ENVS – Mackenzie Hoult

Wasteocene Project Update 3

December 5, 2018December 7, 2018Leave a comment

Top of the Hourglass Refinement

In order to refine what we wanted to focus on when looking at the wasteocene, we decided to revise our framing question. We changed it from“How does a neglect of waste/pollution and resource management intrinsically affect developing countries, and what strategies could prove useful?” to “How should nation-wide issues of solid waste in developing countries be dealt with through the use of solid waste management systems?”. This change specified our focus on issues of solid waste and transitioned our question to a more instrumental question. Our framing question then is, “Does the presence of solid waste affect people more in developing countries?”. This made us more focused on what we wished to concentrate on in our wasteocene project. It did not, however, change our key sources because all of our sources, while not all related to solid waste, encompass issues that interact with solid waste’s harmful and damaging presence as well as ideas for solutions.

Middle of the Hourglass Work

As we worked on the elements of the middle of the hourglass for our project today, we wanted to make sure to include as many skills we’ve learned throughout the semester. As you can see here, we have worked on and refined a Zotero library with our key sources and annotations for them. We also created a cmap, which you can find in the project summary linked below, in order to visualize the roles and characters in our project. We have also been discussing, as a group, our proposals for field-based data as well as surveys we would like to propose as an addition to our situated project. In order to compare Chile to other countries, we utilized ARCGIS and country data. We did this in order to structure it similarly to previous labs in ARCGIS, by comparing income (Gross National Income per capita, measured in U.S. dollars) and the human development index.

The human development index is an indicator created by the United Nations Development program for assessing the development of a country. The indicator is composed of Long and healthy life (measured in life expectancy at birth), knowledge (measured in expected years of schooling for children and average years of schooling in the adult population), and a decent standard of living (measured in GNI per capita). For our wasteocene project, we are most interested in the section about “a decent standard of living” as waste issues in developing countries are most felt by the citizens and their overall health. Using this information we were able to create a map, mapping the data across different countries and comparing it to Chile. The map can be found in my project summary page where Chiles comparisons to other countries is explained.

Bottom of the Hourglass

In our group we discussed the implications of the bottom of the hourglass, which include, comparison/generalization and next steps/further research. Since this project is more of a proposal of a situated research project, since we won’t actually be going to Chile, we discussed a lot about Chile’s comparison to other countries. Through our ARCGIS map we will be able to compare Chile to different countries at different levels of development and see what kind of health and waste issues that country has. By doing that we can compare our research to why and how Chile might have these waste management issues and propose further research within Chile that might help us come to more concrete solutions.

The Informal Waste Sector

December 5, 2018December 7, 2018Leave a comment

Over the course of the second half of the semester, we have been looking at the capitalocene in our labs. The Capitalocene aims to looks at how as countries become more economically advanced, their impact on the environment worsens through human interaction and altercation. The Kuznet curve is one way to interpret the capitalocene as it theorizes as countries begin to develop they will be less environmentally efficient until they are developed, then they will begin to become more environmentally friendly again. We use this theory and others for our final project of looking at waste issue in Chile, which you can read more about here in my project summary page. In this reflection post, I wanted to reflect a little deeper into a reading I read about the informal waste sector in developing countries, as it was only addressed in a small sense in our project.

In many developing countries there is a lack of funding for a formal waste sector, but there is still a surplus of waste. This leads to a formation of the informal waste sector which are lower income populations in these countries that sort, collect, transport and trade waste. A paper titled “Approaches to formalization of the informal waste sector into municipal solid waste management system in low and middle income countries” stated that the informal waste sector consists of, “individuals, groups and micro-enterprises performing informal waste services and/or informal valorization ‘but are not sponsored, financed, recognized or allowed by the formal solid waste authorities’” (Aparcana, 595). The issue with this type of waste management is it creates poor working and living conditions as well as negatively affects the health of a large portion of the poorer parts of a developing country. This paper by Sandra Aparcana talks about how the transition of this informal waste sector to a formal one would improve conditions for workers as well as validate these type of jobs that are normally looked down upon. A report released by OECD stated, “ This type of work only allows for basic survival. This area in Chile is under development… it opens up a field for the collection, transportation, recycling treatment and disposal of waste, as well as energy use of organic waste or waste exchange between companies” (OECD, 43).

