Should we visit poverty ? Slum Tourism: The Example of Favela Tourism in Rio de Janeiro

Abstract: This paper discusses the main issues of slum tourism in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro. It shows how controversial it is, how difficult it is to weight up the pros and the cons and how related it is with more general issues.


Keywords: Slum tourism, Rio, poverty, ethic.


Slum Tourism is one of the segments of niche tourism which experienced the most important development in the last few years. It consists in visiting poor urban areas. Most of the big cities of the developing countries have their variant of slum tourism. It has been popularised since a few years in the media for example with the film Slumdog Millionaire (2009) and the number of academic writings about it have largely increased. Rio de Janeiro is an interesting example to examine this phenomenon because it was here the first company offering slum tours was created in 1992. The fact that the country is about to host the Football World Cup and, in 2016, the Olympic Games makes the case study even more interesting because slum tourism is already a controversial form of tourism but in such a context – when we can expect an important increase of tourists – the issues might be strengthened. “Should we visit the favelas?” could be the question that some tourists in Rio would ask themselves and this is a totally relevant question because visiting poor areas could be considered as unethical and it could remind us the slumming activity of the wealthy in East End London during the Victorian period. But is slum tourism still about this ?
The first argument in favour of favela tourism would be the cultural importance of the favelas in the Brazilian culture. The favelas are indeed an important part of Brazilian identity. Samba which is a famous Brazilian dance associated with the Brazilian carnival was for example invented in the favelas and nowadays most of the school of samba are located in the favelas. Moreover, the favelas, in Rio de Janeiro, are almost always visible wherever you are and represent an important part of the landscape therefore they cannot be ignored.
Another positive aspect is the fact that favela tourism is also beneficial for the favelas. Most of the local residents have a good opinion of the presence of the tourists in their favela. Indeed they say that tourists are a good thing for the local economy, they bring money in the favelas since most of the time a part of the benefits made by the tourist companies is saved to support social projects but also thanks to the souvenirs or the food they buy. It is also beneficial for the image of the favelas which are often associated with violence, drug and insecurity. Thanks to these tours people from all over the world can see that the stereotypes spread by the media are not always a reality.
However some other arguments could make us think that favela tourism is negative. These arguments deal mostly with ethic and morality. The main reproach made to these favela tours is their voyeuristic dimension. The opponents of this form of tourism say the tours rely on the romanticization of poverty. They think that people are more here to experience, to see poverty than to have a real cultural exchange. Besides it is interesting to notice that most of the companies associate their tour with adventure tourism, promising a sensational experience. A company even drives its tourists in a Jeep like for a safari.
Another embarrassing aspect of slum tourism in the favelas is the social and cultural shock implied by these tours. Firstly who would not find it inappropriate that people having very good living conditions came to visit the favelas during three hours and came back in their comfortable hotel afterwards as if they only came back from a visit in a museum. With these tours two different worlds are put face to face and the interaction seems to be very difficult. The difference in living condistions is not the only barrier. There is also the language barrier because very few people speak English in the favelas and very few tourists speak Portuguese.
Finally it appears that the question has not a concrete answer. The pros and the cons are difficult to weight up. Favela tourism relies mainly on contradictions and implies more general and complex issues such as the role of the State in this phenomenon. This State which is spending billions for the Football World Cup thinks that by simply advertising slum tourism in its favelas it will improve the living standard of the residents thanks to the support of the companies and the charity of the tourists. Actually even if these incomes are helpful they are sporadic and quite insignificant face to the scope of the social gap which is to fill. To conclude it seems logical that a form of tourism relying on poverty cannot be the answer to poverty itself. The answer to this controversy might be to develop a form of tourism more in tune with the local communities and with the space, a more organized tourism, with some amenities which would make of the favelas more than a mere place of sightseeing tours.


References:

Frenzel, Fabian, Ko Koens, and Malte Steinbrink. Slum Tourism: Poverty, Power and Ethics. New York: Routledge, 2012.
“Rio’s Favela Tours: Helpful or Just an Exercise in Voyeurism?,” May 12, 2011. http://www.brazzil.com/
“Slum/Favela/Poverty Tourism.” Tourism Concern, http://www.tourismconcern.org.uk/

I chose to comment on this discussion paper because of my personal interest in the topic and because I wrote about slum tourism in Dharavi, Mumbai, for this conference. Also, as the author of the paper suggests, it is one of the niche types of tourism that has experienced rapid growth and its examination is relevant in recent years.

In my opinion, the above discussion paper is clearly structured in two main parts- the first one, presenting the positive sides of slum tourism in Rio and the second, discussing some of its negative impacts. The author starts with a concise introduction on what the paper is going to cover. His statement that slum tourism emerges in developing countries, however, can be criticized as slum tours are not only organised in destinations such as Rio, Dharavi in Mumbai or Nairobi in Africa. Such tours exist in wealthier countries as well. For example, in the USA tourists have the opportunity to take part in organised tours of Harlem in New York or participate in gang tours in Los Angeles (Whytte, Selinger and Outterson, 2011).

Slum tourism can fall under the umbrella of cultural tourism (Ramchander, 2004 and Jaguaribe and Hetherington, 2004 in Burgold and Rolfes, 2013) and this statement is supported by Quentin’s first argument in favor of favela tourism. He discusses the importance of the favelas for the Brazilian culture stating that the samba dance was invented there and most of the samba schools operate in the favelas. From this point of view, a tour to this part of Rio can be seen as a positive activity indeed.
The author discusses the voyeuristic nature of slum visits as an unethical side of this type of tourism. However, an examination of tourists’ motivations could have been useful since authors such as Selinger and Outterson (2009) suggest that all slum tourists cannot be labelled as poverty voyeurs and there is no hard evidence that all or a high percentage of them have disrespectful motivations to partake in slum tourism.

Quentin makes a good point by saying that the State should approach slum tourism in a more sustainable way. As a key stakeholder in tourism development (Heitmann, 2010), the government should be actively working towards the well-being of the favelas and their residents.

Finally, Quentin concludes that the pros and cons of slum tourism are difficult to weight up and that a poverty tourism could not be the answer to reducing poverty. Also, he suggests that a type of tourism more in tune with locals should be developed. These statements are similar to Scheyvens (2001, in O’Brien, 2011) who states that the question should not be whether slum tourism should exist but how to be conducted. An ethical slum tourism builds solidarity between visitors and observed; provides understanding on the bases of equality, sharing and respect; supports local communities; maximizes economic, social and cultural benefit.

Overall, in my opinion this paper provides straight to the point discussion on slum tourism in Rio’s favelas and can set the basis to further research in this topic. Also, it should be noted that this is a summary of a larger paper and many of the suggestions I made may have already been discussed in the full version of this paper.

References:

1. Burgold, J.and Rolfes, M. (2013) Of voyeuristic safari tours and responsible tourism with educational value: observing moral communication in slum and township tourism in Cape Town and Mumbai. Journal of Geographical Society of Berlin, 144(2), pp. 161-174.
2. Heitmann, S. (2010) Film tourism planning and development: questioning the role of stakeholders and sustainability. Tourism and Hospitality planning and development, 7, pp.31-46.
3. O’Brien, P. (2011) Business, management and poverty reduction: a role of slum tourism?. Journal of Business Diversity, 11(1), pp. 33-46.
4. Outterson, K. & Selinger, E. (2009) The Ethics of Poverty Tourism. Boston University School of Law Working Paper 09-29. Environmental Philosophy.

5. Whyte, K., Selinger, E. and Outterson, K. (2011) Poverty tourism and the problem of consent. Journal of Global Ethics, 7(3), pp. 337-348.