Economy – Page 4

How successful has your society been in embracing the old?

It is a common misconception that the elderly are marginalised in society and are passed over in favour of younger workers. Critics also opine that the elderly receive limited healthcare, and have their needs neglected. Fortunately, the far-sighted government of Singapore has taken steps to accommodate and appreciate the value of the aged in many ways. From enhancing the employability skills of the elderly to investing in healthcare and even integrating them into society by altering the living environment, much has been done to embrace the old.

Faced with the reality of an ageing population and shrinking workforce, the Singapore government has given much attention to the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP). TAFEP curtails workplace discrimination against the elderly and gives those above 55 an equal chance to progress at work. To assist older workers in staying relevant, government-sponsored skills-training programmes encourage employers to hire and invest in training older workers. These initiatives point to the fact that the Singapore government has taken the welfare and interests of the elderly into consideration and protected their position in the workforce. Success, in this case, is the foresight with which the government has implemented these initiatives.

Employability aside, the Singapore government has upgraded physical infrastructure and subsidised medical consultations and treatments for the elderly. The Pioneer Generation Package was implemented in 2014 to help senior citizens to cope with rising health expenses in their old age. New hospitals have been built in older public housing estates to cater to geriatric care. The public authority in charge of road infrastructure and transport has installed new road safety features at selected locations with a higher proportion of elderly residents. Measures have been implemented in several housing estates to slow down motorised traffic and enable motorists to keep a better look-out for pedestrians. Singapore has done much to embrace the old, not only in the workplace but also in terms of healthcare and living conditions.

To suggest that everything is perfect in Singapore would be rather dystopian. There are dark corners in even the most brightly lit room. There are a few instances where the elderly have felt outcast and left behind as the rest continue to move forward. There was opposition against the construction of nursing homes in some public housing estates some years back. Residents were afraid of falling property prices with a nursing home in their midst. Isolated instances of young people being rude to the elderly on trains have been documented via social media. Fortunately, such cases are mostly isolated. Singaporeans are largely mindful of the place of the elderly and give the elderly a wide berth in how they adjust to life. The government provides subsidies to young couples to purchase flats near the home of their parents to ensure strong familial links. Even private developers build housing with dual keys to ensure parents can live next to their married children and eventually look after grandchildren.

Singapore has made great leaps in embracing the old. They are kept active in the workforce, infrastructure is adjusted to help them be mobile and healthcare coverage has been expanded to ensure suitable coverage. Singapore has welcomed the old with open arms. They are an asset to the country and the elderly deserve to be well-taken care of rather than being marginalised. There will always be gaps, especially in some members of the public’s mindsets. On the whole, however, Singapore has indeed created a society largely embracing the old.

Are the poor an inevitable feature of any society?

The rich-poor divide has existed in society for centuries and till today, philosophers and sociologists are still pondering about whether the poor are an unavoidable characteristic of society. Some say that it is a problem that can only be eradicated when the right measures and government policies are in place at both domestic and international levels. Others argue that it is a natural phenomenon in a society that would exist regardless of how societies are run. In my opinion, I feel that the number of people who are poor can be reduced but the poor would definitely remain as an indelible part of society as the world today presents several new problems, in addition to the existing ones, that exacerbate the situation brought forward from the past.

A prime reason why the poor are present and prevalent in some societies is due to existing debts in the form of international or individual debt. This problem can be solved through international debt relief or through micro-financing that may ease or eradicate the number of poor people. Third World countries such as Haiti and Cameroon are such examples; they are saddled with large amounts of debt, which saps resources meant for economic growth, causing these countries to be under-developed. As a result, poverty becoming a major issue as the majority of the people living there is unable to find jobs and cannot afford basic commodities. The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank launched the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative to provide debt relief for the world’s poorest countries, and a large portion of the international debt has been bought over by such organizations, to free up resources for economic growth in such countries. Poorer countries have benefited as a result as more money is spent on improving the living conditions of the people and poverty is minimised in these countries. Together with micro-financing through banks, it allows a wider scope of people to be debt-free, hence reducing the number of people in debt.

Another reason would be due to unstable governance in society that comes in forms such as corruption and organised crime. An upright and respected government has to be installed in order to ensure that the basic needs of the people are met. However, in societies ran by kleptocratic governments, funds in the form of education, farming and other subsidies meant for the public are embezzled, depriving the locals of opportunities to break out from the poverty cycle. Other societies that are dominated by criminal syndicates are also in the same situation. Protection rackets, drug-trafficking and loan-sharking are some activities that are prevalent in such societies, and with governments unwilling to crack down on such illegal activities, it leaves a negative impression on foreign countries and investors. As such, jobs are not created to provide employment for the people, and the poor continue to exist in society. Thus, ensuring that a government which is honest and unafraid to crack down on crime is in place may allow the number of poor people in societies to fall.

