Topic: Volunteer tourism
Abstract
Volunteer tourism, also called voluntourism is a kind of tourism that can be defined in a number of ways. For instance, the industry defines it as “a seamlessly integrated combination of voluntary service to a destination along with the best, traditional elements of travel – arts, culture, geography, and history – in that destination” (Lee & Woosnam, 2010)Academics on the other hand define it as “utilizing discretionary time and income to travel out of the sphere of regular activity to assist others in need”. While some have looked at this phenomenon from an environmental or conservation based point of view (Lee & Woosnam, 2010), other players have approached it with a wider perspective taking into account socio-cultural aspects and an emphasis on economy (Lee & Woosnam, 2010)For instance, conservation-based initiatives may encompass the measurement of the impacts on the environment in and around the wilderness areas. On other hand, the socio-cultural and economic may put emphasis on such factors as improvement of schools, construction of new homes for the locals or repairing existing ones or participation in activities that promote culture preservation. This paper seeks to discuss the effects of volunteer tourism and whether it promotes intercultural exchanges that rationalize poverty and reinforces tourism as neo-colonialism or it is all positive for both the volunteers and the locals.
Introduction
Volunteer tourism incorporates travel with voluntary work. It is therefore mostly attractive to those individuals who want to have a tourist experience yet, at the same time, contribute positively to their personal development and that of the social, natural and/or economic environments in which they choose to be in (Wearing, 2001: 1). This kind of tourism is thus viewed as a form of reciprocal tourism which is mutually beneficial to both the tourist and the host communities. This has made the concept of volunteer tourism to be widely associated with other concepts such as sustainable tourism and sustainable development, particularly with respect to ecotourism (Raymond & Hall, 2008)In recent years, the number of individuals signing up for short term, organized volunteer tourism programmes (VTPs) have increased tremendously, this scenario has been fuelled by the increasing number of sending organizations which promote, sell and organize events for volunteer tourists (Raymond & Hall, 2008)
It has been put forward that the interactions promoted by this kind of tourism between volunteer tourists and the host communities often result into an improved inter-cultural understanding, with the volunteers gaining a more in depth understanding of the local people’s way of life as well as the challenges they face (Raymond & Hall, 2008). Furthermore, some group VTPs end up attracting more volunteers from all over the globe and the friendship forged during these activities help reduce racial, cultural and social boundaries (Raymond & Hall, 2008).
Currently, existing publications have focused primarily on the advantages of volunteer tourism. Most of these publications have also centered on profiling the volunteers and investigating what motivated them to take part in the programs. Conversely, there a number of negative bearings caused, either directly or indirectly, by volunteer tourism that beg for increased attention from both project managers and researchers (Guttentag, 2009). These include neglect of what the locals really want, disruption of the local economies, strengthening of conceptualizations of the “other” and rationalization of poverty and an initiation of cultural changes (assimilation) (McGehee & Andereck, 2009).
More research has also questioned the assumption that volunteer tourism always result in improved cross-cultural understanding. Particularly, a UK study has suggested that volunteer tourism may as a matter of fact fuel the already existing stereotypes and increase the dichotomies of ‘them and us’ (McGehee & Andereck, 2009). This trend is also supported by scholars and the media (McGehee & Andereck, 2009)who report that some kinds of VTPs may symbolize a form of neo-colonialism or imperialism. That is, the VTPs unintentionally strengthen the power inequalities which is perceived to exist between the developing and developed countries and even in those same countries (McGehee & Andereck, 2009).
For instance, when the volunteer tourists assume positions such as ‘expert’ or ‘teacher’ without any particular training in the specific fields, it may be perceived as neo-colonialism. Particularly, in a study by Raymond & Hall, (2008) on a ‘service learning’ programme in El Savador and Nicaragua brings out the case that volunteer tourism results into ‘global citizenry’. That is. ‘interdependence and mutual responsibility’ Crabtree, 1998: 187). The report also gives an example whereby this kind of tourism acts as a form of ‘reconciliation tourism’. This is illustrated by a quote from an American tourist who says “ Cleaning up your own mess: I guess that’s what we’re doing here. Much of the situation here is, to some degree or another, our mess. That’s part of the poeticjustice.We’rerebuildingaschoolthatourtaxdollarsdestroyed…It seems like the right thing to do (Volunteer journal excerpt, in Crabtree, 1998: 195)”
Similar sentiments are also found within the industry. For example, the president and CEO of a Volunteer sending organization, ‘Global Volunteers’, says ‘Volunteer service engenders hope and friendship, both of which are critical to waging peace . . . The more people volunteer all over the world and make friends with local people, the more peaceful the world will be’.
Putting a stop or fuelling Cultural Stereotypes?
