I am a tourist… get over it

by  •  • 15 Comments

I was inspired to think about what kind of traveller I am at the recent Future of Tourism event in Vancouver. Instead of discussing what tourism will look like in 5, 10 or 15 years down the road, though, the key speaker – G Adventures’ (formerly GAP Adventures) founder, Bruce Poon Tip – gave a business presentation about successful business models and some the good things his company has done over the years in developing countries.

(G Adventures and its non-profit partner, Planeterra, presented the event, which included Paula Vlamings speaking about Planeterra’s work, and blogging couple Daniel and Audrey of UncorneredMarket.com, who gave a great presentation on technology and travelling, although not much was said about the future of it.)

As I sat watching video clips about the projects G Adventures has done (opening the 20/20 Vision Centre in Cambodia to restore sight to blind residents, fundraising over $50,000 in under two days to install two water stations outside of the Dadaab refugee camps in Kenya during the drought in 2011, both INCREDIBLE undertakings), I had a lot of time to think about marketing and messages that create a movement, both of which G Adventures are experts at.

Bruce Poon Tip, founder of travel company G Adventures (formerly GAP Adventures)

Bruce Poon Tip, founder of travel company G Adventures (formerly GAP Adventures)

Are you a traveller or a tourist?
In their video campaign that starts with the voiceover, “I’m not a tourist,” the obvious conclusion is that being a “traveller” is much better than being a “tourist”; their app is called the “untouristapp.” It’s a cute marketing twist, but whether you’re a backpacker, on a tour with G Adventures, or a cruise passenger along with 3,000 other guests, you’re still a tourist.

Definition of tourist (from the Merriam-Webster dictionary): “One that makes a tour for pleasure or culture.” Read another take on it by Robin Esrock here.

An example that Bruce brought up about travelling to connect with the local community – which makes you a traveller and not a tourist – was a project G Adventures did in Peru. They established the Women’s Weaving Co-operative in the Ccaccoccollo community of Peru’s Sacred Valley so that the female residents, often the “wives, daughters, sisters and mothers of [G Adventures’] porters and cooks,” could contribute financially to the household.

But because G Adventures (and other companies) brought their tours to this area in the first place, Bruce mentioned that kids are moving to the cities to get jobs working at accommodations serving tourists. In doing so, a lot of the local traditions are being forgotten. So, G Adventures started the co-operative, by request from the local women, to help keep those traditions alive and provide employment.

On the surface, these types of projects sound great, but I feel a bit uncomfortable with them. As outsiders, as travellers, we impose a new way of doing things on them and then give them the “opportunity” to make a living a new way, with a new meaning for success. Our way. Is that really progress, teaching other cultures to be like us?

Which brings me back to the message of choosing to be a traveller rather than a tourist. It’s really just a marketing term used to make us feel like we’re better than those who take mass-consumed cruises and bus tours. And it works. The live Twitter feed that was streaming at the Future of Tourism event was filled with travellers patting each other on the back for changing the world through travel. They happily devoured the message and parroted direct quotes from the speakers, which were re-tweeted again and again. It was fascinating to watch.

My take away from the event? G Adventures is smart, really smart. But I think it’s important to remember that, whether the message is coming from a company you respect (G Adventures really does seem to be filled with good people who have good hearts) or a corporation that you despise, they’re still feeding us a message that benefits their bottom line.

There is no “real” Cancun or “authentic” Cuba, referring to getting away from the “tourist areas.” Those areas exist because we created them, us travellers, and they are just as much a part of the city or country as the so-called “real” areas. Locals still work there and probably spend more time there than at their homes, so how is getting away from them any more “real”?

If we wanted to see countries that are untouched by others, the “way they once were,” we have to stop travelling to them, which I’m sure no one with an adventurous spirit wants to do. :-) We can’t have it all ways.

As consumers / tourists / travellers, it’s our responsibility to always be thinking critically about what we’re being told. We have to keep asking questions, especially from the companies and brands we love, because that dialogue is what makes travelling so enriching.

No matter how much I travel and get to know a culture, I am still a tourist, I am still a visitor; and I’m grateful for being welcomed into so many countries as a guest.

I am a tourist.

  • Daniel

    Thanks for contributing to the dialogue, Lori. Really appreciate it — and glad that the Future of Tourism event provided the opportunity to further the discussion. I agree especially with the fact that we need to keep asking questions of the companies we love. Full disclosure — I work for G Adventures and had a hand in creating the campaign to which you refer.

    Our take on the ‘tourist’ stereotype lies in an active resistance to the status quo in the travel industry. In short, we’re out to change the way people think about small group travel. We want to return the act of travelling to the individual—where being a tourist is less about being a consumer and more about passion and purpose.