One other contributing factor to the existence of the poor would be discrimination in gender, cultural and racial aspects. Discrimination disadvantages certain groups of people into being unable to have the same rights as others, and as a result, they constitute the majority of the poor in many societies. Racial bias, for example, was a major issue in the US, such that before the African-American civil rights movement took place in the 1960s, African-Americans did not enjoy the same rights as white Americans. As such, they made up the bulk of the poor in the US in the past. However, with the help of pro-black groups such as the Black Panther Party, African-Americans are better off than before and poverty in America is no longer concentrated amongst African-Americans. Such rights groups still exist today, and they are still campaigning to stop discrimination and ensuring equal opportunities for all. They play an important role in eradicating biasedness in any form, such that people can get jobs regardless of their colour or religion. This also breaks down most social barriers, and it would pave the way to reducing the number of poor people disadvantaged because of discrimination.

The existence of the poor may now seem to be a relatively simple problem that can be solved in these changing times as certain trends are changing, but some solutions are more theoretical rather than practical and do not help in removing the ‘poor’ tag in societies as believed.

Gender, racial and cultural bias is one perennial problem that appears solvable but is impossible to resolve. This is because such discrimination stems from people’s mentality that has been shaped by negative influences as they grow up. As such, it is present in many forms in society, for example, in job interviews, discriminative employers may only offer jobs to certain groups of people and this creates a disadvantage for such people, which may be the reason why people who are discriminated against form the bulk of the poor. Also, in today’s society, the problem of discrimination is partly due to the older generations carrying historical baggage, such that the negative impressions they have of other groups of people are brought forward from the past and their actions could be discriminative. The problem also creates a vicious cycle when parents from these generations, out of stereotypical fears, inadvertently inculcate a sense of discrimination in their children. As such the people who are discriminated against might continue to feel resigned to be part of the poor and the problem carries on for generations. The population of the poor who are being discriminated against thus either grows or remains the same.

Another issue that contributes to the existence of the poor would be the different innate abilities in everyone. Some people are brighter than the others, while others can be more charismatic than others and the list goes on. Such traits distinguish each and every individual and it depends on which traits are more in demand that determines who might be rich and who might be poor. Generally, people who are intellectually superior to others would be in higher demand, and this could translate to them being better paid as well. This naturally creates a rich-poor divide in every society. Furthermore, a portion of the poor is also made up of people who are less skilled or unwilling to work. Comparatively, a person who is skilled would be more likely to secure a job than one who is not; a person who is willing to find a job would stand a chance of finding one compared to one who is not searching. As such, the poor basically constitutes of people who do not have the right skills or the right work attitude which dampens their chances of securing a job and breaking out of the ‘poor’ category.

Furthermore, studies have shown that the literacy rate in countries is a key determinant to the country’s economic prosperity, which can, in turn, increase the average local’s income. As such, most countries focus on making education available to every child in the country. Yet, for some countries, education may not be freely accessible due to political, geographical, social and other reasons. This is evident in populous rural areas which are highly inaccessible to the rest of the world, where the standard of education is not on par with education systems elsewhere. The level of education in such rural regions is limited in terms of choice, due to less resource made available for teaching. As a result, the people are deprived of accessible education services and end up forming the bulk of the country’s poor. However, this does not solely apply to rural societies. In developed countries such as the US and Canada, places in top-notch education institutions are reserved largely for the wealthy. This is due to the vast amount of resources concentrated on the varsities that provide the best form of education. As such, when such schools are compared to schools that are widely available to the public, there is a disparity in terms of quality of service provided, and this puts the poor at a disadvantage. In the end, it does not solve the situation of the poor in such countries.

In addition, in many developed and developing societies today, social mobility has become increasingly disparate between the rich and the poor. This is largely due to the tendency of the rich to cluster together to share resources and capital, such that the rich are becoming richer while the poor are becoming worse off. Income gaps in countries are widening as a result and this segregates the rich and the poor. As seen from today’s trends, the rich naturally have the capability to use resources unavailable to the poor, for example, they can afford to send their children for tuition to give them every possible advantage in terms of academic tests. Statistics show that students from the top income quartile have increased their share of places in elite American universities from 39% in 1976 to 50% in 1995, which shows us how the rich could possibly be gaining an edge over others in certain areas. As such, the poor have become the underdogs in areas where the rich seem to be dominating, and in the long run, this trend may have adverse effects on the chances of poor in improving their social status.

