What Regional Travel Advisory Risk Means for Site Selection

Safety can determine whether an otherwise attractive location remains on a company’s shortlist. The war between Russia and Ukraine, conflict in the Middle East, civil unrest, and health emergencies illustrate how conditions can complicate employee travel and the oversight of international operations.

For companies evaluating offshore and nearshore locations, they must weigh lower labor costs against the ability to operate reliably. A market may offer qualified talent and significant savings, yet become difficult to support if leadership, trainers, or clients cannot travel there under corporate policy. Additional security requirements and contingency arrangements can also reduce the expected financial benefit.

Site Selection Group reviewed U.S. Department of State Travel Advisory ratings for 118 selected countries and territories across Asia-Pacific, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Middle East and Africa. The October 28, 2026 snapshot shows substantial regional differences and highlights why travel risk is critical in the initial screening process.

Understanding the Four Travel Advisory Levels

The State Department uses four advisory levels for U.S. travelers: Level 1, Exercise Normal Precautions; Level 2, Exercise Increased Caution; Level 3, Reconsider Travel; and Level 4, Do Not Travel. The State Department reviews advisories regularly and updates them as conditions change. Individual areas within a country may carry higher warnings than the overall country rating.

Across the 118 markets reviewed, 39 are at Level 1 (33.05%), 50 at Level 2 (42.37%), 19 at Level 3 (16.10%), and 10 at Level 4 (8.47%). Nearly one-quarter of the selected markets therefore fall into the two highest advisory categories. These figures describe the study sample, not the distribution across every country worldwide.

Comparing Travel Advisory Risk Across Regions

Europe has the strongest overall travel advisory profile among the markets reviewed, with 21 of 34 destinations at Level 1 (61.8%). Asia-Pacific follows with 11 of 23 (47.8%), compared with four of 40 in the Middle East and Africa (10.0%) and three of 21 in Latin America and the Caribbean (14.3%).

Europe has many highly developed countries and cities, so it is not surprising that many of the European countries have a Level 1 ranking. Aside from the Russia-Ukraine war, most of Europe benefits from secure borders and many safe, vibrant global cities.

Asia-Pacific also offers numerous lower-advisory options, with 21 of its 23 markets at Level 1 or Level 2. Of the countries analyzed in Asia-Pacific, only Pakistan and Myanmar had less favorable Travel Advisory rankings.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, Argentina, El Salvador, and Paraguay are the only Level 1 destinations in the study, but another 12 markets (57.1%) are at Level 2. This is a good barometer of the overall safety of the LATAM region and further supports LATAM's popularity as a nearshore solution.

The Middle East and Africa have the greatest concentration of higher advisories, with 47.5% of the selected markets at Level 3 or Level 4. Armed conflict, health risks, crime, and civil unrest drive warnings across this diverse region, though concerns vary by country. The regional findings help prioritize a location search; the individual country and city assessments determine how those risks could affect a proposed operation.

Asia Pacific Offers Numerous Lower Advisory Options

Among the 23 Asia-Pacific markets reviewed, 11 are at Level 1, 10 at Level 2, one at Level 3, and one at Level 4. Australia, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, and several other established business destinations carry the lowest advisory level in the supplied dataset.

India and the Philippines, both important locations for global services, are at Level 2. Both countries are very large with many population hubs. Their ratings reinforce the need to evaluate the safety level of a specific city, region, and submarket, as safety concerns can vary across the country. Pakistan’s Level 3 rating and Myanmar’s Level 4 rating warrant closer examination against corporate travel requirements before a company invests in detailed labor or real estate analysis.

Europe Has the Largest Number of Level One Markets

Europe accounts for 21 of the study’s 39 Level 1 markets. Of the 34 European destinations reviewed, 21 are at Level 1, 11 at Level 2, none at Level 3, and two at Level 4. Approximately 62% of this regional sample carries the lowest advisory rating.

The distribution provides a broad range of options for companies seeking European operations. Several major Western European economies are at Level 2, showing that higher operating costs and established global cities do not necessarily correspond to a lower advisory rating. Conversely, many lower-cost Eastern European countries have the lowest Travel Advisory, giving companies many viable location options that offer safety, cost arbitrage, language skill sets, and talent supply. Russia and Ukraine are at Level 4 and are an anomaly to the region’s lower-rated markets.

Latin America Requires Close Attention to Local Conditions

The 21 markets reviewed in Latin America and the Caribbean include three at Level 1, 12 at Level 2, six at Level 3, and none at Level 4. Argentina, El Salvador, and Paraguay carry Level 1 ratings, while most of the regional sample falls into Level 2.

For U.S. companies pursuing nearshore operations, proximity and time zone alignment remain valuable advantages. However, the Level 3 ratings for Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela may affect executive access, training visits, and client acceptance. Supplement countrywide ratings with a review of neighborhood safety, transportation arrangements, and any regional restrictions. Mexico is a good example of a country with a Level 2 advisory, but individual states range from Level 1 (Campeche and Yucatan) to 13 states with Level 3 or Level 4 advisories.

The Middle East and Africa Have the Greatest Concentration of Higher Advisories

Of the 40 markets in this regional group, four are at Level 1, 17 at Level 2, 12 at Level 3, and seven at Level 4. The region contains seven of the study’s 10 Level 4 destinations. Its 19 Level 3 and Level 4 markets represent 47.5% of the regional sample.

Recent changes demonstrate how quickly an operating assumption can become outdated. Kenya moved from Level 2 to Level 3 on October 19, 2026, due to health risks associated with Ebola. Its advisory also identifies crime, civil unrest, kidnapping, terrorism, and traffic safety concerns. Health risks drove the increase; the other concerns are part of the broader operating environment.

Rwanda moved from Level 2 to Level 3 on May 17, while Uganda moved from Level 3 to Level 4 the same day, in connection with the Ebola outbreak. Chad’s advisory increased to Level 4 on April 28.

Travel Risk Belongs Within a Broader Site Selection Analysis

Travel advisories provide a useful screening input, but they do not measure a location’s complete business suitability. Companies should connect each warning to practical requirements: who must visit, how often, whether clients require on-site access, and how local teams would be supported during a disruption.

A complete location assessment should also evaluate:

• Labor supply, occupational skills, recruiting capacity, and workforce scalability
• Labor costs, wage escalation, employee turnover, and total operating expenses
• Language requirements, cultural alignment, and time zone coverage
• Air service, infrastructure reliability, and business continuity arrangements
• Real estate availability, occupancy costs, and implementation timing
• Economic incentives, taxes, and the local business environment

Conclusion

The study highlights meaningful differences in travel advisory risk across global markets. Europe offers the most Level 1 destinations, while the Middle East and Africa have the highest concentration of Level 3 and Level 4 ratings. Within every region, companies need to examine the conditions affecting the specific location under consideration.

Site Selection Group helps organizations combine travel and operating risk with workforce analytics, labor cost benchmarking, language needs, time zone alignment, real estate evaluation, and economic incentives. The objective is to identify locations that can deliver the required talent and savings while supporting employee safety, management access, and long-term operational continuity.

Contact us to learn how a comprehensive global location assessment can support your next expansion, consolidation, or offshore and nearshore investment.