“Language Education & Global Citizenship” (14) – What is “Voluntourism” and how does it relate to English language teaching? (by Juliette Esposito)
“If you have come to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is linked with mine, let’s work together.”
(Aboriginal activist group from Queensland, Australia, 1970)1
Editor’s note: Juliette Esposito is a student of English at the University of Education Karlsruhe in the Bilingual Course Secondary Education degree, which specializes in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). When she was still doing her Bachelor’s degree, she participated in my “Global English(es) & Global Citizenship Education” seminar, where I noticed her interest in questions of global justice. Towards the end of the seminar, she shared the source of her growing sense of discomfort: After finishing high school, she had taken part in a volunteering programme in Ghana and lived outside of Europe for the first time. Living outside Europe sparked her interest in power dynamics and decoloniality back then, eventually leading her to question her previous volunteering programme in Ghana, and then, logically, others too. I suggested that she could write a blog article about this growing awareness as a seminar requirement in the “Language Education & Global Citizenship” blog series. She submitted a first draft to receive the Credit Points. After the first edits, her draft evolved into a more comprehensive examination of “white saviour”2 narratives and research into the manipulative side of the voluntourism industry.
Table of Contents
- General Overview
- The Business behind the Voluntourism Industry
- English Language Teaching (ELT) Voluntourism
- Conclusion
- Further Watching
- References
General Overview
In the Cambridge Dictionary (Cambridge Dictionary 2022), “Voluntourism” is defined as “a type of holiday in which you work as a volunteer (= without being paid) to help people in the places you visit”. This definition, however, stems from a rather descriptive and uncritical perspective. One problem, for example, is that the term “help” suggests that voluntourism is an unquestionably positive activity (McGloin and Georgeau 2016, 413). Popular volunteer activities include construction work, teaching English or other subjects, and working with children (Bakker and Lamoureux 2008, 23).
However, there are some more identifiers for voluntourism. Firstly, it is more of a short time commitment and fits into the individual’s schedule in the same way a holiday would (McGloin and Georgeau 2016, 405). Secondly, concerning the business perspective, it is an “economic activity driven by profit occurring within an unregulated industry and operating without any accreditation process” (McGloin and Georgeau 2016, 405). Thirdly, the direction of travel is mostly from “First World” countries to “Third World“2 countries (McGloin and Georgeau 2016, 405). For example, the international organization “Projects Abroad” runs projects in Africa (Botswana, Ghana, Kenya etc.), Asia (Cambodia, India, Nepal etc.) and Latin America & The Caribbean (Argentinia, Jamaica etc.), but no projects in North America, and only one project in Europe (Romania) (Projects Abroad, n.d.). This fact arguably reinforces the “neo-colonial construction of the superior Western in race and knowledge”, because “Third World” countries are portrayed as needing volunteering programs from “First World” countries to help with building infrastructure, sharing knowledge, spreading morals or even language and culture (Brodzinski-González 2023, 17).
The myth of the “superiority”3 of the West is also reflected in the description of a medical internship in Jamaica, hosted by “Projects Abroad”. On the website it is stated that “[y]ou’ll also give back to the community through outreach work” and that the volunteer will “help provide basic medical care where it’s needed most, and share knowledge about preventing and managing diseases” (Projects Abroad (a), n.d.). It is important to note is that no previous medical knowledge is needed to participate in the internship, and the only requirement is to be “18 years or older” (Projects Abroad (b), n.d.). This is a clear example of western ethnocentrism , which results in the assumption that a white 18-year old volunteer will be able to contribute knowledge in a hospital with fully qualified nurses and doctors, just on the basis of coming from a so-called “developed” country.
The Business behind the Voluntourism Industry
Nowadays, a voluntourism experience can be booked online with a simple click. The experience and credentials of volunteers are secondary aspects (Jakubiak 2016, 245). Different organizations are offering these trips, non-profit and for profit. Examples: “Global Volunteers” (non-profit), “i-to-i” (commercial and part of the TUI Travel Group), “Volunteer Service Overseas” (non-profit) and smaller organizations like “Projects-Abroad” (for-profit) or “Madventurer” (commercial tour operator) (Bakker and Lamoureux 2008, 32). Recently, also airlines, cruise lines, and hotels started to implement these volunteer experiences, which demonstrates the market value of the voluntourism business (Bakker and Lamoureux 2008, 35).
