Ugandan tourism faces a new test after the declaration of a global health emergency over Ebola
On 17 May 2026, the World Health Organization determined that the outbreak of Ebola disease caused by the Bundibugyo virus in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda constitutes a public health emergency of international concern. According to the WHO statement, this is a status that requires a coordinated international response, but the event currently does not meet the criteria for a pandemic emergency. That distinction is important both for public health services and for the tourism sector, because the risk assessment must not be reduced to the message that the entire region is closed or unsafe for any travel. Uganda is now facing a dual task: it must prevent the spread of infection and at the same time protect the tourism economy, which has only just recovered from years of disruption.
According to data published by WHO, by 16 May 2026, eight laboratory-confirmed cases, 246 suspected cases and 80 suspected deaths had been reported in Ituri Province in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In Uganda, two laboratory-confirmed cases were reported in Kampala on 15 and 16 May, including one fatal outcome, with WHO stating that these were people who had travelled from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The organization also warns of unusual clusters of deaths in the community, suspected cases in Ituri and North Kivu, and possible hospital transmission after the deaths of health workers. Because of uncertainty about the actual number of people infected and the geographical spread, health authorities must act as if the scale of the outbreak is larger than the officially confirmed figures.
Why this outbreak is particularly sensitive
Ebola is not a new threat in Uganda, but this time concern is increased by the combination of cross-border movement, an urban setting and the Bundibugyo strain. WHO states that, unlike disease caused by the Zaire strain, there are currently no approved specific therapies or vaccines against the Bundibugyo virus. This does not mean that the disease cannot be treated, but that the response must rely on early isolation, laboratory confirmation, intensive supportive care, contact tracing, protection of health workers and the trust of local communities. According to WHO, Ebola is transmitted through direct contact with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected persons, and through surfaces and materials contaminated with those fluids. A person infected with ebolavirus does not spread the disease before symptoms appear, and the incubation period can last from two to 21 days.
For the tourism sector, such epidemiological characteristics mean that the risk differs from the risk posed by respiratory diseases that spread easily among strangers in crowds. A traveller who has no contact with an ill person, bodily fluids, a risky healthcare environment or funeral rites does not have the same exposure profile as family members, health workers or people involved in caring for and transporting patients. Nevertheless, the mere fact that cases have been confirmed in the capital has a strong psychological and market effect. Tourism depends on the perception of safety, and in crises that perception often changes faster than official epidemiological assessments.
WHO does not recommend closing borders or general travel bans
The most important message for Uganda and the tourism industry is that WHO, in its statement, does not call for the closure of borders or the introduction of general restrictions on travel and trade. The organization explicitly states that countries should not close borders or introduce measures that exceed scientifically based recommendations, because such moves can encourage people to cross through informal border points, make surveillance more difficult and place an additional burden on local economies. WHO recommends that infected persons, suspected cases and contacts should not travel internationally, except under strictly controlled circumstances of medical evacuation. For affected countries, exit screening at international airports, ports and major land crossings is recommended, with a questionnaire, temperature measurement and assessment of unexplained febrile illness.
This is the framework within which Uganda can try to preserve travel that is not connected with areas of transmission, while significantly strengthening health measures. Travel agencies, airlines, hotels and safari organizers will have to communicate clearly that official recommendations concern risk management, not a complete suspension of tourism. At the same time, any downplaying of the problem could have the opposite effect. If travellers get the impression that the industry is concealing risk, trust may be damaged in the long term more than by temporary cancellations and itinerary changes.
Kampala as a signal for caution, but not proof of general spread
The confirmation of cases in Kampala is particularly sensitive because the capital is the country’s transport, business and administrative centre. According to WHO, the two confirmed cases in Uganda were reported within 24 hours and had no obvious link to each other, apart from the fact that the patients had travelled from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Such information does not automatically mean that there is widespread local transmission in Uganda, but it justifies the highest level of caution, rapid epidemiological investigation and transparent public information. For tourism, transparency is crucial: the market accepts short-term disruptions more easily if it receives clear and regular information about where the cases are, what measures have been introduced and which activities remain safe.
Uganda has experience with such situations. The WHO Regional Office for Africa recalls that on 26 April 2025 Uganda declared the end of the previous outbreak of disease caused by the Sudan virus after 42 days without new cases. That outbreak was confirmed on 30 January 2025 and, according to WHO, involved 14 cases, including two probable cases, and four deaths, including two probable deaths. During that response, coordination structures were activated, rapid teams were deployed, surveillance was strengthened, treatment units were established and measures at points of entry were reinforced. That experience is important now, but it does not automatically guarantee a rapid end to the new crisis, especially because of the different strain and the cross-border context.