I thought this was a really interesting human perspective on what initially seems like a solely environmental issue. While waste in developing countries is a large issue, as we discovered throughout our research for our project, I thought this more human perspective on the way it was being dealt with was very interesting. Shifting from the informal to the formal waste sector gives developing countries an opportunity to greatly improve and take advantage of waste management. By shifting this informal waste sector to a more formal and recognized position, there is large opportunities for creation of jobs along with safety for lower income populations who rely on these types of jobs.

Citations

Aparcana, Sandra. “Approaches to Formalization of the Informal Waste Sector into Municipal Solid Waste Management Systems in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Review of Barriers and Success Factors.” Waste Management 61 (March 2017): 593–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.12.028.

“Chile´s Pathway to Green Growth: Measuring Progress at Local Level – Projects – Wikiprogress.” Accessed November 15, 2018. http://wikiprogress.org/data/dataset/chile-s-pathway-to-green-growth-measuring-progress-at-local-level.

Featured Image: “An informal sector waste worker picker sorting through different types of plastics. Photo by Enrico Fabian. Not for republication.”

Tracing Waste – The Kabari’s Contribution To Society

Wasteocene Lab 2 – Progress + Concept Map

November 26, 2018November 26, 2018Leave a comment

As we worked more on our research project focusing on the “Wasteocene” the majority of our original findings have held true. We aimed to focus on how the neglect of waste and resource management in the development of countries can end up effecting them. As we did more research it became clear that waste management is an issue that is often set aside when countries are developing. This leads to poor environmental standards as well as poor environmental health. This also related us to the Kuznet curve which we had addressed in earlier capitaloscene labs where, less developed and low income countries tend to have a lower EPI score which, according to the Kuznet curve, may be due to industrialization. Our framing question is aiming to look at how countries deal with waste effectively in order to minimize their environmental impact in the long run, as well as examining reasons for large waste and pollution during development.

One of the larger issues we identified through our research so far is solid waste. As a country develops, their population grows and their becomes are very large need for effective solid waste management as this directly affects human health. Another interesting thing we found is that more developed countries have the resources to effectively control and plan for waste management as it can be quite expensive. While less developed, or currently developing countries struggle with this because they are still developing their economy.

In terms of Chile, one of the bigger issues they have is properly recycling and managing electronic waste. Chileans each produce 9.9 kilos of e-waste annually, according to a recent United Nations report. This is twice the global average, so Chile is beginning to launch specific initiatives to formalize the recycling of electronic products. Their main focus is products of telecommunication as these are the most prominent and are extremely harmful to the environment. As we do more research it will be interesting to look at how other countries have started to launch environmental initiatives, or lack thereof, based on how important their environmental standards are to them.

We have also created a concept map of important points so far which can be found, along with updates of progress on our Wasteocene project, on my Wasteocene summary page.

Featured Image Link: https://sites.sph.harvard.edu/hoffman-program/2016/08/26/formal-e-recycling-the-complexity-of-solving-the-e-waste-problem-worldwide/

Whats at Steak?

November 21, 2018November 27, 2018Leave a comment

Vegan, vegetarian, NO animal products! All diet trends that are becoming more common in society today, but are they more than just a fad? I love bacon, I wont lie, and I love a good burger, but I had to ask myself, why are all these people switching to a meatless or animal product free diets? The meat industry is one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gases in our atmosphere as well as deforestation, droughts and pollution from sewage and pesticides. In this reflection post I’m aiming to look at the facts of the meat industry and how they actually affect our climate, not only to learn more myself, but also to give a more clear general understanding of how all these things come into play.

