Slum Tourism: A Misplaced Idea?
Author: Tawanda Mabhumbo
1 Commentries
Abstract
This paper discusses the discord perpetuated by hosting slum tourism. The discussions for and against slum tourism are thus analysed through academic literature on; global slumming, places of authenticity, commoditisation of poverty and ethical slumming themes, in a bid to ascertain if slum tourism is a misplaced idea?
Keywords
Global Slumming, Places of Authenticity, Tourist Gaze, Commoditisation of poverty, Ethical Slumming
Discussion Paper
Slum tourism originally started on the slums of East London in the 19th century where wealthy adventurers would leave their elite places to explore places of sordidness of the city, thereby referred to as slumming (Durr and Jaffe, 2012a). Since then, neoliberalism has boosted tourist mobilities to places of hardship thus increasing the global representation of slum tours which have become an expanding business worldwide (Durr and Jaffe, 2012b). In India, slum tours started after taking inspiration from favela tours in Brazil and ever since they have grown rapidly to become established as a slum destination (Frenzel, 2015). In addition, slum tours have been further popularised and propelled by the release of movies centred on slums such as; Tsotsi, City of God and Slumdog millionaire (Tzanelli, 2013). Mekawy (2012) defines slumming as, the touring of impoverished dwellings with the perception of understanding of local inhabitants.
Tourist gaze at the destitution and suffering of others is not a new phenomenon (Koven, 2006), people have always been fascinated by the rougher side of life. Although that is the case, this concept continues to ignite a divergence of opinions not only between those in favour of slum tourism and those against the idea (Frenzel, 2013), but the need to appeal to the post tourist or one who is lured by the rougher side of life has created new challenges for tour organisers because those with opposing views argue that, slum tours are a mere form of voyeurism which are exploitative of poor people (Butler, 2010; Tourism Concern, 2014). Concurrently, slum tourism is further problematized by emergent research which examines the ethical concerns and potential benefits of this past time, which has thus led some to question the morality of hosting slum tourism in the first place (Scheyvens, 2011).
Various slums around the world have succumbed to scrutiny of inquisitive visitors but, the question is, is it right to host slum tourism just because of human curiosity? Promoters of slum tourism defend visits to places of hardship as a means of gaining authentic experience which is not staged, in comparison to other tourism experiences which are artificial and often thrive on simulacra (Durr and Jaffe, 2012). While other supporters have also justified slum visits by stating that, such visits are necessary for tourists who have an interest for local culture, people and the desire to know what life is like inside a slum (Hanrahan, 2013).
However, those who do not support this type of tourism, feel that slum tourism is a misplaced idea and thus should not be hosted, as it glorifies the need to meet the desires of tourists who are curious to see how low or dark poverty looks like, at the expense of those who live in the slums. Likewise some slum dwellers have spoken against the intrusion of tourists by stating that, they felt as though they were being watched like animals in a zoo, (Osman, 2014). While Odede (2010:1) voiced that, “It turns poverty into entertainment, something that can be momentarily experienced and then escaped fromâ€. The level of irritation depicted between host and tourists in the above statements is negative, demonstrated by the misgivings the community members in this case have for tourism. This can thus serve to portray that slum dwellers have reached the irritation stage of Doxey (1975) Irritation Index model.
Proponents of slum tourism have also othered the poor by claiming in the ethical debates that, slumming contributes to the development of slums by changing the representation of slums and its people through fighting poverty (Tourism Concern, 2014). While others who also have an appetite for slum tourism have also stated that, slum tourism is necessary because the exposure can motivate tourists to give, (Science Daily, 2010). However, these claims are repeatedly contended by critiques, who continue to highlight the limits of tourism as a development strategy and a weapon for fighting poverty (Scheyvens, 2011). This is because tourists who participate in slum tours do not always give, and when they do, it is very little and far between, the kind of giving which is not sustainable to address the social gap.
Additionally, those who are sceptical of slum tourism, ask critical questions on the ethics of the business which they perceive problematic for two reasons; the commodification of poverty (Freire-Medeiros, 2012:586) and the unequal distribution of income generated from such tours (Durr and Jaffe, 2013).
To conclude, slum tourism is indeed a misplaced idea because the downsides of slum tours outweigh the potential benefits to those who live in hardship. Furthermore, the intrusive nature of this type of tourism is not only exploitative and degrading (Patinkin, 2013) but it increases the gap between the poor who are often powerless and the wealth elite who are often inquisitive to take a tour of the slum.
References
•Durr, E. and Jaffe, R. (2012) Exploraciones/Explorations. Theorising Slum Tourism: Performing, Negotiating, and Transforming Inequality. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies. 93: 113-123
•Frenzel, F. (2013) Slum Tourism in the Context of the Tourism and Poverty (Relief) Debate. Journal of the Geographical Society of Berlin. 144 (2): 117- 128
•Koven, S. (2006) Slumming: Sexual and Social Politics in Victorian London. Princeton: Princeton University Press
This paper discusses the discord perpetuated by hosting slum tourism. The discussions for and against slum tourism are thus analysed through academic literature on; global slumming, places of authenticity, commoditisation of poverty and ethical slumming themes, in a bid to ascertain if slum tourism is a misplaced idea?
