sorry but terms like eco-tourism and ethical travelling just get under my skin...you're not fooling anyone...it all starts out so innocently self-righteous...I live in an inlet that fills up with eco-tourists that now travel in large packs...drive their SUV's down dirt roads at warp speed on their way to their wilderness adventure...and then return the favour on their way back from same wilderness adventure...and there seems a growing inability and desire to actually take a kayak out alone...it's mostly in the form of jammed-tight flotillas now...geez...I guess I'm just a touch resentful...ya think?

I feel compelled to respond to your well meaning but perhaps short sighted article. I admire the spirit of your pursuit, mindful exploration of cultures and authentic engagement with others is a noble cause and I was happy to hear a voice calling for this. I know that you represent one person in a growing movement of travelers who rejects tourism that preys on the vulnerabilities of cultures and the comodification of people and places that is unfortunately still so highly regarded in the Western world. Perhaps where I begin to diverge from your philosophy is that I am not so certain that the actual outcome of “couch surfing” is really any different than staying at a resort and purchasing cheap souvenirs. The ways in which they harm are just different. The intention of those travelers whom you refer to as being the unfortunate norm is to experience something new and exciting which is why they fall subject to the quick fixes of the pleasures of home abroad and objects that signify their travels to be shared with their loved ones once they come home. In the end is the “couch surfer” really all that different? This is not simply an issue of strain on local infrastructures and the encouragement of negative economic pillars but one of cultural capital and the negligence of travelers in seemingly blissful cultural exchanges. I know that perhaps you feel as though you are returning home with a more authentic experience and connection with a culture or community but in the end that right is only reserved to residents and people from within that culture and even then this right is often only reserved for those who were born and have lived a lifetime in one place. I am tired of hearing people wearing their “truly unique” travel experiences as badges of honour to be respected and ultimately to contribute to your understanding of their identity as exclusive and conscious. Whether it is crossing the border in Iraq, being invited on a boat trip up the Nile or living with an indigenous community these experiences and the richness that they hold can be lost if it is done so simply for the pursuit of the experience. What is so difficult is that the intricacies of culture, community and the presence of outsides within them is a highly contentious issue and one that deserves a greater response than to say “been there, done that, I can wipe my conscious clean now because I didn’t abuse the local culture.” I challenge you to think of the people in the communities and the genuine real connections you made with people (which I assume you did because of your keen interest in finding authenticity.) What did you leave with those people and what did you take with you? If it is a just a great story about boiling water abroad which draws a distinct contrast between the worlds depravities compared to your own than you have dishonoured this connection. I am sorry to single you out, I realize I am functioning on the basis of many assumptions but the issue of cultural comodification in the travelers identity is one to important to be ignored. I don’t think there is a clear answer as to how to travel and honour your experiences but it is one that deserves more discourse.

I think that the first three posters (castilleja, lynn, and rrose) are being a little harsh on Ms. Godtree here. However, Rrose does admit to making assumptions, and freely invites further discussion.

I disagree strongly with the attitude that…

I have never “couch surfed”, but I can am certain that “couch surfers” are not drastically changing the character of the neighborhoods that they are visiting. Couch surfers I am certain do not demand extra security and services in the neighborhoods that you are staying.

rrose wrote:

We are now a “global city”. I am starting to dislike the term global village, but the concept is still the same. Our cultures are rapidly blending. Think of you own neighbourhood…. what do you want to eat tonight, what do you want to watch? You can get anything from almost any culture? Want to connect with another culture? Get on an internet discussion group.

However, those who are able to travel as tourists throughout the world are a different “class” of people. Entry in this class is defined by networth in US dollars (no matter what the local currency is). I think the only idea that bothers you three is the economic disparity between the tourist and the local. Are you advising the author not to travel? Or our you advising that she has to travel with a peace-corps mentality?

Criticizing the pursuit of experience is crazy exercise… as we will live in constant guilt if we do it. Go out for dinner and beers as a cost of $50, then go watch the “Fog of War” for another $10…. Could you have used that money to make the world a better place for others? You bet… but you wanted the experience.

Bottom line…. it is almost IMPOSSIBLE to be truly be an ethical traveler. Unless you are planning to walk or hitchhike your way around the world, you are going to have to consume resources or vast amounts of wealth to get around.