The EWG (environmental working group), an activist group focusing on research and advocacy in areas such as agriculture, did a study on the different effects meat has on the environment. They studied the production and distribution lifecycle of 20 different agricultural products. Through this study they found that the meat industry uses huge amounts of pesticides, fertilizers, fuel, feed and water. But how do these processes effect the greenhouse gas emissions in our environment and how are they all interconnected in a “lifecycle”? Starting at the source, livestock are fed large amount of grains, like corn, which take an immense of land, fertilizer and water to be grown. To put this into perspective and numbers, the EWG estimates livestock feed requires 167 million pounds of pesticides and 17 billion pounds of nitrogen fertilizer. This process not only puts large amounts of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, but also is creating food that could go directly to our large population to feed more people. Continuing on, because cattle ranching needs so much land, the affects of deforestation are tremendous. Forests are not only a carbon sink but they also provide important homes and ecosystems for biodiversity.

While all of these steps may seem very daunting, it becomes more clear as you read that the meat industry not only uses so many of our precious resources but continually builds on its negative impacts on the environment. To simplify the process I included a graphic below to compare how meat is produced.

Photo courtesy of: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/06/27/155527365/visualizing-a-nation-of-meat-eaters

While there are so many articles and propoganda out there about what we should and shouldn’t eat I think a couple things are important to consider when reading and making environmental decisions. A lot of these stats are daunting and it seems as if you as one person can’t do anything, but that’s not true! Even if you cut meat out of your diet a couple days a week, there is always something you can do to change your carbon footprint. I also believe it is imparative to stick to the facts and figures and not get bogged down in propoganda and flashy articles. I hope this article was helpful in gettting the facts straight in your mind and maybe even convincing you to at least cut some small portions of meat of your diet. Check out meat consumption per capita below to see where your country falls in meat consumption.

Map courtesy of: https://ourworldindata.org/meat-and-seafood-production-consumption

Featured Image Courtesy of: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-130949000/stock-photo-funny-cow-on-a-green-summer-meadow.html

The Wasteocene (Lab 1)

November 19, 2018November 25, 2018Leave a comment

Background:

We are aiming to look at the “Wasteocene” which is mainly looking at how countries deal with waste and waste management. We found this to be a big environmental issue as well as one that directly affects human health and citizens. Our draft framing and situated context question is below. We plan to possibly alter these as we do more research.

Draft Framing Question: How does a neglect of waste/pollution and resource management intrinsically affect the development of a country?
Draft Situated Context: How can this be viewed within the context of Chile?

These questions will help us research the general issues around waste management in countries all around the world. From there we can also research specifically Chile and what kind of environmental and waste issues they face.

Procedure:

In order to find key literature for our research project we used Google Scholar, Primo, Ebso and researchgate. We searched key terms like, Chile, Municipal Solid Waste, Waste-to-energy, environmental issues in developing countries, Waste Management. These key words helped us find articles to relate to our general framing question about waste management as well as to find specific articles about our situated context in Chile. In order to organize our articles and books once we found them, we used a database called Zotero. This allowed us to add all of our research to one shared library between the three of us and organize it using tags. These tags allowed us to categorize and process different articles and find key themes that were found throughout multiple articles. Zotero also allows us to share our annotated bibliography which you can find below.

Results:

The link to our full annotated bibliography and library you can find here. From our findings it is clear that waste management is a key environmental issues especially in developing countries. Electronic waste and solid waste management were the largest issues that were cited and discussed multiple times. Looking at our specific situated context articles there are other environmental issues such as indigenous land rights, that became specific to Chile as we researched. You can find all articles in this library and click on the separate tags to look at specific resources we found.

Discussion:

As we researched it became clear that waste management is a large environmental issue today as it was cited and researched many times in multiple different countries. I think it would be helpful to research a little more on Chile specifically and look at if they are working on fixing their waste management issue or if their government is more focused on economic development. Our annotated bibliography right now gives us a really strong base for waste management in Chile as well as in developing countries and I think the tags we utilized on Zotero are a great tool for relating different research.

