Save the World in a Week: Volunteer Tourism, Development and Difference
Barbara Vodopivec and Rivke Jaffe
aIndependent Researcher.
bLeiden University, Leiden.
Abstract
Alternative forms of tourism such as eco-tourism feature prominently in developmentpolicy and literature. This article focuses on international volunteer tourism, a specific form of tourism that is closely linked to a range of development projects in low-income countries. This form of ‘tourism with a development agenda’ has become increasingly popular among young people from developed countries. We argue that volunteer tourism both reflects and contributes to a new logic of development. This form of travel can be understood as a particular, neoliberal form of development practice, in which development is not only privatized but can be packaged as a marketable commodity.We focus critically on the process of volunteering and the interactions that take place within this form of tourism, with a focus on the concurrent commercialization of development and cultural difference.
Keywords: volunteering; tourism; anthropology of development; Guatemala; neoliberalism; mobilities
Introduction
Following increasing academic and policy critiques of mass tourism, various forms of ‘alternative’ tourism have come to feature prominently in development policy and literature.
In Latin America in particular, pro-poor, community-based and eco-tourism have been the focus of much attention, as these initiatives came to be viewed as improved options for pursuing development and combating global inequalities. Development oriented volunteer tourism is one of these new forms that has been especially popular, appealing to the desire of many young people in the developed world to effect a positive change abroad. However, this form of travel is indicative not only of changes in the tourism industry, but of shifts in development ideology and practice as well. While the phenomenon of volunteer tourism has emerged as a new research topic over the pastdecade (for example, Wearing, 2001; Simpson, 2004; McIntosh and Zahra, 2007; Lyonsand Wearing, 2008), the ways in which it both reflects and contributes to a new logic of development have not been fully analyzed.
This article focuses on international volunteer tourism. Following Wearing’s (2001,
p. 1) popular definition, we understand volunteer tourism as involving ‘those tourists who, for various reasons, volunteer in an organised way to undertake holidays that might involve aiding or alleviating the material poverty of some groups in society, the restoration of certain environments or research into aspects of society or environment’.[1]Our particular focus is, however, on volunteer tourism that takes place within development projectsin low-income countries.
We argue that volunteer tourism can be understood as a particular, neoliberal form of development practice, in which development is not only privatized but can be packaged as a marketable commodity. In order to understand the complex relations between volunteer work, tourism and development, this article asks how ideas of development and cultural difference are commodified, consumed, challenged and reproduced within what we call the‘volunteer encounter’, following Cohen’s (1984) concept of the tourist encounter. Through an examination of volunteering in the Guatemalan town of Antigua, the article explores the expectations and experiences of the development practitioners – the volunteers – and, to a lesser extent, the hosts. We discuss the feelings of disappointment and confusion that many volunteers expressed, relating these to broader constructions of development and difference and their mediation through the marketing of development volunteer work by volunteer sending agencies (VSAs). These sending agencies can be understood as any ‘organisation which develops and organizes a volunteer tourism program and can range from a locally based non-profit organisation, to a multinational commercially run organisation’ (Raymond,
2008, p. 49). These agencies operate at the intersection of a tourism industry shifting towards alternative niche markets and a development industry that promotes private initiative.
What Kind of Development?
Development ideas within volunteer tourism cannot be analyzed outside of the broader context of contemporary development discourse and practice. While the popularity of volunteer tourism speaks to the ability of the tourism industry to find new niche markets, it also reflects new ways in which the market has become central to development. The pervasive influence of neoliberal ideologies is evident in, first, the outsourcing and privatization of development practice, and, second, in the commodification and marketing of development activities. Both tendencies are exemplified in volunteer tourism in developmentprojects.
Development practice has undergone a process of privatization, as the actors responsible for development are increasingly located in civil society (Mohan and Stokke, 2000,p. 247). In contrast to previous top-down, state-led economic development models, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and local communities are now promoted as the appropriate actors and spaces for development. Although this might be a promising tendency within development discourse and practice, it should not be accepted uncritically.
First, this privatization reflects a new seemingly depoliticized form of neoliberal hegemony, in which governability is more important than empowerment (Manji and
O’Coill, 2002; Townsend et al, 2002; Miraftab, 2004). Rather than promoting democracy and efficiency, the outsourcing of development may undermine the capabilities of the local state. The financial dependence of private sector development actors on foreign donorscan trigger both internal competition and external cooptation. In addition, these private actors in development may well suffer similar issues to the state in terms of efficiency, transparency and accountability.
Second, this new localism in development echoes volunteer tourism discourse (described in more detail below) as it tends to essentialize the local as a disconnected, apolitical place that hosts relatively homogeneous communities (Mohan and Stokke, 2000). It implies a natural association of a place, culture and people, neglecting differences within a locality and obscuring sameness between different localities. Places are constituted by economic, social, cultural and political relations and flows of commodities, information and people that extend far beyond a given locality and it is precisely through these flows that a place becomes most local and specific (Tsing, 2005, p. 126).
