Chapter 14

Preserving the Planet:Human Impact on Environmental Systems

A. Logistics

Students’ Time RequirementsActivity 1: Environmental Impacts (IPAT) by Development Category:

A Global Warming Case Study 30–45 minutesActivity 2: Human-Environment Systems Analysis 50–75 minutesActivity 3: Conflicting Viewpoints on Environmental Problems 50–75 minutes

Activities 1–3 are completely independent of each other and thus can be done separately, although Activity 2 is a good lead into Activity 3. They offer three different perspectives on environmental geography. You may need to devote nearly two weeks of your course to environmental geography if you plan to do all three during class time; or you can choose to do only one or two activities.

Activity 1 applies the IPAT perspective to carbon dioxide emissions data for low-, middle-, and high-income countries.

Activity 2 is a computerized human-environment systems flowchart. Students read an article on screen, and copy and paste highlighted passages into the correct boxes of a flowchart. The software makes it easier for students by highlighting the important text and giving the students feedback if they paste it into the wrong box. It also makes the analysis more system-like with feedback loops from the fifth stage of the model (six different categories of solutions) to the other four stages. You can assign any of three articles for this activity: the Disappearing Aral Sea, Cattle in Tropical Latin America, or Wildlife Corridors in North America.

Activity 3 is a role-playing activity that can be done using the same three articles. You can print the articles from the Student Companion Site. We recommend that you use a different article for Activity 2 and Activity 3. You can substitute any other article that you prefer to use, such as one describing an environmental problem in your local area or one in your field of expertise. An ideal article would be one that discusses the problem from the points of view of several different kinds of stakeholders.

For Activity 1, a calculator will make things go much faster. If you are going to do this one in class, remind the students to bring one.

Before doing Activity 2, use the lecture time to help students understand some of the finer distinctions in the model, such as:

–human driving forces vs. human activities–affluence vs. economic/political systems–culture vs. affluence

–adverse natural consequences vs. the initial form of environmental change–distinctions among the three types of environmental change–distinctions among the six kinds of solutions–technology as a driving force vs. technological change as a solution–mitigation vs. compensation

Students can complete Activity 2 through trial-and-error, so you should emphasize to them that a guesswork approach will not prepare them for the inevitable exam!

For Activity 3’s role-playing debate, we allocated minutes in order to complete it within a 50-minute class. We have successfully tested it in that format. In order to complete it, we asked students to e-mail their answers to Question 3.1 to the rest of their stakeholder group before the class. That way, they can get off to a very fast start in writing their position statement. You’ll need to emphasize the importance of doing this. If your class is 1 hour and 15 minutes or longer, you can probably dispense with the e-mail exchange and have them answer 3.1 together in class. Even so, it would be important to emphasize to them that they MUST read the article before class. If you have a longer class, you might still ask them to do the e-mail exchange, but simply give them a longer time to discuss any of the questions. To facilitate the e-mail exchange, make sure you leave time in the previous class to form groups and exchange e-mail addresses.

It is up to you what, if anything, you ask them to hand in for the role-playing activity. We have included spaces for all students in a group to write their names on a single written document. Alternatively, you can ask each student to hand in a separate document, or not ask them to hand in anything at all. You can also ask students to hand in evaluations of their peers for the group work.

We have written up the role-playing activity in a highly structured manner, with the help of a collaborative learning expert at ASU (Dr. Susan Ledlow), who also helped lead the Human Geography in Action NSF summer workshops in 1998 and 1999. The key parts of the structured approach are (a) defined roles for each group member that get everyone involved and keep things on track, and (b) random selection of the student who will have to make the presentation on behalf of the group. Have them count off #1, #2, etc., and then, when the time comes for the public statements by each stakeholder group, pick a number and require that student to make the statement. In this way, all students will pay attention, if not participate, during the group’s preparations. You can choose to ignore the structured approach, but your students may not get as much out of it.