Tourism is too economically important for Uganda for the response to be left to improvisation
According to data from Uganda’s Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife and Antiquities, Uganda recorded 1,371,895 international arrivals in 2024, an increase of 7.7 percent compared with the previous year and a recovery to 89.2 percent of the pre-pandemic level. The ministry states that tourism revenue in 2024 rose by 25.9 percent, to 1.28 billion US dollars. These figures show why the health crisis will also be carefully measured through its economic consequences. Tourism does not include only luxury travel and national parks, but also hotels, transport, guides, local suppliers, craftspeople, restaurants and small entrepreneurs who depend on visitor arrivals.
On the international market, Uganda relies on national parks, gorilla trekking in Bwindi Impenetrable Forest, adventure activities, the Nile, cultural heritage and promotion of the country as a nature and wildlife destination. If fear of Ebola spreads beyond the actual risk areas, parts of the tourism offer far from confirmed hotspots may also be affected. That is why the ability of the authorities to publish precise geographical and operational information will be crucial, as will the industry’s ability to flexibly adjust routes, cancellation terms and health protocols. The most damaging scenario for the sector would be an information vacuum in which travellers and tour operators fill the gaps themselves with speculation.
What tourism companies can do immediately
Tourism companies in Uganda can do the most in the first phase by standardizing communication. Hotels, agencies, carriers and guides should rely on data from the Ministry of Health, WHO and other official bodies, not on unverified posts on social media. Guests should be informed in advance about health measures, the availability of medical assistance, procedures in case of fever and rules for changes to travel plans. In crises, it is more useful to clearly acknowledge that the situation is developing than to give absolute guarantees that no one can credibly confirm.
The second important step concerns operational readiness. Accommodation facilities and travel organizers should train staff to recognize symptoms, avoid unprotected contact with bodily fluids, properly refer guests to health services and keep basic records that can help epidemiologists. This does not mean that hotels should take on the role of hospitals, but that they must know when and how to involve the competent services. Special attention should be paid to protecting workers, because health and service workers in crises are often exposed to greater pressure and misinformation than travellers themselves.
International tour operators will seek clear criteria
Major international tour operators, insurers and airlines generally do not react only to the number of cases, but also to the quality of the official response. For them, criteria such as the availability of reliable laboratory data, functional contact tracing, clear risk maps, stable hospital protocols, regular reports and alignment with WHO recommendations are important. If Uganda shows that it can quickly isolate cases linked to travel from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, trace contacts and prevent secondary transmission, part of the tourism market may retain planned trips with increased caution. If unexplained chains of transmission appear in urban areas or among health workers, the pressure for cancellations will be significantly greater.
For visitors, it is important to follow official recommendations before travel and during their stay. WHO advises countries to provide travellers to affected and at-risk areas with relevant information about risks, risk-reduction measures and what to do after possible exposure. In practice, this means that travellers should avoid contact with sick people and bodily fluids, not take part in risky funeral practices, immediately report symptoms and respect the instructions of health authorities. Travel insurance, flexible bookings and checking the conditions for entering or leaving the country become part of reasonable planning, not a sign of panic.
Uganda must balance health, trust and the economy
The most likely path for Ugandan tourism is not denial of the crisis, but precise risk management. The country will have to prove that it can carry out exit screening, quickly detect suspected cases, cooperate with Congo and international partners, and at the same time prevent unjustified stigmatization of the entire tourism product. WHO’s message that general travel bans should not be introduced gives the industry room to continue part of its activities, but that room depends on trust. Trust is built through regular data, consistent protocols and the recognition that the situation may change.
If the outbreak is limited to imported and quickly isolated cases, the consequences for tourism could be serious but time-limited. If wider local transmission is confirmed in Kampala or other transport hubs, the sector will face a longer period of cancellations, stricter assessments by insurers and more cautious traveller behaviour. In both scenarios, Uganda will have to act strictly in public health terms and communicate in a measured way. It is precisely that combination, more than promotional campaigns, that will determine whether tourism confidence can be preserved while the new fight against Ebola continues.
Sources:
- World Health Organization – statement of 17 May 2026 on the declaration of a public health emergency of international concern due to Ebola disease caused by the Bundibugyo virus in DR Congo and Uganda (link)
- WHO Regional Office for Africa – information on the symptoms, transmission, incubation and treatment of Ebola disease (link)
- WHO Regional Office for Africa – announcement on the end of the previous Ugandan Ebola outbreak in 2025 and response measures (link)
- WHO Regional Office for Africa – announcement on strengthening Uganda’s preparedness for Ebola, traveller surveillance and response planning (link)
- Uganda Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife and Antiquities – data on arrivals and tourism sector revenue in 2024 (link)