Which one of the previous four authors in the Reader would you most closely associate the thoughts of Ian McHarg? Why? How do they differ?
I would associate Howard’s essay most closely with the thoughts of Ian McHarg. Both of these essays allude to the importance of balancing the environment with human needs. Howard’s approach was based on the “three magnets” where McHarg describe the “8 natural processes” that needed to be protected. I think that Howard’s essay was a little more general than McHarg’s but I had an easier time connecting to McHarg’s essay.
How did Ian McHarg characterize suburban growth? How did he describe the fate of older suburbs?
He described suburbs as being part of the country at first then slowly becoming engulfed by the city till they were no longer considered as areas outside of the city. Old suburbs then become harbor’s of disease. McHarg references that the “sad suburb is an unrealizable dream” which, to me, implies that the suburb has lost all hope of being what it was originally.
What eight “natural processes that performed work for man” did McHarg map and measure? What were those maps used for?
The eight natural processes are: surface water, marshes, floodplains, aquifers, aquifer recharge areas, prime agricultural land and Forests and woodlands. After these areas were mapped, the community was laid over these areas. This method ensures that these natural processes remain intact.
According to Frank, what was the main effect of development efforts after World War II on developing countries? What mechanism did he propose to explain this effect? Is this effect still occurring?
Developing countries were receiving help form developed countries. This assistance actually made developing countries more poor. A possible mechanism for this “dependence”. This effect still does seem to be occurring as globalization continues.
According to the Meadows team, what kinds of problems are people most likely to pay attention to? How does that relate our ability to tackle global problems like climate change and environmental degradation?
People are most likely to pay attention to things happening in relation to family in a short period into the future. Global issues, being separated from family issues by things happening in the neighborhood or their nation, receive less concern from the average person. In the cases of problems like climate change and environmental degradation, those problems are not only global problems, but they are problems that are, most likely, not going to affect a person in their life time. This makes these issues even less pressing to the common person.
What were the three conclusions of the Limits to Growth study? Have they been dis proven since 1972? How have they been echoed by others in your lifetime?
The three conclusions are:
“If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next on hundred years”
“It is possible to alter these growth trends and to establish a condition of ecological and economic stability that is sustainable far into the future”
“If the world’s people decide to strive for this second outcome rather than the first, the sooner they begin working to attain it, the greater will be their chances of success.”
In my time, especially as part of my undergraduate course load, I have been aware of the current ecological problems as a function of human population growth. I have also heard that the trend is so advanced that there is no longer and way to alter the change. However, I certainly hope for the best and I do believe that people can make a difference if they try.
How did Daly connect “growthmania” and “hyper-growthmania” to our economic measure of Gross National Product (GNP)?
“Growthmania” and “hyper-growthmania” is described as the consumption of resources far above the natural restorable amount. Daly described the economic means for allowing this growth to continue is by increasing growth in all other areas.
What is Daly’s core argument for a stead state economy?
Daly states that the steady state economy is necessary because the “world is finite, the ecosystem is a steady state”. Since the human economy is dependent on the steady-state ecosystem, our economy must match that ecosystem.
By what mechanisms does Daly propose to attain a steady state economy? What are the barriers to such a transformation?
Daly states that we must provide both lower AND upper limits on wealth. The most obvious barrier to this transformation is getting people to let go of that upper end of economic growth. It seems very difficult to tell people that they can only go so far.
No comments:
Post a Comment