In my essay, I wrote about the environmental impacts mentioned by Goldin during his TED talk. I believe that the destruction of the environment is the most pressing issue as it affects humans as much as it affects the flora and fauna. In order to mitigate the problem, government policies were implemented and efforts were made to clean up polluted ecosystems. Organisations provided funds in an attempt to maintain the wellbeing of the environment. Despite the efforts undertaken, it is difficult to fully eradicate the consequences globalisation caused to nature.
When planning the essay, I debated addressing the social inequality faced by people. As the world became more integrated, the impoverished are unable to close the widening income gap between them and the affluent. This is turn leads to social disparity. This problem can be alleviated and is reversible to some extent with a lot of assistance from the government and international organisations. Hence, I decided to write about environmental issues instead because destruction of the environment has a detrimental impact on the planet.
Writing this essay was challenging in some areas due to the lack of evidence to support the effect of environmental policies as some is exaggerated to prove the effectiveness of the policies. Reports regarding the success of Kyoto Protocol may be difficult to accept because the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) want to promote the rectification of the protocol. Therefore, the success of the protocol may be largely exaggerated in order to garner support from the countries. Nonetheless, it was relatively easy to write the essay as I have some prior knowledge of globalisation from studying geography and reading articles related to environment issues.
In conclusion, the process of constructing the essay has allowed me to improve my grammar and sentence structure. I have also learnt how to use the APA format when listing literature cited. At the same time, I learn more about the different kinds of policies implemented to alleviate environmental problems.
English ES
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Globalisation Essay Final Draft
In his TED talk, Goldin presented some
problems that arose due to rapid globalization. He states that the
deterioration of biodiversity and ecosystem, climate change, financial crisis
and the widening gap in social equality are the major problems faced by the
world today. Globalisation is the growing interconnectedness of people and
places through converging processes of economic, political and cultural
changes. It has caused countries to become increasingly integrated among one
another because of the advances in technology. In my opinion, the most
significant problem is the environmental impact due to large-scale human
activities.
The world we live in today has adopted
the capitalist ideology, which promotes the growth of a consumerist and
materialistic society. This in turn results in unnecessary wastage and
overconsumption as well as exploitation of natural resources as the majority of
the nations would exploit the advantages nature has to offer in order to ensure
progress. Thus, biodiversity and the ecosystem are deteriorating due to over
exploitation and the large demand for resources. Human activities such as
deforestation, agricultural processes, and vehicle exhaustion had increased the
carbon emissions into the atmosphere, further contributing to global warming.
At the same time, harmful chemicals released are polluting the environment,
destroying natural habitats and endangering the ecosystem. Hence, in an attempt
to mitigate the problem, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have come
together to resolve the environmental issues. The United Nations Environmental
Programme (UNEP) is one example of such NGOs as it assists countries in
implementing environmentally sound policies and practices, and promotes the
wise use and sustainable development of the global environment.
To enforce the importance of ecosystem
management, international organisations pressured countries to limit economic
activites that may be harmful to the environment. By doing so, countries will
have no choice but to obey the demands of these NGOs to prevent loss of
potential trade partners. An example of political pressure was showed during
the 2008 Beijing Olympics whereby China received tremendous global pressure to
reduce carbon emissions and pollutants as the particles in the air could be
deadly to athletes (Soos, 2012). China was listed as the largest carbon dioxide
emitter, overtaking the United States since 2007 (Rosenthal, 2008). However,
intimidating countries may not be effective enough to significantly reduce the
impact on the deteriorating environment. China did not rectify the Kyoto
Protocol even though it was faced with much global pressure. China is still the
largest carbon dioxide emitter followed by the United States today. Hence,
international influence on the country may be effective to a limited extent, as
some countries do not want to dampen their local economic growth by reducing
industrialization. Due to the nature of the world today, economic success has
become the main focus of every country. In order to no lose out in the global
market, countries tend to place a larger emphasis on profit instead of
protecting the environment. Therefore, international organisations may not be
able to achieve its ideal impact on protecting the environment.
Another solution to resolve
environmental degradation is to pump in large amounts of funds to remove the
pollutants in the natural environment. Governments would fund projects that
help to preserve endangered habitats and clean polluted ecosystems. In many
less developed countries, there is a lack in monetary power for proper disposal
of waste material. Unregulated dumping of sewage and industrial waste polluted
many water sources. Sewage can also
carry potent human pathogens as well as toxic chemicals. The Suzhou Creek
Rehabilitation Project was implemented in 1999 to improve water quality,
strengthen water resources management, and improve flood control (ADB, 2005).
