U.S. International Travel and

Transportation Trends

Bureau of

Transportation

Statistics

U.S. Department of Transportation
Bureau of Transportation Statistics

Our mission is to lead in developing transportation data and information of

high quality and to advance their effective use in both public and private

transportation decisionmaking.

Our vision for the future: Data and information of high quality will support

every significant transportation policy decision, thus advancing the quality of

life and the economic well-being of all Americans.

To obtain U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends and other 

BTS publications

Phone: 202-366-DATA [press 1]

Fax: 202-366-3197

Internet: www.bts.gov

Mail: Product Orders

Bureau of Transportation Statistics

U.S. Department of Transportation

400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7412

Washington, DC 20590

Information Service

Email: answers@bts.gov

Phone: 800-853-1351

Recommended citation

U.S. Department of Transportation

Bureau of Transportation Statistics

U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends, BTS02-03

Washington, DC: 2002
Acknowledgments

U.S. Department of

Transportation

Norman Y. Mineta

Secretary

Michael P. Jackson

Deputy Secretary

Bureau of

Transportation

Statistics

Ashish K. Sen

Director

Rick Kowalewski

Deputy Director

Susan J. Lapham

Associate Director for 

Statistical Programs

John V. Wells

Chief Economist

Produced under the 

direction of:

Wendell Fletcher

Assistant Director for 

Transportation Analysis

Project Manager

Elijah Henley

Editor

Marsha Fenn

Major Contributors

Lisa Randall

Marcus Mathias

Felix Ammah-Tagoe

Other Contributors

Don Bright

David Chesser

Martha Courtney

Dorinda Edmondson

Ketreena Hamilton

Joy Sharp

Matthew Sheppard

Lorisa Smith

Lynn Weidman

Peg Young

Cover Design

Colabours 

Communications Inc.
Table of Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Overview of U.S. International Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

North American Travel Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

North American Same-Day Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

North American Overnight Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Border Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Overseas Travel Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Outbound Overseas Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Inbound Overseas Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Aviation in Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Factors of Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Aviation Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Conclusion: The Future Environment of U.S.

International Travel and Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

List of Tables

Table 1 

Travel Between the United States and Foreign 

Countries: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Table 2 

Overnight Travel Between the United States, Canada,

Mexico, and Overseas: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Table 3 

U.S.Travel and Passenger Fare Receipts and 

Payments for the Top 6 Countries: 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Table 4 

Same-Day Travel Between the United States, Canada, and 

Mexico by Mode of Transportation: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Table 5 

Overnight Travel Between the United States, Canada, and 

Mexico by Mode of Transportation: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Table 6 

Canada-U.S./U.S.-Canada Travel by 

Trip Purpose: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Table of Contents > v <
Table 7 

Border Crossings into the United States from Canada and Mexico:

Passenger and Personal Vehicle Crossings, 1998–2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Table 8 

Top 10 North American Border Ports for Incoming 

Passenger and Personal Vehicle Crossings: 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Table 9 

Top Border Ports for Personal Vehicle Crossings from 

Mexico and Canada: Monthly Data for 2000 and 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Table 10 

Top 20 U.S. Gateways for Nonstop International

Air Travel: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Table 11 

Top 20 Routes for U.S. International Airport 

Pair Passengers: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Table 12 

Top 40 Foreign Countries Visited by U.S. Residents 

for Overnight Travel: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Table 13 

Top 10 Overseas Countries of Origin for Overnight Arrivals

in the United States: Percentage Decline for September,

October, and November 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Table 14 

Top 40 Countries of Origin for Overnight Arrivals 

in the United States: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Table in Box 2 

U.S. Nonstop International Air Passengers: Focus on JFK and LAX . . . . . . . . . . . 40

List of Figures

Figure 1 

Overall U.S. International Travel: 1990, 1995, and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 2 

U.S. International Overseas Overnight Travel 

by Region: 1990, 1995, and 2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Figure 3 

U.S.Travel and Passenger Fare Receipts and 

Payments for the Top 6 Countries: 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Figure 4 

Top Border Ports for Personal Vehicle Crossings 

from Canada and Mexico: 2001. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

> vi < International Travel and Transportation Trends
Figure 5 

Top 10 Countries for Total Nonstop Bidirectional 

Air Travel with the United States: 1990 and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Figure 6 

Top 5 Border Ports for Personal Vehicle Crossings 

from Canada and Mexico: 2001. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Figure 7 

Top 20 U.S. Gateways for Nonstop Bidirectional 

International Air Travel: 1990 and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Figure 8 

Top 20 Foreign Gateways for Nonstop Bidirectional 

Air Travel with the United States: 1990 and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Figure 9 

Annual Load Factors for U.S. Carrier International Flights: 1990–2000. . . . . . . . 35

Figure 10 

U.S. GDP and Aviation Revenue Passenger-Miles: 1990–2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Boxes

Box 1

International Travel Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Box 2

Spotlight on Two of America’s International Air Gateways:

John F. Kennedy International and Los Angeles International. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Table of Contents > vii <
Introduction 

Today, security is one of the most important issues in U.S.

international passenger travel and transportation. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, had an immediate impact

on international travel and transportation, and are expected to

continue to influence not only the aviation industry but all passenger travel to and from the United States. Following the

attacks, for example, overseas travel to the United States

declined by 39 percent in October 2001 compared with October 2000, and overseas travel from the United States fell 29 percent1(USDOC ITA 2002a, 2002b, 2002c). International air

enplanements and border crossings also fell significantly in September and October 2001. Not surprisingly, however, international travel is slowly returning to its pre-September 11 levels as

traveler confidence is restored. 

Prior to the attacks, international passenger travel to and

from the United States showed steady growth in most markets,

for an average annual increase of 2 percent between 1990 and

2000. During this period, overall U.S. outbound passenger

travel rose from 131 million trips to 171 million, a 31 percent

increase. At the same time, overall inbound passenger travel to

the United States grew by 6 percent from 184 million trips to

195 million (table 1). International travel continues to hold a

large share of U.S. economic activity and tourism.

Although U.S. international passenger travel has seen dramatic changes in recent years, there have also been patterns of

continuity. Same-day travel with Canada and Mexico accounts

for the majority of U.S. international travel and saw slow but

steady growth during the 1990s. Overnight travel to and from

other countries grew notably during this same period from 84

million trips to 112 million, a 33 percent increase2 (table 2). 

Because of the terrorist attacks, new security procedures

and concerns are already placing increased demands on the

nation’s transportation network and posing new challenges for

1

1 At the time this report was written, comprehensive data were not available to illustrate the

impact of the September 11 attacks on all U.S. international travel, both same-day and

overnight for North America and overseas, and for all modes of transportation. Where available, post-September 2001 data are used to assess the impact of September 11 on U.S. international passenger travel.

2 Overnight travel includes overseas and North American travel of more than one day. In 2000,

overseas overnight trips totaled 53 million and North American overnight trips totaled 59

million.
> 2 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Table 1

Travel Between the United States and Foreign Countries: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Thousands of trips)

Percentage Annual

change, growth rate

1990 1995 2000 1990–2000 (percent)

TOTAL TRIPS 315,173 314,188 366,251 16.2 1.5

Outbound travel from

the United States 131,145 138,670 171,152 30.5 2.7

Inbound travel to

the United States 184,028 175,518 195,099 6.0 0.6

NORTH AMERICA1 284,124 274,490 313,423 10.3 1.0

Overnight2 52,939 54,456 58,881 11.2 1.1

U.S. residents to Canada 12,252 13,005 15,114 23.4 2.1

U.S. residents to Mexico 16,381 18,771 18,849 15.1 1.4

Canadian residents to the United States 17,263 14,662 14,594 –15.5 –1.7

Mexican residents to the United States 7,041 8,016 10,322 46.6 3.9

Same-day 231,185 220,034 254,542 10.1 1.0

U.S. residents to Canada 22,482 24,325 28,769 28.0 2.5

U.S. residents to Mexico 64,038 63,508 81,565 27.4 2.4

Canadian residents to the United States 53,171 37,491 28,019 –47.3 –6.2

Mexican residents to the United States 91,494 94,710 116,189 27.0 2.4

North America share of total (percent) 90.1 87.4 85.6

OVERSEAS OVERNIGHT TRAVEL3 31,049 39,698 52,828 70.1 5.5

Outbound travel from the United States 15,990 19,059 26,853 67.9 5.3

Inbound travel to the United States 15,059 20,639 25,975 72.5 5.6

OVERSEAS OVERNIGHT TRAVEL

BY REGION3 (bidirectional)

Europe 14,702 17,389 24,970 69.8 5.4

Western Europe 14,439 16,706 24,091 66.8 5.3

Eastern Europe 503 1,158 1,228 144.3 9.3

Asia 6,902 10,180 12,468 80.7 6.1

Caribbean 4,367 4,665 5,198 19.0 1.8

South America 2,239 4,069 5,036 125.0 8.4

Middle East 893 1,464 2,072 132.0 8.8

Oceania4 1,238 1,179 1,778 43.7 3.7

Central America 1,020 1,271 1,708 67.4 5.3

Africa 425 605 778 83.1 6.2

1 North American data in this table are different from and should

not be compared with the border-crossing data in table 7. See

also box 1 on page 4.

2 U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico overnight travel data presented in

this table are from the U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of of Tourism Industries. They

reflect overall totals for inbound and outbound overnight travel

with Canada and Mexico. Table 5 in this report also presents overall totals, but with mode of transportation details. Data for table 5

are from Canadian and Mexican government agencies. These

agencies make adjustments and revisions to their data at the

modal level. Because of this, the overall overnight travel totals in

table 5 will differ from those in this table. Throughout this report,

U.S. Department of Commerce data are used for overall overnight

travel totals, while Canadian and Mexican sources are used for

mode of transportation and trip purpose analysis.

3 The aggregate figures for overseas trips differ from the sum of

trips to or from individual regions, because a single outbound trip

by a U.S. resident is counted once as an "overseas" trip but could

be attributed to multiple regions.

4 Oceania includes Australia and New Zealand.

SOURCES: Overnight—U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of Tourism Industries, “Arrivals

to the U.S. 1990–2000,” and “U.S. Resident Travel Abroad: Historical Visitation—Outbound 1990–2000 (One or More Nights),” available at http://tinet.ita.doc.gov, as of July 1, 2001.

Same-day—Statistics Canada, International Travel: Travel Between

Canada and Other Countries ( Touriscope), Catalogue No. 66-201-

XPB (Ottawa, Ontario: Various years).

Banco de México, Dirección General de Investigación Económica,

Dirección de Medición Económica, 1999 and 2001.
the transportation sector. In particular, the key gateways—airports and land border crossings—that primarily service these

travel flows continue to be affected. Like other transportation

demands, any changes in international travel will also affect the

U.S. transportation network in terms of safety, capacity,

scheduling, and congestion.

This report examines transportation’s role in facilitating

international travel and the demands such travel places on the

U.S. transportation system. It provides an overview of U.S.

international travel, reviews regional trends, and highlights significant changes in air travel. It also looks at some of the new

challenges facing the international transportation community in

general, and the aviation industry in particular, following the

September 11 terrorist attacks. Although it is still too early to

fully assess the long-term effects of these attacks, passenger

mobility and international travel could be affected on several levels, including changes in travel volumes, continued adjustments

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 3 <

Table 2

Overnight Travel Between the United States, Canada,

Mexico, and Overseas: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Millions of trips) Percentage Annual

change, growth

1990 1995 2000 1990–2000 rate (percent)

Total trips 84 94 112 33.0 2.9

North America 53 54 59 11.2 1.1

Canada 30 28 30 0.7 0.1

Mexico 23 27 29 24.5 2.2

Overseas 31 40 53 70.1 5.5

Inbound to the United States 39 43 51 29.3 2.6

North America 24 23 25 2.5 0.2

Canada 17 15 15 –15.5 –1.7

Mexico 7 8 10 46.6 3.9

Overseas 15 21 26 72.5 5.6

Outbound from the United States 45 51 61 36.3 3.1

North America 29 32 34 18.6 1.7

Canada 12 13 15 23.4 2.1

Mexico 16 19 19 15.1 1.4

Overseas 16 19 27 67.9 5.3

NOTE: The International Trade Administration counts inbound

overnight arrivals using Immigration and Naturalization Service 

I-94 data and includes only arrivals of each tourist visitor to the

United States. A tourist visitor is defined as a "person traveling to

the United States for one or more nights for a period not exceeding twelve months and who is traveling for pleasure, business or

study."

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade

Administration, Office of Tourism Industries, “Arrivals to the U.S.

