Skip to main content

Home/ IB Geography/ Group items tagged response

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Benjamin McKeown

Blaming natural disasters on climate change will backfire. - 0 views

  • Thus, the migration in response to the severe and prolonged drought exacerbated a number of the factors often cited as contributing to the unrest, which include unemployment, corruption, and rampant inequality. The conflict literature supports the idea that rapid demographic change encourages instability. Whether it was a primary or substantial factor is impossible to know, but drought can lead to devastating consequences when coupled with preexisting acute vulnerability, caused by poor policies and unsustainable land use practices in Syria’s case and perpetuated by the slow and ineffective response of the Assad regime [emphasis added].
  • suggests that an unprecedented drought accentuated frustration with the Assad regime and led to migration from rural to urban areas.
  • While climate change will probably increase the number and intensity of heavy showers, leading to more frequent landslides, intensive logging and government negligence in permitting new construction in these areas cause the real disasters.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • While global warming probably accentuated the torrential rains, it was actually policy failures that allowed heavy rains to cause the flood and human suffering: Over the past two decades, the city government has systematically disregarded basic principles of ecology and urban planning by building structures in flood plains and marshlands.
  • Climate change is often going to be the domino that falls. But that does not mean we can ignore the rest of the dominos in the row.
Benjamin McKeown

Japan panel: Fukushima nuclear disaster 'man-made' - BBC News - 0 views

  • It said that the situation at the plant worsened in the aftermath of the earthquake because government agencies "did not function correctly", with key roles left ambiguous. It also highlighted communication failures between Tepco and the office of then Prime Minister Naoto Kan, whose visit to the site in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake "diverted" staff.
  • "Japan's regulators need to shed the insular attitude of ignoring international safety standards and transform themselves into a globally trusted entity," it said.
  • "could and should have been foreseen and prevented" and its effects "mitigated by a more effective human response",
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • The report catalogued serious deficiencies in both the government and plant operator Tepco's response.
  • It also blamed cultural conventions and a reluctance to question authority. Analysis By Mariko OiBBC News, Tokyo While the report is highly critical of all the key parties, it digs even deeper. The panel called the disaster "Made in Japan", because the mindset that allowed the accident to happen can be found across the country. It flagged up the bureaucracy's role in both promoting and regulating the nuclear industry, and also cultural factors such as a traditional reluctance to question authority. The report was expected to use strong language, but not many thought it would be this harsh. The panel also found that there was a possibility that the plant was damaged by the earthquake, contradicting the official position that only the tsunami contributed to the disaster. It could put further pressure on the government, which recently authorised the restart of two nuclear reactors in western Japan. They were declared safe in April but the plant also sits on top of a fault line.
  • "Although triggered by these cataclysmic events, the subsequent accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant cannot be regarded as a natural disaster," it sai
Benjamin McKeown

BBC News - BP found 'grossly negligent' in 2010 Gulf oil spill - 0 views

  • Under the US Clean Water Act, a ruling of negligence would have meant BP was liable to pay $1,100 per barrel of oil spilled; gross negligence increases the penalty to $4,300 per barrel.
  • Judge Barbier said BP should shoulder 67% of the blame for the 2010 spill, with drilling rig owner Transocean responsible for 30% and cement firm Halliburton responsible for 3%.
  • Also in 2012, BP reached a $9.2bn civil settlement and agreed to put $20bn into a trust to pay to businesses and individuals.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • d into the Gulf; BP has said the figure is closer to
Benjamin McKeown

Geoengineering Is Inevitable - 0 views

  • But it will happen, and buried in chapter 4 of the new IPCC report is the reason why: it’s cheap, and it’ll probably work.
  • We have this same conversation about intentional, large-scale tinkering with the climate to counteract our ongoing, less-intentional tinkering with the climate because climate change is scary, and it is dangerous, and because we are paralyzed.
  • There is a danger that geoengineering will lead to complacency in the fight to transition away from fossil fuels. And finally, this would be a planetary-scale experiment with so many variables as to make firm predictions of the results nearly impossible.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Keeping it from soaring beyond that level and into the realm of the catastrophic “would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society.” Does that sound like something humans are remotely planning on doing, given what we have seen to this point?
  • Accepting the inevitable could spur the development of a regulatory framework, for instance. In the absolute best case scenario, it could even convince some reluctant actors to push harder on mitigation efforts.
Benjamin McKeown

International response to the Chernobyl accident - 0 views

  • Quite early on, attempts were made by the United States, WHO/HQ, and OCHA to coordinate both the humanitarian and research initiatives. One problem was a lack of clarity over the leadership of the newly independent states: the Russian Federation regarded itself as senior to the others, the accident occurred in Ukraine, and Belarus was the most affected country. The United States and WHO/HQ each claimed to have made exclusive agreements with the affected states—IPHECA to the effect that it was to be an umbrella under which all research and humanitarian activities would be coordinated, and the United States to the effect that it had priority where the conduct of research was concerned. OCHA claimed that its mandate overrode other humanitarian-linked agreements. The result was a serious lack of coordination and a fair measure of chaos on both humanitarian and research fronts.
Benjamin McKeown

The Brussels attack is giving way to a terrible isolationist sentiment. - 0 views