    The way I see it, the travel industry has sought to convert the tourist from the traditional values of mindful travel to a consumer. They have a vested interest in ensuring that you remain a ‘socks-and-sandals’ wearing tourist in order to contain, idealize and commodify your experience. After all, standardization increases profitability—but does little to increase the fullness and uniqueness of your travels. What they really want you to do is to confirm what you already believe by feeding it back to you under the guise of a “cultural experience”, hoping that you visit the gift shop on the way out. It’s just about the bottom line.

    Which is why I threw my lot in with G Adventures—it’s a different kind of travel company that sees its customers as important decision makers that aren’t just passive consumers but proactive partners. Many of the elements of travelling with us—utilizing local businesses, getting off the beaten path, etc—are at odds with industry norms.

    Sure, as you mentioned, travelling with us contributes to our bottom line—but our bottom line isn’t just about profit margins. People and planet are equally important to the success of our business. Like you, I believe that we “can’t have it all ways”. But we can do our best. We don’t pretend to have all the answers but we’re always listening.

  • Kat

    Great article, Lori!

    Ideally, travel would be a mutual positive exchange between hosts and guests, but in a world of inequality that dynamic doesn’t exist and hasn’t since the earliest conquests (which colonizers had the luxury of defining as adventures in travel and exploration). Unfortunately, even well-intentioned projects today can reinforce dependency or notions of superiority/inferiority (but if basic needs aren’t being met, I guess the effects on local identity become secondary…).

    As for adventure “travellers”, good for them. Adventure (especially in less developed countries) makes them brave, but not automatically altruistic heroes. I think the marketing push is to make consumers who are aware of their privilege feel less guilty about their decisions, and selling travel over tourism is another way of doing that.
    Most corporations striving for globalization (aka global capital) are not after authenticity, like Lori and Daniel said. In fact, they are part of the reason people are having to go greater distances to find the untouched.

    Having said that, I think it is great that some individuals and companies are working toward mindful cultural experiences, whether we label them as tourism or travels. It is great to get out of our comfort zones whether that is through an event, an adventure, a project, or simply observing a different way of life. The trick is to allow ourselves to be changed. Our motivation shouldn’t be to change others.

    Whether I considered myself to be traveller or a tourist seemed irrelevant because once exposed to another culture, I became subject to their stereotypes (not always as favourable as “tourist” or “traveller”). I am not a Gringa…but I will get over it ;)

  • http://www.candicedoestheworld.com Candice

    Funny coincidence, Lori. I was just reading this blog post when you followed me on Twitter! Haha.

    “There is no “real” Cancun or “authentic” Cuba, referring to getting away from the “tourist areas.” Those areas exist because we created them, us travellers, and they are just as much a part of the city or country as the so-called “real” areas.” I could not agree more. If the Cancun is commercialized and touristy, then that’s authentic Cancun. If I take a boat trip around rural Newfoundland, my presence alone makes it a different place.

    I think about this SO much with the increasingly popular tourism industry in NL. The world is becoming smaller, and if it wasn’t…well, we wouldn’t be travelling at all.

  • http://www.lorihenry.ca Lori Henry

    DANIEL: Thanks so much for stopping by! I really do love what G Adventures is doing, allowing travellers to be more engaged in their trips, rather than being passengers, so to speak. I also think that, even with that philosophy, that doesn’t make us non-consumers or mean that we’re consuming less. Just because we choose to travel with more of a purpose, doesn’t mean that it’s bad or should be looked down upon to go on vacation without trying to “change the world through travel.” I’m not saying that G Adventures is doing that, but it does promote a sort of “we’re better” attitude for choosing their trips rather than ones with gift shops and matching luggage. :-) Trust me, if I went on group travel, I would probably choose G Adventures because, as you mentioned, the company’s bottom line includes benefits to local businesses and people, cultural experiences and a movement to be more aware of where and how we spend our money. That’s AMAZING. That’s IMPORTANT. That’s RARE in such a large company. But I also want the conversation to stay open, so that people who aren’t as conscious of how their vacations are affecting local communities and the earth itself can still be a part of it without feeling like they have to throw away their matching luggage sets and travel exactly the same way as G Adventurers do. I’m not sure there is a right way to travel, but I don’t think there has to be a divide. (Can you tell I’m one of those “Let’s all hold hands and be friends” kind of people?!) At the end of the day, we all send out the same amount of emissions on a flight from point A to point B, for example, and we are all foreigners when we step out of the plane.