In addition to this outsourcing of development practice, volunteer tourism indicates a new way in which development activities become commodities within a tourism niche market. As Hutnyk (1996, p. x) notes, ‘Rather than working towards social transformation, alternative travel and charity work seems often to tinker at the edges of capitalistexpansion into new market niches’. Specifically, this process of commodification finds ways to capitalize on altruism while drawing on the notion of difference embedded in development. The clear-cut boundaries between various categorizations – us/them, local/global, developed/developing, problem-causers/problem-solvers – that are central to volunteer identities are also essential to the packaging and selling of volunteer tourism.
The sending and receiving organizations play a significant part in constructing these categorizations as distinct; by translating complex and heterogeneous relations into homogenous units of beneficiaries and volunteers, organizations emphasize boundaries between these groups, mapping and marketing zones of inclusion and exclusion. The end result is the joint commodification of development and difference.
The packaging, marketing and selling of development-focused ‘altruism’ also reflects the rise of political consumerism as a global force. Again reflecting the neoliberal turn,consumer choices are increasingly flaunted as an effective, easy-access form of marketbased politics, with a global reach. As the market becomes highlighted as an important site of politics, collective action and ethics, its politicization goes accompanied by the privatization of politics. This shift towards the market may restrict access to the realm of politics to those with money, while ‘political’ consumer choices may turn out to be temporary trends that are replaced by a newer fad or abandoned when consumers’ income levels slump (Micheletti, 2004).
Tourism Transformations, Volunteering and Development
The political nature of consumer choices in tourism has gained increasing recognition over the past two decades. Various authors (Smith and Eadington, 1992; Brohman, 1996; Ashley et al, 2001; Mowforth and Munt, 2008; Telfer and Sharpley, 2008) note the broad transformations in tourism that have taken place, as alternative forms of travel gained prominence.
While mass tourism was a popular development strategy during the 1960s and 1970s, its social and environmental impacts soon led to major critiques. Rather than the driving force of development it was made out to be by various national governments and multilateral lending agencies, tourism came to be viewed as one of the key players in the unequal and uneven distribution of wealth (Pattullo, 1996, p. 5; Scheyvens, 2007). Moreover, the detrimental ecological effects of large-scale tourism activities in often fragile environments became increasingly visible. Cultural change among so-called traditional, mainly indigenous groups, felt to result from large numbers of foreign visitors, also emerged as a source of concern (Mowforth et al, 2007; Mowforth and Munt, 2008; Wilson, 2008).
In a context of national and international criticism as well as more individualized post- Fordist tourist desires, a set of so-called new tourisms emerged. Aiming to satisfy both visitors and hosts while respecting natural, social and cultural values in host country and communities, sustainable tourism became an important focus within broader discussions of sustainable development. Sustainable development-oriented forms of tourism such as eco-tourism, pro-poor, community-based, participatory and volunteer tourism became increasingly popular, if at times only in rhetoric. In Latin America, sustainable tourism initiatives often focus on indigenous communities and nature conservation. The shift towards sustainable tourism coincided with an increased demand for active and interactive forms of tourism that involve a variety of experiences or adventures, rather than the passive consumption many critical travelers associate with traditional mass tourism. Rather than replacing mainstream tourism, however, this range of sustainable and active new tourisms should be seen as coexisting with traditional practices, as the differences have become blurred (Smith and Eadington, 1992; Stronza, 2001; Mowforth and Munt, 2008).
Volunteer tourism is often touted as one of the most promising forms of sustainable tourism, a ‘new “poster-child” for alternative tourism’ (Lyons and Wearing, 2008, p. 6).
Wearing (2001, p. 12) argues that volunteer tourism ‘can be viewed as a development strategy leading to sustainable development and centring the convergence of natural resource qualities, locals and the visitor that all benefit from tourism activity’. Cross-cultural contact and mutual collaboration in local development projects have become its most prominent features. Volunteer tourism is seen as redefining tourist destinations as mutually beneficial, interactive sites for both tourists and host communities. It is generally presented as attempting to move beyond superficial social interactions, allowing volunteers to gain self-developmental experiences and local communities to achieve sustainable community development (McIntosh and Zahra, 2007; Lyons and Wearing, 2008).
For young people in particular, volunteering is becoming an extremely popular way to travel, especially to so-called developing countries.[2]This relates not only to the active promotion of volunteering as an important form of sustainable travel, but also to the emergence of the gap year phenomenon in the United States, Europe, Australia and New Zealand in the past decade or so. This gap year has become a recognized and institutionalized phenomenon and refers to the year young people from high-income countries take off before pursuing further studies or work (Simpson, 2004). Travelling to developing countries to help the poor has become a popular way to spend such a year and is encouraged by schools, universities, churches and even governments. While this is indeed an opportunity to learn more about the world, we argue for exploring the commodification of volunteer tourism, the privatization of development, and the extent to which volunteer experiences serve to bolster rather than challenge pre-existing notions about development and people living in developing countries.