In different interviews, focus groups with volunteer tourist, host organizations and sending organizations, (Raymond & Hall, 2008).the philosophy that volunteer tourism may result into cross-cultural understanding arose severally. This was found to happen in two main ways: first and foremost, it occurred through the interaction of the host communities with the volunteer tourists, whereby the volunteers viewed the process as a challenge to their national stereotypes, according to an interviewee, a team leader of a volunteer group, he says “I think a really big thing is the positive image of North Americans they are bringing. With the locals and with the school kids who just have a really narrow view of the US and they’re really helping to break those stereotypes and share some of their culture (Raymond & Hall, 2008).. This mindset was influenced partly to the volunteers’ interaction and exchange with the local communities and volunteer tourists of other nationalities. In other various cases, it can be attributed to the sending organizations which describe their volunteers as ‘good’ people who travel for long distances in order to help those in need. Such views go hand in hand with the research that was conducted Stoddart and Rogerson (2004), which shares that some of the volunteer tourists view this form of tourism as a channel to improve racial relations.
The role played by sending organizations
Even though the obligation to develop cross-cultural understanding cannot be placed entirely on the sending organization, however, a research (Raymond & Hall, 2008) shows that by carefully planning and managing the process, these organizations play a major role at a number of stages. The research puts forward three, main recommendations that can help these organizations improve race relations through their programmes (Raymond & Hall, 2008).
First of all, the sending organizations need to think carefully about the kinds of volunteer work they want the volunteer tourist to go engage in through their programmes: One director of a sending organization said that “It’s about getting the volunteers to fit in and match their skills with the needs of the community rather than just as some companies do, getting the volunteers and then dumping them on a project” (Lee & Woosnam, 2010).
It is important to find the appropriate work for the volunteers in order to counter the arguments that suggest that some VTPs may represent a form of neo-colonialism in which the volunteer tourist use their host communities as a form of training grounds for future professionals (Lee & Woosnam, 2010). For the organizations to distance themselves from such allegations, it is important that the volunteers be qualified and prepared so as to be viewed in positive light by their host communities and thus make genuine contribution in the improvement of their welfare rather than simply waste time and resources.
Volunteer and responsible tourism
Many scholars have turned to classical ethical theory when it comes to explaining the philosophies of social responsibility in tourism development. With the use of already existing definitions of ethics from a business point of view, it can be described as an ‘‘inquiry into the nature and grounds of morality where morality means moral judgments, standards and rules of conduct” (Tsalikis and Fritzsche, 1989). There is no precise definition of what “ethical” tourism development is really constituted of and this can be attributed to its complexity which led to the lack of a definition which can wholesomely include all it’s many dimensions (Sin, 2009). However, “ethical” forms of tourism such as; eco-tourism and pro-poor tourism, have been covered both in scholarly publications and popular consumption, and as in this paper, volunteer tourism.
Responsible tourism and the scope of responsibility
The idea of “responsibility” whether in the ambits of scope of responsibility and care or within activities interacting the ethical and/or moral responsibilities in tourism, is often built around the notion that the privileged “developed” world have an obligation to be responsible to the less privileged “developing” world (Sin, 2009)Assigning responsibility only to the developed world if often an unmentioned and seemingly unproblematic assumption.
Caring relationships
While the way an individual decides to volunteer differ greatly from construction of schools for the locals, teaching them English to animal and cultural conservation and so forth, the essence of volunteer tourism remains in the provision of essential and developing services to the host community. In a research (Sin, 2009)respondents have shown that hosting volunteer tourists can prove beneficial to their well-being. It many at times lead to improvement of the local’s physical facilities including building of new schools (from kindergartens, public primary schools and English teaching colleges) or restoring the existing ones that are not in very good shape and refurbishing of weaving factories which facilitated the local cottage industries which are supported by various NGOs. Such initiatives were put in place with an objective to contribute in the collective and more sustainable benefits and development to the local communities.
For instance, respondents said that their investment in educational resources were often preferred by the volunteer tourists as they saw it as a chance to develop and improve the future employment opportunities of the youth in that community (Sin, 2009). Another respondent said: “They did a lot of things! We had a big repair of the kindergarten…It was an old house, it was not built to be a kindergarten.”
As discussed above, therefore, the nature of volunteer tourism has different features as compared to other forms of tourism, specifically, mass tourism. This is because volunteer tourists are sometimes not viewed as tourists by either the local communities and even themselves. In addition, depending on the sending organization that placed the volunteer tourists in that specific location, the volunteers may require some basic needs such as accommodation, food, transportation in a very different way from other forms of tourism such as mass tourism. On the other hand, volunteer tourists are also similar to mass tourists in some ways. For instance, they too can impact the daily lives of the communities which they visit.
Research suggests that while almost all respondents agree to the fat that volunteer tourism has positive effects, those who are more educated, on most occasions, can also point out to the negative impacts of the same as compared to those with a lower level of education. In the case whereby there lacks a relationship between individual benefit and support for definite volunteer initiatives, a viable explanation may come from the fact that volunteer tourism is very unique in nature. It is also probable that the respondents who had seen the positivity of volunteer tourism and gained from it might have been in favor of more volunteer tourism generally.
