I have in the past had discussions with people regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of short-term missions work. The question boils down to, Is it useful to go on/support short term missions trips?
For some types, the benefit is not debatable. Whenever a mission provides a skill set not present where it is being brought to, the indigenous population benefits. Medical missions come immediately to mind – if you have a medical skill that is in short supply somewhere, it is clearly advantageous to use it.
When it comes to budgeting in general, there are recurring and non-recurring costs. The problem with short term trips is that the non-recurring costs, those needed once and spent up front, dominate the total monetary pool. For instance, if I’m going to fly to Cameroon, it will cost me more to fly there than the average per capita yearly income of someone living there. If I’m going to be doing something that no one there does, more power to me, money well spent. However, if I am going to fumble my way through digging a well, perhaps 10 locals could get a months worth of income from my plane tickets? Another 5 from my living expenses while I’m there? Is my presence worth more than 15 employed natives?
There is an interesting article that gives an even handed approach to answering this question by a fellow named Trevor Wax. He brings up a good point – for instance, many short term missionaries end up becoming long term missionaries…which is where the real power comes in. Long term missions are qualitatively different, as they are part of a community, not just interlopers. Also some churches are, through consistent short term missions to the same place, able to garner cultural currency at that location, and greatly ease the burden of supporting short term missionaries.
I guess it comes down to one thing: who are short term missions trips for? You hear about how much the missionary’s life was changed by going – this is the sort of transformation that apparently leads to the development of long-term missionaries. If it is for the missionary, perhaps short-term missions really represent a sort of reality based, hands on, tourism. The money supports the local economy in the same way that a vacation might. The more I think about it, the less I think there’s anything wrong with that.
So I’ve come full circle. You get a couple weeks of human interaction, you get to experience a culture at a grass roots level, you discover the world in a new light, and maybe even some other people get a different impression of Americans or Christians. It might be able to be distilled to a simple question with a complicated answer:
Who is this for? If the answer is God, how is this for God? If the answer is the people, is it effective for the people? If the answer is you, well, I guess knowing that beforehand will help you know what to look for. The reality probably comes in some combination of the three.
I don’t think anyone should put any limits on what God is capable of doing.
How do you mean?
There are almost infinite ways in which God could use anything. For instance, he might transform those who go on the trips and give them a heart to be involved in the culture for a decade. Absolutely a perk. He might use a conversation to spark a fire in the heart of a native…and hope they have the internet, a Bible in their own language, an aboriginal pastor or a long term missionary to fan it. He might do something miraculous, as with the converted native that killed Jim Elliot and broke down in tears when he first heard Handel’s Messiah in the states, saying that he had heard the music coming from the jungle when Elliot died. He might pull a community together around an orphanage that is built by locals and foreigners together. Or perhaps someone who has a strong foundation in the area will be able to use their support to facilitate growth from within the community – buildings do grow on foundations typically. Or he might introduce smallpox and eradicate half the population.
It seems vague, I’m not sure what you’re alluding to.
I recommend this article – especially Deacon’s comment on 7/20/08. What he says is the absolute truth and if you are supporting STMs you really need to think about the issues he raises.
http://deaconandusher.wordpress.com/2008/07/19/short-term-missions-the-real-truth/
C. Holland’s blog is also insightful
http://www.missionaryconfidential.com/how-effective-are-short-term-mission-trips/
Here are 3 people (including myslef) involved long term in missionary work trying to get the message out to those thinking of STMs. However, I am not sure anyone is listening.
Thanks for the feedback – I actually just spoke with someone about this last night. I tend to agree with you, though I still contend that short term missions that provide specific skillsets that are absent in the local population (medical, engineering, etc) are valuable. The second consideration that someone brought to my attention yesterday was that the native population gets a tangible feeling that SOMEONE in the outside world cares about them. If that can be translated into “God and God’s people” care about them, then you’re on to something.
When I launched against this a few months ago, I had to question my motivation. Why was I browsing the web looking to justify my opinion? Why did I need to be right on this? I’d be interested in what it is that has motivated you to adopt this as your prime talking point…
Right now I am working with many sending organizations on an orphanage outreach project. It is actually for therapy which is one of the specific skill sets you mentioned in your post that the local population does not have. This is my “prime talking point” because after talking to these organizations, I realized someone needed to raise awareness about the issues surrounding STMs. If there were endless resources and no harm came from the actions of STMs, then I would not care as much as I do.
Again, I do think there is good in STMs. I think the good is mostly for the go’er-but I don’t think that is a bad thing! Growing in your walk with God, seeing His heart for the poor and for justice, expanding your worldview- these are all good reasons for STMs and not the same as taking a vacation (as others have stated about STMs.) I think we just need to be honest about that so when we are making decisions about STMs we are not basing them on false ideas. I also think it will help STMs and LTMs be on the same page about expectations/puposes/roles and in turn will create a more effective relationship and better results for the goal at hand.
In response to your second consideration, I don’t know but I do know that many times people see Americans- not Christians and especially in countries where you can’t speak the language- abstract ideas are hard to communicate.
Below are my thoughts I had posted to another site:
Being a long term missionary and having many teams of short term missionaries come through, I am going to speak from another perspective. I felt like many of those that commented after going on short term trips. However, when I was the missionary in the field, I started to see things with new eyes.
