© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This section of the journal encourages discussion between several authors on a policy-related topic. The same question may, therefore, be addressed from different theoretical, cultural or spatial perspectives. Dialogues may be applied or highly abstract. This Dialogue starts with this contribution and is followed by four comments by Sharpley https://doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2017.1362798; Reid https://doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2017.1362799; Coghlan https://doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2017.1362800 and, finally, Burrai and Hannam’s reflections prompted by the observations of fellow contributors https://doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2017.1362810

Bebbington A.

Butcher J.

Elisa Burrai

Harvey D.

Kevin Hannam

McGehee N. G.

Mostafanezhad M.

Urry J.

Burrai, E

Hannam, K

Leeds Beckett Repository

1  Challenging the Responsibility of ‘Responsible Volunteer Tourism’   Introduction Volunteering in tourism is changing.  An increasing number of organisations no longer merely advocate volunteering but now offer opportunities to volunteer responsibly. The difference between volunteering and volunteering responsibly is rarely explained but the latter implies a stronger moral dimension; to participate is to evidently do good. To that extent, the promotion of responsible volunteer tourism might reasonably appeal to policy-makers seeking to maximise socio-economic welfare of those living in particular destinations.  This Dialogues paper questions the ability of organisations to offer, and for actors to participate in, ‘responsible’ volunteering.  Moreover, it argues that the notion of responsible volunteer tourism offers no more than a veneer of respectability to an activity which has complex consequences which are potentially valuable or damaging in their effect.  Hence, there is a danger that responsible volunteer tourism amounts to little more than a marketing device to attract more participants rather than address the root causes of inequalities that neoliberalism entails. This paper thus seeks to challenge academics and policy makers to critically rethink responsible tourism and, more specifically responsible volunteer tourism. In line with the critical turn in tourism studies, we emphasise the need to address the political structures and imbalances of responsible tourism discourses (Jamal et al., 2013) as we consider the ethicality and practice of responsible volunteer tourism.  The paper develops this critique through four key issues that remain apparent. Firstly, we argue that responsible volunteer tourism remains integral to neoliberalism which emphasises market based economics as the solution to poverty at the expense of broader state interventions into the social inequalities that responsible volunteer tourists engage with. Secondly, we argue that responsible volunteer tourism emphasises the responsibility of the individual (often without any real accountability) to solve the problems of social inequalities and thus masks the need for the broader actions that responsible tourism asks for. Thirdly, we note the inherent power relations that are involved in any form of responsible volunteer tourism and how this is predicated on a ‘care for the self’ rather than a care for the other. Fourthly, we highlight the continued neo-colonialism involved in responsible volunteer tourism through ongoing Eurocentrism. Fifthly, we acknowledge the ways in which so called green marketing of responsible tourism also masks inequalities through discourses of heroism and greenwashing. It is concluded that policy makers need to be much more critical of responsible volunteer tourism if they are to avoid the Cassandra complex.  Neoliberalism Volunteer tourism shares similar values of care and awareness with responsible tourism. At first, the latter emerged as an alternative and responsible form of travelling (Wearing, 2001; McGehee, 2002) and it has been also been referred to as justice, pro-poor, or goodwill tourism (Butcher and Smith, 2010; Rogerson, 2011). Nonetheless, rising concerns over industry practices and subsequent attempts to improve its operations have marked a shift from being implicitly responsible volunteer tourism to be openly labelled responsible volunteer tourism.  