1990–2000,” and “U.S. Resident Travel Abroad: Historical Visitation—Outbound 1990–2000 (One or More Nights),” available at

http://tinet.ita.doc.gov, as of July 1, 2001.
in security and safety procedures, carrier modifications in

scheduling and pricing, and shifts in geographic patterns of

travel. This report uses a variety of data sources to show longer

term trends in U.S. international passenger travel from 1990 to

2000, and where available employs recent data to assess the

immediate impact of the events of September 11 on U.S. international passenger travel.

Overview of U.S. International Travel 

U.S. international passenger travel experienced a notable

expansion from 1990 to 2000 (table 1 and box 1). In total, 366

million inbound and outbound trips were made between the

> 4 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Multiple data sources must be used to track U.S.

international travel and transportation trends. These

data may be collected for administrative/regulatory

purposes, from air carriers, or through travel surveys.

Each provides important information for analyzing

U.S. international travel, but no one source is comprehensive. The United States does not conduct an

international travel survey for all modes of transportation for both same-day and overnight travel.

Both kinds of information are needed to evaluate

the impact of these flows on U.S. transportation systems and services. These different data sources use

different definitions, time series, and methodologies,

which complicate analysis.

Administrative/Regulatory Data

Immigration Data. As part of the immigration documentation process for entry into the United States,

the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)

requires non-U.S. residents entering the country to

complete INS form I-94. Residents of some countries, such as Canada, are exempt from filing the I-94

if they stayed in the United States for less than a certain period or within a specific geographic area. To

accommodate this gap, the International Trade

Administration (ITA) supplements the INS I-94 data

with other sources for those countries. Information

on returning U.S. residents is collected through INS

form 1-92. Information collected from both these

forms provide data on the travel volumes of foreign

residents from specific countries to the United

States as well as the destination countries visited by

U.S. residents.

U.S. Customs Data. The U.S. Customs Service collects

daily count data of all persons and vehicles entering

the United States along the northern and southern

borders. These data do not provide travel and trip

characteristics. Nor do they identify travelers by

nationality, and as such cannot be used to determine how many persons entering the United States

are U.S., Canadian, and Mexican residents or residents of other countries. However, the Customs data

show the level of entries at particular border-crossing points.

Travel Surveys

Survey of International Air Travelers. To supplement

the travel volume figures from the immigration

data, the ITA Office of Tourism Industries conducts a

Survey of International Air Travelers that provides

information on travel and trip characteristics for

overnight trips by air.

U.S-Canada and U.S.-Mexico Data. Travel volumes

and trip characteristics for same-day travel between

the United States and Canada and the United States

and Mexico (other than the Customs and INS data

mentioned above) are based on travel surveys conducted by Canadian and Mexican government

agencies. No comparable data are available from

U.S. sources. Overnight travel data between the

United States and its North American partners are

also available from Canadian and Mexican agencies

as is some limited information from the ITA Tourism

Industries Office.

For U.S.-Canada travel, data are collected through

Statistics Canada’s Tourism Statistical Program. The

data are based on administrative counts, as well as

Box 1

International Travel Data

(Box 1 continued on next page)
United States and other countries in 2000, a 16 percent increase

from 315 million trips in 1990.3 Of trips made in 2000, the

majority of U.S. international travel (approximately 86 percent)

was with Canada and Mexico, and most of this was same-day

travel (figure 1). While North American travel dominates U.S.

international travel overall, it grew at a slower annual rate than

U.S. travel with overseas countries in the 1990s. Between 1990

and 2000, trips generated in North America rose 10 percent, in

contrast to a 70 percent increase for trips between the United

States and overseas countries. 

The number of U.S. residents traveling to overseas destinations is slightly greater than the number of overseas visitors

coming to the United States. In 2000, 27 million U.S. residents

traveled to overseas destinations, while 26 million overseas

residents4 came to the United States. Overall, inbound travel to the

United States, including both overseas and North American,

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 5 <

an international travel survey. The administrative

count data track crossings and arrivals, modal characteristics, and nationality characteristics at all

Canadian ports of entry on a census basis (except

for sampling done at seven land ports to estimate

automobile and motorcycle flows). Statistics Canada

obtains a more detailed international traveler

dataset including trip duration, trip purpose, and

trip-taker personal characteristics through the

Canadian Customs distribution of questionnaire

surveys to travel parties according to a prearranged schedule and subsequent enhancement

by sampling.

For U.S.-Mexico travel, the Banco de México uses

sample survey methods at specific international airports and border cities to collect total visitor data,

as well as statistics for trip duration, income level,

trip purpose, transportation modes used, points of

departure, and major cities visited .

While Canadian and Mexican sources are used in

this report to highlight modal breakdowns for overnight and same-day U.S.-North American travel, the

Bureau of Transportation Statistics’ (BTS) American

Travel Survey (ATS) also reports characteristics of

U.S. travel abroad. The ATS, last completed in 1995,

provides data for long-distance trips of more than

100 miles, including trips made by U.S. residents to

Canada and Mexico.This stricter definition of visitors

yields a lower number of American trips to Canada

and Mexico as compared with the Mexican and

Canadian source data and assigns a higher proportion of trips to air travel. For 2002, BTS and the Federal Highway Administration are jointly conducting

the National Household Travel Survey, covering

both long- and short-distance travel.

Air Carrier Data

BTS’s Office of Airline Information collects air

carrier data on international travel and transportation.These include the T-100 segment data collected

from nearly 90 U.S. commercial air carriers and

cover all scheduled and unscheduled international

nonstop commercial traffic arriving and departing

U.S. airports for aircrafts of 60 seats or more.

Approximately 140 foreign carriers serving or transiting the United States file information similar to

that supplied by the U.S. carriers, which is included

in the T-100(f ) statistics.

(Box 1 continued)

3 Total trips include overnight trips (or those of a duration of one night or more) and same-day

trips (which include an arrival and departure on the same day). The U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration provides overnight data based on immigration documents required by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Same-day data are from

Canadian and Mexican statistical agencies based on immigration documents and travel surveys.

4 This number includes Canada and Mexico and is based on overnight visits only.
increased more slowly than outbound

U.S. travel. Still, the United States,

with 51 million foreign resident visits,

surpassed Spain to become the second-most visited country worldwide.

In comparison, France accounted for

the most international overnight visits,

with 76 million in 2000 (USDOC

ITA 2001d). Europe still remains the

top origin and destination for U.S.

inbound and outbound overseas travel,

followed by Asia, the Caribbean, and

South America (figure 2). However,

U.S. travel grew fastest with Eastern

Europe, the Middle East, and South

America, during the last decade (table

1). Regions such as Africa, Central

America, and Oceania (Australia

and New Zealand) also experienced

notable increases in travel with the

United States.

Although U.S. international

travel increased between 1990 and

2000, travel began to slow in early

2001 and more significant declines

occurred following September 11,

2001. Overnight trips between the

United States and overseas countries

from January through August 2001

were slightly lower than comparable numbers for 2000. The

September and October drops in overseas overnight travel were

more drastic, falling by 32 and 34 percent, respectively, from

2000 levels. 

Despite these recent declines, international passenger travel

generates much revenue for transportation carriers, hotels, restaurants, and other travel-related businesses. The United States had a 7

percent share of all international overnight visitors in 2000 and a

17 percent share of worldwide international overnight visitor

receipts (USDOC ITA 2001c). Travel expenditures by international

> 6 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Total travel Overseas

(overnight)

North American

 overnight

North American 

 same-day

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

1990 1995 2000

Millions of trips

Figure 1

Overall U.S. International 

Travel: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Bidirectional)

SOURCES: Overnight— U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade

Administration, Office of Tourism Industries,“Arrivals to the U.S. 1990–2000,”

and “U.S. Resident Travel Abroad: Historical Visitation—Outbound 1990–2000

(One or More Nights),”available at http://tinet.ita.doc.gov, as of July 1, 2001.

Same-day—Statistics Canada, International Travel: Travel Between Canada and

Other Countries (Touriscope),Catalogue No. 66-201-XPB (Ottawa, Ontario: Various years). Banco de México, Dirección General de Investigación Económica,

Dirección de Medición Económica, 1999 and 2001.
visitors in the United States amounted

to $82 billion in 2000, nearly $18 billion more than U.S. residents spent on

international trips5 (table 3). Passenger

fares paid by international travelers to

U.S. transportation providers brought in

another $21 billion, but this was $3 billion less than what U.S. residents paid to

transportation service providers in other

countries.6 Although U.S. residents travel

most frequently to Canada and Mexico,

they spent the most in terms of their

travel costs and passenger fares for visits

to the United Kingdom (table 3 and figure 3). In 2000, residents of Japan and

the United Kingdom spent more than

other international travelers to the United

States, followed by Canada and Mexico. 

Japanese visitors’ expenditures

are largely responsible for the U.S.

travel and passenger fare expenditures

surplus. In 2000, the Japanese spent

over $10 billion more in the United

States on travel and passenger fares

than did U.S. residents traveling in Japan. Meanwhile, the

United States ran a travel and passenger fare deficit of approximately $1.6 billion with Mexico in 2000. U.S. residents spend

much greater sums of money on their trips to Mexico than

Mexicans do in the United States, as expenditures on passenger

fares alone show a relatively small balance (USDOC BEA 2001,

tables 1 and 10).

North American Travel Trends 

The majority of U.S. international travel is with Canada and

Mexico. It has been characterized by fluctuations during the

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 7 <

Europe Asia South 

America Caribbean

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1990 1995 2000

Millions of trips

Figure 2

U.S. International Overseas Overnight Travel 

by Region: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Bidirectional)

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of Tourism Industries, “Arrivals to the U.S. 1990–2000,”

and “U.S. Resident Travel Abroad: Historical Visitation—Outbound

1990–2000 (One or More Nights),” available at http://tinet.ita.doc.gov,

as of July 1, 2001.

5 Travel expenditures include goods and services (e.g., food, lodging, recreation, gifts, entertainment, and local transportation) purchased when visiting a foreign country. A traveler is a person

who visits a country for less than one year, except diplomats and military and civilian government personnel. Educational and medical expenditures are not included. Expenditures on sameday trips by U.S., Canadian, and Mexican residents are included.

6 International passenger fares are fares paid by residents of one country to airline and vessel

operators in another country on trips to or from the two countries involved.
1990s, most recently since September 2001. In 2000, approximately 313 million visits, or roundtrips, were recorded between

the United States and Mexico and the United States and Canada,

an increase of 10 percent from 1990.7 Of this travel, U.S.-Mexico

activity accounted for 72 percent (227 million trips) and U.S.-

Canada travel represented 28 percent (86 million trips). Sameday trips accounted for four-fifths of all travel back and forth

across the borders, with the remaining 20 percent involving an

> 8 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Table 3

U.S. Travel and Passenger Fare Receipts and Payments for the Top 6 Countries: 2000

(Millions of dollars)

Receipts from Payments by Balance (receipts

foreign residents U.S. residents minus payments)

Passenger Passenger Passenger Total Travel fare Total Travel fare Total Travel fare

Country receipts receipts receipts payments payments payments balance balance balance

Japan 14,011 10,238 3,773 3,810 2,872 938 10,201 7,366 2,835

United

Kingdom 12,708 9,957 2,751 11,114 6,368 4,746 1,594 3,589 –1,995

Canada 8,768 7,055 1,713 7,194 6,367 827 1,574 688 886

Mexico 5,964 4,937 1,027 7,566 6,646 920 –1,602 –1,709 107

Germany 5,125 4,035 1,090 4,602 2,678 1,924 523 1,357 –834

France 3,653 2,637 1,016 4,817 3,634 1,183 –1,164 –997 –167

Total, top 

6 countries 50,229 38,859 11,370 39,148 28,565 10,583 11,126 10,294 832

Total,

all countries 102,787 82,042 20,745 88,734 64,537 24,197 14,053 17,505 –3,452

NOTES: Countries are ranked by total receipts.

Travel—The travel accounts cover purchases of goods and services

by U.S. citizens traveling abroad and by foreign travelers in the

United States for business or personal reasons. These goods and

services include food, lodging, recreation, gifts, entertainment, and

other items incidental to a foreign visit.

Passenger fares—The passenger fare accounts cover fares paid by

residents of one country to airline and vessel operators (carriers) of

another country.

Receipts consist of fares received by U.S. air carriers from foreign

residents for travel between the United States and foreign countries

and between two foreign points and for travel on U.S. cruise vessels.

Payments consist of fares paid by U.S. residents to foreign air carriers for travel between the United States and foreign countries and

for travel on foreign cruise vessels.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Survey of Current Business, July 2001, tables 1 and 10.