One of the key players of the market, “Cross-Cultural Solutions“, is a non-profit organization that offers among others the program “Volunteer Abroad”. A trip in the “Volunteer Abroad” program can last two weeks for $2,600 and can be extended up to 12 weeks with $300 added for every week (Bakker and Lamoureux 2008, 28). “[A] three-week stay in Daramsala, India, helping locally run organizations improve the live of residents”, would be an example for a trip that is offered for $2,900 (Bakker and Lamoureux 2008, 28).
Someone who chooses to participate in this form of vacation plays two different roles. These roles are in an ambiguous relationship to each other. The volunteer has a romanticised image in his or her head and is inspired to “help”, “make a difference” and “give-back”, an idea that has been created by clever marketing on the websites (Verardi 2013, 67). On the other hand, the role of the tourist demands an experience, something that the volunteer “gets”, for example pictures (Verardi 2013, 67). Marketing frames these trips as “life-changing experiences” (McGloin and Georgeou 2016, 412) and veils their actual business intentions. For reference, this business had “volunteer tourists spending up to €1.45 billion (£1.25 billion) on trips in 2019”, before the COVID-19 pandemic (Godin 2019).
A volunteer pays the organizations to participate in the trips organised by them. “Projects Abroad” visualizes the division of the expenses paid by the volunteers in a pie chart as they have committed themselves to transparency about expenses. The largest portion of the fee is allocated to “[d]irect costs of the volunteer experience (29%)”, which cover essential daily costs for the participant, such as “accommodation, meals, transport, airport transfers, insurance premiums”, but also “equipment, materials, and donations to placements” (Projects Abroad (b), n.d.). The second largest expenditure is “[r]ecruitment and communication (24%)”, which funds “advertising, staffing, training, and materials necessary to attract future volunteers and promote the organization’s work” (Projects Abroad(b), n.d.). “Indirect costs of the volunteer experience” account for 22%; these include “local staff salaries and benefits”, but also “monitoring, pre-departure support, destination office rent, utilities, and required government registration and reporting” (Projects Abroad (b), n.d.). The remaining portions cover “organisational costs” (13%), which maintain the “global infrastructure, IT, HR, and financial systems required to run a business”; “Excess of revenue over costs” (7%), which provides “capital for growth, setting up new projects, funding projects that run at a loss, emergency reserves, and modest dividends for shareholders”; and “Taxes” (5%), paid to “various governments globally” (Projects Abroad (c), n.d.).
On closer inspection, the financial distribution displayed in the pie chart can be criticised for not being fully transparent. It is unclear how much of the percentage actually reaches the local projects, since the financial categories in the pie chart do not distinguish clearly enough between funding for the global organization, funding for local organizations and funding for the volunteer tourist to participate in this experience. This can be seen in the financial category for the “[d]irect costs of the volunteer experience” (29%), because in this category, the costs for the volunteer are combined with the costs for equipment, materials, and donations, which are very important resources for the local projects (Projects Abroad (b), n.d.). Furthermore, when analysing the costs in the “[i]ndirect costs of the volunteer experience (22%)” financial category, it can be seen that the money for the local organization and the money for the global organization are mixed up in one category (Projects Abroad (b), n.d.). The description states that the money is intended for local staff and destination office rent, which would typically be allocated to the local organization. However, it is also used for monitoring and pre-departure preparation, which would typically be allocated to the global organization (Projects Abroad (b), n.d.). This makes it difficult to distinguish between funds intended for the local community and those intended for the global organization.
As shown in the “[r]ecruitment and communication” financial category of the pie chart, the second largest portion of costs goes towards the company’s self-preservation. This is demonstrated as 24% of costs being used for advertising, attracting future volunteers, and promoting the organization’s work (Projects Abroad (b), n.d.). Furthermore, 7% of costs, the “[e]xcess revenue over costs” category, are used among others for capital growth or setting up new projects, which in the end also contributes to the organization’s self-preservation (Projects Abroad (b), n.d.). Bearing this in mind, it could be argued that the organization has no intention of becoming obsolete for local projects since they are essential for its economic growth. Therefore, it can be concluded that these companies actually create new dependencies in the Global South under the premise of “helping”.
The development of orphanage volunteering in Cambodia highlights a crucial side of the voluntourism industry, by actually increasing the risk of child trafficking and child exploitation (Lyneham and Facchini 2019, 78). In Cambodia, “the number of residential care facilities for children is reported to have increased by 75 percent between 2005 and 2010”, which is also a result of the growing voluntourism industry, with a faible for orphanage volunteering, in South-East Asia (Lyneham and Facchini 2019, 76). It is known that approximately “80 to 90 percent” of children in institutional care have “at least one living parent” (Lyneham and Facchini 2019, 76) – which raises questions of why they are placed in orphanages in the first place.
