Commerce.

This heightened awareness is part of a broader pattern: travelers are increasingly factoring geopolitical risk into their planning, but without abandoning international travel altogether.

According to the survey, 85% of respondents express at least some concern about disruptions caused by global conflicts—including airspace closures, flight rerouting and airport delays. However, nearly two-thirds (67%) have not changed their travel plans.

“Travelers aren’t panicking, but they are re-calibrating. They remain committed to going abroad, but they’re factoring in risk in a much more deliberate, informed way,” Richards said.

Among those who have adjusted plans, behavior reflects adaptation rather than retreat. Approximately one-third of travelers report modifying itineraries, including changing destinations (9%), postponing trips (16%) or canceling travel altogether (9%).

“We’re seeing a pivot, not a pullback. Travelers are navigating around risk, not retreating from travel altogether,” Richards said.

Cost pressures tied to geopolitical instability are also influencing decision-making. Two-thirds of travelers report noticing at least some increase in international travel costs, including airfare and routing changes. Looking ahead, more than half say rising airfares could cause them to reconsider, delay or cancel trips.

“Travelers are thinking beyond logistics to perception risk,” Richards added. “With only a small minority saying they’re not concerned at all, most Americans are aware of how they may be perceived abroad—and that awareness is shaping where they go and how they travel.”

Despite these pressures, demand for international travel remains resilient. More than 40% of respondents (41%) say they expect no change in their international travel frequency over the next 6 to 12 months, while 29% anticipate only a slight reduction.

“Resilience in international travel demand remains strong. That level of stability underscores a durable appetite for global travel, even in uncertain conditions,” Richards said.

The data also shows a nuanced risk posture among travelers. While concern is elevated, it is not translating into widespread alarm. Instead, travelers are making calculated adjustments—balancing safety, cost and perception.

“The modern traveler is managing risk, not avoiding it,” Richards said. “What stands out is that concern levels are high, but behavior changes are measured. Today’s travelers are more sophisticated. They’re weighing disruption, cost and safety simultaneously, and making calculated decisions rather than reactive ones.”

For more information: Bill McIntyre | bmcintyre@globalrescue.com | +1 (202) 560-1195 (phone/text)

About the Global Rescue Traveler SNAP Survey

Global Rescue, the leading travel risk and crisis response provider, collected more than 1,000 responses from current and former members between March 18–23, 2026. The respondents revealed key insights and attitudes regarding travel behavior amid the war in the Middle East.

About Global Rescue

The Global Rescue Companies are the world's leading provider of medical, security, evacuation and travel risk management services to enterprises, governments and individuals. Founded in 2004, Global Rescue has exclusive relationships with the Johns Hopkins Emergency Medicine Division of Special Operations and Elite Medical Group. Global Rescue provides best-in-class services that identify, monitor and respond to client medical and security crises. Global Rescue has provided medical and security support to its clients, including Fortune 500 companies, governments and academic institutions, during every globally significant crisis of the last two decades. For more information, visit www.globalrescue.com.

(Lebanon, N.H – March 17, 2026) – Despite widespread awareness of health risks tied to certain foods and tap water abroad, many travelers continue to engage in behaviors that increase the likelihood of illness, according to the Global Rescue Winter 2026 Traveler Sentiment and Safety Survey. The findings reveal meaningful differences by gender and residency, with men and non-US survey respondents generally more willing to trust local conditions than women and US survey-takers.

Tap water exposure remains one of the most common risk areas. Overall, 44% of travelers say they are most likely to brush their teeth with tap water in a foreign country, making it the most common accidental exposure. Another 30% report drinking beverages with ice added, while 9% say they consume drinks diluted with local water such as juice or cocktails. Smaller shares report rinsing their mouth in the shower (6%) or drinking a glass of tap water directly (2%).

US-based respondents and non-US respondents show distinct patterns. Half of non-US respondents say they brush their teeth with tap water, compared with 43% of US travelers. US travelers are more likely to consume drinks with ice (33%) than non-US travelers (20%). Men are significantly more likely than women to brush their teeth with tap water, at 56% versus 40%, while women are more likely than men to drink beverages with ice made from tap water (36% compared with 15%).

“Water safety boils down to the local area where travelers are staying,” warns Jeff Weinstein, a paramedic and medical operations manager for Global Rescue. “Assumptions about water quality can vary widely from place to place, even within the same country.”

Food-related trust presents similar risk tolerance. Nearly half of all travelers, 49%, say they trust freshly cooked hot food from a street vendor the most when faced with risky food choices during travel. All other options trail far behind, including street-vended fruits or snacks (7%), fresh salads or leafy greens (6%), and food purchased during peak crowds or festivals (6%). Sushi or ceviche, runny or soft-cooked eggs and buffet foods with unclear temperature control each draw trust from fewer than 5% of respondents.

Non-US travelers are more trusting of street food overall, with 53% selecting freshly cooked hot food from a street vendor compared with 49% of US travelers. Non-US respondents are also more likely to trust fresh salads or leafy greens, 11% versus 5% among US travelers. Men and women show similar levels of trust in street-vended hot food, but women (10%) are more likely to trust food purchased during peak crowds or festivals compared to men (6%).

“When you travel to a place that’s new to you, there are a lot of germs your body is not used to,” Weinstein said. “Something like traveler’s diarrhea or a really bad case of food poisoning can become an emergency.”

Dan Richards, CEO of The Global Rescue Companies and a member of the US Travel and Tourism Advisory Board at the US Department of Commerce, said the findings underscore a persistent gap between knowledge and behavior. “Most travelers understand, in theory, that food and water safety matters, but convenience and familiarity often override caution,” Richards said. “These results show why pre-travel medical and risk guidance remains critical, especially for travelers heading to regions with different sanitation standards.”

Richards added that differences between men and women, and between US and non-US travelers, point to varying risk perceptions. “Men and non-US travelers tend to accept higher levels of risk, while women and US travelers are generally more cautious, but no group is immune from making risky choices when traveling,” he said.

About the Global Rescue Traveler Sentiment and Safety Survey

Global Rescue, the leading travel risk and crisis response provider, surveyed more than 1,400 current and former members between January 13 - 17, 2026. Respondents shared their attitudes, behaviors and preferences related to travel safety, technology and global mobility.

About Global Rescue

Global Rescue is the world’s leading provider of medical, security, evacuation and travel risk management services to enterprises, governments and individuals. Founded in 2004, Global Rescue maintains exclusive relationships with the Johns Hopkins Emergency Medicine Division of Special Operations and Elite Medical Group. The company has provided medical and security support during every major global crisis over the past two decades.