7 These data differ from the border-crossing numbers presented later in this section. The 313

million visits represents roundtrips made by residents of Canada, the United States, and

Mexico. The data are obtained through a combination of immigration and travel surveys. Such

sources provide travel characteristics, including trip duration and purpose. In contrast, bordercrossing/entry data are collected at the U.S. ports of entry (land, water, and air). These numbers

reflect all entries, not just the residents of the departure country. It is not possible to separate

these data by trip duration or country of residency. 
overnight stay. The vast majority of people cross the border in

personal vehicles (tables 4 and 5). Other options for travel

across the border are walking, flying, or taking a bus. Relatively

few travelers use trains. 

North American Same-Day Travel 

Same-day excursions dominate travel between the United States

and its two neighbors, accounting for about 87 percent of total

travel between the United States and Mexico and about 66 percent of total travel between the United States and Canada. 

About half of Canadian travelers cited pleasure as the most

common reason for same-day travel to the United States in 2000.

Another one-third traveled for shopping and other purposes.

About 7 percent cited business as their main reason to travel,

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 9 <

Figure 3

U.S. Travel and Passenger Fare Receipts and

Payments for the Top 6 Countries: 2000

Japan United 

Kingdom Canada Mexico Germany France

–2,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

Receipts from foreign residents Payments by U.S. residents

Balance (receipts minus payments)

U.S. dollars (millions)

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Survey of Current Business, July

2001, tables 1 and 10.
while another 11 percent visited friends and relatives (table 6).

Same-day trip purpose shares for U.S. residents traveling to

Canada are comparable, with a slightly higher proportion visiting friends and relatives and shopping; fewer traveled for pleasure and business (Statistics Canada 1998, 2000, Various years).

Comparable data are not available for Mexico.8

> 10 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Table 4

Same-Day Travel Between the United States, Canada, and

Mexico by Mode of Transportation: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Thousands of visits) Percentage 1990 1995 2000 change,

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 1990–2000

SAME-DAY TRAVEL TO THE UNITED STATES

Canadian residents 53,171 100.0 37,491 100.0 28,019 100.0 –47.3

Air 137 0.3 138 0.4 121 0.4 –11.7

Land

Motor vehicles 52,629 99.0 37,201 99.2 27,784 99.2 –47.2

Personal vehicles 51,829 97.5 36,414 97.1 27,106 96.7 –47.7

Intercity and charter buses 800 1.5 787 2.1 678 2.4 –15.3

Intercity rail N N N N N N N

Other1 405 0.8 152 0.4 114 0.4 –71.9

Mexican residents 91,494 100.0 94,710 100.0 116,189 100.0 27.0

Air N N N N N N N

Land 91,494 100.0 94,710 100.0 116,189 100.0 27.0

SAME-DAY TRAVEL FROM THE UNITED STATES

U.S. residents to Canada 22,482 100.0 24,325 100.0 28,769 100.0 28.0

Air 165 0.7 260 1.1 496 1.7 200.6

Land

Motor vehicles 21,412 95.2 23,604 97.0 27,719 96.4 29.5

Personal vehicles 20,692 92.0 22,746 93.5 26,646 92.6 28.8

Intercity and charter buses 720 3.2 858 3.5 1,073 3.7 49.0

Intercity rail N N N N N N N

Other1 905 4.0 455 1.9 540 1.9 –40.3

U.S. residents to Mexico 64,038 100.0 63,508 100.0 81,565 100.0 27.4

Air N N N N N N N

Land 64,038 100.0 63,508 100.0 81,565 100.0 27.4

1 Includes boaters, pedestrians, and cyclists.

KEY: N = data are nonexistent.

SOURCES: Statistics Canada, International Travel: Travel Between Canada and Other Countries ( Touriscope), Catalogue No. 66-201-XPB

(Ottawa, Ontario: Various years).

Banco de México, Dirección General de Investigación Económica, Dirección de Medición Económica, 1999 and 2001.

8 The U.S. government does not conduct surveys on same-day travel to or from the United

States, nor does it collect data that include modal detail or travel purpose for all modes of transportation for overnight travel between the United States and Canada. U.S. agencies typically

obtain these data from Statistics Canada. However, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics’

American Travel Survey provides trip purpose data on U.S. travel to Canada for trips longer

than 100 miles (approximately 160 kilometers).
Same-day travel between Canada and the United States

declined dramatically between 1990 and 2000, dropping from

76 million visits to 57 million. Much of the decline is due to

fewer Canadians coming to the United States, while the number

of American visits to Canada has grown. The most pronounced

decline is for pleasure and business trips, although all trip

purposes have been affected. The drop in Canadian trips to the

United States has partly been the result of unfavorable exchange

rates for the Canadian dollar. For specific modes, same-day

travel by personal vehicles from Canada to the United States

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 11 <

Table 5

Overnight Travel Between the United States, Canada,

and Mexico by Mode of Transportation: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Thousands of visits) Percentage 1990 1995 2000 change,

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 1990–2000

OVERNIGHT TRAVEL TO THE UNITED STATES

Canadian residents 17,262 100.0 14,663 100.0 14,648 100.0 –15.1

Air 4,039 23.4 3,802 25.9 5,354 36.6 32.6

Land

Motor vehicles 12,770 74.0 10,338 70.5 8,694 59.4 –31.9

Personal vehicles 12,164 70.5 9,686 66.1 7,966 54.4 –34.5

Intercity and charter buses 606 3.5 652 4.4 728 5.0 20.1

Intercity rail 36 0.2 34 0.2 42 0.3 16.7

Other1 416 2.4 489 3.3 558 3.8 34.1

Mexican residents 7,040 100.0 8,189 100.0 10,604 100.0 50.6

Air 959 13.6 796 9.7 1,456 13.7 51.8

Land 6,081 86.4 7,393 90.3 9,148 86.3 50.4

OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FROM THE UNITED STATES

U.S. residents to Canada 12,252 100.0 13,005 100.0 15,225 100.0 24.3

Air 2,372 19.4 2,769 21.3 3,872 25.4 63.2

Land

Motor vehicles 9,103 74.3 9,451 72.7 10,256 67.4 12.7

Personal vehicles 8,381 68.4 8,702 66.9 9,458 62.1 12.9

Intercity and charter buses 722 5.9 749 5.8 798 5.2 10.5

Intercity rail N N 72 0.6 108 0.7 N

Other1 778 6.3 713 5.5 989 6.5 27.1

U.S. residents to Mexico 16,377 100.0 19,221 100.0 19,379 100.0 18.3

Air 3,635 22.2 4,741 24.7 6,710 34.6 84.6

Land 12,742 77.8 14,480 75.3 12,669 65.4 –0.6

1 Includes boaters, pedestrians, and cyclists.

KEY: N = data are nonexistent.

NOTE: U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico overnight travel data presented in this table are from Canadian and Mexican government

agencies. These agencies make adjustments and revisions to

their data at the modal level. Because of this, the overall

overnight totals in this table will differ from those in table 1.

Table 1 data are from the U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of Tourism Industries and

are not adjusted at the modal level.

SOURCES: Statistics Canada, International Travel: Travel Between

Canada and Other Countries ( Touriscope), Catalogue No. 66-201-

XPB (Ottawa, Ontario: Various years).

Banco de México, Dirección General de Investigación Económica,

Dirección de Medición Económica, 1999 and 2001.
shows the most decline, while same-day air travel by Americans

increased over this period.

In contrast to the U.S.-Canada situation, same-day travel

between the United States and Mexico increased markedly (by

approximately 27 percent) from 1990 to 2000. Same-day travel

in both directions increased at comparable rates. The rate at

which same-day travel between the United States and Mexico

grew was especially rapid toward the close of the decade. 

The vast majority of North American same-day travelers

cross the border in personal vehicles. Border-entry data show that

344 million land passenger crossings were made into the United

> 12 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Table 6

Canada-U.S./U.S.-Canada Travel by Trip Purpose: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Thousands of visits) Percentage 1990 1995 2000 change,

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 1990–2000

CANADIAN RESIDENT TRAVEL TO THE UNITED STATES

Overnight travel 17,262 100.0 14,663 100.0 14,648 100.0 –15.1

Pleasure/tourism 10,586 61.3 8,316 56.7 7,752 52.9 –26.8

Business 1,972 11.4 2,260 15.4 2,739 18.7 38.9

Visit family and friends 2,701 15.6 2,626 17.9 2,881 19.7 6.7

Other1 2,003 11.6 1,462 10.0 1,276 8.7 –36.3

Same-day travel 53,171 100.0 37,491 100.0 28,019 100.0 –47.3

Pleasure/tourism 34,159 64.2 22,394 59.7 14,066 50.2 –58.8

Business 3,567 6.7 2,971 7.9 1,848 6.6 –48.2

Visit family and friends 4,703 8.8 3,473 9.3 2,971 10.6 –36.8

Other1 10,741 20.2 8,650 23.1 9,134 32.6 –15.0

U.S. RESIDENT TRAVEL TO CANADA

Overnight travel 12,252 100.0 13,005 100.0 15,225 100.0 24.3

Pleasure/tourism 7,012 57.2 7,498 57.7 8,534 56.1 21.7

Business 1,729 14.1 1,926 14.8 2,363 15.5 36.7

Visit family and friends 2,602 21.2 2,323 17.9 2,832 18.6 8.8

Other1 909 7.4 1,259 9.7 1,496 9.8 64.6

Same-day travel 22,482 100.0 24,325 100.0 28,769 100.0 28.0

Pleasure/tourism 10,958 48.7 11,839 48.7 13,784 47.9 25.8

Business 1,967 8.7 1,792 7.4 1,425 5.0 –27.6

Visit family and friends 5,385 24.0 3,923 16.1 3,781 13.1 –29.8

Other1 4,172 18.6 6,771 27.8 9,779 34.0 134.4

1 Includes personal, in transit, shopping, educational study, and other.

SOURCES: Statistics Canada, International Travel: Travel Between Canada and Other Countries ( Touriscope), Catalogue No. 66-201-XPB

(Ottawa, Ontario: Various years); and Statistics Canada, special tabulations, 1998.
States from Mexico and Canada in 2001—approximately 944,000

a day.9 These data also show that the number of passenger and

personal vehicle crossings into the United States has fluctuated

since 1998 (table 7), with steep declines in the later months of

2001 (discussed in detail in the section on Border Issues).

On the U.S.-Mexican border, about 20 percent of those

entering the United States from Mexico were on foot, while most

of the rest crossed in personal vehicles. In 2001, approximately

245,000 personal vehicles crossed into the United States everyday

from Mexico, with El Paso, Texas, and San Ysidro, California,

each handling a large share, over 40,000 incoming personal

vehicles a day (table 8). 

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 13 <

9 These data differ from the trip data presented in tables 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6. In contrast, the data

presented here represent crossings into the United States, collected by the U.S. Customs Service

at all U.S. land, air, and maritime ports. These numbers reflect all entries, and it is not possible

to separate these data into entries for same-day and overnight travel or by country of residency

for the traveler. Additionally, these border-crossing figures do not reflect the number of unique

individuals, but instead indicates the number of border crossings (the same individual may

make multiple trips). This is not the case for same-day and overnight travel data, which are

always referred to as visits or trips.

Table 7

Border Crossings into the United States from Canada and Mexico:

Passenger and Personal Vehicle Crossings, 1998–2001

1998 1999 2000 2001

Number Number Number Number

(thousands) Percent (thousands) Percent (thousands) Percent (thousands) Percent

FROM CANADA

Total, passenger

crossings 92,904 100.0 97,610 100.0 95,775 100.0 80,431 100.0

By train 241 0.3 187 0.2 270 0.3 254 0.3

By bus 3,951 4.3 4,366 4.5 4,873 5.1 4,456 5.5

On foot (pedestrian) 585 0.6 587 0.6 585 0.6 750 0.9

By personal vehicle 88,127 94.9 92,470 94.7 90,047 94.0 74,971 93.2

Total, personal

vehicle crossings 36,597 100.0 37,220 100.0 36,915 100.0 34,308 100.0

FROM MEXICO

Total, passenger

crossings 274,232 100.0 294,311 100.0 290,368 100.0 263,993 100.0

By train 13 – 17 – 18 – 19 –

By bus 3,639 1.3 3,495 1.2 3,466 1.2 3,367 1.3

On foot (pedestrian) 44,477 16.2 48,186 16.4 47,090 16.2 51,501 19.5

By personal vehicle 226,104 82.4 242,613 82.4 239,795 82.6 209,106 79.2

Total, personal

vehicle crossings 83,854 100.0 89,470 100.0 91,157 100.0 89,527 100.0 

KEY: – = value too small to report.

NOTE: Data for passenger crossings in personal vehicles include

the driver. Personal vehicle crossings include automobiles, minivans, sport utility vehicles, and pickups.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, special tabulation, February 2002; based on U.S.