Finally, relativity also suggests that there will always be both the rich and the poor. A person who is better off than others would naturally be considered to be part of the rich, while the poor applies to the rest of the people. It tells us how people are grouped into either the ‘rich’ or ‘poor’ group. Take, for example, a person who earns a salary slightly higher than another is considered to be richer, while the other person is considered to be poorer. A poor person may not be identified as one who is not capable of affording basic necessities, but one whose financial worth is less than that of others. This is because an individual who may be considered to be poor in a developed country may not be so in a developing country. This serves to tell us that regardless of whether a society has a portion of its people who are poor, there might be others who are even worse off than them, and the problem of the poor existing in societies would thus persist no matter what happens.

Is there still a place for charity in today’s world?

With globalization on the rise, societies may be increasingly preoccupied with bringing in the dollar bills and squandering it to raise their living and comfort levels. As such, would it be possible that the poor, homeless, and the destitute would be left displaced in society without any source of help? Personally, I do believe so. Despite the presence of charitable organizations and programmes to help raise funds for the less fortunate, it is even more evident that charity is given less priority in today’s world. As modernization and rising affluence begin to assume control in this world, many people in the Third World and those marginalized in developed societies would be at a greater disadvantage, as charity seems to be displaced from society.

Some may argue that with globalization and modernization, the charity has evolved into what is known as ‘modern philanthropy’, taking action rather than supporting charitable organizations with one-off donations. Previously, while acts of charity were usually associated with monetary donations and supporting donation drives, the charity has now evolved into action, with people travelling across countries and helping those in need. Locally, schools have made overseas Community Involvement Programme (CIP) an integral part of the school curriculum, especially at the secondary and tertiary levels of education. Not only do these programmes allow for well-rounded education, but they also provided opportunities for students and teachers alike to understand the plight of the less fortunate and to take action in building wells, schools and other facilities to help them meet some basic needs. On the global stage, the creation of The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (B&MGF) could be seen as one of the leaders of modern philanthropy. From Africa to Asia, the foundation has impacted countries positively in line with their belief that ‘all lives have equal value’. They are concerned with educating the poor, eliminate poverty and have given out grants and donations in order to try to nip these problems in the bud. Henceforth, philanthropy in today’s context may not merely be about monetary donations. Rather, charity is still relevant today because of how man uses it as a tool to help better the lives of others.

Furthermore, charity is still existent today as it allows people to understand what compassion is truly all about. In a world where globalization seems to numb people, inhibiting their ability to feel for the destitute, charity still has a place to help them regain consciousness of the plight of fellow men in other parts of the world. For instance in Singapore, local celebrities Priscilla Chan and Alan Tern had been giving recognition for their charitable works overseas by Channelnews Asia. On the international level, an entirely new industry centred on giving has been created. Philanthropy workshops and coaches have emerged, helping people to narrow in on what they genuinely are concerned about, guiding them in managing their finances and taking the right action in contributing to charity. Philanthropic coaches go an extra mile in helping their clients create mission statements based on the type of change they envision and help them to plan their giving, both in mode and magnitude. As such, proponents of the claim that charity still has a place in the world today may be valid as charity takes on a different and more meaningful nature when people get their hands dirty and create change in the world.

On hindsight, however, rather than allowing the charity to gain some control over the world today, greed seems to be the new “virtue” that many subscribe to. With rising affluence in many parts of the world today, one cannot help but start to practice material hegemony, igniting a desire for material pleasure. Even with a greater amount of wealth, it would be surprising that man would donate a portion of it to charity purely out of goodwill rather than desiring to be recognized for such a major contribution. The recent Wall Street meltdown is an apt example of how a rich and developed country led to its own downfall and adversely affected the global economy. In the USA, citizens took mortgages from the banks without being able to pay them off due to their desire for their dream house without being fully informed of the risks involved, in a bid to increase their pool of wealth. Locally, there are also instances in which people bought Minibonds that were repackaged and sold through local banks, losing thousands of dollars overnight, showing how greed is perhaps innate and universal. Therefore, wouldn’t it be more appropriate to claim that in today’s world, charity is becoming more displaced and greed has taken its toll on society?