Case Study and Methods
We use the case study of volunteering in the Guatemalan town of Antigua to analyze these intersections of volunteering, tourism and development. This article draws on fieldwork in and around Antigua, conducted by the first author during three months in 2008. Methods included participation as a volunteer in three organizations, which offered a possibility to observe the volunteer encounter and to participate in it, facilitating access to the people working on the projects and the observation of on-site interactions. In addition to participantobservation, a total of 27 semi-structured interviews were conducted in Spanishand English with volunteers, project staff beneficiaries and Spanish language schools, andincluded volunteers from other projects in the area of Antigua and Guatemala City.Interviews were complemented by 19 on-site surveys with volunteers, five email surveyswith volunteers after they had returned home, and numerous informal conversations withall involved in volunteer encounters. Interview and survey topics included information onmotivations, expectations, impacts and consequences, time and place of interactions andpersonal background information. An additional method involved visual and discourseanalysis of online promotional material of VSAs.
The research focused on three different volunteer projects. The first project, referredto here as Nuestros niños[3] was a small project with approximately 40 children affiliatedwith it. The project, situated in a village outside of Antigua, was aimed mainly at children,centering on educational support within a broader range of efforts including child healthprograms and psychological help for the whole family. This small Guatemalan NGOwas run by a director from another Central American country who had been living inGuatemala for over 10 years. During three months of observation, approximately 10volunteers came and left. Some stopped just for a day, some for a week, only two stayedfor two months. The second project, called Luz de Jesus here, was facilitated by a Spanishlanguage school and involved a volunteer placement in a Catholic hospital in Antigua thatreceived almost 700 volunteers per year. This was a very large hospital accommodatingmentally and physically handicapped people of all ages. The flow of volunteers workingin the hospital was constant; many came for a day or two, some individually and some inlarger groups. A relatively small number stayed for a month or more. The third project,referred to here as Hijos de Dios, was part of an international organization that ran asite near Antigua. Situated on the outskirts of Antigua, this large project worked withhundreds of families living in the surrounding areas. Its activities ranged from educationalsupport to the provision of food, medical care and housing. The project was run byan American organization that ran projects in the United States and Africa as well. Theorganization received hundreds of volunteers per year.
These projects were selected in the field as pre-fieldwork access proved challenging andaccessing them as a volunteer through a VSA was prohibitively expensive. Ten VSAsdeclined to facilitate research within their programs; some stating they did not ‘offer freetrips’, others declaring that they ‘have great relations with the local communities’ althoughnothing to the contrary had been implied. The bias this selection of projects entailed wasmitigated by extensive off-site interaction with volunteers from other projects throughoutAntigua. The first author spent a period of one to three months on each project, enablingher to experience different volunteer timeframes and to reflect on how timeframes influencevolunteers’ and her own perceptions and engagement in a project. Participatingas a volunteer rather than as a beneficiary or as staff within an organization influencedthe author’s role as a researcher and affected what she was told, how she was treatedand the way she gathered and interpreted her information. It was easier for the author torelate to and identify with the volunteers’ perspective than with any other perspectives,as she did all the things a volunteer does: taking Spanish lessons in the morning, doingvolunteer work during the day, going out in the evenings with other volunteers, talkingabout the projects and reflecting on the volunteer experience. The researcher was thereforenot a neutral participant or observer and can speak only from a certain position orperspective.[4]
Volunteers and Tourism in Antigua
While contemporary Guatemala remains a popular destination for mass tourism andpackage holidays, it also attracts large numbers of independent travelers, developmentworkers, missionaries, backpackers and volunteers. This reflects the broader transformationsin tourism sketched above in which tourists become ‘travelers’ and the interactive tourist experience replaces the passive tourist gaze. The Guatemalan government is activelyinvolved in promoting sustainable tourism, as witnessed for instance in the NationalPolicy for Development of Sustainable Tourism of Guatemala 2004–2014.[5] This shift isalso driven by foreign demand, and a growing number of national and internationalagencies specialize in selling ecotourism, adventure tourism, responsible tourism andvolunteer tourism in Guatemala.
Short-term volunteers can be found throughout the country, working with sea turtleson the Pacific Coast or on archaeological sites in El Pete´n, building houses in the highlandsof Central Guatemala or helping out in women’s shelters in Guatemala City.Volunteers are omnipresent in and around the city of Antigua, especially during the maintourism seasons, and there are dozens of organizations offering volunteer placementsin the area. The city and its surroundings house a large number of volunteers workingwith children. Recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage site in 1979, Antigua is oneof Guatemala’s most popular tourist destinations. As the former capital of colonialGuatemala, it is recognized for its Spanish colonial architecture and spectacular volcanoringednatural setting. Antigua is a bustling town, with a wide range of small cafes, barsand restaurants and dozens of Spanish language schools catering to international languagestudents.
Little (2004, p. 64) describes Antigua as a town of contradictions: ‘To tourists, Antiguais both inauthentic, corrupted by tourism and tourists themselves, and authentic, a placewhere “Indians”, colonial architecture and Western conveniences blend together’. This isreflected in the opinions of many volunteers, for whom Antigua provides a great combinationof moving between what they perceive as authentic poor villages in the surroundingareas (where many of them work) and a town that can provide them with more or lesseverything they are used to back home. These attractive features filter through in the waythat many VSAs promote Antigua.