  • http://www.lorihenry.ca Lori Henry

    Kat, I think you summed up a very important point when you wrote, “The trick is to allow ourselves to be changed. Our motivation shouldn’t be to change others.” Of course, the whole concept of discovering and conquering a “new land” is all about changing others and not ourselves, and we see the effects of that everyday. I also love that you brought this up: “Unfortunately, even well-intentioned projects today can reinforce dependency or notions of superiority/inferiority (but if basic needs aren’t being met, I guess the effects on local identity become secondary…).” This is what I struggle with when I think about voluntourism. Groups of foreigners travel to a country to help, usually giving out free things, offering money and working on a project. It’s hard to say those aren’t good things, but we sometimes forget that we’re also creating a dependency and reinforcing how developing nations see us, the rich foreigners who sweep in to help with our money, good intentions and short term projects. (Although, we are rich, no matter how many things we can’t afford when we get back home…) But if a community/city/region/country is struggling for more than their cultural survival (ie. starvation, access to water), how can we not help and give everything we possibly can, and then help them build for the future? I just wish we didn’t help build their future in our version of what’s best for them.

  • Carolyn Ali

    I agree with everything Lori says here. I was at this Future of Tourism presentation, and while I believe G Adventures is a good company, this was hard marketing–especially the Twitter feed full of praise from G staffers.

    People who call themselves “travellers” rather than tourists are the same people who say they visit “Lao” instead of “Laos”. (Do you refer to Spain as “espana” or Germany as “Deutschland”?) I find it pretentious.

    I lived in Bangkok and was amused to no end as “travellers” came through and couldn’t wait to get out of the city to see “the real Thailand”. That modern city is the real Thailand.

    But these tourists are looking for a more romantic image, a place that exists in their mind with people dressed in hilltribe clothing. Their demand supplies it. This does not mean their experience is more authentic. In fact, one could argue it’s less authentic, perpetuated especially for them. Or preserved for them–you decide if that’s good or not.

    It’s not so black and white.

  • http://www.lorihenry.ca Lori Henry

    CANDICE: Weird, and a bit creepy on my part, if I had of known! ;-) Ha.

    Good points, especially considering Newfoundland. It’s one of the problems we have as writers when we report back to readers hungry for good places to travel – we play such a huge part in helping people decided where to go and how to get there, that we can collectively affect a place with our passion, excitement and enthusiasm. Which isn’t always a good thing. I bet a lot of born and raised Newfoundlanders are not too excited about the growing tourism industry in their backyards…

  • Daniel

    There’s no doubt that all travel changes the world — whether negatively or positively. The best we can hope for is—regardless of how you travel or who you travel with—is that we have a net positive effect on the planet as we explore it.

  • http://www.worldwideadventurers.com Jo

    Lori, I love your article, and your points of view, is there perhaps some perceived snob value in the “traveller” label.

    Do we even need a label at all? are we not just humans wandering, exploring and sharing various places on earth that are not necessarily home.

  • http://www.lorihenry.ca Lori Henry

    CAROLYN: We indeed romanticize travel and places that we travel to, hoping for a glimpse of the life that was, complete with aboriginal regalia, face paint and feathers. So communities re-create those things for tourists in a new sort of economy. You’re right, the demand from travellers supplies these initiatives, the benefits and downsides of which can be debated forever. It is not a simple issue.

  • http://www.lorihenry.ca Lori Henry

    JO: I think there is a “snob value” to labelling ourselves as travellers, but not tourists, in thinking that because we travel a certain way, it is better than others who do not. My schooling has almost entirely been from my travels around the world and not sitting in a classroom (I discuss the positives and negatives of that decision all the time!), but I don’t look down on or separate myself from people who have travelled less and spent more time in school, either. It’s all education. I also value where G Adventures is coming from and that their mission as a company is “to create an authentic, sustainable travel experience like nothing the world had ever seen.” That’s a great reason to start a business. I believe that we can become educated, intelligent people no matter the how. So in that sense, yes, the label itself is pretty irrelevant…

  • http://www.intentional-traveler.com Michael McCarthy

    Yes, this is a topic well worth pursuing in the proper forum, which would be what? It is the kind of topic that I would like included in a website I have planned to support my current radio show The Intentional Traveler on WGRN. I wonder what kind of forum there is on the G Travel website for this sort of topic? For instance…

    The first time I went to the International Travel Writers Conference (Corte Madera, California) I got to meet a lot of big name travel writers. Several of us were sitting around a big table, and happened to be talking to Edward Hasbrouck, who wrote a syndicated column called The Practical Nomad. He had mentioned that the reason why I seemed to love the Bay Area so much (and why so many other travel writers wanted to live there) was that it was an “intentional community” of people who chose to live there for personal reasons. That is where I got the name for my brand The Intentional Traveler.