Featured Image picture: https://www.croda.com/en-gb/careers/our-locations/latin-america/chile

Capitalocene and Environmental Justice

November 8, 2018November 12, 2018Leave a comment

Background

Over the past 3 weeks we have been looking at different environmental data in different locations around the world in order to analyze the Capitalocene. In general, the Capitalocene analyzes how as countries become more economically advanced the worse their effect on the environment is. In our first lab we use EPI and World bank data to compare income level with region their environmental impact. Graphing this data showed us that less developed and poorer countries tended to have a worse EPI level. Our second lab we wanted to look at more factors that contribute to the Capitalocene to potentially see further correlation, and then map these findings on to ARCGIS. From this lab I actually found that more developed countries, especially in Europe, actually had a worse pollution score compared to less developed countries. Look at this specific data mapped it was clear we needed to further look at Capitalocene data to make a clear connection. So, for our third lab we analyzed world values survey v.s income level. We specifically looked at citizens responses to Economic development v.s Environmental protection, by finding a hypothesis and a p value based on our data, we proved that the lower the countries income the higher they’ll prioritize economic growth over environmental protection. All these labs helped us analyze the ideas of the Capitalocene and how the world’s current environmental data correlates.

For this final Capitalocene lab we shifted our focus to EJ, environmental justice. The U.S EPA defines environmental justice as ““the fair treatment and meaningful involvement [emph. added] of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies”. We analyzed this data while relating it to the Capitalocene by looking at race v.s class, specifically we wanted to look at environmental injustice having to do with toxicities. We also utilized multiple Portland Air Toxicity Reports (PATS) in order to look at pollution that affects the Portland area. We specifically focused on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which is pollution from wood combustion. We chose this because based on PATS report, this is the pollutant they were most worried about. We did this in order to see spacial coincidences with waste and race/class. While it may connect to the Capitalocene in some ways, some issues with analyzing this type of data is that spatial correlation may not imply causation. We will further talk about factors that might affect our data when we discuss our maps.

Procedure

We first began this lab by importing data from ACS and PATS. The PATS data, like i mentioned above, is from the Portland Air Toxics Solutions, a database that gathers information on toxic air pollutants in Portland. The ACS data is a census community survey that regularly gathers information on different demographics. We utilized the information about the toxin PAH15, or Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons. This toxin is an outcome from wood combustion and we used it because it is the pollutant PATS is most concerned about. The ACS data gave us information on income level and race demographics from citizens in Portland. We were able to manipulate this data by combining income over $100,000 to make a high income group and combining low income (under $50,000) groups. Additionally we combined the black and hispanic groups to create a minority race group to compare to the residence location of white citizens.

Results:

Toxicity level of wood combustion based on race –

Toxicity v.s Income ( x < 49,000)

Toxicity v.s Income (100,000 ≤ x ≤ 200,000)

Heat Map of Toxicity levels for wood combustion pollutant

From our maps we can start to see some correlation between class and race v.s toxicity levels in an area. EJ focuses more on race when looking at environmental justice and injustices. We chose to look at it from multiple angles as to really flush out a true correlation or conclusion. As you can see from our two income level maps, lower income areas and residents are more central to these toxicities compared to higher income. This same thing is true if you compare our white residents map to our black and hispanic map, there are more concentrated areas of black and hispanic residents where the toxins are more concentrated. While this might point out environmental injustices in Portland as well as the Capitalocene, which I will discuss below, it is important to recognize other factors. Some of these being geographic influences as where more concentrated populations live are going to have more toxins as well as non-human used areas. Overall, it is important not to generalize when looking at smaller pieces of data as you don’t always have to come to an immediate and clear solution.

Discussion:

Based on our mapping, the high income group seems to reside farther outside the city, which is farther away from these toxins. We found one exception on the map which is a cluster in the center of the city which also happens to be an expensive place to live. A lot of the low income group resides not in the center of the city but also not on the far out cleaner suburban areas. The minority residents seemed to be living in closer proximity to the city in higher toxin areas. Compared to white residents who are settled on the outside of the city in lower population areas illustrating an even larger divide between white residents and black and hispanic ones.