An excellent piece, rrose, from an interesting and different perspective. I agree there is not really a clear answer.

Nothing against the experience of travel itself but the eco and ethical terminology despite often good intentions ...is frankly delusional. eg. if you fly to your destination...it's not eco-tourism....no matter how you wish it to be so...planes take massive amounts of fuel.

Tourism is not an experience but an industry... whatever the promotional label says. It is the marketing of travel, which now includes the marketing of eco-tourism....eco-sell. Like most markets they begin small..but always hold the potential to mutate into something quite different...something that no longer bears any resemblance to the ideals of their more humble beginnings.

It's much more complex...I don't think travel is quite deserving of the labels "ethical" or "eco" yet despite the sincerity of some people's aspirations of trying to move it in that direction...and it comes off as prematurely self-congratulatory....and well.. false.

Addressing alternative energy sources in order that we can all travel more lightly on the earth would be a first consideration...by merely calling or naming a travel experience an environmental one does not necessarily make it so...especially if government monitoring and regulations have not been put in place to assure that companies are indeed what they promote.... or what they pretend to be.

couchsurfing.com

sign up.

Use some thought in creating your profile.

have some people stay at your house.

then start talking.

Questions, on the other hand....

rRose. what do you do? Much as I feel oppressed by your pejorative treatise, I am intrigued by what you are doing. It may be because I like people who use the pejorative because it makes me feel right at home.

I'm willing to go there.

As for couch surfing. I believe it has brought some tremendous benefit to my life, to act as a host. And I will definitely try it when I choose to visit some neighbouring communities. heck, I might even use it in town if I have to leave my apartment.

lynn,

I totally, but respectfully, disagree with you here.

The marketing and the reconciliation of preconceived ideas are part of the "experience". For example, some hikers view the "Grouse Grind" or a camping trip to Cultus Lake as a "wilderness experience". Other's view the west coast trail as a wilderness experience. That is what (rightly or wrongly) feel is a wilderness experience.

Others need to go on an expedition with food drops to have a "wilderness experience".

As for environmentally friendly travel.... it is impossible, unless you are completely self-propelled.

As for "couch surfing", not really into it, but I think it is more "eco" friendly than many forms of accomodation.

As for defining "eco" tourism, let's debate that when an article comes up in the next little while.

There is a serious question about the difference between tourism and travel.

Tourism is, as it always has been, an attempt to experience the exotic without leaving the comfort of the familiar.

Travel, in the sense that it was something different from tourism, is at best an attempt to escape or distance the individual from the familiar. For the middle class, who hardly existed prior to the 20th century, travel as a phenomenon began at the end of the First World War. The desire of a whole generation to get away from the mud of France, either by returning home or by finding some ‘other’ place of escape was the initial idea behind the excursions we now take so much for granted. Far from hoping to find a reproduction of ‘home’ in exotic destinations, the travellers of the years between the wars seem to have been much more open to the possibility that foreign locales might really be a lot ‘better’ and certainly different from the nightmares of the trenches they were trying to leave behind.

Those with enough funds to do this have always been able to travel; those who lack the funds do their travelling through books, and, increasingly film and television.

The quality of the experience, whether real or virtual, varies with the effort put into it and the degree of naïveté one has at the beginning of the exercise.

The most depressing thing about Godtree's essay is the realization that it will not be long before all travel has become, in fact, tourism.

In the Arabian kingdom of Dubai or Bahrain, (I can't remember which ), I understand it is now possible to ski indoors year round on manufactured snow. As everything turns into a commercial experience the whole world becomes nothing more than a supermarket through which deracinated souls wander beneath fluorescent lights with foolish grins on their faces.

.

ooooo... so well said...that's one of the real dangers....and what a loss for all.

Sorry, Moat, for some reason I did not see your post above. No doubt there are different levels and varieties of experience whatever those experiences be...I just find the labelling of travel through the tourism industry as ethical and eco to be highly premature and self-congratulatory ...and yes, delusional. Okay, I'm repeating myself. ;-)

ahhhhh...so true, sing the birds, whales and sun-burnished butterflies.

