Some thoughts on “development tourism”

If you’re looking to spend some money to volunteer abroad, there are no shortage of websites to help get you started. These programs often cost the so-called “development tourist” thousands of dollars, but a question that’s rarely asked is this: Do these programs really make a difference?

Chris Blattman, a global development researcher and a professor at Yale, has a couple thought-provoking posts over on his blog about the idea of “Development Tourism.”

In his first post, Chris questions how much good a two-week service trip, which can cost thousands of dollars for the “volunteer,” can really do for a poor community. Chris writes:

The contribution of organizations like Habitat for Humanity, who send Western volunteers to build homes in poor countries, has never been obvious to me. Is there a shortage of unskilled construction labor in developing countries of which I’m unaware?

Of course, questioning the usefulness of an organization like Habitat for Humanity isn’t exactly popular; it’s like saying you don’t like cute puppies or the movie Juno. But Chris’ point, as I see it, is quite reasonable– that brief trips to “help out” abroad might be better for the volunteer than the poor community.

For me, two-week development adventures fall clearly in the tourism category… Is there an argument for these trips actually helping? If so, is the benefit even close to the best use of the thousands of dollars it took to get that person out there?

That’s almost certainly right, but I think it’s important to remember that when a traveler pays thousands of dollars to “volunteer” in Africa, she usually realizes that the trip is mostly for her. Moreover, if she didn’t go on the trip, her money would probably not end up in Africa. The choice isn’t between paying thousands to volunteer or just donating thousands; it’s between paying thousands to volunteer or nothing.

In a subsequent post, Chris explains that he doesn’t mean to criticize well-intentioned volunteers, and that he doesn’t think that short volunteering trips abroad are completely worthless.

I’d not like my last word to be one that condemns a well-intentioned someone, who heads down the right path, for not doing enough. That is the takeaway among some commenters and from friends I respect very much, and after some thinking, that’s not my intention. I, like anyone, would be thrilled to see people do more, but I won’t condemn them for not doing so.

Several people pointed out, rightly I think, that Westerners who spend even two weeks on a development project can give back, just not right away. Later in life, these people may give more time, thought, and money to important causes and decisions as a result. That is excellent, and important.

In that case, however, perhaps we should call these trips what they are: thoughtful and caring, but experiential, not charitable.

I think what makes me uncomfortable is the tendency (for some) to frame or advertise short visits and contributions as a way to give back, or (worse still) to ‘save’ someone else. Making a difference takes months, years, and perhaps a lifetime. Saving, I would argue, is an impossible and ultimately harmful aim.

Thoughts?