The first phase of the plan has successfully completed in 2003. It was able to
alleviate the odor and pathogens from the sewage and realised social,
environmental, and economic benefits. This shows that cleaning up the
environment by the government is effective. However, it might be unfair to less
developed countries, as they do not have the necessary resources to mitigate
the problems they face. In order to maintain the ecosystem, large amounts of
money are required to fund the costly projects to clear up waste. These
countries may often be in monetary debt and thus unable to produce the funds to
maintain the environment. At the same time, poorer countries would tend to
disregard environmental issues as they focus on economic growth.
In conclusion, globalisation can be a
boon or bane for countries. The impact on the environment due to human
activities can be alleviated with political influence and large government
funded projects. However, we should protect the environment from the smallest
of actions by recycling and reducing waste. We are after all, ‘caretakers’ of
the planet as the most intelligent species on Earth.
Literature cited:
Asian Development Bank, 2005. Suzhou
Creek Rehabilitation Project (Loan 1692-PRC) In the People’s Republic of China.
Retrived from http://www2.adb.org/Documents/PCRs/PRC/pcr-prc-32121.pdf
Goldin, Ian. 2009. Navigating our global future. Retrieved
from http://www.ted.com/talks/ian_goldin_navigating_our_global_future.html
Ghose, Tia. 2013. Global carbon emissions to reach record
level. Retrived from http://www.livescience.com/41326-2013-carbon-emissions-record-levels.html
Rosenthal, Elisabeth. 2008. China
Increases Lead as Biggest Carbon Dioxide Emitter. The New York Times. Retrieved
from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/14/world/asia/14china.html?_r=0
Soos, Andy. 2012. Beijing 2008 Olympics
Air Quality. Retrieved from http://www.enn.com/pollution/article/44710
Zarco, T. H. (2014). The Influence of
Materialism on Consumer Preferences: A Conjoint Analysis Approach. Philippine Management Review, 21.
Monday, March 10, 2014
Globalisation Draft 2
In his TED talk, Goldin presented some problems that arose due to rapid globalisation. He states that destruction in biodiversity and ecosystem, climate change, financial crisis and inequality are major problems faced by the world (Goldin, 2009) Globalisation is the growing interconnectedness of people and places through converging processes of economic, political, and cultural changes. It has caused countries to become increasingly integrated among one another because of the advances in technology. Goldin stressed the two pressing consequences of an intricate interconnected world. Firstly, globalisation induces social inequality as developmental gap widens between the affluent and the impoverished. Only the privileged will have the opportunity to take part in the global community. Secondly, as countries become more integrated with each other, pandemics and financial collapse can affect every country.
The most significant problem is the environmental impact due to large-scale human activities. Industrialisation has increased the carbon emission to the atmosphere, which results in rising global temperatures. At the same time, harmful chemicals were released pollute the environment, destroying natural habitats and endangering the ecosystem. In addition, the world has adopted capitalism which promotes the growth of a consumerist and materialistic society. Thus, resulting in wastage and overconsumption as well as exploitation of natural resources. Hence in an attempt to mitigate the problem, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) had come together to resolve the environmental issue. The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) assists countries in implementing environmentally sound policies and practices. Another solution is for the cooperation to integrate green technology in their products.
As the world today place a large emphasis on economic growth, majority of the nations would exploit the advantages nature has to offer in order to ensure progress. Thus, biodiversity and ecosystem are deteriorating due to over exploitation and large demand for resources. In order to protect the environment, international organisations pressures countries to limit their economic activities in order to reduce the impact it may have on the ecosystem. By doing so, countries would have no choice but to oblige to the demands of these organisations. This is because these supranational bodies may place sanctions against their country, causing them to suffer because they are overly dependent on other nations due to the effects of globalisation. An example of political pressure is evident during the 2008 Beijing Olympics whereby China received tremendous global pressure to reduce carbon emissions and pollutants. China was listed as the largest carbon dioxide emitter in EDGAR in 2012 (Ghose, 2013). However, intimidating countries may not be effective enough to significantly reduce the impact on biodiversity. China did not rectify the Kyoto Protocol even though it was faced with much global pressure. China is still the largest carbon dioxide emitter followed by United States.
Hence, international influence on the country may be effective to a limited extent as some countries do not want to dampen their local economic growth by reducing industrialisation. Due to the nature of the world today, economic success has become the main focus of every country. In order to not lose out in the global market, countries tend to place a higher emphasis on profit instead of protecting the environment. Therefore, international organisations may not achieve its ideal impact on protecting the environment.
Another solution to resolve environmental degradation is to pump in large amounts of funds to remove the pollutants in the natural environment. Governments would fund projects that helps to preserve endangered habitats and clean polluted ecosystem. Despite China’s efforts on environmental protection, it is not sufficient to cover the environmental needs. Shanghai has attempted to clean up the Suzhou River that was polluted by unregulated dumping of sewage and industrial waste. Therefore, it is evident that not enough is being done to alleviate the problem of environmental deterioration. A possible reason is because China does no have the necessary resources to mitigate the problems they face.
