Overseas Community Projects – Altriusm or Self-Indulgence?

Posted by emilylsn on June 6, 2014 · 1 Comment 

A Minister of Parliament in Singapore recently proposed a plan to send youths abroad to “help youths appreciate Singapore’s success better”.

I’ve always opposed to the idea of an Overseas Community Involvement Project (OCIP).

For those who are unfamiliar with OCIPs, it is a programme to send students overseas to developing and rural regions to help with the community. The ‘involvements’ ranges from performing songs and skits to teaching English in the local schools and even construction of new schools and infrastructure. Such CIPs are becoming increasingly popular. Some universities even enforce compulsory community service hours, encouraging students to embark of these OCIPs.

And here’s my beef with it:

1. The villagers are not benefiting from it.

Go ahead and talk about how we are helping them build their economy and infrastructure and educating them about English. It’s all bullshit. 

So many times I’ve heard about how villagers have to work through the night to tear down and rebuild whatever infrastructure the students have constructed. Well, who can blame them? They are after all students, not construction workers. And neither are they teachers, nor do they speak the local language. So I really do not see how Singaporean students can value-add to whatever the village was already providing.

Villagers have to accommodate, feed and host all these students during the time for a measly amount and this source of income is barely sustainable, for the amount of pollution (which comes with all tourism) and effort required.

2. Moreover, it promotes a sense supremacy over the villagers.

Many at times we kid ourselves that we are there to “help” them. But well, we aren’t. Clearly.

But what we are doing is creating this false notion that they need help, when they may not, at least not what we are offering. I feel like OCIP creates this self-pepetuating notion that Singapore is awesome, and that everyone should be more like us, which is why we are helping everyone else. Because we are awesome. Did I mention we were awesome??

But are we?

We are one of the unhappiest cities in the world, and most impolite. Shouldn’t we be learning from the villagers? They do seem a lot more carefree than we are, so why are we acting like we are so almighty and offering our help? And this is why the MP’s speech was so ridiculous, in my opinion.

Just to give students a more relatable example of what he is suggesting, I’ve decided to apply it to schools.

To allow students from our richer independent schools (most equipped with swimming pools and multiple auditoriums) to appreciate their wealth and success, we will be encouraging them to have field trips to our poorer neighbourhood government schools. This way, they can understand how privileged they are. We will be helping them construct a poorly-built shed in their school field and at the same time, they can get to spend some time with us and see how we it is like to be privileged and rich. They get to have a new shed and we get a new sense of pride. Win-win!

Is this really the mindset or values to be inculcated to our students and youths?

3. The village can do so much more with the money spent.

Each student pays around a few hundred dollars to embark on these OCIPs and they mostly consist of the travel and leisure expenses. Each trip sends around 40 students.

Lets’ say each student pays $500. That would be $20,000.

A village can build an entire school, or start a farm, or could go a long way towards allowing easier access to clean water and sanitation.

With an OCIP, they get none of it, and sometimes incur more costs as they have to host and rebuild the infrastructure. This reemphasises on how we are the only ones who benefit from it. New experiences, a holiday from school, a new sense of pride and self-fulfilment, not to mention, new Facebook profile pictures.

4. So much more can come from it.

Sending a group of highly-educated students overseas to be construction workers or impromptu singers is a complete just a complete waste of opportunity and talent. Why not have the Business undergraduates initiate a new micro-financing model to allow for sustainable income for woman and families? Why not have the Engineers formulate new designs to improve sanitation and infrastructure? Why not have the Doctors perform free health examinations? Why not have the Biologists introduce new methods of agriculture with GM seeds?

The idea of having this pool of talent contribute towards less developed communities can be an excellent idea, but the application falls short of its actual potential.

And it is extremely frustrating to see our nations’ leaders failing to see such faults.

 

Also, why is there a need to fly across the sea to help others, when Singapore has many underprivileged groups that require care and attention as well. Having CIP in Singapore can also allow for long-term engagement and sustainable projects rather than short-term endeavours. Wouldn’t that inculcate better values and nurture a stronger sense of altruism because of the commitment and dedication required?

Even with that aside, the portrayal of OCIPs has to change.

OCIPs can happen, and I do see how students would be excited to go for them. It gives them a break away from the stress of school while gaining new experiences. However, they have to understand the damage (or lack of help) they are to the villagers. It is definitely not an act of altruism. But self-indulgence? Probably.

So, is that really what we want for our youths? A sense of self-indulgence and elitism to everyone else? If yes, well, I guess we are on the right track.

Filed under First World Problems, Singapore Happenings, University · Tagged with cip, community, infrastructure, involvement, OCIP, overseas, Overseas Community Involvement Project, parliament, projects, singapore, students, university