This is particularly evident if we look at the recent efforts made by the industry to develop and adhere to guidelines for the creation of 2  ‘more responsible’ volunteer tourism experiences. In this article we critique the implications and complexities that underpin ‘more responsible’ volunteer tourism products and experiences. The volunteer tourism industry is integrated into the growth-focused logics of neoliberalism and it follows the same economic model of “relentless growth in global consumption” (Carrington et al., 2015: 2). As a result of growth in contemporary capitalism, everyday consumption practices are subject to change to satisfy new consumer’s desires for a laudable focus on sustainability, ethics and social justice. This, allows possibilities of alternative consumption which “inadvertently works to thwart the destruction of capitalism” saving it from itself through the creation of a “more just, more sustainable, kinder” (Carrington et al., 2015:3) type of capitalism. Conceptualising responsible volunteer tourism within this neoliberal capitalist context facilitates a more critical understanding of the difficulties and often paradoxes that permeate the commercial and moral drivers of developing responsible volunteer tourism experiences. The danger is that advocates of responsible volunteer tourism become complicit in masking the unequal relationships that precipitate the need for the very actions they support.   Individualism The growth in responsible tourism discourses is part of the wider neoliberalisation of development and humanitarianism in tourism (Mostanfanezhad and Hannam, 2014). In neoliberal terms there is an absence of collective values and aspirations introduced by the enhancement of individualism and self-interest (Harvey, 2005) which are replicated in responsible tourism through the activation of mechanisms of responsibility attributed to individual consumers. The focus on the individual rather than the society emphasises a shift in the political agenda which prioritises individuals’ roles of doing good in the society alleviating, at the same time, the public scene from moral obligations. This resonates with what Vrasti and Montsion (2014: 341) have suggested in that: “the relation of responsibility that ties individuals and their communities is no longer based on collective bonds and social obligations given through a national project so much as on capricious ethical and affective principles, like volunteerism”. Hence, ethics, care and responsibility become part of a personal project yet they remain mediated by the marketplace. Responsible volunteer tourism as an individualised project displays all the symptoms of the Cassandra complex where people know the problem but ignore the complexity of the underlying answers (see Urry, 2016).   Power relations The neoliberal boundaries which confine discourses of ethics and responsibility are entangled with notions of power which circulate and defines individual’s roles in responsible volunteer tourism. Foucault (1982) famously demonstrated that in terms of power relations, governments were shifting towards a greater individualised ‘care of the self’ involving a devolution of power which made the individual more responsible for their own actions but simultaneously legitimised society to ‘uncare’ for the majority. Power is rooted in human relations and “in everyday life which categorises the individual, marks him (sic) by his own individuality, attaches him (sic) to his (sic) own identity, imposes a law of truth on him (sic) which he (sic) must recognise…It is a form of power which makes individual subjects” (Foucault, 1982: 781). On the one hand, this leads us to contextualise volunteer tourism as part of the transformation of today’s societies which links productivity and commodities to moral values. On the other hand, responsible volunteer tourism promotes care, compassion and individual dispositions for a fairer world. According to Vrasti and Mointsion (2014: 337) volunteer 3  tourism is, therefore, placed within the “so called Third Way neoliberalism [which] sees no contradiction between market rationality and moral actions”. This exposes practitioners and academics alike to some of the complexities that underpin volunteer tourism.  