B. Lesson Plan

I. Human-environmental interactions1. Interface between physical and human geography2. Humans have long modified the environment3. Change today is on a global scale and potentially threatening to life

II. Physical geography basis1. Systems

a. Stocks—stored amounts of energy or materials

b. Flows—movements between stocksc. Cycles—when flows come back around to replenish stocksd. Examples

i. Hydrologic cycleii. Nutrient cycle

iii. Carbon cyclee. Equilibrium—when stocks are replaced by returning flowsf. Feedback loops

i. Negative feedbacks counteractii. Positive feedbacks snowball

1. Vicious vs. virtuous cycles2. Biosphere

g. Atmosphereh. Hydrospherei. Lithosphere

III. Inserting humans into a systems model of environmental change1. Human driving forces

a. Populationi. Population pressure

b. Affluencei. Greater consumption

ii. Ability to afford environmental protectionc. Technology

i. Renewable resourcesii. Conservation technologies

iii. Creation of new unnatural chemicalsd. Political and economic systemse. Cultural values

2. Human activitiesa. Extractive activities

i. Hunting and gathering, including forestry and fishingii. Raising livestock

iii. Agricultureiv. Mining

b. Industry c. Servicesd. Household consumptione. Transportation

3. Environmental changea. Energy/materials redistributionb. Pollutionc. Direct biological interference

4. Adverse consequencesa. Human consequencesb. Natural consequences

5. Solutionsa. One way of distinguishing these is to look at which of the previous four stages

they address (see arrows in diagrams)b. Preventionc. Technological change

i. Examples of how certain activities can be less damagingii. Technology can be used to help humans adapt to change

iii. Technology can address human driving forcesd. Natural feedbackse. Land-use change

i. Changing location of an activityii. Changing land use of a location

iii. Changing land uses around an activityf. Mitigationg. Compensation

IV. Example showing the interconnected human-environmental system: Introduced foxes in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands

a. Environmental change: Introduction of foxesb. Human activity: Trapping and huntingc. Human driving force: Affluence and cultural desire for furd. Adverse natural consequence: Increased stock of foxes, decreased stock of geese,

decreased flow and stock of nitrogen, decreased stock of grass, increased stock of shrubs

e. Positive feedback loop continually decreases the stock of geesef. Solution: Mitigation by killing foxes, but not enough

V. Background on global warming for Activity 11. Earth’s energy balance

a. Incoming energy is reflected or reradiatedb. CO2 acts as natural insulatorc. Greenhouse effect is not new—actually essential to lifed. Environmental change is the high emissions of heat-trapping gases

2. Human activitiesa. Fossil fuel combustion in all sectors of the economy

3. Global warming debatea. Are temperature changes we see within natural climate fluctuation range?b. UN concludes that change is attributable to human activity

4. Environmental consequencesa. Sea-level riseb. Polar ice caps and glaciers meltingc. Coral reefs suffering from bleachingd. Shift of climate, agricultural, and biotic zonese. Increased droughts and increased storm activity in higher latitudesf. Growing season increase

5. Negative feedbacks

a. Increased absorption of CO2 in oceansb. Sulfates increase reflected lightc. Increased vegetation in response to more CO2 d. Cold water in oceans from glacial melt could cool atmosphere

6. Predictionsa. Two to five times higher temperature increase by 2100 than seen in the twentieth

centuryb. About two-foot sea-level risec. Adverse consequences will affect less-developed countries more

7. Politics of global warminga. Timeline of international efforts and inaction while the atmospheric concentration

continues to riseb. Friction between more-developed and less-developed countriesc. Differentiated responsibilities of Kyoto Protocol d. United States was the only more-developed country to not ratify the Kyoto

Protocol, joined by Canada pulling out in 2011e. Tragedy of the Commons

i. Short term, personal gain for the U.S. and Canada outweighs long-term collective global interests

ii. U.S. and Canada refuse to voluntarily reduce emissions until all other countries, including lesser developed countries, do the same

8. Stabilizing carbon emissions not easya. Pacala and Socolow stabilization triangleb. Fifteen technological solutionsc. Even stabilizing CO2 emissions at current levels will not stabilize global warming,

but only keep the rate of increase constantd. Stakeholder groups: Winners and loserse. Impediments to change

9. Sustainable development offers solutions

VI. Discussion of issues1. Synergistic nature of driving forces

i. IPAT model is multiplicativeii. Culture and politics were left out of original IPAT model

iii. Increasing affluence lowers birth rates (demographic transition)

C. Answer Key

Activity 1: Environmental Impacts (IPAT) by Development Category: A Global Warming Case Study1.1 Note: There is some rounding error in the world total.