We only have demographics on these residents and not where they are employed. This factor could affect the ACS groups as proximity to work is an important factor to where you live. This is a limitation of what our data allows us to look at. Our results seem to indicate that minority and low income groups are more exposed to air pollutants and toxins. I believe it would be interesting to look at low income minority groups and low income white groups to see if race is important or if it depends mostly on the income level. This would be especially interesting having to do with EJ because it would allow us to really look at environmental injustices specifically with race. This further showed us how the Capitolscene affects the environmental as we look at specific environmental factors and how different groups are affected by industrialization. I think it would also be interesting to see if minorities make up the majority of the low income sections.

Featured Image: Courtesy Ricardo Levins Morales

Daryl Davis – Environment Across Boundaries

November 5, 2018November 7, 2018Leave a comment

Daryl Davis is a famous musician, activist and author famously known for his engagement with members of the Ku Klux Klan. As an African American man he is responsible for around 40 people leaving the KKK. But, you’re probably wondering, how was he capable of this? And, what does this have to do with environmental studies? Well, in this post I’m going to focus on a lot of the ideas Daryl talked about in how to engage people with severely different views then you and how this relates to the environment and climate change.

Daryl Davis’s presentation at Lewis and Clark spoke a lot to how we engage across boundaries and difference. For him, he was also confused about how someone could be racists towards him as he stated, “how can you hate me when you don’t even know me?”. This question brought him to meet with many KKK members, even in dangerous situations just to basically ask them that question. Daryl believes that when it comes to different, we must address issues immediately in order to open the conversation. Fear, he says, is our biggest weapon because ignorance fuels fear which fuels hate and then destruction. Daryl strongly believes in personal connections, as these have shown him time after time that when you can sit down and talk to someone you begin to feel empathy for the other. Rodger Kelley, the leader of a KKK group, who ended up leaving the klan after many years of being friends with Daryl, stated, “at least he respects me enough to listen to what I have to say”. This respect that he felt from Daryl made their friendship open to conversation about sensitive topics and eventually changed Rodger Kelleys mind. Without this feeling of mutual respect, conversations can never begin.

Now, what exactly does this have to do with environmental studies? Daryl Davis, after all, is a man who has been fighting racism for years through his relationships with KKK members. Well, his ideas about how to engage with people with wildly different views then you hold true to environmental studies. Per my last post, I talked about how climate change today can be incredibly frustrating and scary as more looming statistics come out about how we need to make change now while not even our president believes it’s happening. But, with the ideas of Daryl Davis, even though there are people who don’t believe in climate change or are not willing to do anything about it, it’s important to stay kind and patient and simply have a conversation. Many times we let fear kick in and we get so angry at “the other side” who don’t believe what we believe so we just talk to people who share our ideas because that feels easier. This type of approach gets nothing done and truly splits people into “the other”. Instead of being fearful and discouraged we have to engage people and discuss like we respect and care about everyones opinions. This is a very important step when it comes to climate change, one that very few people take, and one that is very easily forgotten as people become more fearful from current science articles and statistics.

Daryl Davis is an incredibly interesting and intelligent man and I feel grateful to have seen him speak. He truly gave me a different outlook on engaging across difference, no matter the subject.

Featured Image Picture Link: https://college.lclark.edu/programs/environmental_studies/symposium/

Capitalocene Lab 3: World Values Survey

November 4, 2018November 5, 2018Leave a comment

Background:

In order to look at the Capitalocene we have been analyzing different world data the past two weeks. The Capitalocene looks at how as countries become more economically advanced, their impact on the environment worsens. We’ve been analyzing EPI and World country data in order to look at how different countries environmental standards compare to their level of development. For this lab, we used the World Values Survey to look at how the Capitalocene can explain significant environmental values and beliefs among people from country to country. These views we assume are related to each countries correlating environmental practices, which was measured through EPI. This survey gives us an entirely new perspective on different countries environmental impact because it gives individual citizens views on how they value the environment as well as how they feel their government should deal with the environment.

