(Let me say again… I’m going to share some criticisms of short-term mission trips. I do that in spite of the positive experiences I’ve had with such. After the criticisms, I want to offer constructive suggestions. Please bear with me!)

Part of the concern that I have regarding short-term missions has to do with a misplaced focus, or, to be honest, several of them:

• The trips are not focused on serving long-term missionaries nor local hosts. The intention is usually there, but when it comes down to it, most trips are focused on the participants: their interests, their talents, their comfort, their safety. That’s why many of the arguments in favor of short-term trips focus on the participants: they give more to missions later in life (not usually), they stay active in missions (not at a higher rate than others), they have an increased awareness of overseas life (no more so than peers who participate in secular overseas study trips)
• Many short-term trips are focused on short-term goals which may or may not fit with long-term objectives. Questions about sustainability and reproducibility need to be asked. The lasting impacts need to be weighed and planned for.
• Most short-term trips are focused on service projects that could be done equally well by non-religious people. Note this quote:
  

  And here is some not-so-good news: For many, the deeper meaning of such actions remains uncertain. As Paul Borthwick says in his book Western Christians in Global Missions, “although globally aware, these young people seem unclear on what the Gospel is beyond just ‘doing good.’” (A Deeper Mission)

  In our fellowship, the term “missions” has traditionally been reserved for efforts related to church planting in other cultures. That focus has been lost in modern-day short-term efforts.

Short-term missions need to be part of a larger plan, a broad vision of outreach. They need to be focused on the needs of the target area, focused on the long-term needs of that area, and focused on the spread of the Good News.