A Single, Comprehensive Solution For Environmental Challenges

As Graf puts it, in order to resume effective deliberation among the actors involved (stakeholders),That is to say, at the forefront of these discussions, there are both internal and external factors that depict a common application and must have an all around understanding of everyone’s values, interests, culture in order for deliberation to be successful (Graf 2011). All of these factors impact new innovations for environmental resources in “social and economic contexts” which trace back to the beginning and start all over again (Graf 2011;

Ecology became an issue thrust into the national limelight for all to see. By bringing the issue to the national spotlight, it forced the government to take action as shown in the number of laws and regulations passed in the 1970s. Gottlieb called the 1970s the “Environmental Decade.” By the late 1970s, after the Vietnam War was over and many of the sociological and political issues had subsided several environmental struggles were weakening, possibly due to less sociological interest seen in the 1960s and early 1970s. Environmental efforts in the 1980s experienced a surprising resurgence and became a strong global social undertaking. Many people did not understand some aspects of the environmental movement. One of the reasons for this lack of comprehension may have been diversity. The terms race, gender, and class were not associated with environmentalism as late as 1993. Gottlieb attempts to bring these terms into the environmental movement in Forcing the Spring. Race, gender and class became more important in the environmental movement in the 1990s. Gottlieb attempts to show this new diversity and by doing this he suggest a revised view of the environmental movement. This new view shows environmentalism as a group of "social

The concept of social justice, and the environment have always been under great threat. However is it possible to mend the two, combine them together, in order to create an equal atmosphere and a sustainable society? The majority of the population have always wanted to prevent the minority in gaining their rights in fear of losing their power, and the nature conquerors have disregarded the wilderness’ needs in fear of losing their profit. Environmental activists and advocates have sought to bridge the gap between the complicated and divisive relationship between the natural world and the advancing technological world. Rebecca Solnit, Wendell Berry, and John Muir all recognize the explicit relationship between social justice and the respect for the natural world.

Rather than governmental identification of social problems and their solutions, conservations rely upon the market mechanics of supply and demand and the individual incentive of profit. Because government is exponentially larger today than it was before the Great Depression, conservatives today often critique the status quo and are resistant to further governmental expansion.

Instead of focusing on the individual, “ecological economics invites us to picture ourselves not as isolated individuals but as housemates” (McFague 132). This model has two goals striving for sustainability and distributive justice which will allow for the earth’s resources to be sustained for future generations. McFague feels that the ecological economic system will provide an efficient system that will suit and support the needs of the world.

In his esteemed novel, “Blessed Unrest: How the Largest Movement in the World Came into Being and Why No One Saw It Coming,” Paul Hawken inspires with a call to environmental attention. As a both writer and entrepreneur dedicated to our world’s ecosystems, Hawken seems to understand the impact we have created on our planet. Despite this, he also appreciates the human capacity to create an equal impact on the other end, and make positive progress. He defines this as the “Movement,” being an assembly of environmentally-minded groups and NGO’s coming together to save the dying ecosystems of the planet. Although Hawken’s optimism should be admired, his outlook seems slightly quixotic.

In an article written by Patrice Lumumba Simms, it is described that when looking at classic environmentalism so far, most of the policies implemented follow three broad categories. The first is pollution amelioration which targets reduction of pollutants. The second is hazard and risk management which, unsurprisingly, focuses on protecting humans from toxins that are hazardous to human health or the environment. The third, and final, is resource protection and conservation which seeks to prevent over utilization of natural resources and preserve nature. A common response to these categories is that they function as a “rising tide that lifts all boats,” (15) meaning that any type of environmental improvement is going to improve conditions for everyone. When using this argument, there is no problem with the classic environmental thinking because everyone benefits, potentially minority and low-income individuals more than anyone else. However, this argument is false. When creating policies, the EPA and organizations like it usually “do not approach programmatic decision-making with an eye toward ensuring comprehensive protection of every community” (16). For example, when discussing hazardous waste regulation, the EPA has regulations in place to manage disposal. However, many