Aside from Greed, the power that Pride yields seem to be usurping the throne that Charity once held, in the 21st Century. As people become more prideful about their wealth and status, the charity may have become more obsolete in their lives. America is a good example, again, of how a nation slowly and painfully learns the truth behind being humble. For the past few years, the USA has prided itself for being brilliant, her greatness in moral convictions, the superiority of its intelligence and the seemingly blameless nature of her actions and decisions. Involvement in war-torn countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan have pulled American into uncomfortable realizations of how far its pride has led it to squander global goodwill and cooperation and in the process, make a number of enemies worldwide. A poll conducted after the Wall Street meltdown was even more telling of how pride blinds people, causing them to be even more self-centred than before. The poll saw a half of Wall Street workers dissatisfied with their 2008 bonuses while the rest of the world suffered from the repercussions of the financial turmoil, with retrenchments and bills that could not be paid off. As people become increasingly preoccupied with meeting their level of happiness and comfort, the charity would seem to disappear from the list of ‘must-dos’, leaving the less fortunate with little hope for the future.

Lastly, laziness seems to be getting the better of the world when it comes to charity. It is ironic how the world is in a constant buzz and yet Sloth stealthily kicks in to help people settle for what is most convenient. Be it struggling to complete one’s PhD, keeping the family together at the dinner table and loving one’s difficult relationship entails costs and sacrifice. Sloth, or rather, laziness propels individuals to choose the easy way out, thereby neglecting what is more pressing. It is no wonder that the larger affairs of the world such as poverty continue to remain unresolved despite the many years of international cooperation. Even with money flowing through the banks of charity, the hands of the people are not yet dirtied as they seem to believe that mere dollar bills would indeed make the world go round in happiness and hope. These people share the common belief that one-off donations would indeed make a difference, but they may not be clearly aware that their laziness in taking action to create changes in the world would ultimately, prevent the less fortunate from envisioning a better life in the coming years ahead. As such, I do believe that charity is becoming increasingly displaced as the world today would rather choose to settle for the most convenient things in life.

To sum up, charity, I believe begins with the heart. With people whose hearts are filled with greed, pride and laziness, how can the world be rid of the current problems that have to be tackled? Poverty would continue to exist in the future if people are unable to realize the increasing importance of charity in the world today. Without charity, there probably would not be any glimmer of hope for the poor and destitute. As the “virtues” of greed, pride and laziness pounce forward and assume control of the world, charity seems to be marked out of the list of priorities in the world today.

Should the poorer countries develop their tourist industry when the basic needs of their own people are not being met?

Tourism in many developing countries is one of the most reliable and sustainable economic development options and in some countries the main source of foreign exchange earnings. Part of this income trickles down to different groups of society and it is easy for this revenue to leak away from the poor benefitting the more educated and well-off segments of society. However, if tourism is managed with a strong focus on poverty alleviation it can directly benefit the underprivileged, empowering them with the ability to take care of their basic needs such as access to clean water, food, proper sanitation. With this in mind, it is my thesis that poorer countries should develop their tourist industry with poverty alleviation and sustainability as the central aims that are built into strategies and action plans.

Developing the tourist industry will generate a tremendous amount of revenue which can be used to elevate the standard of living of the people. Hence it would be sensible for poorer countries to expand the tourist industry. Constituting the second most important source of foreign exchange revenues, the growth of the tourism industry can result in a significant change in the economy of a developing nation. On top of that since the industry is conventionally made up of microenterprises and many of the jobs demand little skills and investment, developing the tourist industry can potentially be the most valuable and sustainable way for economic development. At the same time, tourism is largely based on the rich cultural heritage, unique landscape and biodiversities of the country which do not require heavy funding for infrastructure and yet creates high turnover. For example in the case of Nepal tourists often embark on mountaineering and trekking expeditions, and religious pilgrimages contributing to 4.6 % of Nepal’s GDP. Moreover, in the process of developing the tourism industry, infrastructure for basic necessities such as clean water, proper sanitation and power supply will be developed. One such example is the millennium villages project, Mayang, Rwanda, like most developing countries, experiences high infant mortality rate, limited health care, no electricity and no paved roads. However, after developing the tourism industry Mayang’s plight has been steadily improving – there is abundant food, booming businesses, increased number of schools and a decline and mortality rate. This reasserts that promoting tourism development can, in turn, benefit the locals through the provision of capital which can be used in meeting the basic needs of the poverty-stricken.

