BootsnAll's Travel Community

So let me set the stage. While traveling this month I met a young American gal..25 yrs old who is making a movie called Beyond Good Intentions. A film about aid, volunteerism and passion which makes NGO's work and also fail. In general she feels that 2 week volunteer programs where you pay to go teach, or similar ones where you volunteer for a very short period fail...they harm more than they do good.

In general she feels the current model of aid and help is failing. She feels we can support the local communities but its the passion and commitment of these locals and their own recongnistion of their issues that will be successful.

We met another traveler who insisted that the school he started in Uganda is great..he did something good...he made a diff. He is not actively involved in it...has not been back since.

I don't know what the right answer is...I do not have experience.I personally think that the answer lies somewhere in between...i still am trying to pondering on some of the questions she posed.

What do you folks think. Do you think that first to pay to volunteer is the right thing. Do you feel short term volunteer work is helpful. Do you feel just having good intention behind your work helps. Or do you think we do all this to "feel good"

Tori's website
http://www.beyondgoodintentions.org/

Thanks for the link, Madhu! We've discussed this a couple times in the Volunteering, TEFL-ing & Working Abroad forum. Two semi-recent threads were Best thing about volunteering overseas and Paying to voluteer?

My personal read is that...

...most short term efforts have little or negative effects and seem to be more about the volunteer than the cause . I qualify that with 'most' because some people have reported solid efforts.
...most pay to work efforts seem like summer camp for college students with parents with too much money

Why do I have such nasty thoughts about the short term-ers? Well...I think that people over value their potential contribution and undervalue the support infrastructure they receive. I am also concerned about organizations that exist to meet the easy-to-volunteer demand rather than serve a community.

Again, thanks for the link...will follow up on it!

(I'll be you 100 Baht that a moderator moves this post in the next day.)

Well, I don't want Stoo to get 100 Baht from you Madhu, so I'm gonna leave this here...for now.

I agree that an organized two-week volunteer stint has a minimal effect for the local community. But like travel itself, I think the experience can at least start to change people's minds - the volunteers' minds, perhaps. That doesn't happen all the time - and I think it's unfortunate if "volunteers" walk away from it thinking they've "brought the west to others" or something when really it's been about their own experience.

I think most of us just can't dedicate our whole lives to a cause, but plenty still want to be a part of something like that, and if volunteers leave their situation and go home and spread the word or even think differently about things themselves, it isn't all bad.

It is a really interesting topic whether an initiative coming form a foreigner can make a difference. I definitely see the point that change needs to come from within, maybe similar to on a personal level (people don't change because someone else pressures them to). That said, sometimes it takes drastically new ideas to shake things up, whether they are ideas from an odd foreigner or from a local with an imagination.

I haven't read your link yet, but I will - VERY interesting after only a quick look. I'll be back!

A great topic Madhu.

I think no matter what or where, local involvement is the most important part of making change a real thing. Doesn't matter if it's well-meaning volunteers flying in to Africa to help, then leaving, or well-meaning volunteers flying to contested states to turn out the vote -- those actions are important and better than doing nothing, but we're always most effective in the communities that we are part of, rather than the ones we are outsider to. Grassroots efforts are almost always more effective than top-down models. They use less resources and have more leverage, more knowledge of how local systems work.

BUT I don't think that a) that's always true (i.e. you may have a skill that a local community doesn't have that's beneficial to them) b) this means our volunteer efforts don't really affect anything.

I think it means we can continually educate ourselves about the full results of our actions, and keep refining the quality of how we volunteer.

On the whole paying-to-volunteer thing, I'm leery. But mainly because I'm cheap I don't mind paying for basic accomodation and food in the local currency, but the concept of paying $1,000 or $2,000 to work for free for a couple weeks seems wrong somehow, even though I know the money is helping a good cause. I do also understand that teaching short-term volunteers can suck time and resources away from organizations, but it doesn't make sense somehow.

Being a semi veteran on the boards I thought about the Volunteer board but I wanted a wider audience and also so that I can share the film's link in case you had suggestions for Tori and Erik.

Thanks Mod!