One of the reasons for the increasing amount of child trafficking in Cambodia, in relation to orphan tourism and voluntourism, is due to a “vicious circle of exploitation”, involving “NGOs who need funds and a reason to exist; voluntourists and donors who naively act on their humanitarian desire; families in the Global South with insufficient resources to care for all of their children; and an aid system that is built on ongoing inequality and dependency” (Higgins-Desbiolles et al. 2023, 2792). Parents living in poverty may assume that their children receive better care and education in an orphanage (Lyneham and Facchini 2019, 85). However, there is also a practice of child trafficking that creates “orphans” on paper in order to place children in orphanages (Higgins-Desbiolles et al. 2023, 2792). Another critical side of orphanage tourism is the easy access to a place that should be safe for children, but “56 percent of projects did not require a police clearance certificate” and “93 percent did not conduct a personal interview” (Lyneham and Facchini 2019, 85) with the applicants.
The colonial idea of “white saviourism”4 complements voluntourism and has increased its social acceptance, economic growth, and influence. It means the belief that “non-White”5 people, particularly those living in the Global South, are unable to escape poverty and misery on their own and must depend on assistance from the white man (Cole 2012, n.p.). This belief is fueled by the rigorous marketing of voluntourism websites and reflected in the use of the phrases of “giving back” or “making a difference” (Verardi 2013, 67).
English Language Teaching (ELT) Voluntourism
Teaching English is one of the most popular volunteer activities. It is seen as useful and effective, which only works because English is used as a synonym for development (Jakubiak 2016, 249). “[M]any volunteer English-teaching programmes […] only require that English be a native language”, making it an especially popular activity for the monolingual English speaking countries (Bakker & Lamoureux 2008, 43). Setting the standards of English that volunteers need to fulfill to native-like fluency is harmful because it perpetuates “Native Speaker Normativity” (NNN)6. The main factor giving native English speakers credibility as teachers is the fact that they are (Western) native speakers. The majority of these trips do not require prior teaching experience or a teaching credential (Jakubiak 2016, 245). As a result of native speaker normativity, monolingual English-speaking countries and their inhabitants have a higher language value solely because of their country of origin – a myth that is still prominent in the voluntourism industry. One example: The website “Global Volunteers” states in a programme description that “[h]aving the opportunity to practise conversation and other language skills with native speakers is very important to Vietnamese students” (Global Volunteers 2022). The marketing of these volunteer trips perpetuates the idea that speaking English is a necessity for rural and disconnected areas to improve their social-economic situation (Jakubiak 2016, 248) and that (Western) native English speakers are the best-suited to teach English, even without prior experience or professional training (Editor’s note: we witnessed this tension ourselves, as German teachers of English in Lao P.D.R.).
In her 2016 study, Cori Jakubiak (2016) interviewed ELT volunteers and attempted to schematize their responses to the topic of how and why ELT volunteers will help the development of a nation. The top four reasons that ELT volunteers decided to participate in these trips were filtered out and will be further explained in the following. Firstly, one reason given by the ELT volunteers was that people would have access to the global economy if they could communicate in English. However, this argument measures prosperity by economic wealth, which can be problematic given that economic development is no guarantee for prosperity (Saitō 2024, 84). Additionally, it eliminates the reality that “non-English”7 speaking nations are being excluded without justification by implying that English is the key to a nation’s involvement in international decisions (Jakubiak 2016, 250-251).
This is connected to the second argument that says that speaking English will make people understand more about the conflicts in the world, implying that English media is the most objective and neutral media in the world and does not transport colonial epistemologies (Jakubiak 2016, 251-252). Thirdly, ELT volunteers claimed that they distribute culture, which was significant to many volunteers because they believed that understanding Western culture would help the local communities and individuals grow. This argument displays the ongoing colonial attitude and eurocentrism that is still prevalent (Jakubiak 2016, 252-253).
Lastly, the ELT volunteers justified their trips by explaining that critical thinking is a necessary component of the school system in Western cultures and is taught in their classrooms. This is an ethnocentric point of view that on the one hand does not include the colonial context in which most school systems were established: “Pedagogy in the colonial context was often tied to lessons in submission. Form rather than content was the goal” (Jakubiak 2016, 254-255). And on the other hand, it seems to assume that critical thinking is only taught in Western school systems, which is not only overbearing but also a very example of uncritical thinking.