Table 14.4 IPAT Table for Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 2008

Region ICarbon Dioxide (CO2)

Emissions (million kg.)

= PPopulation (millions of

persons)

AAffluence

(Gross Domestic Product in US$ per capita1)

TTechnology(kg of CO2

emissions per US$ of GDP2)

Low-income countries

220,032 = 764 1,152 0.25

Middle-income countries

16,697,729 = 4,861 6,134 0.56

High-income countries, excluding United States and Canada

7,197,673 = 775 33,169 0.28

United States and Canada

6,074,958 = 337 46,222 0.39

World 32,368,927 (multiplying

rows, not adding

column)

= 6,737 10,677 0.45

Group totals:Income group Total carbon dioxide emissions (million kg)Low-income countries 220,032Middle-income countries 16,697,729High-income countries 7,197,673 + 6,074,958 = 13,272,631

Answer to question 1.1: Middle-income countries

1.2 Table 14.3 IPAT Table for Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 1996–98Region A

Affluence(Gross

Domestic Product in US$ per capita)

* TTechnology(kg of CO2

emissions per US$ of GDP)

= ATPer Capita Emissions

Factor(kg of CO2

emissions per person)

Low-income countries

1,152 * 0.25 = 288

Middle-income

countries

6,134 * 0.56 = 3,435

High-income countries, excluding

United States and Canada

33,169 * 0.28 = 9,287

United States and Canada

46,222 * 0.39 = 18,027

World 10,677 * 0.45 = 4,805

1.3 The U.S. and Canada average is 62.6 times that of the low-income countries.The U.S. and Canada average is 1.9 times that of other high-income countries.

1.4 Some of the possible reasons that students might give for the U.S. and Canada generating so much more CO2 per dollar of GDP than other high-income countries are:

Due to larger areas and lower population densities, more travel and transportation is required in the U.S. and Canada as compared to other high-income and more densely settled countries.

Colder climate in the case of Canada, and hotter climate, in the case of the Southwest, and overall, a more extreme continental climate in North America compared with the more maritime climates of Western Europe and Japan contributes to high heating and cooling bills.

Reliance on personal automobiles and less use of mass transit. More sprawling cities compared to the denser cities of Europe and Japan. Larger, less fuel-efficient automobiles. Fewer diesel vehicles, which tend to be highly fuel efficient but which have been

more heavily regulated in the United States because of their history of emitting more particulates than gasoline-powered vehicles (thus, ironically, it was a greater environmental awareness in the United States in the 1980s and 1990s that led to this difference).

Larger houses, which are also more likely to be detached single dwellings, increases the amount of energy required for heating and cooling.

Government policy results in cheaper gasoline in the U.S. and Canada as compared to many high-income countries, resulting in less pressure for energy efficiency (plus, SUVs and other low-mileage vehicles are very popular—an example of how government policy helps influence cultural choices).

Higher use of coal in the United States because of its great availability and low price. Coal produces more carbon dioxide per BTU of heat than do oil and gas.

Less use of nuclear power to generate electricity, perhaps because of Three Mile Island, or our active environmental groups and “protest culture,” or our legal system that enables NGOs and citizens to tie an issue up in court, or our litigious culture, or our less powerful central government, or any number of other reasons.

Because of their large land resources and ample mineral and energy resources, the United States and Canada specialize in many extractive industries and heavy manufacturing, which tend to produce lower dollar values per unit of energy consumed than services and light manufacturing. Some of these products are exported to Japan and Western Europe, such as aluminum, timber, and coal. Thus we are, to some extent, emitting carbon dioxide in the United States and Canada for the benefit of Japan and Western Europe.

Less government support of renewable energy. The powerful energy lobby in Washington.

