Altruism gone awry: voluntourism, a seemingly good-hearted form of volunteering, and the harmful impact it can have on local communities.
The World Tourism Organisation is meeting this week to debate voluntourism: a form of tourism in which the tourist participates in voluntary work as their form of sight-seeing.
Voluntary works include distributing supplies to the needy, building houses amongst other labour, and raising funds or donations. Voluntourism has become a prominent form of development in developing countries, as well as aiding redevelopment in countries after natural disasters.
Voluntourism missions to countries begin noble enough: distribute medical supplies in South Africa, help paint the walls of an orphanage in Sri Lanka, or help rebuild some homes in Haiti. But in my opinion, this has long-lasting harmful impacts on local communities.
According to the Cambodian government and UNICEF, an estimated 16,500 children are living in orphanages in Cambodia, of which roughly 80% still have a living parent.
Voluntourism has been capitalised upon by figures in society as an opportunity to make a profit. This has led to an increase in the number of ‘ingenuine orphans and fake orphanages in countries such as Cambodia, often a product of kidnapping or child-trafficking. Children are made to put on a show for visiting voluntourists, and then later, behind the scenes, abused by those who now own them. Money raised by voluntourists supposedly meant to buy children new clothes or send them to school go into dishonest pockets instead.
Another example is Hope of Life International.
Hope of Life International is a Christian mission in rural Guatemala, who has scouts who look for sick infants in mountain villages. As Tina Rosenberg describes in a Guardian article: ‘Although time is of the essence, when they find an ailing baby, the scouts do not bring them directly to the hospital. Instead, they alert the organisation, which assembles a team, accompanied by volunteers, to collect them.’
Like the volunteers who come to Hope of Life, many voluntourists are driven by a want to do good while away on vacation, and voluntourism gratifies this desire. This leads to some organisations prioritising bringing voluntourists to provide aid, rather than providing aid themselves, as skimming money off the top of what voluntourists pay is often much more attractive. The aid that local communities should receive is delayed, so that organisations facilitating it for voluntourists can make a profit.
In other words, it seems to me that voluntourism has created a demand for needy places for do-gooders to visit, and local groups are more than happy to meet this demand for corrupt personal gain. Some programs and organisations are even founded entirely on this basis, making voluntourism grounds for commercialised poverty.
Furthermore, I believe that the purpose of voluntourism efforts, to provide short-term aid, is often overlooked as countries grow increasingly reliant on voluntourism.
Voluntourism has become some countries’ largest source of development aid, one example being Haiti. On a surface level, this fact seems harmless, but it holds the potential for harmful consequences to the country’s long-term development.
Voluntary work such as spending time with orphans and providing medical aid are not viable for the short term. Orphans need constant, lasting affection and company, while certain medical prescriptions may not be available locally.
I strongly believe that voluntary work meant for the long term is not meant to be taken up by turns of visiting voluntourists, and aid should not be provided if it will compromise the development of local communities.
One might argue that the constant interest in voluntourism makes it more sustainable and thus viable option in comparison to other alternative forms of aid. I disagree.
Applying to be a voluntourist, as Claire Bennett, co-author of Learning Service: The Essential Guide to Volunteering Abroad, said, has become increasingly easy: “It used to be if you wanted to volunteer abroad, you wrote letters to overseas contacts. Now you can buy a volunteer experience with a few clicks.”
There are close to no qualifications to be met to become a voluntourist. Organisations rarely perform background checks on individuals before they are allowed to travel overseas to volunteer, and interact with the locals there. Past voluntourism missions have exposed a concern with this convenience.
There have been instances of voluntourists displaying unsavory behaviour to local communities, such as inappropriate slang and swearing, as well as the use and access to substances such as alcohol and drugs. Local communities are quick to learn from these exposures, resulting in similar unsavory behaviors as well as abuse of these substances.
Voluntourism has the potential of exposing locals to harmful behaviours, and it is because of this risk that I disagree with voluntourism as a sustainable, viable method of aid.
