It has often been said that pragmatism is Singapore’s governing principle. A minuscule island largely made up of immigrants that underwent a sudden metamorphosis into a nation when we were forced out of Malaysia in 1965, Singapore has always had to be unwaveringly practical-minded in order to survive in a tough world. Through this, we achieved what many around the world have termed an economic miracle and have become a respected player with an outsized influence on the world stage both diplomatically and economically. Along the way, we have had to compromise the environment at times, for instance producing substantial carbon emissions from our key manufacturing and aviation sectors, and clearing a large proportion of our rainforest to build …show more content…
We have always had to pursue development in any industry in which we could carve out a relevance for ourselves in the world economy. When a country is so insignificant geographically that one needs a magnifying glass to find us on the world map, it cannot be too ethically delicate or idealistic in the economic choices it makes. Thus we have built up some key industries that pollute significantly – tourism, aviation, shipping and manufacturing to name a few. In fact, one great irony in our economy is that even though we do not produce a single drop of crude oil, we are world leaders in oil rig building through Keppel Corporation and Sembcorp Marine. We are also a major oil refining and trading hub with a growing liquefied natural gas trading and storage industry. Our airport and seaport are among the busiest in the world and we attract some three times more tourists each year than the size of our resident population. Inevitably, all these activities either produce, or are complicit in producing, very large amounts of carbon emissions contributing to anthropogenic climate
That’s why the whole country is in chaos: drugs, violence, unemployment, and homelessness. The American society is the richest and most prosperous in the world but it is hardly safe and peaceful,” (Reyes 181). America shouldn’t have input on how Singapore acts
Summary Essay In the year 1991, Vaclav Havel, former prime minister of the Czech Republic, delivered a speech at a university called The Quiver of a Shrub in California that discussed the environmental problems of a small country in Europe and how humans as a species need to become more aware of the situation that is arising, and do something about it. Havel declares this speech in order to, inform people and make them more aware of the situation that is occurring in his home country. This situation being that all around, the environment is crumbling under the oblivious eyes of the people and that as a race humans need to realize that though they believe that being humans makes them superior to every other living creature. There is a need
When you see a litterbug throw the rest of their half-eaten lunch on the ground or dispose of a cigarette out their Hummer window, you might be disgusted by the fact that, that someone negatively impacts the environment. Most human beings know that our negative actions towards the environment have a ripple effect like a drop in the ocean. However, not everyone cares or sees the impact that we all individually have on the earth. In the essay, Our Unhealthy Future Under Environmentalism, John Berlau, an American economist, debates that conserving and preserving our environment is unnecessary and environmentalist should chill out with this save the planet bull crap. This essay comes directly from Berlau’s book called, Eco-Freaks: Environmentalism
Under the assessment and evaluation of current environment situation, the federal government have developed the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change and other collective actions to address climate change. Under the federal consideration of climate change, there exists four pillars including pricing carbon pollution, taking action in each sector of the economy, adapting to climate change and supporting clean technologies, innovation and job creation. As carbon pollution is the majority factor influencing climate in earth, much attention has been put on this area. In order to control the carbon pollution to climate, government will collaborate with the territories and indigenous people to assess the practice of carbon
In “Why Bother?” an article published in the New York Times Magazine, commentator Michael Pollan questions the severity that contributes to environmental problem and how an individual should attempt to make an impact regardless of the miniscule effect it will have presently and in the future. Pollan discusses how an individual's endeavors remain unnoticed when taking into account the consequences of one’s environmentally friendly actions. The concept of being named a liberal is discussed and its correlation towards one's decisions in changing one’s manner. Implementing laws that would promote green behavior is a drastic step to help the environment, but they would be very simple so everyone can comply.
“Why Bother” Michael Pollan’s essay “Why Bother” claims both sides of the argument of why people should take action to change their daily lives that will help the environment or if it is a wasted effort to try to change the things that have been done. Pollan repeatedly asks the reader a specific question throughout the essay: Why bother? Why bother slowing down global warming? Why bother walking to and from to make one’s self carbon footprint better? He asks these questions over and over to make the reader engage and think about the environment.
In 2006, former Progressive Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was honoured as being Canada’s most environmentally friendly Prime Minister. Nearly ten years later, it is likely that Mulroney would still be able to hold on to that claim. Following Mulroney’s government, the environmental policies of both Jean Chretien, and his successor, Paul Martin’s Liberals and Stephen Harper’s Conservatives have been lacklustre, at best. Despite being involved in many international environmental initiatives, such as the Kyoto Protocol, Canada has been criticized for its poor environmental policy.
IF a common man is questioned “can protectionism ever be justified” he’d probably say NO, we live in a world of globalisation and there won’t be many who agree with the term protectionism is today’s day, its mostly considered as an “economic bad” . You will easily find governments who say ‘I am in favor of globalisation’ but rarely will u ever find a nation which says “we are for protectionism” and that’s probably the most basic difference between the two. Let’s start with understanding protectionism before we debate if it’s even justifiable or not? Protectionism may be defined as (Block, and McGee, 1997) ‘Any policy intended to shield domestic industries from import competition’ Protectionism is merely an attempt by a countries government
In the perspective of third world's countries, it is shown to give many opportunities for employment, but what large corporations won't tell you is that they are exploiting the smaller less industrialized and causing havoc and damage to them. For instance, China's pollution rate is
Companies should think about less polluting products and production processes for
Although not much can be done to emission of GHGs from natural sources, but emission through human activities can be evaluated and corrective measures can be suggested so as to minimize them. Carbon footprinting is the measure
Pollution may be a threat, but it can be solved in our
Confucianism has many influences on education of Vietnam and Singapore Originated from China, Confucianism, an ethical and philosophical system developed from the teachings of Chinese philosopher Confucius, is considered as one of the largest religions in Asia, concerned with the principles of good conduct, practical wisdom, and proper social relationship. Among Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries, Vietnam and Singapore are profoundly affected by Confucian ideas in many aspects of life such as economy, policy, society and especially in education. Although both Vietnam and Singapore’s education have been influenced by Confucianism, there are similarities and differences between two countries in terms of origin, moral education
This is because of our market led economy which only focusses on profit, competition and money making rather than a sustainable development approach. “Capitalism” has been identified by several scholars as the root cause for environmental degradation. Gus Speth, (2008) who is a former environmental adviser to the White House, in an interview said that, “My conclusion is that we’re trying to do
Economic globalization has greatly adjusted the industrial structure of the developed western countries. Some developed countries actively adjust their industrial structure and product mix at home and vigorously develop emerging industries with high technology, compactness and high added value. At the same time, International economic cooperation, international investment or the operation of transnational corporations, some high-energy, high-material consumption, high-pollution and labor-intensive sunset industries will be transferred to developing countries and even landfills will be built in these countries to directly plunder the land there , Labor, natural resources, clean air and clean water, thus achieving the transfer of environmental pollution. For example, asbestos, a strong carcinogen, is used in Europe and the United States to control the use of products, but the world 's consumption has not diminished, for which, such as the United States MONBIL company and Europe 's largest asbestos manufacturing companies came to India to invest and build a joint venture. Then they set up factories, which produced a lot of pollution in India.