“Changing the World on Vacation”

Posted on: March 3, 2009 Posted by: Kaia Smith Comments: 0

“Changing the World on Vacation”

For those who have watched the film, and even for those who haven’t but are interested in the topics of traveler’s philanthropy, voluntourism, and NGO work, we want to elaborate on the lessons we have learned as they relate to Daniela Kon’s documentary.

Lesson #1: Poverty voyeurism is bad and can add to the problem. Johnny was right.  We agree strongly that Steung Menchey (Phnom Penh’s largest garbage dump) is not a place travel groups should visit, regardless if they go with an NGO or not.  PEPY brought its first group of participants to Steung Menchey with an NGO partner we were working with at the time and, as I state in the film, we thought the visits were justified at the time.  The last time we visited  Steung Menchey with a PEPY group (shown in the film December 2006), we realized that despite how “well” we thought we were doing the visits, how much money we contributed to groups working with children from the dump, nor how much learning it provides to the travelers, we were still participating in a type of tourism we do not believe in.  Tour buses now visiting Steung Menchey stop at the top of the site, allow people to get out and take pictures and then head off to lunch.  People traveling with an average operator,  which is usually not funding development projects in Cambodia, often feel overwhelmed at Steung Menchey and want to “help”.  With no education on how best to do that, some hand out food (resulting the chaos like in the documentary) or money.  

Consider that life on the dump means an average of ½ dollar in revenue for a family.  Consider that many of the people working on the dump are children who have either been sent to the dump by their families to make money or, in many case, “bought” by someone, sometimes with honest explanation and sometimes under another guise, to work in the dump.  If this is the case, and tourists start handing out dollars,  the expected daily income quickly increases and suddenly it  becomes more profitable to move and work on the dump.  Thus, the charitable tourist actually compounds the problem, making children and families more dependent on the dangerous dump rather than less so.

Throughout this week we will be following up with other responses to the film.  Stay tuned and please give us your thoughts.