“We feel helpless in the face of our knowledge, and we’re not sure we want to know anything more,” (Steingraber 674). Due to the fact that this crisis has multiple causes, those who accept the responsibilities that go along with solving this environmental issue feel as though their to-do list is never done, filling with one problem after another. Often times these activists begin to feel helpless. There isn't just one cause of the problem but multiple. Sandra Steingraber stated “the environmental crisis is actually two crisis, although they share a common cause. You could view it as a tree with two main branches,”(672). She understands that it isn't just one single problem but multiple problems with the same cause. People may fix one “branch” but they don’t realize that there are other “branches” that needs to be

In the paper “People or Penguins: The Case for Optimal pollution” written by William F. Baxter, Mr. Baxter says that usually what benefits us sometimes also benefits our environment. He says that in a serious outreach to eliminate pollution or to do something, questioning your objective does not support the action you want to take. When someone proposes a solution or something that they want to accomplish it is not educated of us to question their resolution, and amongst everyone it is viewed as imprudent commit such an action. Not everyone comes up with the same ideas, so most of the time there will be conflicts when we are debating over possible solutions. These conflicts inhibit the ideas of each person involved.

The author successfully incorporates many environmental initiatives and efforts into a comprehensive plan for moving forward. She embraces and encourages these efforts, but argues they are just placing more Band-Aids on a leaky pipe, rather than dealing with the problem at hand, they are just not big or powerful enough. Rather, Leonard asserts there must be a civic engagement part to bring the accountability and responsibility back to the government and corporations (175). Leonard makes a great point, but

The world consists of many opposing views on how the world should function and how to best interact with it. The first points describes different environmental worldviews and the second point describes the importance of resource conservation.

The Twentieth Century conservationists like John Muir and Gifford Pinchot always argued that it was important for the government of the day to strike a balance between the two conflicting goals of economic development and environmental conservation. According to Menzel (2007; 3- 4), other environmental movements in the USA had been in constant conflict with industrial enterprises. The major root cause of conflict being the fact that industrial enterprises had ignored the fact their activities were hurting the environment through

Environmental issues have been a cause of a lot of debate in the recent past. Governments and nongovernmental organizations have been in constant consultations on how to help protect the environment. Apparently, as a result of man’s many actions, the natural environment is getting torn apart so quickly that the coming generations will not enjoy this kind of environment, unless a

Pollution is a major problem globally and it becomes greater as the human population continues to rise exponentially. One of the major problems with increased population is higher waste production, which creates increased air, soil, and water pollution. To resolve this problem waste reduction must be of primary importance in preventing and reducing pollution. Waste management can be an expensive undertaking if not managed correctly so sustainable practices must be addressed. While pollution prevention and reduction programs can be expensive if not managed correctly, waste reduction is essential for the reduction and prevention of pollution.

With geological experts currently heralding a new geological period, the Anthropocene (Kolbert, 2011), attention is drawn to the overarching impacts of humankind upon the environment. The article ‘Anthropogenic nutrients and harmful algae in coastal waters’, published by the Journal of Environmental Management, Davidson et al. (2014) propose that nutrients from anthropogenic sources are a major contributing factor towards the increasing occurrence of Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) in coastal waters worldwide. The authors conclude that the function of anthropogenically sourced nutrients in stimulating the growth of HABs is dependent on location, other parameters often regulate the occurrence of algal blooms. The article is comprehensive from a scientific perspective, accessing quantifiable parameters from an empirical cause and effect assessment. However, from an Anthropology perspective there are various perspectives which, overlooked in this article, could enrich the understanding and comprehension on the causes of HAB events. To demonstrate how anthropological perspectives could contribute a more complex understanding and interpose valuable paradigms to environmental management models and challenges. The article by Davidson et al. (2014) is critiqued with regards to the Humanistic-Scientific spectrum, as well as the Holistic perspective as opposed to the Reductionist perspective, and the Temporal perspective is contrasted with the Tempocentric. However, advancing in this