In summary, I believe that voluntourism’s effects will be more harmful than beneficial to local communities in the long term, and is not a suitable option for countries to take without enforcing measures to reduce its negative outcomes.
Voluntary works include distributing supplies to the needy, building houses amongst other labour, and raising funds or donations. Voluntourism has become a prominent form of development in developing countries, as well as aiding redevelopment in countries after natural disasters.
Voluntourism missions to countries begin noble enough: distribute medical supplies in South Africa, help paint the walls of an orphanage in Sri Lanka, or help rebuild some homes in Haiti. But in my opinion, this has long-lasting harmful impacts on local communities.
According to the Cambodian government and UNICEF, an estimated 16,500 children are living in orphanages in Cambodia, of which roughly 80% still have a living parent.
Voluntourism has been capitalised upon by figures in society as an opportunity to make a profit. This has led to an increase in the number of ‘ingenuine orphans and fake orphanages in countries such as Cambodia, often a product of kidnapping or child-trafficking. Children are made to put on a show for visiting voluntourists, and then later, behind the scenes, abused by those who now own them. Money raised by voluntourists supposedly meant to buy children new clothes or send them to school go into dishonest pockets instead.
Another example is Hope of Life International.
Hope of Life International is a Christian mission in rural Guatemala, who has scouts who look for sick infants in mountain villages. As Tina Rosenberg describes in a Guardian article: ‘Although time is of the essence, when they find an ailing baby, the scouts do not bring them directly to the hospital. Instead, they alert the organisation, which assembles a team, accompanied by volunteers, to collect them.’
Like the volunteers who come to Hope of Life, many voluntourists are driven by a want to do good while away on vacation, and voluntourism gratifies this desire. This leads to some organisations prioritising bringing voluntourists to provide aid, rather than providing aid themselves, as skimming money off the top of what voluntourists pay is often much more attractive. The aid that local communities should receive is delayed, so that organisations facilitating it for voluntourists can make a profit.
In other words, it seems to me that voluntourism has created a demand for needy places for do-gooders to visit, and local groups are more than happy to meet this demand for corrupt personal gain. Some programs and organisations are even founded entirely on this basis, making voluntourism grounds for commercialised poverty.
Furthermore, I believe that the purpose of voluntourism efforts, to provide short-term aid, is often overlooked as countries grow increasingly reliant on voluntourism.
Voluntourism has become some countries’ largest source of development aid, one example being Haiti. On a surface level, this fact seems harmless, but it holds the potential for harmful consequences to the country’s long-term development.
Voluntary work such as spending time with orphans and providing medical aid are not viable for the short term. Orphans need constant, lasting affection and company, while certain medical prescriptions may not be available locally.
I strongly believe that voluntary work meant for the long term is not meant to be taken up by turns of visiting voluntourists, and aid should not be provided if it will compromise the development of local communities.
One might argue that the constant interest in voluntourism makes it more sustainable and thus viable option in comparison to other alternative forms of aid. I disagree.
Applying to be a voluntourist, as Claire Bennett, co-author of Learning Service: The Essential Guide to Volunteering Abroad, said, has become increasingly easy: “It used to be if you wanted to volunteer abroad, you wrote letters to overseas contacts. Now you can buy a volunteer experience with a few clicks.”
There are close to no qualifications to be met to become a voluntourist. Organisations rarely perform background checks on individuals before they are allowed to travel overseas to volunteer, and interact with the locals there. Past voluntourism missions have exposed a concern with this convenience.
There have been instances of voluntourists displaying unsavory behaviour to local communities, such as inappropriate slang and swearing, as well as the use and access to substances such as alcohol and drugs. Local communities are quick to learn from these exposures, resulting in similar unsavory behaviors as well as abuse of these substances.
Voluntourism has the potential of exposing locals to harmful behaviours, and it is because of this risk that I disagree with voluntourism as a sustainable, viable method of aid.
In summary, I believe that voluntourism’s effects will be more harmful than beneficial to local communities in the long term, and is not a suitable option for countries to take without enforcing measures to reduce its negative outcomes.
Comments
Post a Comment