However, a paradox is that the rise in tourism can also be detrimental to the poor. Hence it may not be advisable for underprivileged countries to develop the tourist industry. The concentration of resources to the tourism industry may possibly result in the negligence of tourism’s welfare. As a consequence, people’s needs will be compromised. Brazil, for instance, had vital services such as transportation, education and health care that were inefficiently run and woefully underfunded. Yet it spent a ridiculously huge sum of 11 billion dollars on hosting the world cup alone. Should the interest of its very own citizens not remain the top priority? It is utterly unacceptable for a country to channel its already limited funds to accommodate the foreigners when the basic needs of its people are still not well taken care of. Having been bogged down by cost overruns, delays in the infrastructure projects and deadly accidents the world cup had also innovatively resulted in an inflation spike in Brazil. The influx of tourists increases the demand for basic services and goods causing prices to accelerate which negatively affect the local residents whose income does not increase proportionately. This impoverishes the poor to an even greater extent, depriving them of their essential needs all the more. Furthermore, in reality, most of the profit generated from tourism goes to the richer strata of society resulting in leakage. Take Thailand for instance, it is estimated that 70% of all the money spent by tourists ended up leaving Thailand via foreign-owned tour operators, airlines and hotels. Evidently, tourism gives the largest piece of the pie to large foreign companies and little earnings remain within the country. Moreover, the running of tourist facilities such as resorts and Recreation parks require a tremendous amount of water and energy. In developing countries, these resources are often scarce and used at the expense of the local population robbing the locals of their meagre essentials. Hence, the suggestion that tourism will alleviate poverty in developing countries may be a misguided one. It may be unwise for poorer countries to expand the tourist industry.

Nonetheless, tourism development should be actuated as long as it is done in a sustainable fashion. This will guarantee that the depletion of resources is minimised and the interests of the locals are not jeopardized. It is imperative that sustainability is taken into account as failing to do so will result in tourism being destructive to the economy which exacerbates the people’s inability to sustain themselves. In order to do so, these poorer countries need to develop their tourism industry whilst having poverty alleviation as the main principle. Part of the revenue needs to be directed towards the building of infrastructure for basic necessities and the government will have to ensure connectivity and accessibility of the industry to the poor. With this in place, more of the poor will be able to earn at least a living wage and thus be able to pay for their basic necessities. Developing nations should model the development of the tourism industry after South Africa’s so as to ensure this economic pursuit will not undermine the ability of the poor to meet their basic needs. In South Africa, ecotourism accounts for a large portion of employment in rural areas, the places where poverty is most rampant. The World Wide Fund also estimates that more than 80% of their revenue is invested in building water filtration facilities in villages. Such a sustainable approach to the development of tourism industry ensures that people are able to take care of the basic needs and also end their poverty cycle.

Tourism being susceptible to political unrest, natural disasters and shift in international demand is a very volatile industry. As such, it would be prudent for poorer countries to develop the tourist industry sustainably and with caution. Its development should also be done with people’s welfare as the main principle. Feeling to do so may result in tourism being a destructive industry, intensifying the people’s suffering and minimising their ability to meet their basic needs.

In what ways does a country both benefit and suffer from where it is situated?

A country’s geographical site is something that is of great significance, however, it can never be changed. A country has no way of deciding where she is located. Depending on beliefs, location is decided by a supreme being or sheer luck. Location can be an asset or a liability to a country depending on the exact nature of the location. Some countries have been submerged in water, others have been mired in war for years and some are located strategically along with trade travel hub. However, given the level of technology today, coupled with factors such as good governance, it is possible to mitigate the effects of poor location in certain situations.

A country with a good location would be a country that is not landlocked, is accessible to good trade routes and natural resources.

A country can gain from her location if she is in close proximity with other countries and they cooperate. This being the case helps to encourage trade and security cooperation which are two important factors that help to build and safeguard a country. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations(ASEAN) and the European Union(EU) are international organizations that carry out the gains mentioned earlier. To illustrate, to bolster security measures, member countries of ASEAN signed the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia, which spelt out the basic principles for their relations with one another and the conduct of the association’s programme for cooperation. In a similar manner, to maximise their influence on the international scene, on trade matters, EU members speak with one voice. In addition, EU members have removed all tariffs on trade when trading with fellow members, in order to boost trade. These examples demonstrate how countries can benefit from their location if they work hand in hand with the countries that are in close proximity.

However, just as close proximity can help a country, it can also bring about the harm such as increased tensions and even conflict. Such is the case of the boundary disputes between India and China. India and China have yet to resolve their dispute over large land areas such as Aksai Chin, a territory that China seized during the Sino-Indian War in 1962. In addition, close proximity due to the location of countries can bring about conflict over natural resources that are shared. A more recent example is the building of as many as 55 dams along the course of the Mekong river flowing through Indochina. This is especially damaging as the river meanders from China through Myanmar, Laos, Thailand and Cambodia. Thus, the lives of millions of people, not only those in Indochina, depend on it. This problem which will not be corrected in the near future has led to an increase in social and political tension between the lower Mekong countries and those in Indochina. This is an apt example of how close proximity arising from countries’ location can result in the sharing of natural resources and the subsequent increase in problems that the countries have to face.