Eurocentrism  Volunteer tourism, like other forms of responsible tourism, emerges from the concepts of Western development and aid (Guttentag, 2009; McGehee and Andereck, 2008) that still reinforce a neo-colonial project of the West knows best.  Eurocentric definitions of progress and amelioration exclude knowledge systems which are not part of the West. Western views of development are constituted by an interrelated dimension: on the one hand, it embraces the contradictory “set of processes underlying capitalist developments” (Bebbington, Hickey and Mitlin, 2008: 5) while, on the other hand, it refers to a plan of “intervention in the ‘third world’ that emerged in a context of decolonization” (Hart, 2001: 650). Programmes of intervention are carried out by aid agencies (both commercial and third sector) which often prioritise economic outcomes over the social transformation of the places where they operate. The privatisation of development becomes part of the wider neoliberal agenda of the government and markets even as it promotes bottom-up approaches to ameliorate the wellbeing of people and destinations, particularly in the so-called Global South.  Responsible Volunteer Tourism Marketing This passage from the macro (i.e. society) to the micro level (companies and volunteer tourists) of intervention contributes to weaken systems to control and regulate the tourism industry exercised by the state. Instead, it encourages the growth of models of corporate self-regulation which often take the form of Western codes of practice, guidelines or examples of best practice which are then utilised for marketing purposes. These models are valued by the industry as Campbell argues (2006: 930) because “it is better to control the regulatory process themselves than to be forced by the state to succumb to a process and a set of standards over which they would have little control”. Self-regulation goes hand in hand with self-praise which has been highlighted in previous studies in volunteer tourism as the desire of volunteers to make a difference, to feel good and to contribute to something worthwhile but also at a macro level through award programmes that highlight so called ‘best practice’ in volunteer tourism. In this context, Smith and Font (2014: 942) have noted that: “preference is given to communicating what is easy, and not what is important. The status of the organisation is no guarantee of responsible practice, and price and responsibility communications display an inverse relationship. … volunteer tourism operators are over positioning and communicating responsibility inconsistently, which highlights greenwashing…” Responsible volunteer tourism, thus, self-validates itself and its participants as somehow being accountable by praising individual heroism which is “normally confined to acts of bravery or sacrifice, such as would be rewarded with medals or trophies” (Tomazos and Butler, 2010: 22). Examples of this can be seen in the Guardian International Development Achievement Award where individuals who were “making a difference to improve the lives of some of the world’s poorest people” were invited to nominate an “unsung hero in international development and give them the recognition they deserve”, or, similarly, the annual responsible tourism award ceremony which celebrates “heroes of responsible tourism” and “the most inspirational and enduring responsible tourism experiences” (Responsible Tourism, 2016).   Conclusions 4  While responsible volunteer tourism experiences may be desirable, and the values of altruism and care noble, the creation of self-organising modes of industry governance is problematic.  This is exacerbated by the lack of critical and conceptual engagement with the meaning of responsibility which emerges from a “lack of sufficient ontology in structuring a way forward” (Fennell, 2008: 4). In addition to this, the de-contextualisation of responsible and volunteer tourism discourses from wider geopolitical landscapes and global institutional governance (Jamal et al, 2013: 4600) expose the industry to neoliberal challenges and ambivalent outcomes (Fennell, 2013).  