Well, Madhu, we do have to split the 100 Baht, you understand...

quote:

Originally posted by Madhu:
What do you folks think. Do you think that first to pay to volunteer is the right thing. Do you feel short term volunteer work is helpful. Do you feel just having good intention behind your work helps. Or do you think we do all this to "feel good"

Awesome topic, Madhu!

I think that it is possible for short term volunteer efforts to be useful, in the proper context, but unfortunately, that is not the case in the majority of instances.

I've participated in Habitat for Humanity work with "paying" volunteers that I thought were useful. The reason(s) that I think they worked are that there was a local H for H organization that was planning and mobilizing in the community, and the paying volunteer teams came in to do specific tactical work (usually building houses) that was identified by the local organization. H for H also has a process in place that makes sure that the local organization gets a certain percentage of the volunteer fees for the local organization's use, and also the local office works to make sure that the volunteers' food and lodging payments go to the community where they are working.

There are a lot of cases where short term volunteering don't work, for a lot of different reasons. Here are some that I've seen:

- The efforts that the volunteers are participating in don't actually make the local community stronger. For example, feeding people or providing them with external medical care may be the right thing in a crisis, but it doesn't make the community more able to care for themselves after the volunteers leave.

- The programs being offered aren't a good fit for the local culture and environment. Western techniques often don't translate well to available resources, knowledge and preferences.

- The programs focus on training people in the religious and political preferences of the organization offering the aid, to the detriment of the actual need with which we promised to help.

- The programs are not well planned for long term sustainment. For example, I've seen agricultural programs designed to grow food from perennial plants, but the locals get cold in the winter and burn them for wood.

- The money that the volunteers pay to participate end up going to advertising the program and entertaining the volunteers, and very little ends up supporting the community where work is going on.

- The program scores pretty low on the "actual" benefit to the community, but it scores well on the "fun for volunteers" measure. Programs like this frequently take volunteers and funds away from programs that could do some real good.

I'm sure there are lots of other things that play into this very compex situation, but these are what I've seen.

La

CIB and La Rosser have excellent points on high level, top down approach to problems with international aid and stuff. It is heart breaking to see so much money, effort and good will squandered. I sorta went off into my own little bottom up tangent, but whatever.

I have the great pleasure to be still working with a Swiss-founded, Thai-registered charity that works incredibly effectually and with a good, solid impact on the target communities--the poorest children of the MeKong River Valley. Basically, it works like this: a grass roots effort has a plan that needs funding. the charity audits the plans and its impact. the charity finds some rich people who are willing to fund the project. the project is built. children benefit. afterwards, the charity keeps an eye on things to watch for any dodgy stuff.

I am very impressed with how they work. The grass roots angle, the auditing effort, etc.

www.childsdream.org

They have set the standard to which I now hold all charitable organizations.

A very interesting topic. Two-weeks just doesn't seem like enough time. But maybe the point is to expose westerners to the plight of people from third world countries. Maybe it isn't just about doing good it is about being good and becoming better.

I think our best example on bootsnall is Conor Grennan of How Conor Is Spending All His Money blog fame. On his RTW he took three months and volunteered at the Little Princes Children's Home in Godawari, Nepal. That was in 2004 and 2005. Inspired by these fantasic children, he returned two more times and finally moved to Nepal this year to start his own Childrens Home and anti-child trafficking institute called Next Generation Nepal.

Does a volunteering vacation work? I say yes. Ask the 16 boys and 10 girls who now live in the Dhaulairi House, the children's home set up by Conor and his colleague, Farid Ait-Mansour. Or the parents and families of the 24 children whom Conor contacted in a dangerous and brutal trek into the remote region of Humla. [His blog entry reads like something out of an adventure article in Outside Magazine.] Ask the two brothers who were on the verge of death when Conor rescued from the streets and who are now back in Humla with their parents. For me the answer is not "Do volunteering vacations work?" but rather, "How can we make volunteering vacations that will change the lives of the volunteers and the those they are are volunteering to help?"

Just my $0.02

Jet

As a former long term volunteer I have have some problems with short term volunteering in general. Although I think that some good can come of it I find that there are a lot of negatives involved.

First of all I was a seasoned traveller when I did do my volunteering stint so was used to being in developing countries and was very aware of cultural differences. I knew how to live in conditions that many find hard to deal with on volunteering trips; especially those on short term committments.

