Poverty aesthetics, or the aestheticization of poverty, is another serious issue arising from the consumption of local culture through voluntourism. Young Westerners often seek authentic experiences in “exotic” destinations — but for many, what feels “authentic” is in fact poverty itself.
Arriving without preparation or awareness of global inequalities, volunteers are often shocked by the visible hardship around them. To manage this discomfort, they tend to romanticise poverty — interpreting the simplicity of life as purity, and hardship as cultural authenticity.
Poverty becomes a symbol of happiness and wisdom, while inequality remains unquestioned.
“Yet, when volunteer tourists confront poverty, they often become uncomfortable and seek ways to negotiate personal anxieties regarding the inequality of the encounter by aestheticizing the host community members’ poverty as authentic and cultural.”
— Mostafanezhad (2013), “Politics of Aesthetics in Volunteer Tourism,” Annals of Tourism Research 43: 156.
This romanticisation often leads to the popular “poor-but-happy” narrative — the idea that people in developing countries are more content without material wealth. While seemingly positive, it justifies inequality rather than challenging it.
“Studies by Lepp (2008), Simpson (2004), Raymond and Hall (2008), and Ver Beek (2006) all found that volunteers commonly remark on how happy locals appear despite their lack of material wealth… However, these ‘poor-but-happy’ remarks may indicate a rationalisation of poverty as a struggle that locals accept.”
— Guttentag (2009), “The Possible Negative Impacts of Volunteer Tourism,” International Journal of Tourism Research 11: 546.
The danger of poverty aesthetics lies in the romanticisation and depoliticisation of poverty.
Volunteers and tourists alike often perceive poverty as natural, even beautiful — a contrast to the materialism of their own societies. This perception overshadows structural causes of inequality and turns suffering into spectacle.
“A result of this association is the depoliticization of poverty, where questions of why or how people became ‘poor’ are overshadowed by the aesthetic pleasure of the experience.”
— Mostafanezhad (2013), “Politics of Aesthetics in Volunteer Tourism,” Annals of Tourism Research 43: 156.
Because poverty and authenticity are seen as linked, volunteers seek “real” projects — the poorest, most marginalised communities — believing this makes their work meaningful. In reality, this mindset can turn poverty into a stage set for self-fulfilment.
“In order to feel involved in ‘real’ volunteer work, volunteers need to be present at the ‘really’ poor projects serving the most marginalised, where they feel they can truly make a difference.”
— Vodopivec & Jaffe (2011), “Save the World in One Week,” European Journal of Development Research 23: 120.
Ultimately, poverty aesthetics sustain the illusion of altruism while obscuring systemic injustice. When hardship becomes an aesthetic backdrop for personal growth, inequality is normalised — and real change becomes less likely.
Explore related topics: Cultural Cannibalism and Neo-Colonialism.
Return to the overview: The Danger of Voluntourism or see our List of Literature and Articles.