1.5 If the entire world’s population had the same GDP per capita and emitted CO2 at the same rate as the U.S. and Canada, total CO2 emissions would be (use Table 14.2):

6,737 x 46,222 x 0.39 = 121,446,069 million kg

In comparing this to the current total, this would be:121,446,069 / 32,368,927 = 3.75

Almost four times more CO2 than at the world’s current affluence and technology levels. (Some students might compare these amounts in an absolute sense, in which case they would answer that around 89.1 million kg more CO2 would be emitted.) The values will vary slightly depending on how the student calculated the world total—whether by multiplying the P, A, and T factors in the world row or adding the CO2 column total for all regions of the world.

1.6 If the entire world’s population had the GDP per capita of the middle-income countries and emitted CO2 at the same rate as the high-income countries (excluding the U.S. and Canada), the total amount of emissions would be (use Table 14.2):

6,737 x 6,134 x 0.28 = 11,570,932 million kg

In comparing this to the current total, this would be:11,570,932 / 32,368,927 = 0.357

or about 36 percent less than the current world total.

Activity 2: Human-Environment Systems Analysis To demonstrate that they have done this activity, students should print out the flowchart and hand it in with their other work. The flowchart will not print properly until fully completed.

Activity 3: Conflicting Viewpoints on Environmental ProblemsThere are no absolute right or wrong answers for this section, but students should be

expected to make strong, coherent arguments for their positions. They should also listen carefully to and accurately record the positions of other teams. Below, we have prepared some

likely and good responses for the role-playing activity on James Parson’s “The Scourge of Cows” article. It is likely, but not required, that students will play their roles along the lines of the following:

3.1 AExamples given below are for “The Scourge of Cows” article. Roles can easily be adapted to the other two contexts:

BIG BUSINESS PROPONENT. Students can take on the role of wealthy Latin-American landowners or transnational corporations—both are discussed in the article. First, “large landowners who have obtained title to tracts of forest pay colonos to clear a few hectares or contract them to do so in return for the privilege of taking two or three crops of maize or manioc from the cleared land, at the end of which time they must leave it in pasture. Then they move on to repeat the process. In such a fashion men with capital or influence become the permanent benefactors of the sweat of those who have gone before them with axe or machete.” Similarly, in Colombia, “the old cattle culture has a traditional latifundia structure with large haciendas worked by a landless campesino class in a clientele relationship with the landholders.” Places mentioned in the article are Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, and the Central-American states. The second possible answer would be large multinational companies: “attracted by government largesse and promises of favorable tax treatment, numerous transnational corporations jumped in—some, like the King Ranch and a Swift-Armour consortium experienced with cattle; others, like several European firms, not.” Also, “subsidies, fiscal incentives, new roads and speculation in an inflationary economy produce enormous untaxed capital gains for the few.” Big businesses are mainly motivated by profits, and also, in the case of transnational corporations, by market share and stock prices. Some more enlightened big businesses may indeed also be motivated by the sustainability of their operations or their corporate image.

LOCAL WORKERS. Local workers are probably most concerned about putting food on the table and a roof overhead. They have little savings, and not much of a safety net. They can’t afford to think about three years from now, let alone three decades. Their economic situation is too precarious for them to put a high priority on sustainability. As the “Scourge of Cows” article states: “the modern colonists who are making clearings (rozas) in the high forests, attracted by new penetration roads and sometimes by government credits, tend to be as interested in cash returns as in subsistence. After a crop or two the roza, increasingly infested with noxious insects and weeds, is likely to be directly planted to jaragua or Guinea grass and sold to the small capitalists who follow behind. The caboclo or campesino may go on to clear another patch of monte somewhere ahead, but where a road or a nascent commercial center is close at hand, his hard-earned money is often quickly squandered. He frequently ends up as a wage earner on the same property that was once his own.”

GOVERNMENT. The article largely focuses on national, not local governments. Governments in many countries are described, especially Brazil. The article describes their multiple motivations for developing the forest as stimulating development, blunting demands for land reform, securing national sovereignty against rebels or other claimants, and representing the interests of the elite. “In Brazil, with more than half of the great Amazon rain forest, it was the military coup of 1964 and the subsequent ‘revolution from above’ that made the development of

the Amazon a cornerstone of that country’s program. It was called ‘the moral equivalent of war,’ and it put huge blocks of state forest lands in the north into the hands of Big Business, corporations both from São Paulo and from overseas… In Brazil, Amazonia was seen as a new farming and stock-raising frontier that was to serve as a safety valve for the drought-ravaged northeast, blunting demands for land reform. It was an idea that fit neatly with military ideology including the securing of national sovereignty by establishing a substantial civilian presence in the vast northern forest. At the same time the economy was to be stimulated and jobs provided by an unprecedented road-construction program.” Some students may also cite motivations such as reducing foreign debt by bringing in foreign exchange. There is also “a popularly held belief that ‘to govern is to people.’”