Department of Commerce, U.S. Customs Service, Mission Support

Services, Office of Field Operations, Operations Management

Database CD.
Similar border-crossing data show that the number of

people coming into the United States from Canada by land is

about one-third of those entering from Mexico, about 80 million in 2001, or 220,000 a day on average. Most of these people

enter in personal vehicles, approximately 94,000 vehicles a day.

Detroit and Buffalo-Niagara handle about 20,000 vehicles a day

each, half the amount of the most active crossing points on the

Mexican border (figure 4). 

North American Overnight Travel 

Over half (53 percent) of international overnight travel involving

the United States is to and from Canada and Mexico (table 2). In

2000, 51 million international overnight trips were made to the

United States, with Canada and Mexico together accounting for

just under half the trips (29 percent from Canada and another 20

percent from Mexico). Although appreciable, it is a drop from

1990 when North American trips accounted for 62 percent of all

overnight visits to the United States. On the outbound side, U.S.

> 14 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Table 8

Top 10 North American Border Ports for Incoming 

Passenger and Personal Vehicle Crossings: 2001

Passengers Daily port share of

in personal Personal personal vehicle

vehicles vehicles crossings, U.S.- Mexico

U.S. Customs (crossings (crossings and Canada borders

Rank1 port/crossing per day) per day) (percent)

1 El Paso,TX 107,399 44,208 13.1 

2 San Ysidro, CA 90,421 41,100 12.1 

3 Detroit, MI 41,526 20,782 6.1 

4 Hidalgo,TX 48,530 20,685 6.1 

5 Brownsville,TX 46,444 20,681 6.1 

6 Laredo,TX 47,349 20,423 6.0 

7 Buffalo-Niagara, NY 45,401 20,263 6.0 

8 Calexico, CA 41,117 17,464 5.2 

9 Nogales, AZ 27,059 12,578 3.7 

10 Otay Mesa, CA 23,028 10,841 3.2 

Total, top 

10 ports 518,273 229,024 67.7 

Total,

North America 778,293 339,274 100.0 

Total, U.S.-Mexico 572,893 245,279 72.3 

Total, U.S.-Canada 205,400 93,995 27.7 

1 Rankings are based on the number of personal vehicle crossings per day.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, special tabulation,

February 2002; based on U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Customs Service, Mission Support

Services, Office of Field Operations, Operations Management Database CD.
Hidalgo

Sumas

Eagle Pass

Mexico

Brownsville

Laredo

El Paso

Nogales

San Luis

Calexico

Otay Mesa

San 

 Ysidro

Blaine

Saulte Ste. Marie

Detroit

Port Huron Buffalo

Massena Champlain

Derby

 Line

Calais

Canada

 Personal vehicle crossings

Less than 1 million

1–5 million

5–10 million

Greater than 

10 million

residents made 61 million overnight trips in 2000 with Mexico

their top destination (accounting for one-third of these trips),

followed by Canada (accounting for one-quarter). Canada and

Mexico have remained the top destinations for U.S. resident

overnight travel for at least the past decade. 

As with same-day travel, ground transportation, particularly the use of personal vehicles, is still the primary mode for

North American overnight travel. About 64 percent of overnight

visits between the United States and Canada were made by land

modes (mainly personal vehicles) in 2000, down from 74 percent in 1990. As for overnight travel between the United States

and Mexico in 2000, approximately 73 percent of these trips

were made by land modes, down from around 80 percent in

1990. 

Air is increasingly relied on for North American overnight

travel. Table 5 (page 11) shows air travel’s growing modal share

of international North American trips from 1990 to 2000, with

the exception of Mexican travel to the United States, where air’s

modal share remained relatively stable during this time period.

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 15 <

Figure 4

Top Border Ports for Personal Vehicle Crossings from Canada and Mexico: 2001

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, special tabulation, February 2002;

based on U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Customs Service, Mission Support Services, Office of Field Operations,

Operations Management Database CD.
During the 1990s, air trips grew from 22 percent to about 31

percent of overnight trips between the United States and Canada,

and from 20 percent to 27 percent for such trips between the

United States and Mexico between 1990 and 2000 (Statistics

Canada Various years; Banco de México 1999 and 2001). Notably

in 2000, the U.S.-Canada market was the world’s second largest

nonstop bilateral air passenger market behind the U.S.-United

Kingdom, while the U.S.-Mexico market ranked third10 (figure

5). The top three North American international air passenger

city pairs were Toronto-New York, Toronto-Chicago, and Los

Angeles-Mexico City (USDOT BTS OAI 2001b). 

Notwithstanding the relatively strong growth in North

American overnight air travel during the 1990s, modest declines

began to occur between January and August 2001. These downturns grew notably following September 11. Trips made

> 16 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

10 In 1994, there were 54 nonstop markets with annual traffic of more than 50,000 passengers.

In 1997, the number of markets with that level of traffic rose to 77, an increase of 42.6 percent

(USDOT OST 1998).

Figure 5

Top 10 Countries for Total Nonstop Bidirectional Air Travel 

with the United States: 1990 and 2000 

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Millions of trips

1990 2000

 United 

Kingdom

Canada

Mexico

Japan

Germany

France

Netherlands

Dominican 

 Republic

Italy

South

Korea

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, T-100 Segment data, 2001.
between the United States and Canada and Mexico declined by

24 percent in September and 23 percent in October 2001, compared with the same months in 2000, with a greater decline seen

in the U.S.-Mexican market than in the U.S.-Canadian market.

Overnight trips by air between Canada and the United States

declined by 21 percent and 22 percent in September and October

2001, respectively, compared with the same months in 2000 and

compared with 33 percent and 27 percent decreases during the

same months for U.S.-Mexico overnight air travel (USDOC ITA

2002a, 2002b, 2002c). 

Overnight trip purposes for U.S.-Canada travel are generally

similar to same-day travel, but with a higher share of businessrelated trips and lower shares for shopping and personal trips. In

2000, over 50 percent of Canadian overnight visits to the United

States were for pleasure and tourism, almost 20 percent were for

visits to friends and family, and nearly 19 percent were for

business. Roughly similar ratios were seen for U.S. overnight

travel to Canada (table 6). Comparable trip purpose data for

Mexican overnight visits to the United States are unavailable.

Border Issues 

Since September 11, 2001, security at U.S. borders has been

heightened, focusing on threat deterrence and preventing

would-be terrorists from gaining entry into the United States.

Government agencies charged with protecting U.S. borders

have also tightened their inspections and security procedures.11

An anti-terrorism law, the USA Patriot Act (Public Law 107-56,

sec. 401), signed into law by President George W. Bush on

October 26, 2001, authorized a tripling of U.S. agents along the

Canadian border. Border enforcement will also increase on the

Mexican border. In addition, the Border Security and Visa Entry

Reform Act (Public Law 107-173), signed into law on May 14,

2002, had several provisions dealing with enhanced border

security, including increases in the number of immigration

inspectors and investigators who will be deployed along both

U.S. land borders and other ports of entry. 

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 17 <

11 The agencies primarily responsible for border control and immigration are: 1) the Immigration and Naturalization Service, responsible for checking travelers’ documents at legal points of

entry; 2) the U.S. Customs Service, which checks cargo, vehicles, and passenger baggage at all

ports of entry; 3) the U.S. Coast Guard, which polices seaports, coastlines, and waterways; and

4) the newly created Transportation Security Administration, which monitors and is in charge

of security for all modes of transportation.
Heightened border security was accompanied by declines

in entries from Canada and Mexico in the months immediately

following September 11, followed by less severe declines in late

2001. Table 9 compares the number of personal vehicle cross-

> 18 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, special tabulation, February 2002; based on U.S. Department of

Commerce, U.S. Customs Service, Mission Support Services, Office of Field Operations, Operations Management Database CD.

Table 9

Top Border Ports for Personal Vehicle Crossings from 

Mexico and Canada: Monthly Data for 2000 and 2001

(Thousands of crossings, ranked by annual crossings in 2001)

August September October November December

Change Change Change Change Change

Border port 2000 2001 (%) 2000 2001 (%) 2000 2001 (%) 2000 2001 (%) 2000 2001 (%)

U.S.-MEXICO BORDER

El Paso,TX 1,480 1,696 14.6 1,427 1,074 –24.7 1,397 982 –29.7 1,249 1,019 –18.4 1,326 1,185 –10.6

San Ysidro, CA 1,315 1,501 14.1 1,197 1,023 –14.6 1,309 1,006 –23.2 1,368 942 –31.1 1,356 1,047 –22.8

Hidalgo,TX 703 526 –25.1 658 563 –14.4 661 555 –16.0 645 573 –11.0 700 666 –4.9

Brownsville,TX 641 688 7.4 632 507 –19.8 633 526 –16.8 648 537 –17.2 704 590 –16.1

Laredo,TX 611 732 19.8 615 496 –19.4 595 509 –14.3 599 524 –12.4 642 571 –11.0

Calexico, CA 544 547 0.4 548 404 –26.4 580 425 –26.8 551 443 –19.6 548 533 –2.6

Nogales, AZ 401 421 4.9 383 321 –16.0 395 284 –28.1 408 352 –13.7 422 348 –17.7

Otay Mesa, CA 432 364 –15.6 427 270 –36.7 408 274 –32.9 242 272 12.2 272 330 21.4

Eagle Pass,TX 275 290 5.6 269 237 –11.9 277 245 –11.5 376 302 –19.9 353 321 –9.2

Calexico East, CA 210 254 20.7 237 223 –5.9 254 229 –9.9 279 271 –2.7 321 315 –1.8

Total, top 

10 ports 6,611 7,018 6.2 6,393 5,117 –19.9 6,509 5,035 –22.6 6,364 5,234 –17.7 6,643 5,906 –11.1

Total, all U.S.-

Mexico ports 7,786 8,268 6.2 7,564 6,141 –18.8 7,701 6,013 –21.9 7,560 6,330 –16.3 7,940 7,243 –8.8

U.S.-CANADA BORDER

Detroit, MI 782 781 –0.1 707 469 –33.6 721 435 –39.7 667 478 –28.3 602 513 –14.8

BuffaloNiagara, NY 954 973 2.0 722 547 –24.2 663 513 –22.6 527 490 –7.0 491 410 –16.6

Blaine,WA 355 358 0.7 312 191 –38.9 271 146 –45.9 249 164 –34.2 242 185 –23.4

Port Huron, MI 264 266 0.6 215 162 –24.7 206 145 –29.8 179 147 –17.8 152 147 –2.9

Calais, ME 154 153 –0.5 127 120 –5.5 120 46 –62.2 108 67 –38.2 109 72 –34.2

Massena, NY 101 114 13.6 95 86 –9.9 93 83 –10.6 86 84 –2.3 83 86 3.6

Sault 

Ste. Marie, MI 134 131 –2.6 121 90 –25.4 106 75 –28.9 85 72 –14.9 85 75 –12.3

ChamplainRouses Pt., NY 128 146 14.1 91 93 2.3 82 70 –13.9 66 64 –4.1 59 64 8.8

Point Roberts,WA 94 89 –5.3 76 54 –29.4 83 44 –46.3 56 42 –25.5 54 45 –16.5

Sumas,WA 95 92 –3.6 78 62 –20.7 69 52 –24.7 55 42 –23.7 54 44 –17.8

Total, top 

10 ports 3,061 3,103 1.4 2,544 1,874 –26.3 2,413 1,609 –33.3 2,078 1,649 –20.6 1,930 1,641 –15.0

Total, all U.S.-

Canada ports 4,094 4,150 1.4 3,375 2,572 –23.8 3,140 2,223 –29.2 2,679 2,180 –18.6 2,493 2,172 –12.8

Total U.S.-Mexico 

and U.S.-Canada 11,880 12,418 4.5 10,940 8,714 –20.3 10,840 8,236 –24.0 10,239 8,511 –16.9 10,433 9,416 –9.7
ings at the top 10 land ports for each border for August through

December, in both 2000 and 2001. In September 2001, the number of personal vehicles entering the United States from Canada

and Mexico was 20 percent less than in September 2000. The

decline continued in October 2001 with a decrease of 24 percent over 2000 levels. However, in November and December

2001, the declines were 17 percent and 10 percent, respectively,

compared with 2000. At some of the busiest ports, the decrease

was even greater. For example, El Paso reported a reduction of

about 25 percent in September 2001 and 30 percent in October

2001, when compared with 2000 figures for those same

months. On the northern border, Detroit and Blaine, Washington, experienced even greater reductions. In September 2001,

the number of personal vehicle crossings dropped 34 percent in

Detroit and 39 percent in

Blaine compared with

September 2000. This

slide continued in October

2001 with declines of 40

percent and 46 percent,

respectively.

Figure 6 compares

patterns in crossing volumes at the busiest

northern and southern

land ports during 2001.

