4.0 Introduction – refer to the CRQ – the data should be presented and discussed in the way that enables the researcher to fully address the CRQ(s)
CRQ: What are the key impacts of COVID19 on digitalisation of the pharmaceutic industry in UAE?
4.1 Part 1: Presentation of the Secondary Data
4.2 Part 2: Evaluation in relation to the literature review
l look at these negative consequences and the stories, images and narratives shared by the organisation to market the programme. Using a postcolonial lense to challenge the notion of a single path to development, I will analyse and critique the popular images and representations of international volunteering more broadly. I will try to bridge the gap between the polarising perceptions of international volunteering; a neocolonial monster? (Pastran, 2014), or as that which has the potential to challenge the economic, technical and cultural focus of globalisation, by encouraging people to connect and relate with each other on a global scale (Devereux, 2008: 358). ELI’s slogan is ‘travel with a purpose!’ – because, traveling without a purpose (assuming they mean standard tourist/beach holidays) is obviously not what you want to be doing with your summer. Instead of traveling without a purpose, why not be empowered through volunteering in a developing country where you can ‘help’ out by offering your skills and knowledge. ELI’s ‘about us’ section explains their philosophy – ‘the most compelling life lessons come through experience, and that international experiences are among the most profound influences on our sense of self and our view of the world (eliabroad.org). Here ELI puts the ‘volunteers sense of self and worldview’ at the center of the experience. The language used is extremely positive, in that it makes you feel like you are very special for wanting to do something so ‘out of the ordinary’ and that you are choosing to do this because you are ‘globally-minded’. Mary Mostafanezhad (2013) says that this ‘rhetoric of compassion,’ mediates the voluntourism experience, and that it also signifies the expansion of neoliberalism, as states see individual citizens working to alleviate suffering that used to be dealt with by the state (Mostafanezhad,2013:320). From first glance at their website there is a strong sense that it’s about what you are getting out of the experience as opposed to what you can give to others. This is one of the main critiques of voluntourism, in that locals receive no measurable outcome, or are negatively affected by being drained of time, energy and resources which are needed to help a volunteer acclimatise and feel comfortable (Devereux, 2008:362). Devereux mentions that not all volunteer organisations make the endeavour paternalistic rather than reciprocal, in some organisations there is a genuinely beneficial relationship between the giver and the receiver, because true international volunteering for development is an exchange of knowledge as well as skill. As stated in the UN criteria for volunteering, it should always benefit someone other than the volunteer, thus it’s also important to remember that local people working with organisations who seek volunteers, are well aware that the volunteer will bring essential ingredients to the partnership. A 1999 study in Nepal showed that more than half of the local people interviewed, said that they definitely felt that international UN Volunteers had made a contribution that could not have been provided by the locals (Devereux, 2008ː362). ELI’s website’s front page statement says that they are allowing volunteers to work ‘side by side with locals’, which shows an acknowledgement of the importance of working with local institutions. They explain how their biggest expense is to their foreign partners on the ground; ‘we emphasize a fair fee for local peoples services, which helps the local economy and raises the quality of life.’ They also explain that host organisations must ‘have the means to meet your needs’ – and since ‘in the third world, that alone is a huge and costly challenge (eliabroad.org)’ volunteers are expected to pay up to $3000 per project, depending on where it is. For example volunteering in Uganda on a microfinance project costs $1520 for a 12 week placement, and volunteers on this project are required to stay for a minimum of >GET ANSWER