  • nstead of calling for solidarity against a common threat, a spokesman for the anti-European U.K. Independence Party declared that the open borders of Europe “are a threat to our security,” even though the U.K. is not part of Europe’s Schengen border treaty.  A columnist for the Daily Telegraph declared Brussels the “jihadist capital of Europe,” and mocked those who call for staying in the EU on the grounds of safety. Meanwhile, American news organizations fell over themselves to get instant reactions from Donald Trump, who had just told the Washington Post that he didn’t see the point of NATO, which “is costing us a fortune.” He didn’t disappoint: “[W]e have to be very careful and very vigilant as to who we allow in this country.”
  • “my country will be safer” if it pulls out of its international alliances is growing.
  • the illogical idea
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Every terrorist attack on U.K. soil in recent memory was carried out by British (or Irish) citizens and not foreigners; nuclear deterrence requires allies and coordinated responses; barbed wire cannot stop a cyberattack. The small-minded, short-sighted isolationists ignore reason and logic, instead substituting panic and fear.
  • Of course there are reasons for this change: German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s disastrous decision to apparently “invite” Syrian immigrants into Europe last summer has left many Europeans feeling queasy and out of control.
  • The only way to fight jihadism is through our existing military, economic, and political alliances
  • And the only way to ensure that we have international support in the future, when a tragedy takes place on our soil—and it will—is to offer our support for a tragedy unfolding on allied soil right now. 
Benjamin McKeown

Judging the COP21 outcome and what's next for climate action | E3G - 0 views

  • An enduring, legally binding treaty on climate action which contains emission reduction commitments from 187 countries starting in 2020. The Paris Agreement will enter into force once 55 countries covering 55% of global emissions have acceded to it.
  • commitments for additional action to reduce emissions and increase resilience were made by countries, regions, cities, investors, and companies.
  • signals the end of business as usual for the energy industries. Future investment will need to be compatible with a zero carbon world.
  • ...16 more annotations...
  • all countries make commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and manage the impacts of climate change. It will shape climate action for decades into the future.
  • countries will need to review and increase their emission reduction commitments every 5 years in order to meet the long term goal of greenhouse gas neutrality by the second half of century.
  • ncluding the G20 and the Sustainable Development Goals.
  • renewables will make up 78% of new power generation investment to 2030
  • n major economies.
  • drive down the cost of renewable energy.
  • Paris Agreement beyond $100bn promised up to 2020 will provide support to emerging and developing countries
  • increasing emission cuts every 5 years to meet that goal.
  • ong term goal of greenhouse gas neutrality i
  • rapid phase out of fossil fuels.
  • multilateral diplomacy. I
  • manage an orderly transition away from a fossil fuel
  • G20 has established a taskforce on the implications of climate policy on financial stability
  • adaptation, resilience and response
  • Scenario 1: ‘Le Zombie’ – tactical deal with high potential for collapse. >        Scenario 2: ‘Comme ci, Comme ça’ – modest progress with guarantees on finance. >        Scenario 3: ‘Va Va Voom’ – cements a new enduring regime on climate change.
  • Climate action beyond Paris 2015
Benjamin McKeown

The effects of subsidies | Global Subsidies Initiative - 0 views

  • the benefits to society of that money, if it had been spent otherwise, or left in the pockets of taxpayers, might have been even greater.
  • heory shows that these depend on a number of factors, among which are the responsiveness of producers and consumers to changes in prices (what economists call the own-price elasticities of supply and demand), the form of the subsidy, the conditions attached to it, and how the subsidy interacts with other policies.
  • such subsidies tend to divert resources from more productive to less productive uses, thus reducing economic efficiency.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Those who take a more benign view argue that subsidies can serve redistributive goals, or can help to correct market failures. But, as the public-finance economist Ronald Gerritse once warned, subsides defended on such grounds "may have externalities that we did not bargain for." Indeed it is such second-order effects that have come under attack by environmental economists in recent years.
  • any subsidies are defended as benefiting disadvantaged groups, or groups the politicians like to make us believe are disadvantaged.
  • tend to favour larger producing units. Recently, for example, the Environmental Working Group, an American non-profit organization, counted up all the direct payments made by the U.S. Government to farmers between 1994 and 2005 and found that ten percent of subsidy recipients collected 73 percent of all subsidies, amounting to $120.5 billion Analyses of agricultural support programmes in other countries appear to lend credence to the 80:20 rule - the impression that 80% of support goes to 20% of the beneficiaries.
  • environmentally harmful subsidies" they generally mean subsidies that support production, transport or consumption that ends up damaging the environment. The environmental consequences of subsidies to extractive industries are closely linked to the activity being subsidized, like fishing or logging.
  • Subsidies to promote offshore fishing are a commonly cited example of environmentally harmful subsidies, with support that increases fishing capacity (i.e., subsidies toward constructing new boats) linked to the depletion of important fishery stocks. In other industries, subsidies that promote consumption or production have led to higher volumes of waste or emissions. For example, irrigation subsidies often encourage crops that are farmed intensively, which in turn leads to higher levels of fertilizer use than would occur otherwise. Moreover, irrigation subsidies can lead to the under pricing of irrigated water, which in turn fosters the overuse and inefficient use of water. While many subsidies have unintended negative consequences on the environment, well designed subsidies can be beneficial when they work to mitigate an environmental problem. In the context of fisheries, for instance, these would include subsidies to management programs that help ensure that fisheries resources are appropriately managed and that regulations are enforced, or to research and development (R&D) designed to promote less environmentally destructive forms of fish catching and processing.    
Benjamin McKeown

american immigration debate - Google Search - 0 views

  •  
    "The U.S. Immigration Debate - Council on Foreign Relations"
1 - 20 of 45 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page