Moving on, a country’s location determines the climate that the country experiences and the magnitude and frequency of natural disasters. Such factors are vital in determining if a country gains or loses. An example of a country that has prospered due to its good climate is Brazil. Climate suitable for agriculture has enabled Brazil’s agriculture sector to grow steadily over the past decade, positioning itself among the most dynamic sectors of the economy. Certainly, the growth is also fueled by the increase in the use of high technologies such as software to maximise the use of fertilizers and pesticides. However, the climate still plays an irreplaceable role in the agriculture sector. This is because, without a suitable climate, crops cannot prosper or survive even if large amounts of fertilizers are used. Hence this case shows how a country can gain from her good climate due to her good location.

In contrast, a country can suffer due to the geography and climate of the country. Problems include natural disasters or islands becoming submerged underwater and these problems can arise due to the location of the country. As the climate continues to warm, entire islands are sinking below rising waters due to melting glaciers. At least 18 islands have been submerged underwater. This problem is a result of the location of these islands. It is because these islands are located in low lying areas which is why the change in climate has resulted in them being submerged. This has brought about harm as whole communities have to be relocated, bringing about the advent of climate refugees. In addition, this has also caused much land to be no longer suitable for agriculture. This example shows the magnitude and how the location of a country can bring harm and loss.

On a separate note, it is important to note that while the location is significant, in this day and age, it is possible for good governance coupled with technology to mitigate the effects of a bad location. Landlocked countries such as Switzerland and San Marino are among the most stable and prosperous countries in the world. This shows that the most unfavourable geographical locations can be made prosperous by good policy. Apart from this, technology can also make geography irrelevant. Technology has enhanced communication and thus shrunk distances. Bangalore has become the software capital of India, with Hyderabad a close second. Both are land-locked, but satellite communications enable them to link up with cities anywhere in the world at low cost.

Location remains an important determinant of whether a country gains or loses. However, it has been shown that technology with good governance can conquer location. Hence while the location is vital, perhaps the gains and losses a country experiences also depends on the resolve of the people to use things available to their advantage and make their country prosperous.

‘Economic growth should be prioritised over environmental efforts in today’s world.’ Do you agree?

The world has enough for everyone’s needs, but not enough for everyone’s greed.” In light of the fact that nations are increasingly pursuing wealth by compromising the environment’s health, Gandhi’s quote reflects how an endless desire for economic development is simply unsustainable. With the rising number of natural disasters and environmental catastrophes in recent years, there has been a growing debate on whether choosing greater economic development to improve standards of living over environmental conservation is a choice that is still justifiable. Proponents of prioritising environmental conservation argue that reckless economic development unfairly places vulnerable nations at risk of environmental disasters and that urgent action needs to be taken to reduce the future impact of environmental catastrophes such as global warming. However, others believe that economic growth is necessary to raise the standard of living in developing nations, even at the expense of the environment, and that the environment can only be protected with revenue from economic progress. Hence, although the immediate benefits of economic growth may seem to outweigh its long-term harms, it should not be prioritised over environmental conservation due to the undue harm of reckless economic development and the urgency to solve environmental issues before they cause irreversible damage.

Despite the pressing need to take steps to curb environmental devastation, proponents of economic development believe that the economy takes precedence over the environment due to the immediate need of developing nations to raise their citizens’ standard of living. Although developing countries may initially damage the environment when obtaining natural resources for economic growth, the revenue gained from doing so allows them to invest in the economy and reduces reliance on natural resources in the long run. Developing nations have a wealth of untapped resources, such as minerals and wood, which can generate income to provide their citizens with an adequate standard of living. Unfortunately, these resources are often locked away in forests and mountains, making it impossible to obtain them without causing damage to the environment. Hence, in order to extract these resources for the sake of economic development, developing nations cut down forests and excavate mines for goods to export. Although this may come at some cost to the environment, the immediate benefits of increased revenue, which improves the lives of impoverished citizens, outweighs the harm done. With more income, governments of developing countries can invest in sectors that help to improve their citizens’ lives, such as healthcare and education. Better living standards and education equip citizens with the ability to acquire better-paying employment, lifting themselves out of poor living conditions. This improves the economy, reducing developing nations’ reliance on extracting natural resources for economic growth. In today’s world, economic progress is important as it is the key to ensuring a nation’s continued success in the global economy. The falling prices of commodities and growing tertiary sectors mean that countries must move away from relying on raw materials as their key source of income. Causing some damage to the environment to lift millions out of poverty is an acceptable sacrifice, especially for a less developed nation whose citizens are struggling to make a living. This is seen in the case of Botswana, which focused on diamond mining to gain revenue, despite the harm it caused to the environment. The income was invested heavily in education and healthcare, lifting 40% of its population out of poverty. Thus, economic growth takes precedence over environmental protection as it alleviates the immediate problem of poverty in developing nations.