1. It takes time to become aclimated or inculturated to a new region and people.

2. It takes time to understand what the people actualy need versus what you think they need.

3. With very few exceptions(Kudos to Conor) most short term volunteers have no lasting connection to what they are doing.

I am not saying that short term volunteers do not do good but I have seen cases where they did more well intentioned harm than good.

I have also seen that in long term volunteers as well. But with long term volunteers there is usually better preperation by the organization sending the volunteers. Many short term volunteers get a pamphlet on the shots to get and what to bring and two page information sheet on where they are going and how to get their visas.

I have also seen long term volunteers get off the plane when I went to pick them up and run screaming(literally) to the ticket desk to get out right away. Some people, no matter what the preperation, can't handle it.

Personally I believe that volunteering is a rewarding experience and will probably will be doing it again. If someone feels the call to do so more power to them. But always look into the organization that will suit them best.

Getting off soap box now.

Call me Pollyanna, but I prefer to subscribe to the "starfish theory".

"Starfish Theory" humm what that?

I will pass on the link to Tori to get the link you provided to some of the organizations.

Some excellent points made above. However, JetGirl, I think Connor is a different case from what we are discussing here. Volunteers with money are generally in a different category, and three months spent in an orphanage is far different from two weeks. In my experience in social work there are huge problems with short term volunteers:

1. They have no training and it takes a lot of time and resources to monitor them and find stuff for them to do. This time and these resources could be far better spent doing something constructive. Since the people doing the supervising are usualy employees, this costs money. If the volunteers don't pay then the programm will most likely have a financial loss due to the volunteers presence.

2. Unless a person has specific skills they can bring to the table, it is far better to get the work done with the locals or recipients of the project. It is always better for a project's long-term success if the people who are helped by it are also involved in helping themselves. And I also think that it is amazingly arrogant for an 18yr old American or European kid to think he or she has more skills that an adults in the country being visited. Get an education first.

3. If you speak English only and are going to a country with a different language (and have no other skills to speak of) then you are by definition a person not fit to find work in that country and through you lacking language skills not qualified to work efficiently even in unskilled labor. Logically, you are also not qualified to help. Even if you have other skills which may be usefull, if you lack the language you might end up being pretty useless.

4. There are things that the poor people of this world need far more than basic english. Literacy for instance. Or solid job skills. But to teach either of these, you need to be able to communicate with the people involved and that - again - means speaking their language. On top of that, ask any teacher you know if it's possible to teach effectively if the teachers themselves are changed every other week. Under such circumstances it is next to impossible to develop an effective educational program with high standards.

5. Here is the big exception: having short term volunteers makes sense IF they continue to be interested and involved in the project after they return home. Most often this means that they do some fundraising or work to raise awareness of social problems. If they do neither then the best you can hope for is that the whoel experience was at least an educational one for the volunteer.

quote:

Originally posted by Madhu:
"Starfish Theory" humm what that?

It goes something like this....There was a man walking along the beach where thousands of starfish had been washed up and would be left to die if they didn't get back to the ocean. He was throwing them back one by one when someone pointed out that what he was doing wasn't making any difference because there were so many and he could only get a relative few thrown back in. His response was that even though he may not have made a big impact over all, to the individual starfish he was able to save he made all the difference.

This is such an interesting topic to me, and I don't really consider myself "qualified" to get too into it, but here are a few thoughts anyway:

- I guess I think that the concept of paying to volunteer is totally separate from the question of "does the current model of aid work"...I think most of us can agree that the impact of a two week volunteer is going to be rather minimal for the community/issue at hand...but I'd say that while this is definitely an industry (arranging paid volunteer placements) - it is different from the current model of aid - the current model of aid in general is not based on people paying to volunteer. I still think it's an interesting question if this current model of aid "works" ?? (and that ?? means I don't know, so maybe Elis or Lost76 or someone else working in a related field is in a position to have a more educated opinion than me and can post...)

- I'd also just say that there is probably a large difference between finding a local organization with a specific need and paying them for your training and accommodation - and paying a "placement organization" that makes this their business and essentially creates a volunteer experience. I don't think either of these is the best of the best - ultimately it makes a lot of sense that locals can do the work the best - but I still think there is a a lot of room for variety among situations where a person might pay to volunteer.