    Somehow that conversation about “intentionality” (a serious subject suitable for another discussion) morphed into another conversation about the “art of travel.” I don’t recall saying or writing anything about any such “art” at that time, but world famous travel writer Jan Morris was sitting at the table and went off on a tangent about the methods she used on her travels. That was the same conference where I met Tony Wheeler from Lonely Planet, who managed to get very defensive when I quizzed him about certain ethical issues for a feature article I was writing. Jan denied there was any “art” to travel, and no difference between “travellers and tourists,” and she certainly didn’t want to talk about certain ethics at all. Tony was uncomfortable with my questions about the way that certain cultures become “ruined” when swarms of backpackers show up, all clutching copies of Lonely Planet and looking for that muffin shop described on page 57.

    It appears to me that some people feel guilty about the impact of their work on the communities they have visited and places about which they have written. There is always that old issue about “ruining a place just by writing about it.” Personally I don’t believe that’s true, but certainly the Lonely Planet books have had a million times more impact on travel than any writing I have done. But the ethical quandary gets murkier the deeper you go into certain topics.

    For instance, a decade ago I met a friend who had been travelling the world for many years, carefully distributing money to small groups that he met (and thoroughly researched before donating). Check out Marc Gold out at the 100 Friends Project. He donates $250,000 a year now, mostly to kids in Asia where he and I have worked together on many projects. At that time there were no sex predators in Cambodia. Then a bunch of travel articles appeared in the papers about sex predators in Thailand. Voila! In no time those dirty swine all moved to Cambodia. There is nothing wrong with exposing sex tourism. However, just the media exposure about the topic launched a huge new sex industry in Cambodia, where disgusting men from Europe, America and Japan go to prey on children. They read about it in the newspapers and learn where to go. Awful.

    Perhaps not the best illustration of my point, but you get my argument I am sure. There are many negative effects of tourism, and the list is long, and most travel writers sure don’t want to talk about them in their work. But I do. For me, the best way to do so is to encourage travel writers to talk about the positive work they do as charitable projects as a result of their travels. Virtually every writer I’ve had as a guest on my radio show supports some sort of charitable work that is a direct result of the negative issues (poverty, mainly) they have observed on their travels. Don’t complain about poverty, DO SOMETHING!

    As the Dalai Lama has said many times in his talks, we (he was referring to Buddhists and Tibetans, but the same principle applies to everybody) need to be less philosophical about life – studying, meditating, trying to improve the self – and more pro-active in our daily work. Get out of the meditation cave and become part of the crowd. Lead, help, do good work. Nobody is going to save the Tibetan culture by setting themselves on fire.

    I met an old man once named Bernie Krisher, a retired journalist living in Asia. since his retirement Bernie has personally built 350 schools in Cambodia, 2 hospitals, and a long list of other amazing projects to assist children. And Bernie is in his 80s! As Mahatma Ghandi said: “BE the change you want to see in the world.”

    I think this is a topic well worth pursuing. I’d like to have Bruce Poon Tip on my radio show and discuss the projects that G Travel sponsors, especially through Planeterra. Every traveller is a potential ambassador or aid worker. As Pack with a Purpose founder Rebecca Rothney told me on my show, you can change a village for the better just by using the full weight of your luggage allowance on an international flight! A stethoscope weighs nothing, antibiotics don’t cost much, a laptop changes a school….

    Michael McCarthy

  • Carol Perehudoff

    Hi Lori, I’ve been listening to this traveller versus tourist argument since my cheapo travel days in Thailand, and the smug ‘traveller’ attitude has always sounded pompous to me. If you’re stressed out and about to have a nervous breakdown and your boss hates you and a week at an all-inclusive in Jamaica (Happy 50th anniversary of independence, Jamaica!) is going to save you, bring it on. If you have more time to travel slowly, and hang with the locals, then you’re the lucky one. But why judge others?

  • http://lorihenry.ca/ Lori Henry

    Some really great stuff there, Michael. Thanks. I love the bit about DOING something (“Get out of the meditation cave and become part of the crowd”). I also think that in order to really get that gusto going, we must sit in our meditation caves and have internal discussions so that we can do something useful, rather than spreading our energy and resources willy nilly. I am approached to be a part of really great start ups all the time, but at the end of the day, I don’t think that the world needs anymore projects that spread out our resources but a way to bring all of the work that people are doing TOGETHER so that we can make some big impact changes. I don’t know, I guess I’ve been involved in a few non-profits that had grand plans but, in the end, we could only do so much as a small group of individuals. It was more frustrating than productive.
    A small/big thing that all travellers can do, as you say, is use “the full weight of your luggage allowance on an international flight! A stethoscope weighs nothing, antibiotics don’t cost much, a laptop changes a school….” We are rich here, so it doesn’t cost us much to help out materially.

  • http://lorihenry.ca/ Lori Henry

    Why judge others, indeed… It’s like people who will only buy organic produce or drive hybrid cars – if others don’t, they look down on them, as if any lifestyle but the one they approve of is despicable. I mean, I want to leave the city to live off the grid in a cob house, but that doesn’t mean I think those who have cars and live in big houses are bad people.