Furthermore, economic growth should take precedence over environmental conservation as environmental protection can only occur with economic advancement. Although economic growth may harm the environment, the increased revenue allows governments to purchase improved technology and to invest in research and development. Hence, economic growth provides nations with the funds needed to restore the environment. An improved economy gives governments more money to spend on environmental conservation, improving its ability to conserve the environment. Conversely, poorer nations have less funding, causing them to be less able to protect the environment. In today’s world, the field of research on environmental conservation is constantly growing, from new sustainable sources of energy to conserving endangered species. Economic growth provides developing nations with the funds to sponsor such research for their own country, acquiring technology to negate pollution. They also have the finances to invest in creating nature reserves for vulnerable species which may have lost their habitats due to economic development. An example of a nation that used economic growth to promote environmental conservation is Austria, where fund accumulated from economic development in the past allowed it to invest in the development of renewable sources of energy, such as nuclear plants, today. Hence, economic growth should be prioritised over environmental protection as it is a prerequisite for effective environmental conservation to occur.

However, although economic development may seem like a sustainable solution to all environmental issues, it should not be prioritised over environmental efforts as it unfairly places vulnerable nations at risk of environmental devastation. Not all nations are created equal, with some possessing much more economic clout than others. The beneficial effects of economic development are limited to a nation’s own populace, but its detrimental effects on the environment are often regional, affecting multiple nations around it. Pollution such as haze and industrial waste is able to transcend national borders, spreading to other nations through the air or shared waterways. A nation’s carbon footprint from industrialisation causes the Earth to grow warmer and sea levels to rise, placing vulnerable island nations at risk of sinking under the sea, despite the fact that they contribute to less than one percent of the world’s carbon output. It is not fair to these nations, which did not benefit from the economic development of the country producing pollution, to suffer from the ill effects of environmental devastation which they are powerless to stop. This is poignant in today’s increasingly interlinked world, where larger countries fail to be held to account for their actions even by international organisations like the United Nations. For instance, the US withdrew from the Paris Climate Accord despite its significant carbon footprint, making it unaccountable for the economic devastation its pollution causes. This responsibility allows more powerful nations to create pollution through economic growth without consequences. An example of pollution affecting other nations is the annual transboundary haze caused by Indonesia when it burns forests to create land for cash crops. The haze spreads to neighbouring nations such as Malaysia and Singapore, affecting the economies of these countries. Hence, economic growth should not be prioritised over environmental efforts as it unfairly places vulnerable nations at risk.

In addition, economic growth should not take precedence over environmental efforts as urgent action needs to be taken to curb the effects of environmental degradation. Economic development is a slow process which happens over years, even decades. However, environmental disasters plaguing the world currently pose an immediate threat, which will only be exacerbated in the future. Hence, there is a greater incentive to take steps to solve environmental issues now, than to wait decades for environmental progress before attempting to solve these snowballing problems. Nations cannot wait for their economies to grow and for their GDPs to increase when their citizens fall victim to natural disasters and environmental pollution. In today’s world, saving the environment is an action that needs to be taken immediately by countries, as waiting for economic growth before trying to solve these issues could lead to irreversible consequences. The extinction of endangered species and loss of entire nations to rising sea levels are devastating outcomes of environmental degradation which cannot be reversed, even with modern technology. One example of a country at risk of vanishing is Kiribati. With islands raised a few metres above sea level, the nation is predicted to become uninhabitable by 2050, when the ocean rises enough to completely submerge the tiny country. The president of Kiribati even made an appeal to the United Nations General Assembly to call for efforts to curb global warming, before island nations such as his vanish for good. Thus, economic development should not be prioritised over environmental efforts, as environmental degradation results in issues that must be solved as soon as possible.

In conclusion, although proponents argue that economic growth is essential to solve the immediate problem of poverty and that it places developing nations in a better position to conserve the environment, they have ultimately failed to recognise that environmental degradation is an issue that must be addressed now and that reckless economic growth unfairly harms vulnerable nations which do not benefit from it. Thus, economic development should not be prioritised over environmental efforts due to the excessive harms that arise from solely focusing on economic growth and neglecting environmental conservation. As Martin Luther King once said, “We may have all come on different ships, but we’re in the same boat now.” Economic development may benefit our own nation, but it is environmental conservation that truly protects the world that we all live in.

Dominance of Asia is inevitable. Discuss.

A ten year old essay that still reads fresh!

