1Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, Brock University, 500 Glenridge Avenue, St Catharines, Ontario, Canada L2S 3A1; 2Centre for Tourism Research
and Development, A-965/6 Indira Nagar, Lucknow – 226016, India
examination of) concomitant tourist typology.
Repetitive scholarly engagement with this theme is indicative of the truth that tourists and their activities are central to the concept of tourism (Tribe, 1999: 79), and that if any benign change is to be effected, it must be initi- ated by the tourist (Mastny, 2002: 124). In thinking this, researchers seem to have entrusted the tourist with the responsibility of realizing the ‘blessings’ of tourism. Hence, while certain types of tourist have been criti- cized on issues of insensitive interactions with the destination’s environment and society (Urry, 2000; Mowforth and Munt, 1998), evi- dence of their ‘mindfulness’ has been less well acknowledged (Franklin and Crang, 2001;
Feifer, 1985). These recent studies indicate a perceptible transformation in the mind of the tourist, over the years (Cohen, 2003; Harrison, 2003), largely in the context of the effect of their presence among and interactions with the locals. Recent documentations on social move- ments in tourism (e.g. Parrinello, 1996; Kousis, 1999, 2000; McGehee, 2002; Cohen, 2003;
Smith, 2003; Mustonen, 2003) allude to this trend.
In this regard, the tourist appears to have progressed from being a seeker of meaningless
‘change’ (Smith, 1989: 1) to being a seeker of value-based ‘exchange’ (Edensor, 2001), and from fantasized internalization to rationalized internalization. In view of concerns regarding tourism’s role in organizing modern life (Franklin and Crang, 2001), this group of tourists could be a promising genre in the evo- lution of post-modern tourism. Researchers have attempted to profile the contemporary tourist differentially (Table 14.1). Such works reconstruct the tourist from a post-modernist perspective. In general, the ‘new tourist’
appears to be an inward-looking individual who seeks out places and people with whom s/he can engage meaningfully, without the inhibiting barriers of colour, class, creed or caste. These tourists are portrayed as post-materialists/post- modernists, who are in search of opportunities that permit them to ‘feel good’ by ‘doing good’
(Beck, 1997, cited in Hustinx and Lammertyn, 2000). This rather abstract expression simply relates back to a need for self-actualization and learning through observing and involving the self with the ‘other’ and the other’s environ- ment (Harrison, 2003).The question that now arises is – what kind of environments and pur- suits can best serve the intrinsic needs of the contemporary tourist?
182 S. Singh and T.V. Singh
Table 14.1.Characteristics of the contemporary tourist.
Genus Traits Reference
Reborn Seeker of personal growth through experiences in novelty, Vogt (1978) spontaneity, risk, simple living and independence; rejection
of affluence
Peacemaker Messengers of understanding and reconciliation; cultural D’Amore (1988) ambassador; promoter of ‘one world’; harbinger of harmony
Humanist New, all-round individuals; a humble human being; seeker of Krippendorf (1987) knowledge/self through inner journeys; willingness to learn and
share
Value-based Seeker of humane bonds through understanding, awareness, Muller (1990) honesty, modesty, tolerance; willingness to learn /adapt/
experiment; creative, respectful, sensitive, attitude of learning, self-inspired and responsible
Post-Fordist Mature individuals with changeable demands; conscious Wang (2000) avoidance of negative consequences; flexible and diverse
Moralist Seeker of direction; new wave tourist who elevates host culture; Butcher (2003) self-disciplined and self-critical; sensitive, sophisticated and
sustainable
Post-tourist Seasoned and contemporary, reflective, sceptical, open-minded, Cohen (2003) involutionary, participative, receptive
Of late, volunteering has drawn the atten- tion of tourism scholars as a purposeful recre- ational and learning activity. It is rationalized that, much like tourists, volunteers travel nationally and internationally with the objective of ‘experiencing’ other people and environ- ments. However, this type of ‘volunteering- tourism’ has been little studied, and it will be some time before this omission is rectified. The knowledge-gap is essentially due to the novelty, obscurity and even lack of scholarly attention to such purposeful tourism pursuits. Studies on tourists as volunteers (Wearing, 2001; Singh and Singh, 2001; Uriely and Reichel, 2003;
Tourism Recreation Research, 2003) have documented a few cases and aspects accruing from the practice and benefits of tourism from a social movements perspective. But these are indeed too few, and perhaps incipient, to safely deduce the power of volunteering in delivering the common good of benign tourism.
Volunteering: a Touristic Pursuit Organizational volunteering, including national and international volunteering, has been traced back to the early 20th century (Wearing and Neil, 2001: 241; Beigbeder, 1991). Although voluntary initiatives have been undertaken in various sectors (see UNEP/IE, 1998), they seem to be particularly confined to addressing environmental concerns (Barde, 1998: 13).
With respect to tourism, volunteering by guests is implied in some definitions of ecotourism.
Ceballos-Lascurain’s definition of ecotourism hints at voluntary and active participation of ecotourists in their experience (Wearing and Neil, 2001: 238). The overt conjunction of vol- unteering and tourism is a recent terminologi- cal reference placed alongside various forms of ecotourism and sustainable tourism. It is under- stood to be a quaint mix of leisure, recreation and work. This heterotopic amalgam of work into the larger frame of meaningful tourism finds congruency with Stebbins’ (1979) con- cept of ‘serious leisure’. Therefore, when tourists willingly engage themselves in re- creative work while on vacation, it transpires into volunteer tourism. Wearing (2001) defines voluntary tourism more elaborately:
The generic term ‘Volunteer Tourism’ applies to those tourists who, for various reasons, volunteer in an organized way to undertake holidays that might involve aiding or alleviating the material poverty of some groups in society, the restoration of certain environments or research into aspects of society or environment.
(2001: 1)
While volunteer tourism is not proposed as yet another new form of tourism, it is made dis- tinctive due to the specialized segment of tour- ers, who engage in volunteering as non-proletarians. Thus the work of volunteer tourers in destination areas during vacations, while being non-remunerative, is accomplished with responsibility to self.
T.V. Singh and S. Singh (2001) explain volunteer tourism:
. . . as being more of a conscientious practice of righteous tourism – one that comes closest to utopia. At best, it may be regarded as an altruistic form of tourism, which has the capacity to uphold the highest ideals intrinsically interwoven in the tourism phenomenon.
Such a form of participation is self-motivated and is guided by a self-developed mission (Searle and Brayley, 1993) for the ultimate gratification of higher intrinsic need (Maslowian thought) for self-actualization. In the process, the volunteer (helper) receives as much satis- faction from the task undertaken as the receiver (resident host), since they work together for the common cause of catalysing welfare among the less privileged. Volunteering in tourism focuses primarily on the gratification of subliminal human needs through cooperative and selfless employment. By virtue of the generic character of volunteering and the post-tourist experience, volunteer tourism acquires an exclusive set of qualities by which it may be recognized as a subtype of ecotourism and/or sustainable tourism (Fig. 14.1). The discussion now moves on to two empirical studies on the subject of volunteer tourism practices in the remote Himalayas. These examples of self-developed volunteer tourism are from two typically rural mountain villages in the lesser-known periph- eries of the Indian Himalayas. A brief descrip- tion of the methods used for data collection is thus pertinent at this juncture.
Volunteer Tourism 183