Procedure:

We first selected three countries we wanted to look at in the World values survey, one of each income group. We chose Haiti (low income), Algeria (Middle income) and Argentina (High income). We extracted each of these countries data from the world values survey and picked a variable, or specific survey question, we wanted to look at. We chose protecting the Environment v.s Economic growth, with a 1 representing a priority for protecting the environment even if it causes slower economic growth and some loss of jobs, and a 2 representing a priority on economic growth and creating jobs even if the environment suffers. We then graphed each countries response to this question into a histogram in order to look at the number of responses compared to whether the majority answered 1 or 2. From there, we calculated the average and standard deviation for all three countries in order to map the varying degree of responses from each country. From this information we came up with a hypothesis in order to later find a null hypothesis and do a t-test to test our hypothesis. Our hypothesis stated, the lower the countries income the higher they’ll prioritize economic growth over environmental protection. In order to find a p variable to compare the data we had to do a t-test for each country, i.e Haiti v.s Algeria, Haiti v.s Argentina and Argentina v.s Algeria. Our null hypothesis stated, the higher the countries income the lower they’ll prioritize environmental protection. We calculated the p-value for each set of countries, and found they were very small, as you can see in the analysis. These very small P-values make sense though, because of our huge sample size. After we found this, we compared our values in order to decide if we should reject or discard our null hypothesis.

Results:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

These three histograms are showing the responses (either 1 or 2) of the citizens of each country. These responses correlate with our hypothesis because for the lower income country (Haiti), the majority of responses fall towards 2 which is economic growth as a priority. Where as the higher income country (Argentina), mostly falls to 1 which puts environmental protection as more important.

This graph is our mean for each countries response, which we calculated from the world values survey data. The bars in the middle represent the standard deviation for each countries data. This helped us look at the different information country to country and see how much they differed.

Discussion:

These findings further back up our hypothesis we made stating, the lower the countries income the higher they’ll prioritize economic growth over environmental protection. From our results you can see that Argentina was the most concerned about their environmental impact, followed by Algeria and the Haiti. From my first Capitalocene lab I found similar results, which suggested that higher income regions also had higher EPI scores. Without further research from lab 1, I wasn’t confident to make a strong link between the Capitalocene due to the EPI being based off of performance goals. In lab 2 I compared Exports and Trade % of GDP to air pollution and overall emissions, which actually showed the opposite findings from my first lab. The data showed that more developed countries in Europe and some parts of Asia actually had a worse EPI indicator for pollution and emissions compared to less developed countries. From that lab I found that the data you map and find is very dependent on the data you pick, so it has the possibility to not give you a good overall look at the Capitalocene country to country. This lab, although, had the ability to give a more broad look at countries view on the environment which I believe is more accurate in terms of the Capitalocene. From this lab, I found that there may be a correlation to attitudes about the environment and protection based off of income level. The higher income countries have a larger emphasis on the environment compared to lower income countries who prioritize economic development. This suggests, there is a trend which shows that the better and more stable the economy may mean that people can focus on other issues such as the environment and their impact.

Capitalocene lab 2

October 28, 2018November 4, 2018Leave a comment

Background:

In our last lab, we shifted from looking at the Anthropocene to looking at the Capitalocene. We did this in order to look at how countries economic growth may affect their environmental impact or lack thereof. From last weeks lab, I found Yale’s EPI did not correlate with the Kuznet curve, which goes against the view of the Capitalocene, that as countries become more economically advanced their impact on the environment worsens. In order to further inspect how capital affects humans influence on the environment, I looked at trade (as a percent of GDP) and Exports.

I chose trade (% of GDP) as well as exports because this has a lot to do not only with a countries capital and position in the world but also how much they produce. This production I think directly has to do with their environmental impact, as a country develops more and uses its natural resources, it is then able to trade and receive goods. By looking at these maps I think I will be able to get a better look at the capitalocene data and how it affects countries environmental impact.