Further, the lack of regulatory systems weakens “the welfare of those operating at the margins of the economy by requiring others to involve them as part of the tourist offer” (Koens and Thomas, 2016: 11). Therefore, in order to rethink responsible volunteer tourism as a social and economic development strategy we need to reconsider our critical engagement with both the concept and the practices of tourism organisations and ‘responsible’ volunteer tourists. In order to avoid simplistic categorisations of what is portrayed to be right and to be wrong we need to question the efficacy of lifestyle politics (i.e. individual political engagement versus common arena) in ethical tourism (see Butcher and Smith, 2015).  This paper advocates the adoption of a radical critique of responsible volunteer tourism. This should encompass more radical ways of engaging the public sector and government, as well as a more appropriately politicised engagement of individuals with the concepts of responsibility, care and development through more complex systems thinking as the future of tourism and development cannot be reduced to the actions of individual actions however ‘responsible’ they may aim to be.  References Bebbington, A., Hickey, S. and Mitlin, D. C. (2008) Can NGOs Make a Difference? The Challenge of Development Alternatives, London, Zed Books. Butcher, J. and Smith, P. (2010) Making a difference: volunteer tourism and development, Tourism Recreation Research, 35 (1), pp.27-36. Butcher, J. and Smith, P. (2015) Volunteer tourism: The lifestyle politics of international development, London: Routledge. Campbell, J. L. (2006) Institutional analysis and the paradox of corporate social responsibility, American Behavioral Scientist, 49, pp.925–938. Carrington, M., Zwick, D. and Neville, B. (2015) The ideology of the ethical consumption gap, Marketing Theory, DOI: 10.1177/1470593115595674, pp.1-18. Fennell, D. A. (2008) Responsible tourism: A Kierkegaardian interpretation, Tourism Recreation Research, 33(1), pp.3–12. Firat, A.F. (1996) The Unmanageable Consumer: Contemporary Consumption and Its Fragmentations, Journal of Consumer Policy, 19(3), pp.393. Foucault, M. (1982) The Subject and Power, Critical Inquiry, 8 (4), pp.777-795. Guttentag, D. (2009) The Possible Negative Impacts of Volunteer Tourism, International Journal of Tourism Research, 11 (6), pp.537-55. Hart, G. (2001) Development Critiques in the 1990s: Culs de Sac and Promising Paths, Progress in Human Geography, 25, pp. 649-658. 5  Harvey, D. (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Jamal, T., Camargo, B. A., Wilson, E. (2013) Critical omissions and new directions for sustainable tourism: A situated macro-micro approach, Sustainability, 5, pp.4594–4613. Koens, K. and Thomas, R. (2016) “You know that's a rip-off”: policies and practices surrounding micro-enterprises and poverty alleviation in South African township tourism, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, DOI: 10.1080/09669582.2016.1145230 McGehee, N.G. (2002) Alternative tourism and social movements, Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (1), pp.124–143. McGehee N.G. and Andereck K. (2008) ‘Pettin’ the Critters’: Exploring the Complex Relationship Between Volunteers and the Voluntoured in McDowell County, West Virginia, USA, and Tijuana, Mexico, In: Lyons, K. and Wearing S. (eds), Journeys of Discovery in Volunteer Tourism, Cambridge, CABI Publishing, pp.12–24. Mostafanezhad, M. and Hannam, K. (2014), Moral encounters in tourism, Ashgate Publishing Ltd., Farnham, Surrey.  Responsible Travel (2016) Awards. Available at: http://www.responsibletravel.com/awards/about/ (accessed 20 April 2016)  Rogerson, C. (2011) Youth tourism in Africa: evidence from South Africa, Tourism Analysis, 16(2), pp.105-120. Smith, V. and Font, X. (2014) Volunteer tourism, greenwashing and understanding responsible marketing using market signalling theory. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(6), pp.942-963.  Tomazos, K. and Butler, R. (2010) The volunteer tourist as ‘hero’, Current Issues in Tourism, 13 (4), pp.363-380.   Urry, J. (2016) What is the future? Cambridge: Polity.  Vrasti, W. and J. M. Montsion (2014) ‘No Good Deed Goes Unrewarded: The Values/Virtues of Transnational Volunteerism in Neoliberal Capital’, Global Society, 28, pp.336–55. Wearing, S. (2001) Volunteer tourism: experiences that make a difference, Wallingford, CABI Publishing.                     