The data show a consistent and notable drop in

personal vehicle border

crossings starting in

September, and this drop

was more pronounced

on the northern border

where personal vehicles

crossings at the top 10

ports were up just over 1

percent in August before

dropping 26 percent in

September and 33 percent

in October (table 9). In

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 19 <

Figure 6

Top 5 Border Ports for Personal Vehicle Crossings

from Canada and Mexico: 2001

Thousands of personal vehicle crossings 1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

 September 

0

October

November

December

El Paso, TX

San Ysidro, CA

Detroit, MI

Brownsville, TX

Buffalo-Niagara, NY

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, special tabulation, February 2002; based on U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Customs Service, Office of

Field Operations, Operations Management Database CD.
comparison, the top 10 southern ports saw crossings increase 6

percent in August 2001 compared with August 2000. 

Overall, personal vehicle crossings on the southern border

dropped 19 percent in September 2001 and 22 percent in October

2001 when compared with the same months in 2000. In December

2001, however, the decline was less severe on the U.S.-Mexican

border, about 9 percent, and on the U.S.-Canadian border the

drop was 13 percent compared with December 2000. Even

though the decline was less severe in December 2001 than in the

previous three months of 2001, the annual 2001 entries for personal vehicles were down when compared with 2000 totals.

Overseas Travel Trends 

Fueled by cheaper airfares and a strong global economy, overseas travel volumes to and from the United States grew across

the board in the 1990s, especially in the last half of the

decade.12 Between 1990 and 2000, U.S. international overseas

travel grew from 31 million trips to 53 million, an increase of

70 percent (table 1). Europe13 is the top origin and destination

for U.S. overseas travel, accounting for 25 million trips in 2000,

an increase of 70 percent between 1990 and 2000. However,

other regions experienced faster growth during this period. For

example, trips between the United States and South America

increased from 2 million in 1990 to 5 million in 2000, or 125

percent. At the same time, travel between Asia and the United

States grew 81 percent from 7 million trips to just over 12

million trips.14

U.S. and international airports serve as key gateways for

much of this overseas travel15 (table 10). In 2000, the top 20

> 20 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

12 This section reviews trends in travel between the United States and overseas countries, for

trips of one day or more (overnight). Overnight travel to and from Canada and Mexico is not

specifically addressed here, but is examined in the earlier section on North American overnight

travel.

13 Includes countries of Western and Eastern Europe.

14 Strong growth regions like Asia and South America are offset by moderate growth regions

that have higher volumes of trips, resulting in a rise of 70 percent overall for U.S. overnight

travel between 1990 and 2000. 

15 International aviation airport pair, passenger, and departure information is derived from the

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, Segment T-100 and T-100F data. T-100F data cover foreign carriers operating in the

United States. The T-100 and T-100F segment data include all traffic arriving at and departing

from U.S. airports on nonstop commercial international flights. These data represent only nonstop service. Air carriers that operate aircraft with 60 seats or less are not required to file T-100

data (T-100F for foreign carriers).
U.S. gateway airports accounted for 90 percent of nonstop

international air travel to and from the United States. John F.

Kennedy (JFK) airport in New York served the highest number

of international passengers16 in 2000, 18.4 million (figure 7).

Other important U.S. gateways are Los Angeles, Miami, and

Chicago, each handling more then 10 million international

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 21 <

Table 10

Top 20 U.S. Gateways for Nonstop International Air Travel: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Thousands of international passengers1)

Percentage Annual Rank in Gateway change, growth rate

2000 airport 1990 1995 2000 1990–2000 (percent)

1 New York Kennedy 16,144 16,266 18,444 14.3 1.3

2 Los Angeles 9,010 12,994 17,116 90.0 6.6

3 Miami 9,873 14,182 16,629 68.4 5.4

4 Chicago O'Hare 4,777 6,561 10,185 113.2 7.9

5 Newark 2,371 3,695 8,794 270.9 14.0

6 San Francisco 3,979 5,605 7,846 97.2 7.0

7 Atlanta Hartsfield 1,840 3,165 6,114 232.2 12.8

8 Houston 2,195 2,734 5,357 144.0 9.3

9 Honolulu 5,743 6,003 5,126 –10.7 –1.1

10 Dallas-Ft.Worth 2,675 3,337 4,812 79.9 6.0

11 Boston Logan 3,030 3,045 4,058 33.9 3.0

12 Detroit 1,460 2,772 3,929 169.1 10.4

13 Washington Dulles 1,260 2,624 3,896 209.2 11.9

14 Minneapolis-St. Paul 755 1,368 2,875 280.6 14.3

15 Guam Island 1,353 2,182 2,841 110.0 7.7

16 Philadelphia 775 1,119 2,554 229.7 12.7

17 San Juan 2,029 2,224 2,501 23.3 2.1

18 Orlando 1,327 2,010 2,354 77.4 5.9

19 Seattle 1,760 1,529 2,202 25.2 2.3

20 New York LaGuardia 1,456 1,284 1,315 –9.7 –1.0

Total, top 20 U.S.

international 

airports 73,811 94,699 128,948 74.7 5.7

Top 20, percentage 

of total 87.0 89.7 89.8 

Total, all U.S.

international

airports 84,864 105,572 143,537 69.1 5.4

1 International passengers are residents of any country traveling

nonstop to and from the United States on U.S. and foreign

carriers.

NOTE: These data are from the T-100 and T-100F forms, which

measure all traffic arriving at and departing from U.S. airports on

nonstop commercial international flights with 60 seats or more.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of

Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, Segment

T-100 data, 2001.

16 International passengers are residents of any country traveling nonstop to and from the 

United States on U.S. and foreign carriers that operate aircraft with 60 seats or more.
passengers (see box 2, pages 39–41). Passenger traffic at other

U.S. gateway airports increased noticeably during the 1990s.

Minneapolis, Newark, and Atlanta grew the fastest in terms of

international passengers. Honolulu and New York LaGuardia

were the only gateways where international traffic decreased

between 1990 and 2000. 

Travelers arriving and departing from U.S. gateways are

transported along major international routes linked by airport

pairs (table 11). New York JFK-London Heathrow ranked first

in bidirectional international air traffic, accounting for approximately 2.9 million bidirectional passengers in 2000. Heathrow

> 22 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Figure 7

Top 20 U.S. Gateways for Nonstop Bidirectional 

International Air Travel: 1990 and 2000

Dallas-Ft. Worth

New York JFK

New York 

LaGuardia

Los Angeles

San Francisco

Seattle

Houston

Miami

Orlando

Atlanta

Newark Boston

Washington Dulles

Philadelphia

Honolulu

San Juan

Guam

Minneapolis-St. Paul

Chicago O'Hare

Detroit

—20 million

—5 million

—10 million

1990 2000

International

enplanements

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, Segment T-100 and T-100F data.
also ranked fourth, fifth, eighth, and ninth with Los Angeles,

Chicago O’Hare, San Francisco, and Washington Dulles, respectively, due in large part to its role as a transatlantic transfer

point. Another U.S.-Europe pair, New York JFK-Paris Charles

de Gaulle ranked seventh in 2000. The top U.S.-Asian airport

pairs included Honolulu-Tokyo Narita, Los Angeles-Tokyo

Narita, and Los Angeles-Taipei. 

Several airport pairs experienced notable annual growth

rates during the 1990s, including: Los Angeles-London

Heathrow, Chicago O’Hare-London Heathrow, Los AngelesTaipei, San Francisco-London Heathrow, Detroit-Amsterdam,

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 23 <

Table 11

Top 20 Routes for U.S. International Airport 

Pair Passengers: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Thousands of international passengers1)

Percentage Annual

Rank in change, growth rate

2000 U.S. airport Foreign airport 1990 1995 2000 1990–2000 (percent)

1 New York JFK London Heathrow 2,084 2,101 2,870 37.7 3.3

2 Honolulu Tokyo 2,107 2,284 1,805 –14.3 –1.5

3 Los Angeles Tokyo 1,533 1,553 1,720 12.1 1.2

4 Los Angeles London Heathrow 588 1,134 1,597 171.5 10.5

5 Chicago O'Hare London Heathrow 433 681 1,466 239.0 13.0

6 Los Angeles Taipei 258 972 1,141 342.2 16.0

7 New York JFK Paris De Gaulle 1,033 623 1,042 0.9 0.1

8 San Francisco London Heathrow 352 790 1,037 194.9 11.4

9 Washington Dulles London Heathrow 420 655 1,018 142.2 9.2

10 Chicago O'Hare Toronto 940 1,025 984 4.8 0.5

11 New York JFK Frankfurt 1,056 813 940 –11.0 –1.2

12 Detroit Amsterdam 7 365 925 2

13,185.9 63.1

13 Guam Island Tokyo 748 677 908 21.4 2.0

14 Los Angeles Mexico City 783 781 906 15.7 1.5

15 Los Angeles Sydney 366 644 905 147.2 9.5

16 San Francisco Tokyo 965 832 897 –7.1 –0.7

17 New York LaGuardia Toronto 809 778 873 7.9 0.8

18 Orlando London Gatwick 232 673 871 274.7 14.1

19 Los Angeles Seoul 470 714 864 83.8 6.3

20 Boston Logan London Heathrow 407 506 860 111.5 7.8

Total, top 20 routes 15,591 18,602 23,629 51.6 4.2

Total U.S. international passengers 84,864 105,572 143,537 69.1 5.4

1 International passengers are residents of any country traveling

nonstop to and from the United States on U.S. and foreign

carriers that operate aircraft with 60 seats or more.

2 Detroit to Amsterdam: This exceptional growth rate is due to a

new alliance between Northwest amd KLM beginning in 1990.

NOTE: Data measure nonstop air carrier service. The actual final

destination or origin of a passenger may differ from the airport,

because the airports may represent transfer points rather than

the traveler's final destination.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, Segment T-100

and T-100F data, 2001.
and Orlando-London Gatwick. Of these airport pairs, DetroitAmsterdam experienced the greatest rate of growth by far. Traffic increased from about 7,000 international passengers in 1990

to over 900,000 in 2000, for an average annual growth rate of

63 percent during this period. This high growth rate is the result

of an airline alliance between Northwest and KLM. Over 60

percent of the traffic on the Detroit-Amsterdam flights does not

originate in either Detroit or Amsterdam. There are numerous

spoke cities connecting to each of these hubs. By linking the

hubs, the alliance created 16,240 connecting opportunities

under a single code in the airlines’ reservations systems (Airlines

Gate 2002). Amsterdam is just one example of a foreign gateway airport that experienced steady increases in the number of

international passengers it served through the 1990s. Figure 8

shows the geographic location of the top 20 foreign gateways

around the world for international travel to and from the United

States and the traffic increases over the last decade. 

Outbound Overseas Travel 

U.S. outbound overseas travel expanded consistently during the

1990s. In 2000, U.S. residents made more overseas trips than

ever before, almost 27 million (table 2). Spurred by solid U.S.

economic performance for most of the 1990s, American overseas visits grew at an annual rate of 5.3 percent between 1990

and 2000. During the 1990s, U.S. business and vacation travelers, keen on lower airfares and the expansion of their economic

and leisure activities, increased their travel to all regions worldwide. Europe was the top destination for U.S. travelers in 2000,

accounting for just over 13 million trips, up 66 percent from 8

million in 1990. During this same period, U.S. outbound travel

to Asia, South America, and the Middle East grew by 93 percent,

130 percent, and 159 percent, respectively.

Although travel grew consistently during the 1990s, U.S.

outbound overseas travel began to change in 2001. During the

first six months of 2001, outbound overseas travel increased

slightly when compared with 2000 levels. However, U.S. outbound overseas travel fell from 2000 levels by 30 percent in

September 2001 and 28 percent in October 2001. Regionally,

U.S. outbound travel decreased the most to the Middle East,

falling 39 percent in September and 42 percent in October. The

> 24 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends
two most visited regions by U.S. residents (Europe and Asia) also

experienced major declines in the number of trips following

September 11. After modest growth in U.S. outbound trips

destined for Europe and Asia in 2001 leading up to September,

trips to these regions declined by 32 percent and 25 percent,

respectively, in September compared with 2000. For European

trips, the decline continued in October, falling to 35 percent

below 2000 levels. 

Prior to September 11, U.S. travel to less traditional destinations was becoming more frequent. Countries such as China

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 25 <

Nassau, Bahamas

Cancun, Mexico

Montego Bay, Jamaica

Sao Paulo, Brazil

Paris, France Vancouver, Canada

Toronto, Canada Montreal, Canada

Guadalajara, Mexico

Tokyo, Japan

Osaka, Japan

Taipei, Taiwan

 10 million

 5 million

2.5 million

1990 2000

Number of 

international 

passengers

London, England (Heathrow)

London, England (Gatwick)

Mexico City, Mexico

Santo Domingo,

Dominican Republic

Zurich, Switzerland

Frankfurt, Germany

Seoul, South Korea

Amsterdam, Netherlands

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, Segment T-100 and T-100F data.