Procedure:

In order to build on our data from last week, I first took all the data from the EPI ratings and the world bank data from last week. From there I picked two other variable that I thought would help me further investigate the Capitalocene affect. As mentioned above, I chose Trade (% of GDP) and Exports. In order to get these three separate data sets into my original excel sheet, I merged both data sets into the data set of World Trade and EPI data from last week. Once merged, I had a cohesive data set that lined up with each country. From there, I uploaded my data into ARCGIS in order to map my new information (Trade and export) against 2 EPI and 1 world trade indicator. For my three EPI indicators I chose, CCE which is Climate and Energy impacts of a country, this indicator encompasses the main greenhouse gas emissions a country produces including CO2, Methane etc. The second EPI indicator I chose was APE, which is the air pollution from a country which is measured by the NOX and SO2 emissions. From there I mapped my two new Capitalocene information onto the three indicators from last week.

Results:

Exports

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Looking at the APE vs exports, we can see that the areas with larger air pollution also have larger exports. This makes sense, especially in terms of the Capitalocene, as countries become more economically advanced they are able to produce more utilizing their natural resources and export it to other countries. Exports vs climate and energy follows a similar trend, countries that export more produce a larger amount of greenhouse gases compared to countries that don’t export as much. Looking at the income level of countries vs their exports their is a clear correlation between high income are large exports.

Trade % of GDP

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Looking at APE vs Trade as well as climate and energy vs trade, the countries that trade a lot have large greenhouse gas and air pollution compared to smaller countries who trade less. Comparing this to income level and trade, we see a similar correlation as more developed and wealthier countries trade more, they also emit more pollution therefore lowering their overall environmental score and quality.

Discussion:
While discussing the Capitalocene we discussed the Kuznet curve which talks about how as countries become more economically developed their negative impacts on the environment go up, implying that less developed countries have less of a negative impact on the environment. We found from our data last week that less developed countries actually tended to show poorer environmental performance when comparing EPI and World Countries Data. But, based on my maps above, it seems that my data is proving the Kuznets curve right. The higher income countries that are more economically developed have a worse impact on the environment when it comes to their air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. We can see these through their exports and trade comparisons because countries that export and trade more have a larger impact on the environment compared to less developed countries that aren’t readily producing and polluting. You can this when comparing areas like Europe and Africa. Europe is usually considered very economically advanced and currently experiencing the Capitalocene compared to Africa which is still a developing country. Just looking at these two countries and their air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions the Kuznet curve is proven since the more economically advanced countries have a larger negative impact on their environment. This doesn’t explain why large, developed countries, like the U.S have small emissions based on these maps. I think the Kuznet curve oversimplifies this idea and in order to further understand this it is important to look at the citizens of these countries actual views on the environment because this can have a large impact on what their overall emissions look like.

The Capitalocene and EPI lab

October 22, 2018November 6, 2018Leave a comment

Background:

The first five labs in class we have done so far looked at the Anthropocene and how it affects the environment. Using the Anthropocene we looked at how human engagement has influenced our environment. By looking at Land Use Cover Change, we were able to see how human interaction in our own community may have changed the environment. We used data from old photos as well as current weather data we compiled, in collaboration with information from a panel of local residents and experts about change in the community. In this new lab, we are using the Capitalocene view to further look at our environment and its changes. This allows us to look at our information through a broader view compared to the Anthropocene. The Capitalocene still classifies everything based on the age of man, but also looks at how capital may have affected the decisions of man. In a race to produce commodities, every region across the world has been transforming on after another, some at different paces then others. Hartley explains this concept by stating, ““Its ultimate horizon is not the impending doom of ecological catastrophe and human extinction: it is the capitalist mode of production and its dismantlement,” (Hartley, 10). Hartley also states how capitalism has a negative effect on the environment because nature became a source of commodities for man to use as we have transferred into a capitalist world. This illustrates how its not just human nature but also a capitalist world is to blame for intensified land use.