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew gave a piece of his advice to the US administration when he was there to receive the Lifetime Achievement Award in Washington. He opined that if the US does not recognize that the Asia-Pacific is where the economic center is going to be, US would lose its influence worldwide in decades to come. Once considered a poor continent from the devastations of the World Wars with little or no influence (with the exception for Japan) on the global economy, Asia is now seen as playing a leading role on the global stage. The dominance of Asia in decades to come will be more defined as a shift in new economic global order sets in.

Intrinsic integration of economies has opened up markets in Asia which has widely benefitted it. Compared to the developed continents of Europe and North America, Asia is largely still a developing continent which strangely is working in her favour. The opening of emerging economies like Thailand, Vietnam and the two economic superpowers India and China has seen low wages being offered partly due to an abundant supply of labour and partly due to lower skills of these workers. As a result, these had led to many multinational corporations to outsource production of their goods in Asia to take advantage of the low-cost of production so as to be able to retain global competitiveness. China known as the world’s largest manufacturer has seen surge in demand for its labour that led to its economy to be overheated. India too is known to export IT services to countries due to her level of competency in that field, many Indian expatriates have been working in Silicon Valley, making up 30 per cent of the workforce. Due to greater demand from corporations it too allowed Asia to grow at an accelerating for the world to straighten up and recognize the rising dominance of Asia due to her economic prowess.

A downside to this though is that as Asia expands at an accelerating pace internal problems have become more poignant. In large parts of Asia, rural developments still persist. People in these areas tend to be illiterate and still engage in the cradle to grave employment – farming. They do not benefit from economic growth that other sectors do arising to the microeconomic problem of widening income inequality. China’s Gini coefficient is relatively high which signifies that if Asian government do not address the bipolarity in developments within its boundaries, the dominance of Asia may just become a passing fad.

On the entertainment area, Asian movies have been making its mark globally. Mention Bollywood and immediately one would conjure up an image of constant song and dance that revolves around a tree. Several Asian movies have received international awards such as Mother from South Korea, My Magic from Singapore; the Japanese movie The Departures won an Oscar award for best foreign film. Cross-border collaborations are rising as well. Westerners see Asia rich in culture and its diversity appealing as more Hollywood movies direct their movies in Asia. Even remakes of Asian films such as “My Sassy Girl” and “Departed” illustrate the growing influence of the Asian entertainment industry.

The myriad of traditions able to blend together in a melting point allows many Asian films to the created derived from the cross-cultural experiences in Asia which is its triumph card in the international market. Models too known for their “exotic looks” are making waves on in the fashion industry. Its dominance yet is not obvious but in decades to come, its rippling of waves would turn to full tides.

Education – a vital, necessary tool to equip are with the necessary knowledge to be able to command a higher wage for skills learnt to provide a comfortable life for one has seen Asian university rankings rise in the annual QS list. The desire to be taken seriously by their competitors have witnessed an immense hunger in Asia to strive for the best or so to speak. Asian education system is known for its rigours and is clearly evident in the number of international maths and science Olympiads Asians win. Compared to the US education system, where school days follow the 19th century agarian calendar which has become irrelevant in today’s world, pale in comparison to the Asian school system, Japan has 242 school days, South Korea 220 and Singapore 200. This has provided Asians a competitive edge in consistent production of highly skilled workers. This, coupled with low-cost labour, creates an ideal investment environment. Academics aside, athletes too are becoming serious competitors in international competitions. It is no wonder then that Asia will lead with an army of well educated scholars that can shape policy and industry.

However, a crucial limiting reagent that can potentially undermine the dominance of Asia is that it is the most vulnerable continent to climate changes that can adversely impede the growth of Asia. The Java coastline of Indonesia has the world’s most fault lines, making it most exposed to earthquakes. To recent surge of fury of mother nature all occurred in Asia. From typhoons rampant in Philippines to Taiwan to Japan, it creates havoc, destroys buildings and more importantly creates casualties. The economic aid into reconstruction from the damage is huge. As Asia constantly experiences such calamities, resources have to be diverted to aid devastated neighbours. This would hinder the capacity Asia has to grow. It is of utmost importance and only circumspect that Asia weaves a social fabric to truly become a domineering force. Lack of aid in times of need would result in a fallout as a whole. Increasing dominance will be diminishing in decades to come instead.

Boasting multi-ethnic groups, multi-talented individuals and large domestic market, Asia is a force to be reckoned with. Its buzzing nightlife and rising social entrepreneurs has sent a message to the world. It is said to be the makeshift of new economic world order. These are transparent signs of rising dominance but to see it turn to actuality, only time will tell.