Challenging the responsibility of ‘responsible volunteer tourism’

Crossref

Journal of Policy Research in Tourism Leisure and Events

This section of the journal encourages discussion between several authors on a policy-related topic. The same question may, therefore, be addressed from different theoretical, cultural or spatial perspectives. Dialogues may be applied or highly abstract. The Dialogue in this issue starts with Burrai and Hannam contribution here https://doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2017.136280

Sharpley, Richard Anthony john

CLoK

ArticleResponsible volunteer tourism: tautology or oxymoron? A comment on Burrai and HannamSharpley, Richard Anthony johnAvailable at http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/19696/Sharpley, Richard Anthony john ORCID: 0000­0002­2135­3206 (2017) Responsible volunteer tourism: tautology or oxymoron? A comment on Burrai and Hannam. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events . pp. 1­5. ISSN 1940­7963  It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2017.1362798For more information about UCLan’s research in this area go to http://www.uclan.ac.uk/researchgroups/ and search for <name of research Group>.For information about Research generally at UCLan please go to http://www.uclan.ac.uk/research/ All outputs in CLoK are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, includingCopyright law.  Copyright, IPR and Moral Rights for the works on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/policies/CLoKCentral Lancashire online Knowledgewww.clok.uclan.ac.ukResponsible volunteer tourism: tautology or oxymoron?    Introduction That so-called responsible volunteer tourism would be proposed as a new and, implicitly, morally superior form of volunteer tourism was entirely predictable. Though yet (perhaps thankfully) to enter the academic lexicon, responsible volunteer tourism or, more broadly, responsible volunteering, is a term increasingly employed to refer to a ‘truly fulfilling and impactful voluntouring experience’ (Plummer, 2015). In other words, it refers to an allegedly alternative approach to the volunteer tourism phenomenon that seeks to optimise the benefits to both the volunteer and host community whilst avoiding its recognised negative consequences (Guttentag, 2009; Palacios, 2010). And as such, the emergence of responsible volunteer tourism reflects that of the concept of responsible tourism more generally. Initially considered a necessary, though controversial, alternative to mass tourism development (Harrison and Husbands 1996; Hayward, 1988; Wheeller, 1991), responsible tourism has more recently been broadly conceptualised (again, controversially) as a means of minimizing tourism’s negative consequences whilst enhancing both the well-being of host communities and the tourist experience (Goodwin, 2011).  This emphasis on ‘responsible’ inevitably suggests that, in some cases, volunteer tourism may be ‘irresponsible’; that is, it may result in limited or unintended outcomes in terms of the volunteer’s experience or the benefits accruing to the host community. And this is often the case. Many examples of such ‘irresponsible’ volunteer tourism are evident in the literature, from experiences that reinforce rather than challenge cultural stereotyping (Raymond & Hall, 2008; Simpson, 2004) or serve to emphasise inequality (Lyons, Hanley, Wearing & Neil, 2012; Sin, 2012) to more extreme consequences, such as the purposeful creation of ‘orphanages’ to exploit volunteer tourists (and children) for profit (see, for example, Farley, 2015). At the same time, others have noted more generally that, as an increasingly popular and potentially valuable sector of the international tourism market, volunteer tourism is vulnerable to over-commercialisation with the profit motive sometimes, but not always, undermining the more positive social and environmental credentials of volunteering projects (Tomazos & Cooper, 2012). Hence, there exists an evident logic behind the ambition to connect potential volunteer tourists – at least, those with stronger altruistic motives described by Callanan and Thomas (2005: 197) as ‘intermediate’ to ‘deep’ volunteer tourists – with more ‘responsible’ volunteer tourism organisations which are committed to bringing net developmental benefits to host communities (see, for example, responsiblevolunteering.co.uk).  Yet, aside from the well-rehearsed academic debates surrounding the phenomenon of volunteer tourism, comprehensively reviewed by Wearing and McGehee (2013), the question remains: is it appropriate to preface ‘volunteer tourism’ with the word ‘responsible’? In addressing this question, Elisa Burrai and Kevin Hannam critique the concept of responsibility as applied to volunteer tourism through broadly highlighting its inherent inequalities and the need to challenge private sector / market led initiatives by enhancing the role or responsibility of the state. Here, I adopt a different approach, both exploring the relevance of ‘responsibility’ to and challenging concept of volunteer tourism itself. That is, on the one hand, it may be argued that the term responsible volunteer tourism is tautological; that is, volunteering may generally be thought of as being altruistic and ethically sound – in short, it is, in principle, an intrinsically responsible form of behavior. On the other hand, responsible volunteer tourism (and, indeed, volunteer tourism more generally) might be considered a contradiction in terms, combining as it does a socially ‘good’ activity (volunteering) with the modern, primarily consumptive and ego-centric social institution that is tourism. This, in turn, would suggest that, contrary to Butcher and Smith’s (2010: 28) argument that it is an ‘appropriate term’, the validity of concept of volunteer tourism itself (responsible or otherwise) demands reconsideration.  