Figure 8

Top 20 Foreign Gateways for Nonstop Bidirectional 

Air Travel with the United States: 1990 and 2000
(including Hong Kong), Brazil, India, Turkey, and Poland saw

travel from the United States more than double between 1990

and 2000 (table 12). Many of the countries with the sharpest

growth rates were in Asia, in part prompted by the more active

promotion of tourism by government agencies in those countries, the expansion of the scope of U.S. international business

activities, and visits to friends and family by members of immigrant communities.

South American countries also drew increasingly large

numbers of U.S. resident visitors during the 1990s. Trips to

Brazil rose by 357 percent for the decade, placing the country

among the top 20 visited by U.S. residents. Argentina and Chile,

also ranking among the high-growth South American countries,

more than doubled their number of U.S. resident visits between

1990 and 2000. In 1990, U.S. residents chose Columbia and

Venezuela for the most trips to South America, but trip growth

to these countries has stagnated since that time. 

Although Eastern Europe accounted for only 1 percent of

all U.S. resident outbound international travel in 2000, travel to

that region increased over 150 percent from 1990 to 2000.

With the fall of communism and the relaxation of travel restrictions, U.S. residents began to frequent destinations in such

countries as Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Russia.

In 2000, Poland and the Czech Republic were the top Eastern

European destinations with just over a half million U.S. visits,

combined. Poland was also the fastest growing Eastern European destination, showing a 460 percent increase in U.S. visits

between 1990 and 2000.

Inbound Overseas Travel 

Throughout the 1990s, the number of overseas visitors to the

United States grew steadily. In 2000, overseas visitors to the

United States made 26 million overnight trips (excluding Canada

and Mexico), an increase of 73 percent from 1990 (table 2).

European and Asian arrivals accounted for a large share of

overseas trip growth to the United States during the past

decade. The two regions, whose residents made 11.6 million

and 7.6 million U.S. visits, respectively, accounted for almost

three-quarters of all overseas trips to the U.S. in 2000. 

> 26 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends
International Travel and Transportation Trends > 27 <

Table 12

Top 40 Foreign Countries Visited by U.S. Residents 

for Overnight Travel: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Thousands of trips)

Percentage Annual

Rank in change, growth rate

2000 Country 1990 1995 2000 1990–2000 (percent)

Total, all countries1 44,625 50,837 60,816 36.3 3.1

1 Mexico 16,381 18,771 18,849 15.1 1.4

2 Canada 12,252 13,005 15,114 23.4 2.1

3 United Kingdom 2,943 2,821 4,189 42.3 3.6

4 France 1,681 1,849 2,927 74.1 5.7

5 Germany 1,877 1,601 2,309 23.0 2.1

6 Italy 1,166 1,429 2,148 84.2 6.3

7 China2 624 1,181 1,476 136.5 9.0

8 Spain 587 610 1,262 115.0 8.0

9 Japan 1,103 839 1,262 14.4 1.4

10 Netherlands 379 743 1,101 190.5 11.3

11 Switzerland 751 724 994 32.4 2.8

12 Bahamas 1,011 934 913 –9.7 –1.0

13 Jamaica 480 1,086 886 84.6 6.3

14 South Korea 541 591 779 44.0 3.7

15 Ireland NA 362 725 NA NA

16 Australia 445 496 698 56.9 4.6

17 Brazil 147 305 671 356.5 16.4

18 Republic of China (Taiwan) 306 515 671 119.3 8.2

19 Israel 270 286 618 128.9 8.6

20 Austria 543 476 564 3.9 0.4

21 Belgium 347 362 457 31.7 2.8

22 Greece 331 457 457 38.1 3.3

23 India 116 305 457 294.0 14.7

24 Philippines 209 496 457 118.7 8.1

25 Singapore 211 343 457 116.6 8.0

26 New Zealand 224 172 457 104.0 7.4

27 Argentina 109 191 376 245.0 13.2

28 Thailand 206 286 376 82.5 6.2

29 Bermuda 79 267 322 307.6 15.1

30 Peru 125 229 322 157.6 9.9

31 Turkey 96 286 322 235.4 12.9

32 Sweden 204 229 295 44.6 3.8

33 Portugal 192 210 269 40.1 3.4

34 Czech Republic NA 191 269 NA NA

35 Poland 48 210 269 460.4 18.8

36 Venezuela 287 267 269 –6.3 –0.6

37 Denmark 236 229 242 2.5 0.3

38 Colombia 244 362 242 –0.8 –0.1

39 Egypt 110 343 215 95.5 6.9

40 Chile 64 172 188 193.8 11.4

1 The aggregate figures for overnight trips differ from the sum of

trips to or from individual countries, because a single outbound

trip by a U.S. resident is counted once as an overnight trip but

can be attributed to multiple countries.

2 China includes Hong Kong.

KEY: NA = not available.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade

Administration, Office of Tourism Industries, “U.S. Resident Travel

to Canada, Mexico and Overseas Countries: Historical Visitation

Outbound,” available at http://tinet.ita.doc.gov, as of July 1, 2001.
However, rates of growth for visitors from less traditional

markets were generally greater during the 1990s as airfares

dropped and travel options increased, due, in part, to international aviation market and policy liberalization and alliancerelated efficiencies. Though ranked third for U.S. overseas

arrivals, South America generated nearly 3 million visits to the

U.S.—an 11 percent overseas share—in 2000, and grew faster

than European and Asian arrivals between 1990 and 2000,

with a 122 percent increase (USDOC ITA 2001b). Arrivals from

Central America, the Middle East, and Africa also saw increases

greater than 90 percent between 1990 and 2000. Yet, visits from

these three regions still only constituted a combined 7 percent

share of all U.S. overseas arrivals in 2000. Likewise, arrivals

from Eastern Europe grew 112 percent for the period, but are

nonetheless eclipsed by those from Western Europe at a ratio of

over 26 to 1. 

While overseas travel to the United States increased

during the 1990s, arrivals began to decrease in 2001 due in part

to the economic downturn in many countries, and then fell

appreciably following September 11. Between January and

August 2001, there were 4 percent fewer overseas arrivals to the

United States when compared with the same months in 2000

(USDOC ITA 2002b). Record level monthly declines of 29 percent, 34 percent, and 29 percent then followed in September,

October, and November 2001, respectively, compared with

monthly totals in 2000. Among the top overseas nations for

arrivals to the United States, Japan experienced the greatest U.S.

inbound travel decline from September to November 2001

(table 13). 

Prior to and after September 11, Canada and Mexico

were the top countries for overall inbound travel to the United

States (table 14). Japan accounted for the most inbound

overseas arrivals in 2000 (5.1 million), followed by the United

Kingdom (4.7 million) and Germany (1.8 million). As Japan’s

economy stagnated toward the close of the decade, the yen

weakened and, as a result, its arrivals grew at a slower rate than

those from the United Kingdom between 1990 and 2000. 

Economic conditions in many countries influenced travel

to the United States during the last decade. Visits from nations

such as South Korea, Venezuela, Argentina, and Colombia more

than doubled between 1990 and 2000. However, travel from

> 28 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends
these countries closely mirrored the economic growth of the

early 1990s, declined with the Asian and Latin American economic shocks of 1997 and 1998, and then rebounded along with

the global economic recovery at the end of the 1990s.17 The connection between national economic performance and international travel was most clearly shown in the case of South Korea.

Ranked only 19th in 1990, Koreans’ total overnight trips to the

United States grew at average annual rates exceeding 12 percent

between 1990 and 2000. As a result of the 1997 Asian financial

crisis, the Korean economy contracted and trips to the United

States decreased by 50 percent from 1997 to 1998. In 1999 and

2000, however, South Korea rebounded with strong economic

and travel growth. The net result was an overall 213 percent

increase in overnight trips to the United States from 1990 to

2000. 

Also notable is China’s 97 percent rise in visits to the United

States for the same period. Most of this growth is attributable to

increased visits from mainland Chinese as opposed to those from

Hong Kong. While arrivals to the United States from Hong

Kong grew by a modest 24 percent from 1990 to 2000, trips

made by mainland Chinese were up a remarkable 278 percent

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 29 <

Table 13

Top 10 Overseas Countries of Origin for Overnight Arrivals in the

United States: Percentage Decline for September, October, and 

November 2001

Monthly percentage change

Rank in September 2000 October 2000 November 2000

20001 Country and 2001 and 2001 and 2001

1 Japan –45 –62 –62

2 United Kingdom –27 –21 –25

3 Germany –46 –44 –36

4 France –34 –28 –18

5 Brazil –49 –65 –50

6 South Korea –20 –38 –25

7 Italy –40 –52 –51

8 Venezuela –21 –23 –3

9 Netherlands –41 –34 –30

10 Australia –36 –38 –31

1 Ranked by total number of arrivals.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of Tourism 

Industries, 2001 Monthly Tourism Statistics: 2001 Monthly Arrivals to the United States, available at

http://tinet.ita.doc.gov, as of Mar. 21, 2002.

17 Argentina also experienced trip growth stagnation in 1994 and 1995 due to its economic

troubles.
> 30 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

Table 14

Top 40 Countries of Origin for Overnight Arrivals

in the United States: 1990, 1995, and 2000

(Thousands of trips)

Percentage Annual

Rank in change, growth rate

2000 Country 1990 1995 2000 1990–2000 (percent)

1 Canada 17,263 14,662 14,594 –15.5 –1.7

2 Mexico 7,041 8,016 10,322 46.6 3.9

3 Japan 3,231 4,598 5,061 56.6 4.6

4 United Kingdom 2,244 2,888 4,703 109.6 7.7

5 Germany 1,203 1,848 1,786 48.5 4.0

6 France 716 922 1,087 51.8 4.3

7 Brazil 398 838 737 85.0 6.3

8 South Korea 211 592 662 213.3 12.1

9 Italy 396 525 612 54.7 4.5

10 Venezuela 264 511 577 118.1 8.1

11 Netherlands 284 408 553 94.7 6.9

12 Australia 466 424 540 15.9 1.5

13 Argentina 185 382 534 189.2 11.2

14 Taiwan 239 413 457 91.3 6.7

15 China1 229 387 453 97.3 7.0

16 Colombia 155 233 417 169.1 10.4

17 Switzerland 294 397 395 34.5 3.0

18 Spain 243 302 361 48.8 4.1

19 Israel 162 216 325 101.1 7.2

20 Sweden 282 219 322 14.1 1.3

21 Bahamas 324 281 294 –9.4 –1.0

22 Ireland 99 149 286 188.1 11.2

23 India 110 123 274 149.1 9.6

24 Belgium 138 206 250 81.0 6.1

25 Jamaica 187 196 243 29.8 2.6

26 Dominican Republic 175 176 197 12.9 1.2

27 Chile 69 152 192 180.3 10.9

28 Peru 115 127 192 67.5 5.3

29 Guatemala 111 131 186 67.7 5.3

30 El Salvador 56 82 185 231.0 12.7

31 Costa Rica 80 118 176 119.8 8.2

32 Austria 107 173 176 64.2 5.1

33 New Zealand 174 142 172 –1.1 –0.1

34 Philippines 98 110 168 70.9 5.5

35 Denmark 97 108 149 54.1 4.4

36 Norway 104 103 148 41.9 3.6

37 Trinidad & Tobago 95 82 138 45.7 3.8

38 Singapore 54 103 136 154.7 9.8

39 Ecuador 72 98 130 81.5 6.1

40 Poland 61 48 116 91.1 6.7

Total, top

40 countries 

of origin 37,830 41,491 48,306 27.7 2.5

Total, all 

overnight trips 39,363 43,317 50,891 29.3 2.6

1 China includes Hong Kong.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of Tourism Industries, “Arrivals to the U.S.

1990–2000,” available at http://tinet.ita.doc.gov, as of July 1, 2001.
International Travel and Transportation Trends > 31 <

for the same period. The ratio of visits by mainland Chinese to

the United States and Hong Kong travelers visiting the United

States was a 5 to 4 proportion in 2000 compared with 2 to 5 in

1990 (table 14). Many factors influenced increased Chinese

travel to the United States, including steady economic growth

within China and some relaxation of travel regulations. Both of

these helped spur more business and leisure visits to the United

States.

Among the approximately 26 million overseas visits made

to the United States in 2000, 15.9 million, or 61 percent, were

made by people who identified themselves as leisure travelers

while 7.8 million, or 30 percent, described themselves as business travelers.18 Yet, when asked specifically about their main

trip purpose, the same overseas travelers to the U.S. cited leisure

and recreation 46 percent of the time and business 26 percent of

the time. Secondary reasons for visiting the United States

included visiting friends and relatives (33 percent), convention

attendance (9 percent), and study or teaching (4 percent). 

