Chris Milla Anteneh Tesfaye ENVS 2 Human Nature, Technology, and the Environment

1
Chris Milla Anteneh TesfayeENVS 2 Human
Nature, Technology, and the Environment

• The Politics of Saving the Environment

2

• The purpose of this presentation is to create a
  foundation of understanding of both domestic and
  international political institutions and their
  relationship with the environment.
• First, we examined the relationship between
  economic growth and the environment. We asked
  questions such as Is economic growth good for
  the environment or bad?
• Next, we looked at the relationship between
  democracies and the environment. We asked
  questions such as do democracies benefit the
  environment? Are there better alternatives?
• Finally, we looked at international organizations
  such as the WTO and examined in relative detail
  whether trade liberalization is good for the
  environment or not.

3
Economic growth and the Environment

• Those that argue that economic growth is bad for
  the environment sight the fact that economic
  growth leads to inequality which in turn leads to
  civil conflict. Civil conflict and civil unrest
  make it difficult for governments to focus their
  energy on environmental protection (Midlarsky pg.
  341).
• On the other hand, those that argue that economic
  growth is good for the environment state that
• Once a countrys basic needs are dealt with (i.e,
  infrastructure), the government can focus on
  other such needs as environmental protection.
• When industries are wealthier and are flushed
  with amore funds then they will readily help the
  environment (Midlarsky pg. 342).

4
Democracy and the Environment

• It has long been assumed that democracies tend to
  treat the environment better than totalitarian
  regimes. Evidence of this is the total
  destruction of the environment carried out by
  Eastern European countries during the cold war.
  In their rush to catch up with the west, in terms
  of industrialization, these regimes paid no mind
  to the environment.
• Still, does this mean that democracies are good
  for the environment?

5

• Those who believe democracies are good for the
  environment argue that (Midlarsky pg. 344-45)
• Democracies respect human rights
• Democracies are more responsive to citizenry
  (i.e, such as right before elections)
• Democracies allow the free-flow of information
  making it an environment for political learning.
• Democracies tend to cooperate with each other
  (this means they can copy each others
  environmental technology)
• Business within Democracies are subject to
  incentives and sanctions which means that
  environmental groups have the ability to lobby
  for legislation that will cost companies money

6

• On the other hand, those that feel that
  democracies are not good for the environment
  argue that( Midlarsky pg. 343)
• Democracies have to persuade their population to
  spend money on the environment. This process is
  often slow and ineffective, totalitarian regimes
  have the ability to enact immediate change.
• In a democracy the focus is on the individual and
  not on the community or on the environment.
• Under the protection of property rights, both
  individual persons and, more importantly,
  corporations, can act willfully, even recklessly
  without regard to impact on the environment
  (343).

7
Trade Liberalization and the Environment

• The objectives of trade liberalization and
  environmental protection seem to be the same.
  Both want to optimize the efficient use of the
  environment making sure that economic growth is
  environmentally sustainable (Brack pg. 497).
• Yet, trade liberalizers and environmental
  protectors are often in conflict with each other.
  In order to understand international political
  institutions it is important to first understand
  how trade can be good for the environment and how
  it be detrimental.

8

• Those that feel that trade can potentially be
  good for the environment argue that
• Trade leads to comparative advantage which helps
  promote environmental sustainability because
  countries focus on one good rather than all
  goods.
• Higher national income allows companies the
  ability to assist in cleaning up the environment.
  
• Natural resources are less likely to be priced
  below cost (Brack pg. 498)Prices may still not
  reflect the true environmental costs of
  production and consumption but at least they are
  less likely to be subsidized (498)

9

• On the other hand, those that do not agree with
  the above claims say that
• Economic growth resulting from an increase in
  trade leads to an increase in pollution and the
  unsustainable consumption of natural resources.
• Trade oftentimes undermines environmental
  standards
• Similarly, a country with strict environmental
  regulations may find its economy undermined by
  competition from other countries with more lax
  environmental standards (Brack pg. 501)
• making country want to relax its regulations in
  order to gain greater market share
• The international trading system, according to
  trade regulations and agreements made in part
  through the WTO, cater to trade interests rather
  than environmental ones.

10
Why International Organizations Might not be as
Effective

• Like all democratic nations, decision making
  process can be slow. Especially when the
  international organization contains several dozen
  nations with different views and interests.
• For example, the difficulty the CTE (Committee
  on Trade and Environment) has had in coming to
  decision can be attributed in part to the
  decision-making process of the WTO and its
  organs. The WTO, despite having 128 members in
  1997, continues the decision making by consensus
  followed under GATT 1947 (The American Journal
  of International Law Vol. 91268)
• However, environmental issues dont allow such
  luxurious decision-making process
• Environmental threats are unambiguously overt,
  things may be too far gone to retrieve the
  situation. When you dont see it, you can still
  act to prevent it but it is denied status by
  realist politics, so you cant when you do see
  it and it is granted status and you could act,
  you probably cant because natural processes have
  passed a point of no return (Politics and the
  Environment, 729).