Study Confirms What I Already Felt About "Voluntourism"

When I came to the U.S. I quickly found out that Americans, particularly those who are religiously affiliated, are passionate about going abroad to help less fortunate people in struggling countries. When I first came across the concept of the "Mission Trip" my gut feeling was that they did much more good to those who went than to the people in developing nations. It seems that I was very right about this one.

I felt particularly bad about the sometimes exorbitant cost of the trip for those involved and always wondered to myself that it would be WAY better that all that fundraising and all that money spent on costly airfare and hotel accommodations would be better employed if sent directly to those countries and used to employ local people to take care of the needy.

Of course one can argue that doctors, dentists and nurses could be in short supply in developing nations and thus medical excursions can be justified. I agree with that, up to a certain point. In the trips that I've known about in addition to medical professionals, lots of other people go and, generally, help build a school, a church or something. That I think is a disservice to the local population since it would cost much less to build the same structure using the money provided by foreigners and local, paid employees.

Although I felt uncomfortable about these trips, particularly with the way those who came back talked about the "poor needy people" in such and such a country and how lovely it had been to go down there and help them, I justified their actions by reasoning that they had had a learning experience and seen a reality way different from them, so they could grow as people.

You see, traveling the world is a life changing experience, I know that because of my expatriate experience. However, what this enlightening and also frightening Guardian article by Ian Birrell describes, particularly in what concerns children, is very sad. The title speaks volumes already: "Before you pay to volunteer abroad, think of the harm you might do."

Birrell calls the recent findings by South African and British academics "incendiary" and he concurs with my "gut feeling" about these trips: "The harsh truth is that "voluntourism" is more about the self-fulfilment of westerners than the needs of developing nations."


He also writes: "In recent years, a disturbing form of slum tourism has taken off, with rich visitors sold a glimpse into the lives of the very poor. In Asia, unbelievably, tourists pay for trips to hand out food to impoverished rural families." His article and the aforementioned study concentrate in the effects of "voluntourism" in children which can, in extreme cases, lead to abuse and the removal of children from their families. Absolutely outrageous!


Birrell ends with these cautionary words:

The desire to engage with the world is laudable, as is the desire to volunteer. But we need to tread more carefully. Unless we have time and transferable skills, we might do better to travel, trade and spend money in developing countries. The rapid growth of "voluntourism" is like the rapid growth of the aid industry: salving our own consciences without fully examining the consequences for the people we seek to help. All too often, our heartfelt efforts to help only make matters worse.

I hope many people involved in this kind of despicable "tourism" may heed his and the study's advice!