Overall, the voluntourism industry supports a system of teaching that is based on outdated, racist, and discriminating oppressive principles: Native speaker normativity, white saviourism and Neo-Coloniality.8 Its success is due to clever marketing that appeals to the naive and uncritical youth and romanticises the idea of “making a difference”. Given that it is managed by for-profit businesses and private organizations and appeals to morality inside the individual, voluntourism is a perfect fit for neoliberal ideology9 (McGloin and Georgeou 2019, 415).
Some people believe that short-term volunteer tourism visits do not actually benefit the local area (Bakker and Lamoureux 2008, 41). Others think that even one day of service combined with six days of sightseeing or surfing is preferable to no service at all (Bakker and Lamoureux 2008, 42). Voluntourism reflects the mentality that every form of help is good, even if it is only small and with minimal effect, because at least you are “helping”. This mentality is problematic and ineffective. Wanting to help is important and shows good character, but it needs to be accompanied with critical thinking. The question of who is profiting from this should always be clearly answered in all its dimensions before participating in a volunteer programme.
The voluntourism industry preys on young and naive individuals that want to do “good” in the world and exploits a character trait that should not be exploited for profit but rather be supported in a constructive way, for example in school lessons, bi-directional exchanges, or university seminars. Furthermore, the exploitation of the local communities through the profit-driven voluntourism industry is evident and should not be further fueled. Therefore, it is important for volunteers and ex-volunteers to reflect on their experiences or future experiences and neatly process if the project is sustainable, useful, and really needed. In general, volunteers should be skeptical of projects that require a fee. Furthermore, they should research the organization or company in charge of the project and use their critical thinking skills to reflect on its motivations, intentions, and abilities. Volunteers could also reach out to former volunteers and ask them about their experiences, read reviews or write reviews about bad experiences. Alternatively, rather than volunteering abroad, we could consider how to build meaningful relationships with the so-called Global South that are based on mutual respect and reciprocity, not exploitation or one-way mobilities.
Text by Juliette Esposito
Illustrations by Juliette Esposito after “Projects Abroad”
Media by www.youtube.com
Watch “The Dark Side of Rich Kids Volunteering” by VICE for more insights on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL8CIZej19o
Dr Samantha Nutt on the Problems of Volunteer Tourism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6noWoS6QXw
TransBorderscapes: Decolonial media:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fI1Q9kQdNfM
Liz Dozier on “Decolonizing the mind to change lives”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYg7sfjrGXs
Notes
1 The quotation stems from a presentation which Dr Lilla Watson, a Gangulu woman, gave in 2004. She prefers the credit to go to the collective who created this awareness, i.e. the Aboriginal activists group Queensland of the 1970s.
2 Originally, the term “Third World” did not mean “poor”, but referred to neutral countries which were neither part of the capitalist nor the communist power bloc. The terms “First World” and “Third World” were coined by demographer Alfred Sauvy in his 1952 classification of three worlds after WWII, when tensions between the two superpowers were growing into a “Cold War” (1947-1991). Sauvy divided countries based on their political orientation and economic strength. This later evolved into the idea of “developed”, “underdeveloped”, and “developing” countries. In either case, it forces the binary separation of “us” and “them”, which evolved into the belief of moral superiority by the ethnocentrism in the West (Brodzinski-González 2023, 16).
3 In his early anthropological works, Immanuel Kant advances a hierarchical classification of human “races” that positions “whites” at the top. By attributing intellectual and moral “deficiencies” to “non-Whites”, Kant provided elements of an argument that was used to legitimize colonial governance (Kleingeld, 2019).
4 The term “white saviourism” goes back to the claim (which grew into a tenet) that white people have the “obligation” to “help” other cultures by spreading their “civilized” morals, beliefs, or culture. The justification for white saviourism was constructed by European Enlightenment philosophy, colonialism, capitalism, and racism. This was advocated in the iconic poem “The White Man’s Burden” by Rudyard Kippling in 1899, which served to justify US colonization of the Philippines: “Take up the White Man’s burden/ Send forth the best ye breed / Go bind your sons to exile / To serve your captives’ need” (from Kipling, 1899). This implies that the white race is responsible for “saving” the non-white races from their own “savagery”, as they are deemed to be incapable of helping themselves. Therefore, the young generation is sent to “help” foreign countries by colonizing them.
5 “Non-White” refers to citizens who are racialized as outside the dominant White group in a given society. The use of “non-” makes lexically clear what the default category is mentally.