As a starting point, it is quite evident but, in the present context, still necessary to emphasise that the practice of volunteering, particularly overseas volunteering, significantly predates the concept of volunteer tourism. According to Gillette (1999), the first modern international voluntary movement, Service Civil International, was founded in France in the early 1920s while in the UK, Voluntary Service Overseas (VSO) first sent just 16 volunteers overseas in 1958, since when more than 48,000 volunteers have worked on international developmental projects (see vsointernational.org). Similarly, the Peace Corps was established as an agency within the US Department of State in 1961, providing volunteering opportunities for more than 180,000 Americans over the ensuing decades. Conversely, it was only following the publication of Wearing’s (2001) text, Volunteer Tourism: Experiences that Make a Difference, that volunteer tourism became the focus of increasing academic attention during a period when, not coincidentally, the popularity of the ‘gap year’ and participation in volunteering as part of overseas travel experiences (and the number of organisations selling such experiences) grew rapidly. In other words, the concept of volunteer tourism emerged only when an already established activity – overseas volunteering – was in effect appropriated and commercialised by a variety of organisations and, for many participants, transformed into a tourism experience. In so doing, the proponents of volunteer tourism have established a distinction, both conceptually and in practice, between ‘traditional’ overseas volunteering and contemporary tourism experiences that, to a lesser or greater extent, involve a period of volunteering.  Equally, it should also be noted that volunteering (both domestic and international) has long been the focus of academic attention, particularly since the early 1990s, both in general and as a form of ‘serious leisure’ (Parker, 1992; Stebbins, 1996). Much of the research explores issues such as intrinsic motives for engaging in volunteering, demographic and contextual factors that influence the nature and extent of such engagement and its benefits to the volunteer (see Wilson, 2000; also Meier & Stutzer, 2006) – all of which have subsequently been explored (or, rather, the research has been repeated) within the volunteer tourism literature. For example, as Wearing and McGehee (2013) observe, an ongoing theme in the volunteer tourism literature is the ‘altruism vs. self-interest’ debate. According to Wilson (2000: 215), however, volunteering is ‘any activity in which time is given freely to benefit another person, group, organization’; and interestingly, he goes on to state that this definition ‘does not preclude volunteers from benefitting from their work.’ Putting it another way, volunteering can be seen simply as a productive activity or ‘an activity that produces goods and services at below market rate’ (Wilson 2000: 216).  Two points emerge from this. First, contrary to what many claim (for example, Bussell & Forbes, 2002), volunteering may be undertaken for either altruistic or selfish reasons, or even a combination of the two; hence, ‘responsible volunteering’ may sometimes, but not always, be a tautology and, consequently, debates surrounding the altruism or self-interest of volunteer tourists, though academically stimulating, are arguably of less relevance than those surrounding the outputs, or the product, of their volunteering. Yet, as has been recognized (Wearing & McGehee, 2013), only limited attention has been paid to this in the literature, a surprising omission given arguments with regards to the role of volunteering in international development (Devereux, 2008)  Second, (responsible) volunteer tourism is a confusing and, perhaps, contradictory term. As already noted, the coining of the term and subsequent burgeoning academic attention paid to it over the last fifteen years not only clearly delineates volunteer tourism as a niche sector of the international market (Callanan & Thomas, 2005), but also implies that it is distinctive from the long-established overseas volunteering sector. This, in turn, both highlights an issue raised by others, that volunteer tourism is an oxymoronic concept (Butcher & Smith, 2010), and perhaps more significantly, emphasises the touristic element of the activity.  