Once foreign travelers enter the United States, they require

transportation for a variety of purposes. Since the average overseas traveler visits at least two U.S. destinations and one-third of

all overseas travelers visit two or more U.S. states, transportation

between destinations is a priority (USDOC ITA 2001a). Transportation choices and services are issues confronting both international and domestic passengers at U.S. airports. As an

illustration of overseas travelers’ need for medium- to long-distance transportation options, a number of U.S. cities and their

airports serve as ports of entry but not necessarily visitors’ final

destinations. For example, while 6 percent of overseas visitors to

the United States in 2000 cited Newark, New Jersey, as their

port of entry, only 1 percent listed Newark as a destination. On

the other end of the spectrum, 6 percent of overseas visitors in

2000 entered the United States in San Francisco, but nearly 11

percent of these travelers characterized San Francisco as a

destination (USDOC ITA 2001a). 

In making trips to and from airports, as well as completing

intracity travel and longer distance movements between U.S.

cities, overseas visitors used a variety of travel modes in 2000.

Of the approximately 26 million overseas visitors to the United

18 These estimates are based on survey data. Trip purpose will not sum to 100 because the

survey allowed travelers to report more than one purpose or no trip purpose at all (see USDOC

ITA 2001a).
States in 2000, approximately 41 percent took taxis, 33 percent

drove or rode along in a rented automobile, and another 26 percent used a company or private car. For other transportation

modes, 29 percent of overseas visitors flew within the United

States, 20 percent used an urban subway, 10 percent boarded

intercity buses, and 9 percent rode on intercity rail service in

2000 (USDOC ITA 2001a). As compared with all overseas travelers, business travelers were more likely to fly and drive while

vacationers and people visiting friends and family took advantage of buses, subways, and trains more often.

Aviation in Focus 

In 2000, air travel between the United States and foreign countries reached record levels. Between 1990 and 2000, the total

number of nonstop passenger trips made by air between the

United States and foreign countries increased by 69 percent

from 85 million to 144 million (table 11). During this period,

international enplanements19on U.S. air carriers rose by 29 percent (USDOT BTS 1999; USDOT BTS OAI 2002). Not only did

more passengers board international flights on U.S. carriers

toward the end of the decade, but they also tended to journey to

more distant destinations. International revenue passengermiles20 flown on U.S. carriers also increased from 124 billion in

1990 to 190 billion in 2000, a 52 percent increase in total distance, outpacing the growth in the number of enplanements

(USDOT BTS OAI 2001a). 

Such strong growth in international air travel was already

beginning to slow in early 2001, and a downturn ensued following September 11, 2001. International revenue-passenger

miles on U.S. carriers fell by 29 percent in September 2001 and

37 percent in October 2001, when compared with September

and October 2000. International enplanements also declined by

similar amounts—27 and 32 percent less compared with the

same months in 2000. 

> 32 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

19 Revenue passenger enplanements are the total number of passengers boarding aircraft,

including both originating and connecting passengers.

20 A revenue passenger-mile is defined as one revenue passenger transported one mile. A revenue

passenger is defined as a person receiving air transportation from an air carrier for which the

carrier received remuneration. Air carrier employees or others receiving air transportation

(including infants) against whom token service charges are levied are considered nonrevenue

passengers.
These large declines in revenue-passenger miles and

enplanements reflect the drop in departures and load factors21

that followed the September 2001 terrorist attacks. After

increasing during the first half of 2001, international departures

by U.S. carriers decreased by 18 percent in September 2001 and

10 percent in October 2001 when compared with 2000 levels.

Such declines were due to the closure of all the major gateway

airports for several days and the reduction in airline service and

schedules once they were reopened. In addition to the reduced

international departures, international load factors dropped.

U.S. commercial air carriers filled only 57 percent of their available international seat-miles22 in October 2001 compared with

75 percent in October 2000.

Factors of Growth 

Several factors contributed to the tremendous growth in U.S.

international air travel that occurred through 2000 including:

aviation industry deregulation and privatization, global alliance

formation among air carriers, strong economic growth, and

increasing trade during the 1990s.

Changes in global aviation began in 1970s when U.S.

airlines were deregulated.23 At the same time, the international

system remained tightly regulated, with many international

carriers under the control of national governments. In such an

environment, flying between countries was governed by bilateral

agreements that were often restrictive on a number of levels,

including the destinations served, the airlines and services

available, and the prices charged. While the basic framework of

bilateral agreements remains in place, in recent years, the U.S.

government has advocated “Open Skies” agreements that are

aimed at increasing competition, lowering fares, and improving

service.

The United States signed the first Open Skies agreement

with the Netherlands in 1992, and more recently, signed an

agreement with France in January 2002. Open Skies agreements

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 33 <

21 Revenue passenger load factor is defined as revenue passenger-miles as a percent of available

seat-miles in revenue passenger services. The term is used to represent the proportion of aircraft

seating capacity that is actually sold and utilized.

22 Available seat-miles are defined as the aircraft-miles flown in each interairport hop multiplied

by the number of seats available on that hop for revenue passenger service.

23 U.S. airlines were deregulated following the passage of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978.
permit unrestricted international air service between participating

countries, allowing each country’s airlines to fly between any city

in its home country and any city in participating countries. In

total, the United States is a signatory to 56 Open Skies agreements that are designed to afford carriers improved operating

flexibility and service expansion. The agreements also facilitate

the scheduling of connecting flights, greater capacity in specific

gate-to-gate markets, and potentially lower prices due to

increased flight options. A U.S. Department of Transportation

(USDOT) study of the effect of airline deregulation on the U.S.

transatlantic market found that average airfares from the United

States to Open Skies markets fell more steeply than did ticket

prices to non-Open Skies countries (USDOT OST 2000, p. 2).

The decline was even greater for Open Skies fares to connecting

markets beyond European gateways, such as those in Asia,

Africa, and the Middle East. 

While the U.S. government has advocated a liberalization

of the international aviation industry for the past several

decades, U.S. and international air carriers have entered into

global business alliances as part of their strategies to compete in

the global market. These alliances have allowed carriers to

overcome national ownership rules and restrictions on travel

routes. These arrangements between air carriers often include

route access and marketing provisions such as code-sharing24

and joint frequent-flier miles programs. They have also extended

to more intense cooperation and business integration in the

form of shared facilities and aircraft, as well as maintenance

agreements. 

Carrier alliances also have increased service and

scheduling options for both small and large markets. USDOT

examined global aviation alliances and found a marked increase

in service to and from smaller markets and decreased fares on

routes that included alliance gateways (USDOT OST 2000, p. 8).

The report found that the number of markets and city-pairs

served by alliances has increased greatly, offering more choices

and travel flexibility for customers. For example, the Northwest/KLM alliance served 7,300 city-pairs worldwide in the

third quarter of 1999 as compared with 1,400 city-pairs in the

third quarter of 1992. The United/Lufthansa alliance increased

> 34 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

24 Code-sharing is a common industry practice where one airline offers services in its own name

for a particular city-pair, but some, or all, of the transportation is provided by another carrier.
the number of city-pairs served from roughly 1,700 in the third

quarter of 1992 to nearly 3,900 in the third quarter of 1999.

In a regional context, passenger traffic between the United

States alliance gateways and the Far East, Middle East, and

Africa has increased at an even greater pace than that to European destinations, which were already fairly well-serviced before

the formation of the carrier alliances. As a result of the

increased service and traffic to these regions, fares dropped

during the 1990s for many alliance gateways. The greatest

impact for air travel between the United States and Europe from

alliance formation has been on routes involving small cities on

both sides of the Atlantic. Some examples include the

Birmingham, Alabama gateway, from which bidirectional traffic

with small European cities increased by 99 percent from 1995

to 1999 while fares dropped an average 34 percent, and the

Sioux Falls, South Dakota airport, from which traffic with

small European cities grew by 117 percent and fares fell by 33

percent between 1995 and 1999 (USDOT OST 2000, pp.

13–14). 

Technological exchange has also

been a feature of some of the global carrier alliances and has helped to improve

service and market shares for many

carriers. Innovations in computer seatdemand modeling and internet bookings helped carriers to optimize their

international revenue passenger load

factors, a measure of occupied seating

capacity, from 69 percent in 1990 to

76 percent in 2000 (figure 9). 

In addition to aviation deregulation and air carrier alliances, strong

global economic growth helped spur

increasing volumes of international

passengers in the 1990s. From 1990 to

2000, the global economy grew by an

annual average of 3.4 percent compared with 5.5 percent for the United

States (both in current dollars) (IMF

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 35 <

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

0.62

0.64

0.66

0.68

0.70

0.72

0.74

0.76

0.78

Passenger-miles/

total seat-miles

Figure 9

Annual Load Factors for U.S. Carrier

International Flights: 1990–2000

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation

Statistics, Office of Airline Information, "Airline Industry Traffic Statistics," special tabulation, Aug. 10, 2001.
2001b). As has historically held

true, international travel increased

in line with global economic

growth. Between 1997 and 2000,

U.S. gross domestic product grew

at an even faster average annual

rate—5.9 percent—compared with

1.9 percent for the world (IMF

2001a, 2001b). This coincided

with years of aviation liberalization25 and the time when the benefits of new global alliances were

taking hold. U.S. international air

travel volumes increased, as travelers with greater disposable income

took advantage of improved flight

options and lower fares (figure 10).

Aviation Security 

In the aftermath of the terrorist

attacks of September 11, 2001, aviation issues such as airport capacity

shortfalls, congestion, and liberalization—closely-related to large

travel volumes—have taken a back seat to security concerns. When

commercial flights resumed a few days after the attacks, there were

noticeable changes in security procedures at U.S. airports. Airport

screeners more frequently check bags by hand for explosives and

weapons. (The list of objects that are prohibited for carry on

because of their potential use as weapons has expanded to include,

e.g., small knives, metal nail files, and corkscrews.) Similarly,

screening has become a stricter process, in which laptops and other

electronic devices must be removed from their cases before going

through metal detectors. In addition, passengers are required to

show legal forms of photo identification several times before takeoff—at check-in, at the screening area, and finally, at the gate before

boarding. Furthermore, at the gate, passengers may be pulled aside

for another search, either at random or on the basis of suspicion. 

> 36 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

160

150

140

130

120

110

100

90

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

Index: 1990 = 100

International RPMs

Domestic RPMs

GDP

Figure 10

U.S. GDP and Aviation Revenue 

Passenger-Miles: 1990–2000

KEY: GDP = gross domestic product; RPMs = revenue passenger-miles.

SOURCES: RPMs—U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, "Airline Industry Traffic Statistics," special tabulation, Aug. 10, 2001.

GDP—U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, "GDP

Historical Data, 1929–2000," available at http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/

dn1.htm, as of Aug. 22, 2001.

25 Of the 56 total U.S. bilateral Open Skies agreements, 43 have been entered into since 1997.
The present state of heightened security has essentially

created a new environment of travel time, forcing passengers

not only to count the total duration of delays and cancellations

as possible inconveniences to their travel plans, but also to

reserve ample time to clear security before each flight. 

On November 19, 2001, President George W. Bush signed

into law the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (Public

Law 107-71). This act created the Transportation Security

Administration (TSA) within USDOT that is intended to provide

the nation’s airports with federal screeners by November 19,

2002.26 In addition, federal security directors, representing TSA,

are being assigned to the nation’s 429 major airports to ensure

consistency in security standards and to oversee enforcement of

procedures. The Aviation and Transportation Security Act also

requires that sky marshals be onboard some U.S. flights,27

requires cockpit doors to be strengthened, and mandates that all

checked baggage be screened by explosive detection devices no

later than December 31, 2002.28 Until that date, all checked baggage must be inspected by other means, such as X-ray or by

hand, or be subject to passenger matching (i.e., baggage may

not be loaded on the plane unless it is confirmed that its owner

is also on board.) 

Conclusion: The Future Environment 

of U.S. International Travel and

Transportation 

Spurred by an expanding global economy, increasing disposable

incomes, and growing travel and transportation services, international travel to and from the United States rose notably in the

last decade. At the same time, changes occurred that affected

both the demand for international travel and the supply of

transportation services that enabled these flows. As this growth

occurred, dominant gateways on the U.S.-Canadian and U.S.-

International Travel and Transportation Trends > 37 <

26 The Act requires that all air carriers and commercial charter operators providing scheduled

and charter services and enplaning passengers from the United States must have security programs that meet the established requirements. See Public Law 107-71 for details. 

27 Public Law 107-71 mandates their deployment on every passenger flight deemed a “high

security risk” by the Secretary of Transportation (e.g., all flights to and from Washington, DC,

Reagan National Airport). Marshals may or may not be present on other passenger flights.

