International Volunteer Tourism. Stephen Wearing

further reduced through the importation of specialized goods and services that cater to the needs of the tourists. Key management positions are often held by outside management companies, subsequently reducing the career opportunities and control local people have over their resources. In many circumstances, little (if any) employment benefits have accrued in local communities because infrastructure (e.g. accommodation) have already been developed (and staffed) in the area. Furthermore, locals living in remote and rural areas often lack formal qualifications, finding it difficult, if not impossible, to compete with outsiders when employment opportunities do arise. Consequently, the general lack of skills and resources has meant that many tourism ventures are owned and operated by expatriates, even ventures that sell themselves as sustainable (Weiler & Hall, 1992). Hong (1985: 25) contextualizes this further and suggests that international tourism requires high capital investment and expensive infrastructure, necessitating heavy borrowing for developing nations in order to finance these projects. To date, few of the rare organized resistances by locals against foreign-owned, often multinational, organizations dominating all aspects of the tourist trade, have been effective. The apparently attractive, definitely sophisticated offers by corporations such as Holiday Inn and Club Med all too often result in little real financial benefit to the host communities (Ascher, 1985; Lea, 1988, 1993).

      Responses to the effects of mass tourism have been seen in the limited formation of local lobby groups (e.g. Barkin and Bouchez, 2002). However, existing local laws and government legislation within affected host nations would seem either non-existent or ineffective in controlling ‘protagonist’-designed tourism and its impact on the local populations. There are numerous examples of ways developers have used their power bases very effectively. In Costa Rica, foreign investors in tourist hotels can enjoy tax exemption, import all building materials and equipment duty free and have been the beneficiaries of aid money to help establish business. This is one example of a developing nation’s government aiding powerful corporations while siphoning and diverting precious resources that could have been used to improve the quality of life of the local people (e.g. Marfut, 1999; Ponting et al., 2005; Mowforth & Munt, 2008).

      The literature discussed above indicates that corporations promoting inappropriate tourism development in developing countries often have little regard for the ways in which their practices impact upon local communities. These corporations are utilizing commodification of destination cultures better to serve their profit purposes often with limited regard for the local community and their culture. This has the concomitant effect that tourist developments often cause displacement of local communities. In relation to privacy, cultural protection, prostitution and environmental protection, there is little evidence of local communities having the education, knowledge or resources to have any effect in protecting their country as a tourist/leisure site, either for themselves or for more responsible visiting tourists.

      Tour operators from developed nations could be said to view tourism as an arena where individuals have certain autonomy over their lives, free from the disciplines of work and the responsibilities of home. However, as Clarke and Critcher (1985: 16) classify it in politico-economic terms: the choice of what appears to the consumer as a multiplicity of tourism experiences is fundamentally only competing brands of leisure goods.

      It must be asked as to whether it is possible for alternative tourism experiences legitimately to incorporate an ethos that diverges from the forms of tourism discussed above. If demonstrable alternatives to market driven tourism ideologies are identifiable, there may in fact then be a considerable range of scope for the provision of forms of tourism experience with significantly divergent outcomes. These may take the form of alternative infrastructure and pricing mechanisms, increased community involvement or lower forms of impact. It is within this context that this book desires to place volunteer tourism.

      To a large extent, individual preconceptions of travel destinations are based on information found in a variety of media utilized in the marketing of destinations — such as television, films, DVDs, print advertising in newspapers and magazines, brochures and the Internet. Many organizations that fit within the volunteer tourism context, however, rely on interactions with people actively involved with the programmes. Therefore, in both instances, socially constructed and culturally determined perceptions of ‘difference’ appropriate to specific social arenas are shared through the internalization of the representational forms. As Urry states:

      Thus, what is portrayed as seemingly natural is in fact in the process of historical and contemporary construction through a complex system of mass media and social interaction. When this process becomes dominated by operators focussed on selling by volume, as in the case of mass tourism, there can be a distancing of the tourist from the reality of the visit, particularly visits to developing countries on which they have little information.

      (Urry, 2002)

      Of course, where large numbers of tourists are involved, more indirect communication of information is achieved through various forms of mass media. In the case of mass tourism, a code of ethics for tourists could possibly be sent to the intending tourist to ensure a better awareness of the issues surrounding their travel destination (e.g. Weiler & Johnson, 1991: 125; Wearing et al.,