I do agree with some of the pros mentioned here to doing STMs and I think STMs are fine to do but we do need to be honest with ourselves about them. Short term mission trips are about YOU. The purpose behind them is to expand your understanding of other cultures, build in you God’s heart for the poor, soul search about a possible future in missions, give you an opportunity to evangelize, ect. It really irritates me to hear STM talk about how they “made a difference” in 2 weeks! You didn’t- at least not a difference that someone local could not have done for much, much cheaper and could have done far more good with the money you spent to come make that “difference.” And really, isn’t that, even those with the BEST intentions, want from the trip- to feel like they did something good- they helped those less fortunate. This is not a selfless act that we are trying to portray it to be. I am not saying that I agree with the extreme portrayal as “vacationism” – I don’t think are motives are puposefully selfish or self-centered but when we are not transparent, people can feel it and start to question.
I just took a course on ethics and it talks about weighing the good against the harm. STMs don’t see the harm they create- because they don’t understand the language or culture so they really don’t understand what the locals think/feel (When I read the Poisonwood Bible, I cringed at how accurate it can still be today), they leave and never see the long term effects, etc. I think leaders have an ETHICAL OBLIGATION to talk to the missionaries in the field and really examine what the pros and cons are not just for those going, but also being a good stewards of our gifts, and what my heart really bleeds for is for the locals we are going to help. You are not there to “serve” them, they are serving you- helping your faith walk, showing you grace with your culture blunders, hosting you in their country. If you walk away feeling you gave more than you took, I would seriously suggest examining yourself and the experience much closer.
The local people benefit in only 3 ways I have identified: 1) If you go back and become an ambassador for those you worked with by talking to others and raising funds 2) bring supplies to the mission or encouragement/spiritual support to the missionaries. 3)bring some kind of skill/service that is not available (I caution that I have seen even good things like Operation smile that does surgical repairs of cleft lip and palate be a harmful thing because the doctors leave and there is no follow care so the repairs open up again and parents don’t have the means to get proper medical care for their child.)
Here is my advice for what it is worth:
1) Short term mission trips are NOTHING like full time missionary work and can give a very skewed perspective if you are using that experience as the basis for going into full time ministry. If God is truely calling you to the mission field, he can do that with or without short term missions. You know that the number of career missionaries has gone down despite the large increase in the number of STM. I wouldn’t spend 3,000 to decide if I wanted a future career as a nurse, so why would I do that about missions? I went to a conference on missions during college and this had a far greater impact on my decision to do LTM than my college STM trip. Read biographies of missionaries, email/call and talk to those in the field, and only if seriously interested, visit- and visit for no less than 3 months to get a real feel.
2) Why allow the same church members to return year after year on short term missions? You go once and give someone else a turn. If you really “have a heart for missions” and want to go every year (and some people twice a year), then maybe you should “count the cost” and go into the field full time.
3) Make those that go accountable when they return. Follow up and see if they are being ambassadors for those that are still there- are they financially giving to the missionaries/organization, raising awareness or funds for the organization, being a leader for the next group that goes, ect. I think you all would be surprised by the number of people that serve at our orphanage on STMs that DO NOT become child sponsors after they return home. (30/month – a cup of coffee a day- and they can’t sacrafice that for the kids they have personally seen and held and “made a difference in their lives”)
4) Leaders of the STMs- You and the whole team need to understand the potential harm you could do to the locals and the missionaries work. Your ONLY agenda should be the one that the local missionary gives you. I have seen many, many STM teams come through and each member has an assignment to give away a Bible (or 3) and share the gospel with a local so they can go home with a story to tell and a number of how many they converted on thier trip to validate them going. Meanwhile, we have newly converted “Christians” walking around proclaiming themselves as Christians but have no discipleship or clear understanding of it and that can negatively impact the work of spreading the gospel- although the intentions were good.
5) If you provide a service/skill that is not available – TEACH that skill to the locals so they can be self sufficient and their is follow up after you leave. If you can’t teach that skill in 2 weeks sufficiently, then consider the harm that can occur if questions/problems arise after you leave.
6) Not everyone is called to missions. Like Paul talked about the body as an analogy for the church, we all have different roles. However, I think we are all called to support missions. I listened to a speaker at a mission conference once who was a lawyer. He said God did not call him to the mission field but what God did call him to do was make 150,000/year and financially support long term missionaries. I want to tell you I think people like him are the real saints- they write that check every month without the acknowledgment that LTMs get and without the great experience to tell everyone about or the tangible result to think “I made a difference” about that STMs get. They do however get the good feeling of knowing they are being faithful servants and affording the opportunity for God’s children to be cared for and the Gospel to be spread.
Lastly, I want to pose a question that I am not even sure what I think the answer is: Are these short term trips actually preventing Christians from taking the leap into a more full time committment? Are they taking away from those that are in the field? For example, the thinking “I support missions- I go on a 2 week trip with my church every year.”
I think one thing that really struck me, and gave me pause to feel somewhat ashamed, was how many Morman missionaries I came in contact with that have given not just 2 weeks- but 2 years of their lives- for short term missions. Think about it- 2 years with the locals to build relationships, spread their “gospel,” and disciple believers. They are willing to give 2 years of their lives for something that isn’t even the Truth.