Another solution to resolve environmental degradation is to pump in large amounts of funds to remove the pollutants in the natural environment. Governments would fund projects that helps to preserve endangered habitats and clean polluted ecosystem. Despite China’s efforts on environmental protection, it is not sufficient to cover the environmental needs. Shanghai has attempted to clean up the Suzhou River that was polluted by unregulated dumping of sewage and industrial waste. Therefore, it is evident that not enough is being done to alleviate the problem of environmental deterioration. A possible reason is because China does no have the necessary resources to mitigate the problems they face.
In conclusion, globalisation can be a boon or bane for countries. It can cause destruction to Mother Nature and conflicts to arise between the poor and rich. At the same time, it can also bring about advancements in different areas such as science, transportation and communication. Despite nations' efforts to protect the environment, I believe much more could be done to save and preserve the endangered ecosystem.
Literature cited:
Goldin, Ian. 2009. Navigating our global future. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/ian_goldin_navigating_our_global_future.html
Ghose, Tia. 2013. Global carbon emissions to reach record level. Retrived from http://www.livescience.com/41326-2013-carbon-emissions-record-levels.html
Friday, February 28, 2014
Globalisation Draft 01
In
his TED talk, Goldin presented some problems that arose due to rapid
globalisation. He states that destruction in biodiversity and ecosystem,
climate change, financial crisis and inequality are major problems faced by the
world. Globalisation is the growing interconnectedness of people and places
through converging processes of economic, political, and cultural changes. It has
caused countries to become increasingly integrated among one another because of
the advances in technology. Goldin stressed the two pressing consequences of an
intricate interconnected world. Firstly, globalisation induces social
inequality as developmental gap widens between the affluent and the
impoverished. Only the privileged will have the opportunity to take part in the
global community. Secondly, as countries become more integrated with each other,
pandemics and financial collapse can affect every country.
The
most significant problem is the environmental impact due to large-scale human
activities. Industrialisation has increased the carbon emission to the atmosphere,
which results in rising global temperatures. At the same time, harmful
chemicals were released pollute the environment, destroying natural
habitats and endangering the ecosystem. In addition, the world has adopted capitalism which promotes the growth of a consumerist and materialistic society. Thus,
resulting in wastage and overconsumption as well as exploitation of natural
resources. Hence in an attempt to mitigate the problem, non-governmental
organisations (NGOs) had come together to resolve the environmental issue. The
United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) assists countries in implementing
environmentally sound policies and practices. Another solution is for the
cooperation to integrate green technology in their products.
As
the world today place a large emphasis on economic growth, majority of the
nations would exploit the advantages nature has to offer in order to ensure
progress. Thus, biodiversity and ecosystem are deteriorating due to over exploitation and large demand for resources. In order
to protect the environment, international organisations pressures countries to
limit their economic activities in order to reduce the impact it may have on
the ecosystem. By doing so, countries would have no choice but to oblige to the
demands of these organisations. This is because these supranational bodies may
place sanctions against their country, causing them to suffer because they are overly dependent
on other nations due to the effects of globalisation. An example of political
pressure is evident during the 2008 Beijing Olympics whereby China received
tremendous global pressure to reduce carbon emissions and pollutants. China was
listed as the largest carbon dioxide emitter in EDGAR in 2012. However,
intimidating countries may not be effective enough to significantly reduce the
impact on biodiversity. China did not rectify the Kyoto Protocol even though it
was faced with much global pressure. China is still the largest carbon dioxide
emitter followed by United States. Despite China’s efforts on environmental protection,
it is not sufficient to cover the environmental needs. Shanghai has attempted
to clean up the Suzhou River that was polluted by unregulated dumping of sewage
and industrial waste. Therefore, it is evident that not enough is being done to
alleviate the problem of environmental deterioration. A possible reason is
because China does no have the necessary resources to mitigate the problems
they face.
Nonetheless,
globalisation has a positive impact on the environment due to the use of green
technologies and increased awareness. The advancements in technologies have
enabled MNCs to conduct researches to reduce the impact of human activities on
the environment. Environmentally friendly products such as hybrid cars are
introduced as they typically have fewer carbon emissions compared to regular
cars.
Another
pressing problem faced by the nations due to globalisation is inequality.
Increased global trade have no benefitted all countries equally. Countries such
as many African less developing countries (LDCs) have little to offer to
attract potential investors and hence receive very limited investments from the
developed countries (DCs), resulting in disparity in wealth accumulation and
hence uneven socio-economic development. Globalisation further accentuates
uneven development within countries, as most foreign investments are often
concentrated in urban areas, not rural areas. Therefore, to reduce the widening
development gap between nations, nations would require implementing policies
that can attract foreign investments. This in turn will create more jobs for
the people, increasing demand for goods and services and economy will progress.