Keywords
Global Slumming, Places of Authenticity, Tourist Gaze, Commoditisation of poverty, Ethical Slumming
Discussion Paper
Slum tourism originally started on the slums of East London in the 19th century where wealthy adventurers would leave their elite places to explore places of sordidness of the city, thereby referred to as slumming (Durr and Jaffe, 2012a). Since then, neoliberalism has boosted tourist mobilities to places of hardship thus increasing the global representation of slum tours which have become an expanding business worldwide (Durr and Jaffe, 2012b). In India, slum tours started after taking inspiration from favela tours in Brazil and ever since they have grown rapidly to become established as a slum destination (Frenzel, 2015). In addition, slum tours have been further popularised and propelled by the release of movies centred on slums such as; Tsotsi, City of God and Slumdog millionaire (Tzanelli, 2013). Mekawy (2012) defines slumming as, the touring of impoverished dwellings with the perception of understanding of local inhabitants.
Tourist gaze at the destitution and suffering of others is not a new phenomenon (Koven, 2006), people have always been fascinated by the rougher side of life. Although that is the case, this concept continues to ignite a divergence of opinions not only between those in favour of slum tourism and those against the idea (Frenzel, 2013), but the need to appeal to the post tourist or one who is lured by the rougher side of life has created new challenges for tour organisers because those with opposing views argue that, slum tours are a mere form of voyeurism which are exploitative of poor people (Butler, 2010; Tourism Concern, 2014). Concurrently, slum tourism is further problematized by emergent research which examines the ethical concerns and potential benefits of this past time, which has thus led some to question the morality of hosting slum tourism in the first place (Scheyvens, 2011).
Various slums around the world have succumbed to scrutiny of inquisitive visitors but, the question is, is it right to host slum tourism just because of human curiosity? Promoters of slum tourism defend visits to places of hardship as a means of gaining authentic experience which is not staged, in comparison to other tourism experiences which are artificial and often thrive on simulacra (Durr and Jaffe, 2012). While other supporters have also justified slum visits by stating that, such visits are necessary for tourists who have an interest for local culture, people and the desire to know what life is like inside a slum (Hanrahan, 2013).
However, those who do not support this type of tourism, feel that slum tourism is a misplaced idea and thus should not be hosted, as it glorifies the need to meet the desires of tourists who are curious to see how low or dark poverty looks like, at the expense of those who live in the slums. Likewise some slum dwellers have spoken against the intrusion of tourists by stating that, they felt as though they were being watched like animals in a zoo, (Osman, 2014). While Odede (2010:1) voiced that, “It turns poverty into entertainment, something that can be momentarily experienced and then escaped fromâ€. The level of irritation depicted between host and tourists in the above statements is negative, demonstrated by the misgivings the community members in this case have for tourism. This can thus serve to portray that slum dwellers have reached the irritation stage of Doxey (1975) Irritation Index model.
Proponents of slum tourism have also othered the poor by claiming in the ethical debates that, slumming contributes to the development of slums by changing the representation of slums and its people through fighting poverty (Tourism Concern, 2014). While others who also have an appetite for slum tourism have also stated that, slum tourism is necessary because the exposure can motivate tourists to give, (Science Daily, 2010). However, these claims are repeatedly contended by critiques, who continue to highlight the limits of tourism as a development strategy and a weapon for fighting poverty (Scheyvens, 2011). This is because tourists who participate in slum tours do not always give, and when they do, it is very little and far between, the kind of giving which is not sustainable to address the social gap.
Additionally, those who are sceptical of slum tourism, ask critical questions on the ethics of the business which they perceive problematic for two reasons; the commodification of poverty (Freire-Medeiros, 2012:586) and the unequal distribution of income generated from such tours (Durr and Jaffe, 2013).
To conclude, slum tourism is indeed a misplaced idea because the downsides of slum tours outweigh the potential benefits to those who live in hardship. Furthermore, the intrusive nature of this type of tourism is not only exploitative and degrading (Patinkin, 2013) but it increases the gap between the poor who are often powerless and the wealth elite who are often inquisitive to take a tour of the slum.
References
•Durr, E. and Jaffe, R. (2012) Exploraciones/Explorations. Theorising Slum Tourism: Performing, Negotiating, and Transforming Inequality. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies. 93: 113-123
•Frenzel, F. (2013) Slum Tourism in the Context of the Tourism and Poverty (Relief) Debate. Journal of the Geographical Society of Berlin. 144 (2): 117- 128
•Koven, S. (2006) Slumming: Sexual and Social Politics in Victorian London. Princeton: Princeton University Press