In other words, overseas volunteering and volunteer tourism share, of course, the common characteristic of international travel. The former, however, is generally regarded as a specific, organised and typically longer-term activity engaging individuals with the skills relevant to the developmental needs of the host community. For example, Palms Australia, a long-established (1956) volunteering organization, states that:  An international volunteer seeks to achieve just and sustainable development by giving themselves and their skills to achieving development outcomes identified by a local community and consistent with the development objectives of the host country. (Palms Australia, 2017)  That is, the focus is on the benefits accruing the the host community. The latter, conversely, though often defined sufficiently broadly to include all forms of international volunteering, is concerned primarily with shorter-term volunteering as part or all of a holiday (Wearing, 2001). The emphasis is primarily on the benefits accruing to the volunteer as a tourist and, indeed, not only does much of the research address the volunteer tourist experience, but studies have revealed that, for many, the principle motives for engaging in volunteer tourism is the travel experience (see, for example, Daldeniz & Hampton, 2010). In other words, volunteer tourism is, essentially, a tourism experience.  For the purposes of this essay, this leads to the conclusion that if the word ‘responsible’ is to be attached volunteering, then it is only relevant to what has been referred to here as overseas volunteering, participants in which are unlikely to considered themselves as tourists. Conversely, there is, perhaps, a need to re-assess the validity of the term ‘volunteer tourism’, endowing as it does the consumption of a particular tourism experience with an aura of altruism, citizenship or, indeed, ‘responsibility’ that may not exist.     References Bussell, H. and Forbes, D. (2002) Understanding the volunteer market: The what, where, who and why of volunteering. International Journal of Non-profit and Volunteer Sector Marketing, 7(3), 244–257.  Butcher, J. and Smith, P. (2010) ‘Making a difference’: Volunteer tourism and development. Tourism Recreation Research, 35(1), 27-36. Callanan, M. and Thomas, S. (2005) Volunteer tourism: deconstructing volunteer activities within a dynamic environment. In M. Novelli (Ed.), Niche Tourism: Contemporary Issues, Trends and Cases (pp. 183-200). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.  Daldeniz, B. & Hampton, M. (2010) Charity-based Voluntourism versus ‘Lifestyle Voluntourism: Evidence from Nicaragua and Malaysia. Working paper 211, University of Kent: Kent Business School. Devereux, P. (2008) International volunteering for development and sustainability: Outdated paternalism or a radical response to globlaisation? Development in Practice 18(3), 357-370. Farley, J. (2015) Potential Short-term International Volunteers’ Perceptions of Children’s Residential Care in Cambodia. Phnom Penh, Cambodia: Friends International. Gillette, A. (1999) A (very) short history of volunteering. Available at: http://volunteering.ge/upload/pdf/b7e88087fbf77747309c21116496a0da.pdf (Accessed 1 March 2017) Goodwin, H. (2011) Taking Responsibility for Tourism. Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers Ltd. Guttentag, D. (2009) The possible negative impacts of volunteer tourism. International Journal of Tourism Research, 11(6), 537-551.  Harrison, L. and Husbands, W. (1996) Practising Responsible Tourism: International Case Studies in Tourism Planning, Policy and Development. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Haywood, K. (1988) Responsible and responsive tourism planning in the community. Tourism Management 9(2), 105-118. Lyons, K., Hanley, J., Wearing, S. and Neil, J. (2012) Gap year volunteer tourism: Myths of global citizenship? Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 361-378. Meier, S. and Stutzer, A. (2008) Is volunteering rewarding in itself? Economica, 75, 39-59. Palacios, C. (2010) Volunteer tourism, development and education in a postcolonial world: Conceiving global connections beyond aid. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(7), 861-878.   Palms Australia (2017) An international volunteer ethos. Available at: www.palms.org.au/papers/an-international-volunteer-ethos (Accessed 2 March 2017) Parker, S. (1992) Volunteering as serious leisure. Journal of Applied Recreation Research, 17(1), 1-11. Plummer, A. (2015) Responsible voluntourism: Doing good abroad. The Changer. Available at: http://thechanger.org/community/responsible-voluntourism-doing-good-abroad Raymond, E. and Hall, C.M. (2008) The development of cross-cultural (mis) understanding through volunteer tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(5), 530-543. Simpson, K. (2004) ‘Doing development’: The gap year, volunteer-tourists and a popular practice of development. Journal of International Development,16 (5), 681–692.  Sin, H. (2010) Who are we responsible to? Locals’ tales of volunteer tourism. Geoforum, 41(6), 983-992. Stebbins, R (1996) Volunteering: A serious leisure perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25(2), 211-224. Tomazos, K. and Cooper, W. (2012) Volunteer tourism: At the crossroads of commercialisation and service? Current Issues in Tourism, 15(5), 405-423. Wearing, S. (2001) Volunteer Tourism: Experiences that Make a Difference. Wallingford: CABI.  Wearing, S. and McGehee, N. (2013) Volunteer tourism: A review. Tourism Management, 38, 120-130. Wheeller, B. (1991) Tourism’s troubled times: responsible tourism is not the answer. Tourism Management 12(2), 91-96. Wilson, J. (2000) Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215-240.   

Responsible volunteer tourism: tautology or oxymoron? A comment on Burrai and Hannam

http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/19696/1/19696_sharpley.pdf

Challenging the responsibility of ‘responsible volunteer tourism’

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Leeds Beckett Repository

Crossref

CLoK