Human life, livelihoods harmed by climate change: Lancet study
Click HERE
The article brings up the point that envmt conservation is impt cos it affects our very physical survivial, our health, our jobs, our business, our economy, etc. Of interest to me is how the rising temperatures can lead to the spread of dengue and affect our health.
It is the AWARENESS of the direct impact on our lives due to the envmtal problems that will motivate and incentivize us to effect change to save Mother Nature. For the masses, esp the uneducated in the third world, it is difficult to see this link between our problems in life and the woes of Mother Nature. This cause-and-effect relation needs to be pointed out to us if there is going to be any hope for Mother Nature. At present, one obstacle to envmtal conservation is our IGNORANCE of how it can wreak havoc in our lives. When we eat shark's fin, we do not know that they are endangered, and that this may upset the marine ecosystem (sharks are at the apex of the marine food chain) which will then threaten our food security from the sea as the fishes at the bottom die out due to the upset in the balance. Only when this kind of complex causal chain reactions is pointed out to us can there be any hope of people alterating their daily habits to be more envmtally friendly, esp when their lives are going to be affected by it...
Suggested Approach for Comparison Qns:
In comparison qns like the one below, other than comparing, it is also good to adopt a stand where u say that while X may be more impt than Y, we cannot discount Y totally as BOTH X and Y are needed in order for the problem to be effectively resolved. One without the other result in an incomplete solution, like a person with only one hand, albeit the stronger hand. You need two hands to clap, which is impossible if u only have one very strong hand. The other hand, even if weaker and smaller, is still needed for the clapping to take place. [note the use of analogy to explain here]
To show this inter-relatedness or symbiotic relationship btw X and Y, consider the possibility of whether X is needed for Y to take place or vice versa. In the qn below, we can argue that education is needed to support the regulations. Only when people are educated, will they be aware of the consequences of their action, and only then will they be convinced of the logic of supporting the regulation and support it wholeheartedly. Without education to provide the awareness as a foundation for the regulation, at best pple will follow it grudgingly because they are afraid of the penalty of breaking it, but they will also try to find loopholes around it so that they can still follow their envmtally-unfriendly ways. And if they can't find loopholes around the regulation, they will resent the govt who impose it and vote that govt out in the next election. This is why govts sometimes lack the political will to go green even when they see the need for it. Hence, the long and short of it is that for regulation to work, it must have the support of the pple, and pple will only support it if they are convinced by the logic underpinning it, and this reuqires the awareness brought about by education. Therefore, we need BOTH education and regulation, as education is needed for regulation to work to save Mother Nature.....
Qn: ‘The solution to all environmental problems is more regulation, not education.’ Do you agree? (DHS Prelim 2017)
The article brings up the point that envmt conservation is impt cos it affects our very physical survivial, our health, our jobs, our business, our economy, etc. Of interest to me is how the rising temperatures can lead to the spread of dengue and affect our health.
It is the AWARENESS of the direct impact on our lives due to the envmtal problems that will motivate and incentivize us to effect change to save Mother Nature. For the masses, esp the uneducated in the third world, it is difficult to see this link between our problems in life and the woes of Mother Nature. This cause-and-effect relation needs to be pointed out to us if there is going to be any hope for Mother Nature. At present, one obstacle to envmtal conservation is our IGNORANCE of how it can wreak havoc in our lives. When we eat shark's fin, we do not know that they are endangered, and that this may upset the marine ecosystem (sharks are at the apex of the marine food chain) which will then threaten our food security from the sea as the fishes at the bottom die out due to the upset in the balance. Only when this kind of complex causal chain reactions is pointed out to us can there be any hope of people alterating their daily habits to be more envmtally friendly, esp when their lives are going to be affected by it...
Suggested Approach for Comparison Qns:
In comparison qns like the one below, other than comparing, it is also good to adopt a stand where u say that while X may be more impt than Y, we cannot discount Y totally as BOTH X and Y are needed in order for the problem to be effectively resolved. One without the other result in an incomplete solution, like a person with only one hand, albeit the stronger hand. You need two hands to clap, which is impossible if u only have one very strong hand. The other hand, even if weaker and smaller, is still needed for the clapping to take place. [note the use of analogy to explain here]
To show this inter-relatedness or symbiotic relationship btw X and Y, consider the possibility of whether X is needed for Y to take place or vice versa. In the qn below, we can argue that education is needed to support the regulations. Only when people are educated, will they be aware of the consequences of their action, and only then will they be convinced of the logic of supporting the regulation and support it wholeheartedly. Without education to provide the awareness as a foundation for the regulation, at best pple will follow it grudgingly because they are afraid of the penalty of breaking it, but they will also try to find loopholes around it so that they can still follow their envmtally-unfriendly ways. And if they can't find loopholes around the regulation, they will resent the govt who impose it and vote that govt out in the next election. This is why govts sometimes lack the political will to go green even when they see the need for it. Hence, the long and short of it is that for regulation to work, it must have the support of the pple, and pple will only support it if they are convinced by the logic underpinning it, and this reuqires the awareness brought about by education. Therefore, we need BOTH education and regulation, as education is needed for regulation to work to save Mother Nature.....
Qn: ‘The solution to all environmental problems is more regulation, not education.’ Do you agree? (DHS Prelim 2017)
posted by Dark Shadow | 2:13 PM
<< Home