The rest of nature in its delightful simplicity... so unbusiness-like.... so way ahead of "enlightened man" as usual.

lynn wrote,

Exactly. Maybe this piece belongs in the ethical hedonist series.

My point is that "couch surfing" is probably more "eco-friendly" than staying in accomodations built for tourists, and it does allow for at least some connection to the local communities. But let's face it, most people in their early 20s are out for the "world party".

It aint for me, but then again, I am in my early 30s now, so maybe we are getting a little "tut-tut"-ish.

i think that my major draw to couchsurfing has been overlooked. its so easy to get tied up in the "eco-friendliness" of travelling. touring. eating. shopping. reading. breathing. drinking. etc. but, being someone in my "early 20s" who is not out there for the "world party" (if we can all be typecast like that) couchsurfing is the best! i mean, FREE PLACES TO STAY! am i the last person on earth that loves cheap? free?

and, i feel that its quite fulfilling to host random strangers in your home, for a day or so, perhaps a week, so they can come see your area that's way out in the middle of nowhere. you can bake them up some yam fries, and MAKE NEW FRIENDS!! xoxo.

What a pretentious and childish article.

To think a couchsurfer is more eco friendly than a tourist shows an utter lack of realistic analysis. Certainly the most polluting part of travel is flying, which I assume the couchsurfer must do in the same plane as the tourist- luxury or otherwise. Just because you can't afford a good hotel and you eat cup noodles each day doesn't make you any morally better. Your hypocrisy will be evident the day you stay in a hotel.

The tourist creates and supports many jobs by staying at a resort and spending around town. By raising the standard of living, countries can afford to pollute less. Lower standards of living result in more pollution.

And this potemkin village the couchsurfer talks about where there is no commoditization of culture....you mean he finds it more realistic and quaint to observe people in noble poverty than to see them making money by flogging their culture to tourists?

bobby peru,
What's the big problem? I doubt couchsurfing is going to put an end to more conventional forms of travel and tourism, but it is nice to know that there are other ways to be in a foreign culture. The issue of how eco-friendly international travel is...is another topic, but I'd agree it's ripe for the plucking.

The Khaosan Road contingent will continue to provide employment for thousands of Bangkok workers, but wouldn't many of us prefer to stay in a quieter locale, away from the 24 hour parties in the backpacker ghettoes? Or the KFC's, Pizza Huts, and McDonalds of the hotel districts. Leave those enclaves for travellers who can't stand anything foreign. Couch surfing doesn't seem to rely as heavily on corporate culture trickle down as standard tourism. Supporting local businesses and local culture, if it's possible, makes sense.

anecdote:
I once had the pleasure of running into an amiable Australian fellow in Phnom Penh who had a ticket that would take him from Hong Kong to Vancouver. He had to take a bus to Calgary to catch the next leg of the flight to London, where his partner was waiting. I offered him two nights at my home in the interior, house-sitters willing. A phone call home two weeks later revealed that buddy had braved the local ski hill. It was the second snow experience of his life. He had a great time, the house-sitters loved him, and the ski hill and local grocery store did all right by him, too. It's not about the destination; it's about the journey ;-)

BobbyPeru spat...

I am not really defending couch surfing, but I think your critique is a little off. The toursit stay at the resort causes less pollution and raises living standards? You are joking right?

Hmmmmm, those resort golf courses in arid environments don't require tons of water? Air conditioning in massive hotels? Pools? Where is your analysis?

Yeah, we North American's with our high standards of living are role models for the rest of the world to follow.... (note sacrasm, please).

I will admit to being a fossil fuel burning hypocrite, and I am not going to deny the fact that I pollute - probably more than I should.

And I am not going to link couch-surfing with greenhouse gas emissions. Any form of travel is linked with greenhouse gas emissions. And no, I am not a "couch surfer". But I do like a cheap hotel.

Come on, admit it- you are 20 something and relatively broke, looking for a good cheap deal. You are still young enough to sleep on a floor.

Nothing new here, except some trendy labels, the internet, and some twisted warp of reality to give you some superiority.

Whatever happened to camping? If you can camp in Africa (I have), you can camp anywhere. And staying with friends or friends of friends? Or stayed in a hostel?

And let me guess- did you hitchhike and call it eco-carpooling? Use a bike and call it eco-spinning?

Ugh.