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has had talks during May 2013 to
address the development gap in ASEAN. It has been reported that even though
disparity between the rich and poor is narrowing, more has to be done. However,
it is not easy to eradicate socio-economic inequality. Variations in resource
endowment and bad governance might prevent the gap from narrowing. These issues
are difficult to tackle, as regional and global organisations are unable to
assist the country directly.
In
conclusion, globalisation can be a boon or bane for countries. It can cause
destruction to Mother Nature and conflicts to arise between the poor and rich. At
the same time, it can also bring about advancements in different areas such as science,
transportation and communication.
References:
Thursday, February 27, 2014
Reader's response (Final draft)
In order to remain competitive in the English speaking global community, then Prime Minister of Malaysia Mahathir bin Mohamad introduced the PPSMI policy in 2003. This policy was targeted at making a new generation of Malaysians who would be able to communicate in the international language. However, the Malaysian government has decided to abolish its policy on English teaching, as the final results were not ideal. They believe that by teaching in English, it will cause the dilution of their national culture.
In my opinion, the Malaysian government removed the policy despite the risks of a decline in their economic growth was agreeable. At the same time, it is not justifiable that having an English speaking education system would bring about economic success. This was mainly due to the lack of manpower in the education sector. Teaching in English requires many capable teachers who are able to converse and speak well in English. Hence, only the privileged schools have the opportunity to hire English speaking teachers to teach. Therefore, causing a possible skill disparity between English schools and other schools. Students who attend English school would have an advantage in the global economy when looking for a job, whereas the rest of the students would be limited to local companies. Thus, it will be unfair to students who work equally hard.
On the other hand, teaching in English might undermine the Malaysian traditions. Singapore is a very good example whereby its younger generations are weak in their mother tongue. It has become increasingly common to find young Singaporeans who do not and cannot speak their language. As families shift towards westernised cultures, traditions are slowly forgotten. Hence in an attempt to preserve the Malaysian identity, the policy was removed.
In conclusion, I agree with the Malaysian government revoking the policy because it would result in a disparity in skills. This might social problems to arise and conflicts to occur. In addition, it is important not the lose sight of local traditions as the west has a profound influence over everything.
In my opinion, the Malaysian government removed the policy despite the risks of a decline in their economic growth was agreeable. At the same time, it is not justifiable that having an English speaking education system would bring about economic success. This was mainly due to the lack of manpower in the education sector. Teaching in English requires many capable teachers who are able to converse and speak well in English. Hence, only the privileged schools have the opportunity to hire English speaking teachers to teach. Therefore, causing a possible skill disparity between English schools and other schools. Students who attend English school would have an advantage in the global economy when looking for a job, whereas the rest of the students would be limited to local companies. Thus, it will be unfair to students who work equally hard.
On the other hand, teaching in English might undermine the Malaysian traditions. Singapore is a very good example whereby its younger generations are weak in their mother tongue. It has become increasingly common to find young Singaporeans who do not and cannot speak their language. As families shift towards westernised cultures, traditions are slowly forgotten. Hence in an attempt to preserve the Malaysian identity, the policy was removed.
In conclusion, I agree with the Malaysian government revoking the policy because it would result in a disparity in skills. This might social problems to arise and conflicts to occur. In addition, it is important not the lose sight of local traditions as the west has a profound influence over everything.
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Reader's response (Draft 01)
In order to remain competitive in the English speaking
global community, then Prime Minister of Malaysia Mahathir bin Mohamad
introduced the PPSMI policy in 2003. This policy was targeted at making a new
generation of Malaysians who will be able to communicate in the international
language. However, Malaysian government has decided to abolish its policy on
English teaching, as the final results were not ideal. They believe that by
teaching in English, it will cause Malaysians to lose their culture.
In my opinion, the Malaysian government removing the
policy despite the risks of decline in their economic growth was agreeable. At the
same time, it is not justified that having an English speaking education system
would bring about economic success. This is mainly due to the lack of manpower
in the education sector. Teaching in English requires many capable teachers who
are able to converse and speak well in English. Hence, only a small percentage
of schools would have the privilege to hire English-speaking teachers to teach.
Thus, it may result in a skill disparity between English schools and other
schools. Students who attend English school would have an advantage in the
global economy for a job, whereas the rest of the students would only be
limited to local companies. Therefore, it would be unfair to students who work
equally hard.
Teaching in English might undermine the Malaysian
traditions. Singapore is a very good example whereby its younger generations
are weak in their mother tongue. It has become increasingly common to find
young Singaporeans who do not and cannot speak their language. As families
shift to westernized cultures, traditions are slowly forgotten. Hence in an
attempt to preserve the Malaysian identity, the policy was removed.
In
conclusion, I agree to the Malaysian government drop the policy because it will
result in skill disparity, which would cause conflicts between different people.
In addition, it is important not to lose sight of our traditions as the west has
a profound influence over everything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)