In this lab we used data from the Yale Environmental Performance Index (EPI) and merge data from the World Bank in order to compare different regions around the world. The Yale EPI is a “careful measurement of environmental trends and progress provides a foundation for effective policymaking. The 2018 Environmental Performance Index (EPI) ranks 180 countries on 24 performance indicators across ten issue categories covering environmental health and ecosystem vitality.” (Welcome | Environmental Performance Index). Here, a score is issued to each country based on their policy goal and performance.

Procedure:

First, I imported the Yale EPI data into a spreadsheet on google, and then imported the World Bank data. Using a chrome extension, we were able to merge the data since the country codes remain the same in both data tables. With the two spreadsheets combined we were able to add a pivot table to track averages per region, averages per income level, standard deviation, and country count in each group. After looking at the data and comparing I made 6 graphs, Income compared to EPI, Region to EPI, and four Income Level to Region charts.
Results:

Our first graph is looking at income level vs EPI score. A countries EPI consists of 60% ecosystem vitality, which include things like air pollution, water resources, biodiversity and habitat etc. and 40% environmental health which includes air quality, water sanitation etc. From this graph we can see as the income rises the EPI score also rises, showing a potential correlation in income and EPI score.

This graph is comparing the average EPI vs specific regions. We wanted to compare these different areas to see if it would show us which specific regions around the world have a higher or lower EPI. Regions like North America and Europe that are often known for being a leading developer in the larger global context compared to smaller, less developed countries. These locations also have undergone the industrial revolution fully and consist of a more capitalistic system.

The next four graphs break down each level of income into their own graph. There are 4 levels of income, high, upper middle, lower and low and they are separated by regions. I did these four graphs in order to analyze and look at how each region preforms at specific income levels. Less developed regions tended to have a worse score compared to more developed regions who have gone through an industrial revolution. Although, in the low income region Latin America is lower than Sub-Saharan Africa, possibly because of the Kuznet curve.

This graph is showing the high income sorted by region with their EPI score. This graph illustrates that higher income areas are gaining a higher EPI score. This was important to compare because the Kutznets curve suggests the opposite.

Similar graph here as above, though the Latin America & Caribbean region has a much higher EPI score in the upper/middle income area.

This graph is illustrating low income sorted by region with their EPI score. These lower income regions have a lower EPI score compared to the graph above which show upper income levels having EPI scores more in the mid 60s-70s. This further illustrates that, in terms of the Capitalocene, their may not be a direct correlation to capitalism and negative impacts on the environment.

This graph is showing the lower middle income sorted by region which gives us more information, similar to the graphs above, about income level and EPI score, which is important in looking at how capitalism has effected the environment, as income is a influencing factor in a lot of regions.

Discussion:

The Kuznets curve shows that as countries become more economically developed their negative impacts on the environment go up, implying that less developed countries have less of a negative impact on the environment. But, as you can see from our graphs, we found this to be the opposite. Based on the EPI measurements we found that the less developed countries tended to have a poorer environmental performance. These findings seem to show that, in terms of the Capitalocene, as regions around the world shift towards a more industrial and post-industrial economy, they have a better impact on the environment. The Capitalocene looks at the way capitalism combined with human nature has affected our environment, but from our findings, it seems to contradict the negative view of capitalism and how it affects the environment. The findings from this lab are very interesting because as countries develop further it seems they would be changing land and the environment in order to further develop which would give them the worse EPI score. I think one possible reason for this is as countries become more economically developed, they gain knowledge and resources to make advancements in environmental technology and sustainability. It is also possible that our findings could be linked to the way the EPI measured data, as the overall score is broken up into a lot of smaller measurements and some are weighted heavier than others. For example, tree cover loss is given 10% of the overall score whereas water & sanitation is given 30%. I think it would be important to look at specific factors the EPI measures specific to each country instead of their overall score. I also think it would be important to look into each countries technological advancements towards sustainability. As well as a census looking at how the citizens of each country feel toward the environment in order to see how much important they they place on protecting it.

Featured Image: https://microform.digital/boa/series/21/the-british-industrial-revolution-mills-and-education%09