Conclusion
At first sight, volunteer tourism generally appears to offer the most sort after potential of the ‘idea’ ecotourism. It may prove to be a very effective and viable strategy especially in rural developing areas where other opportunities to make a good living are in limited numbers. Such tourism can be controlled locally and the benefits can also be distributed locally hence benefiting the host community. The environmental experience is also essential and beneficial to the volunteers, which occurs simultaneously with other benefits to the locals and hence there can be no infringement of rights to the locals (Guttentag, 2009). As tourism continues to spread widely, volunteer tourism can prove to be the strategy of choice especially for rural communities in developing areas areas (Clifton & Benson, 2006; Jackiewicz, 2005) pdf 2.
On the other hand, this paper has also highlighted the possible negative effects that can be brought about by volunteer tourism. Therefore, if volunteer tourism is supported while focusing only on its positive impacts and neglecting the ones, the sector risks becoming a ‘Trojan Horse’ pdf3 cittn, that communities will end up embracing and supporting while failing to realize the negative consequences. Fortunately, as discussed above, the negative effects attributed to volunteer tourism are not completely inevitable and it is possible to mitigate them when these programs are organized and planned in an efficient manner. For example, MCGehee and Andereck (2008) share that several of the local volunteer tourism administrators and project managers that were interviewed suggest the regulation of this sector as a possible solution to some of the negative effects of this form of tourism. They also suggest the reduction of the number of volunteers per organization and community while actively matching the skills of the existing volunteers with the needs of the particular communities.
In addition, Raymond and Hall (2008) pdf3 recommend that the sending organizations should come up with programmes which are of genuine value for the volunteers and local communities as well. They recommend that the projects be viewed as a learning process for both parties rather than simply an experience. They also suggest the deliberate facilitation of of opportunities for interaction of the volunteers with other cultures. However, just as it has been shown that volunteer tourism may be suitable for some communities and a disaster for others, any detailed recommendations for improvement of this sector may be suited for some communities and may not necessarily work in others. For instance, some communities may not be interested in interacting with the volunteers as it can be widely assumed. This is to show that there can be no specific formula that can be adopted to develop volunteer tourism projects which are completely beneficial but instead, a greater awareness is needed of the sector’s possible negative effects that are caused by volunteer tourism so that the projects can be developed independently and managed and planned in a manner such that it avoids any unwanted impacts.
So far, most scholarly research has centered primarily on the advantages brought about by volunteer tourism and the profiles and drive/motivations of these volunteers. However, as shown in this paper, the same volunteer projects can also cause various different negative impacts and therefore, volunteer tourism also requires the same intensity of scrutiny as other forms of tourism (Guttentag, 2009). These negative impacts also require much more research and evaluation than they have received so far. With these measures put in place, maybe volunteer tourism can finally become more beneficial both to the host communities and the tourists allowing it to enjoy, genuinely, the praises it already receives (Guttentag, 2009).
References
Crabtree, R.D. (1998) Mutual empowerment in cross-cultural participatory development and service learning: Lessons in communication and social justice from projects in El
Gray, Noella J. and Campbell, Lisa M.(2007) ‘A Decommodified Experience? Exploring Aesthetic,Economic and Ethical Values for Volunteer Ecotourism in Costa Rica’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15: 5, 463 — 48. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/jost725.0
Guttentag, D. A., (2009). The Possible Negative Impacts of Volunteer Tourism. 26 March.pp. 537-551.
Lee, Y. J. & Woosnam, K. M., 2010. Voluntourist Transformation and the Theory of Integrative Cross-Cultural Adaptation. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(4), pp. 1186-1189.
McGehee, Nancy Gard and Andereck, Kathleen(2009) ‘Volunteer tourism and the “voluntoured”: the case of Tijuana, Mexico’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17: 1, 39 — 51 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669580802159693 (McGehee & Andereck, 2009)
Raymond, Eliza Marguerite and Hall, C. Michael (2008) ‘The Development of Cross-Cultural
(Mis)Understanding Through Volunteer Tourism’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16: 5, 530 — 543. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669580802159610 (Raymond & Hall, 2008).
Sin, H. L., 2009. Who are we responsible to? Locals’ tales of volunteer tourism. 4 September.
Tsalikis, J., Fritzsche, D., 1989. Business ethics: A literature review with a focus on
marketing ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 8, 695–743.
Wearing, S. (2001) Volunteer Tourism: Experiences That Make a Difference. Oxon: CABI.
Salvador and Nicaragua. Journal of Applied Communication Research 26 (2), 182–209. Stoddart, H. and Rogerson, C.M. (2004) Volunteer tourism: The case of habitat for hu-
manity South Africa. GeoJournal 60 (3), 311–318.