28 The Act also assigns TSA the duty of coordinating the security of the other transportation

modes.
Mexican borders (Detroit, Buffalo, San Diego (San Ysidro) and

El Paso) became key infrastructure points for North American

passenger flows. Similarly, leading U.S. airports, such as New

York JFK, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Chicago O’Hare, and Miami,

served as critical points of entry for international passengers

arriving and departing by air. These gateways and their surrounding infrastructure all experienced significant growth in

recent years.

The September 11 attacks dramatically affected the United

States on many levels, including our transportation system and

services, and the effects will be felt for years to come. The travel

industry was one of the sectors where this impact was most pronounced, including the demand for international travel as well

as its provision by carriers and other service providers. Consequently, several questions will guide thinking about international travel and transportation in the near term: Will past growth

rates continue or will they level off? Will patterns of international travel continue or will there be regional and country

changes? How will the new security environment and concerns

affect demand for international travel? How will the aviation

sector respond to these market changes, and how will these

affect planning for other transportation services? 

The answers to all of these questions are, as of yet,

uncertain. However, they will require careful monitoring and

assessment, particularly in light of expected changes to policy

and consumer demand. Although the level and nature of U.S.

international travel may change in ways unanticipated prior to

September 11, it is clear that pressure on border and gateway

infrastructure as well as inland transportation systems will

continue, especially given new security concerns. Balancing the

efficient and effective flow of international travelers with these

necessary security requirements will have important implications

for transportation policies and planning in the short and long

term.

> 38 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends
International Travel and Transportation Trends > 39 <

Two of America’s top international gateways, the

John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) and the

Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), handled

over 35 million international inbound and outbound passengers in 2000. Nearly one in four U.S.

international trips passed through these two airports (see table on next page). Effectively addressing security threats while continuing to serve the

large number of passengers moving through these

and other U.S. international airports is one key

challenge.

JFK Airport

JFK (called Idlewild Airport until 1964) opened as

New York’s first international airport in 1948. Having

longer runways than LaGuardia airport, Idlewild

enabled propeller aircraft of those days to carry

enough fuel for transatlantic flights. In 1957, the airport added a terminal serving foreign-flag carriers

and handling international passengers arriving on

all airlines. Today, this newly renovated facility is a

huge complex with three gates that will be able to

handle the world’s largest civilian aircraft, called

“super-jumbos,” which will be in service in the next

several years. These aircraft are larger than the Boeing 767, have a travel range of 7,500 nautical miles,

and can carry 600 passengers on two decks.

During the past decade, international passenger

traffic at JFK grew at an average annual rate of 2

percent. In 2000, the airport handled on average

nearly 50,000 international passengers each day,

traveling on over 80 U.S. and foreign airlines from

more than 50 countries [1]. Four of the top 20 U.S.

international airport pair gateways involve JFK. In

2000, JFK-London Heathrow was the leading U.S.

international airport pair with over 2.9 million

passengers (see table 11). JFK-Paris, JFK-Frankfurt,

and JFK-Tokyo were the others.

Since 1995, JFK airport has offered U.S. frequent

travelers U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service

electronic identity verification cards (INSPASS) to

speed the massive flow of international passenger

traffic through the airport more efficiently.1 INSPASS

reduces the amount of time it takes to get through

immigration clearance by verifying identities electronically. Travelers insert their cards at the INSPASS

kiosk and place their hands on an electronic reader.

Their identity is automatically verified and they are

sent on their way to baggage claims and Customs.2

INSPASS can get travelers through immigration in as

little as 15 seconds compared with an average of up

to 5 minutes with an immigration inspector. Immediately after the September 11, 2001, terrorist

attacks, the INSPASS program was suspended but

has since been restored.

JFK’s ability to handle growing demand is based

primarily on its current airfield capacity (number

and placement of runways and taxiways, types of

navigational aid, and types of air traffic control and

facilities). Other factors such as airline scheduling,

aircraft performance, the mix of aircraft types,

weather, and runway closures affect how much of

the airport’s capacity can be used at a given time

and results in variability in capacity [2]. In 2000, JFK

had an hourly arrival rate of 56 flights (domestic

and international) and an hourly departure rate of

50 flights for a combined total of 82 flight operations per hour.3 The airport’s current capacity

benchmark is 88 to 89 flights per hour in good

weather and 71 flights per hour in adverse weather

conditions, including poor visibility, unfavorable

winds, and heavy precipitation. Variability in airport

capacity, when combined with the pattern of aircraft demand and scheduling, can result in airport

congestion, typically leading to the formation of

queues waiting for permission to land or takeoff.

Congestion eventually results in passenger delay.

On a typical day, when demand approaches or

exceeds capacity for extended periods of time, any

disruption can create persistent backlogs and

delays.

Continued growth in passenger traffic is expected

at JFK. In the near term, there are no plans for

constructing additional runways to increase the

physical airfield capacity. However, there are plans

to improve operational efficiency for both good and

adverse weather capacity by changing arrival and

departure procedures, deploying advanced

Box 2

Spotlight on Two of America’s International Air Gateways:

John F. Kennedy International and Los Angeles International

(Box 2 continued on next page)

1 Three other U.S. international and two Canadian airports

offer the INSPASS service: Los Angeles, Miami, San Francisco,

Toronto, and Vancouver.

2 INSPASS is currently free and available to citizens of the

United States, Canada, Bermuda, legal residents of the United

States, and Visa Waiver Pilot program countries who take at

least three international business trips per year.

3 Typically, total operations are less than the sum of hourly

arrival and departure rates. The difference reflects runway

configuration and use. While some runways allow more

arrivals and others allow more departures, total operations

reflect the number of arrivals and departures that can be

handled simultaneously.
> 40 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends

technology, and restructuring airspace to improve

and provide more efficient air routes.

In the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist

attacks, JFK has upgraded its security. Immediately

after the attacks, the airport enforced new procedures that permit only ticket holders past airport

security checkpoints. Since then, all passengers are

also required to check in and get boarding passes

before proceeding to the gates. Like other highvolume airports, security breaches are a significant

concern. Because of the heightened security alert, a

variety of situations ranging from forgotten purses

to unattended boxes and luggage have triggered

terminal closures for a number of hours. In November

2001, the airport closed for several hours after American Airlines Flight 587 from JFK to the Dominican

Republic crashed in Queens, New York. Initially, terrorism was suspected, but was later ruled out.

Los Angeles International Airport

The site of the Los Angeles International Airport

(originally known as Mines Field) has been used for

general aviation since 1928. Prior to the construction

of the municipal airport, pioneer aviators used part

of the site as a makeshift landing strip where the aircraft of that time landed and departed on rough

ground. Commercial airline service started in 1946

and the present terminal complex was constructed

in 1961. The airport added the Tom Bradley International Terminal in 1984. This 963,000 square foot terminal has 11 aircraft gates and 18 gates served by

buses that shuttle passengers from the terminal to

remote aircraft parking pads.

In 2000, LAX handled nearly 17 million international passengers, about 25 percent of the total

number of passengers using the airport. These international passengers traveled on U.S. airlines and over

50 foreign carriers between the United States and

more than 40 countries. During the past decade,

international passenger traffic through LAX has

grown at an average annual rate of over 7 percent

per year. Of the top 20 U.S. international airport pair

gateways, 6 included LAX in 2000. The leading gateway pair was LAX-Tokyo with 1.7 million international

passengers, followed by LAX-London Heathrow and

LAX-Taipei, Taiwan. LAX, like JFK, also offers the

INSPASS identification processing service to reduce

the time it takes travelers to go through immigration

clearance.

On average, there were about 81 departures and

83 arrivals per hour at LAX, for a combined total of

145 flight operations per hour in 2000. The airport’s

current capacity benchmark is 148 to 150 flights per

hour in good weather and about 127 per hour under

adverse conditions. Like JFK, LAX plans to use

improvements in landing and takeoff procedures

and deployment of advanced technology to increase

capacity, mitigate airport congestion, and reduce

passenger delays.

(Box 2 continued)

U.S. Nonstop International Air Passengers: Focus on JFK and LAX

(In thousands)

Percentage Annual

Rank in Gateway change, growth rate

2000 airport 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 1990–2000 (percent)

Total, all U.S.

international 

airports 84,864 89,875 98,598 113,269 125,360 143,537 69.1 5.4

1 New York JFK 16,144 14,404 15,154 16,697 17,201 18,444 14.3 1.3

2 Los Angeles LAX 9,010 10,543 12,365 14,020 14,933 17,116 90.0 6.6

New York JFK,

percentage 

of total 19.0 16.0 15.4 14.7 13.7 12.8

Los Angeles LAX,

percentage 

of total 10.6 11.7 12.5 12.4 11.9 11.9

NOTE: International passengers are residents of any country traveling nonstop to and from the United States on U.S. and foreign carriers

that operate aircaft with 60 seats or more. These data are from forms T-100 and T-100F, which measure all traffic arriving at and departing

from U.S. airports on nonstop commercial international flights with 60 seats or more.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, Segment T-100 and 

T-100F data, 2001.

(Box 2 continued on next page)
International Travel and Transportation Trends > 41 <

Following the September 11 attacks, LAX

enforced new procedures to fulfill the requirements

of the new Aviation and Transportation Security

Act.4 One of the key procedures requires that all

passengers pick up a paper ticket before proceeding to the security screening stations, because only

ticketed passengers are allowed past these points.

Also, all passengers must have a photo identification card. Immediately after the attacks, the airport

canceled curbside luggage check-in but has since

resumed it.

(Box 2 continued)

4 President George W. Bush signed this Act into law (Public

Law 107-71) on Nov. 19, 2001.

SOURCES

1. JFK International Airport website, available at http://

www.panynj.gov/aviation/jalmain.htm, as of Dec. 14, 2001.

2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, 2000 Aviation Capacity Enhancement Plan,December

2000, available at http://www.faa.gov/ ats/asc/00ACE.html, as

of Dec. 17, 2001.

References

Airlines Gate: The World of Commercial Aviation. 2002. Alliances Strategies.

Available at http://airlinesgate.free.fr/articles/alliances.htm, as of February

2002.

Banco de México, Dirección General de Investigación Económica, Dirección

de Medición Económica. 1999 and 2001.

International Monetary Fund (IMF). 2001a. Gross Domestic Product: All

Countries. World Economic Outlook (WEO) Database: October 2001.

Available at http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2001/02/data, as of

May 2002.

_____. 2001b. World Economic Outlook (WEO) Database: October 2001.

Gross Domestic Product: Selected World Aggregates. Available at http://

www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2001/02/data/, as of Oct. 4, 2001.

Statistics Canada. 1998 and 2000. Special tabulations. 

_____. Various years. International Travel: Travel Between Canada and

Other Countries (Touriscope), Catalogue No. 66-201-XPB. Ottawa,

Ontario, Canada. 

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), Bureau of Economic Analysis

(BEA). 2001. Survey of Current Business. July.

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), International Trade

Administration (ITA), Office of Tourism Industries. 2001a. Survey of

International Air Travelers (In-Flight Survey) Program. July.

_____. 2001b. U.S. Historical Inbound Arrival Statistics. Available at

http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/, as of July 1.
_____. 2001c. U.S. International Travel and Tourism Balance of Trade. July.

_____. 2001d. World Tourism Overview. Available at http://www.tia.org/

ivis/worldtourism.asp, as of Sept. 20, 2001. 

_____. 2002a. 2002 Monthly Tourism Statistics: 2002 Monthly Arrivals to

the United States. Available at http:// tinet.ita.doc.gov, as of March.

_____. 2002b. 2001 Monthly Tourism Statistics: 2001 Monthly Arrivals to

the United States. Available at http:// tinet.ita.doc.gov, as of March.

_____. 2002c. U.S. Citizen Air Traffic to Overseas Regions, Canada, and

Mexico, 2002 and 2001. Special tabulation. March 23.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Bureau of Transportation

Statistics (BTS). 1999. Air Carrier Profile. National Transportation

Statistics 1999. Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Bureau of Transportation

Statistics (BTS), Office of Airline Information (OAI). 2001a. Airline

Industry Traffic Statistics. Special tabulations.

_____. 2001b. T-100 Segment data.

_____. 2002. International Traffic Monthly by Quarter: 2000. Available at

http://www.bts.gov/oai/indicators/inttrafmon00q1_q4.html, as of Feb. 14,

2002.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Office of the Secretary of

Transportation (OST), Office of Aviation and International Affairs. 1998.

The Impact of the New U.S.-Canada Aviation Agreement at Its Third

Anniversary. February.

_____. 2000. Transatlantic Deregulation: The Alliance Network Effect.

Washington, DC. October.

> 42 < U.S. International Travel and Transportation Trends