6 “Native speaker normativity” is the newer term used for the native-speaker ideal or “native speakerism” and describes the idea of the native-speaker being the superior English speaker due to their nativeness. The native speaker is given prestige on the basis of their (Western) origin. For further information check “Pronunciation issues for L2 speakers of English“, “2 Erasmus+ Mobilities to SKU and finishing our PhDs“, or “Reviewing English schook books“, or wait for “The neo-colonial role of English” (article-in-progress).
7 “Non-English speaking” refers to nations and communities in the Global South where English is not the dominant language and where ELT volunteers often intervene. These communities are structurally excluded from decision-making due to their lack of English knowledge, creating an unbalanced power dynamic that pressures them to learn English while their own languages and perspectives remain undervalued.
8 “Neo-coloniality” refers to the indirect influence of former coloniser nations or so-called “First World” countries over formerly colonised, often so-called “developing” nations. This power dynamic is maintained through unequal relationships in trade and politics, as well as ongoing cultural influence over language or cultural norms and practices.
9 “Neoliberal ideology” refers to the belief that minimal government control is the most efficient form of market regulation promoting economic growth and, ultimately, human progress. Neoliberalism criticises the redistribution of wealth on the basis that it inevitably leads to totalitarianism. Within neoliberal ideology, social problems are often framed as individual failures, shifting accountability from the state to the individual. Also, proficiency in the English language is seen as key for individual advancement.
Bakker, Martine, and Kristin Lamoureux. 2008. “Volunteer Tourism.” International Travel & Tourism Analyst 16.
Cole, Teju. 2012. “The White-Savior Industrial Complex” The Atlantic, 21 March. Accessed August 31, 2022. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/03/the-white-savior-industrial-complex/254843/
Cambridge Dictionary. s.v. “voluntourism (U.).” Accessed August 30, 2022. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/voluntourism
Higgins-Desbiolles, Freya, Regina A. Scheyvens, and Bhanu Bhatia. 2023. “Decolonising tourism and development: from orphanage tourism to community empowerment in Cambodia.”
Jakubiak, Cori. 2016. “Ambiguous Aims: English-language Voluntourism as Development.” Journal of Language, Identity & Education 15 (4): 245-258.
Kipling, Rudyard. 1899. “The White Man’s Burden” McClure’s Magazine, February. 12(4). Accessed February 23, 2026. https://www.google.ca/books/edition/McClure_s_Magazine/hF0DAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA290
Kleingeld, P. 2019. On Dealing with Kant’s Sexism and Racism. SGIR Review, 2 (2), 3-22. https://philpapers.org/rec/KLEODW
Lyneham, Samantha, and Lachlan Facchini. 2019. “Benevolent harm: Orphanages, voluntourism and child sexual exploitation in South-East Asia.” Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice 574: 1-16.
McGloin, Colleen and Nichole Georgeou. 2016. “Looks good on your CV’: The sociology of voluntourism recruitment in higher education.” Journal of Sociology 52(2): 403-417.
Verardi, Cassandra. 2013. Perceptions of Voluntourism. MA thesis, University of Ottawa. Library and Archives Canada. ISBN 978-0-494-94593-3.
Websites
Global Volunteers. “Nepal teacher volunteering.” Accessed August 31, 2022. https://responsibletravel.com/holiday/24253/nepal-teacher-volunteering#accessibility
Godin, Melissa. 2021. “Voluntourism: new book explores how volunteer trips harm rather than help“ The Guardian, 10 June. Accessed August 8, 2022. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/ 2021/jun/10/voluntourism-new-book-explores-how-volunteer-trips-harm-rather-than- help
Projects Abroad (a), n.d. “Medical Internships in Jamaica.” Accessed August 31, 2022. https://projects-abroad.org/projects/medicine-internship-jamaica/
Projects Abroad (b), n.d. “Where does the money go?” Accessed October 6, 2022. https://docs.projects-abroad.co.uk/about-us/money-matters/handbook-volunteersfees.pdf
Projects Abroad (c), n.d. “Main Volunteer and Internship Brochure.” Accessed January 5, 2023. https://projects-abroad.org/about-us/brochure-leaflets/
Responsible Travel. “Vietnam Community Invite” Accessed August 31, 2022. https://globalvolunteers.org/vietnam-community-invite/
Rosenberg, Tina. 2018. “The business of voluntourism: do western do-gooders actually do harm?” The Guardian, 13 September. Accessed August 8, 2022.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/sep/ 13/the-business-of-voluntourism-do-western-do-gooders-actually-do-harm
You must be logged in to post a comment.