ENVIRONMENTALISTS. The article refers to many scientist-advocates who study how tropical areas are changing. It refers to “the east coast of Nicaragua, where there has been continuing conflict between the Miskito Indians and the government.” Also, “in Panama the threat of continued clearing on the upper drainage of the Canal’s Gatun Lake is a matter of widening public concern.” It also mentions that, “in Costa Rica, too, conservation groups and scientists associated with the Organization for Tropical Studies have been exceptionally active, supported by enlightened local political leadership and a substantial grant for land purchase for a tropical forest reserve by at least one major foreign foundation.” That’s the only mention of international conservation groups—it could be Sierra Club, Audubon Society, WCS, and WWF. The environmentalist lobby might come at this problem from several angles, depending on their persuasion. They may care only about the flora and fauna of the forest, possibly including the native Indian population. They may emphasize the global implications Environmentalists from the U.S. and Canada may have a difficult time seeing the issues from a local worker’s perspective. This group may be motivated by grand goals of saving the planet rather than saving their own particular lifestyles and incomes.

CONSUMERS. The article mentions beef consumers both in Latin America and in the United States and Canada. “There has been much talk of late about ‘the hamburger connection,’ suggesting that the U.S. appetite for Big Macs or Whoppers might be responsible for the almost exponential rate of deforestation in Central America. But with this area’s population growing at close to three percent a year, only 12 years will be needed to add another eight million people.” Anglo-American consumers are the least likely to care how the problem gets resolved, they are mostly likely simply interested in cheap, nondiseased beef. Short-term prices will carry the most weight in this group’s arguments. Consumer groups are motivated by their need to be able to feed themselves and their families on a reasonable budget. The article also mentions how “beef is seen especially as a source of protein, symbol of the mass middle-class ‘good life’ in America.”

3.1 B BIG BUSINESS PROPONENT. Big businesses are likely to describe the environmental change as a change for the better, with “worthless” rainforest being converted to “useful” pasture. Plus, it will grow back—how can it not, with so much rain and sun? They may also point the finger at loggers for cutting the rainforest, or at the colonists who make the first clearings.

LOCAL WORKERS. Local workers are also likely to describe the environmental change as a change for the better, with “worthless” rainforest being converted to “useful” pasture. They may

point the finger at loggers for cutting the rainforest, but are more likely to blame the large landowners who take advantage of all their hard work and leave them with nothing, thus forcing them to move on to clear new patches. Do they think the rainforest will just “grow back?” Who knows?

GOVERNMENT. The national government should try to represent a variety of competing national interests, and not focus solely on economic development. They really cannot pretend, like big business, that nothing of value is being lost with the conversion of forest to pasture, or that cattle ranching is not a contributing factor. “One Brazilian government report estimated that between 1960 and 1975, 38 percent of all the rain forest destroyed in that country could be attributed to large-scale cattle developments.” They should be concerned with the loss of habitat for species that may have high medicinal value. Indians may not vote in large numbers, so they may not be concerned with their fates.

ENVIRONMENTALISTS. Of all the stakeholders, this is the group likely to provide an exhaustive catalog of environmental changes: rainforest conversion to pasture, pollution from burning trees, destruction of a globally important carbon sink, loss of habitat, loss of species, and soil erosion. They are likely to have studied the human activities involved, and point the finger at ranching and logging and short-term farming. They believe the rainforest will take hundreds of years to grow back, if it does at all.

CONSUMERS. It is hard to say who consumers might feel are to blame, and for what. They may have a vague idea about rainforests being cut down, but most are probably not aware that it is for their cheap Big Macs. They may say “we don’t know and we don’t care.” Consumers are often out of touch with the reality of where their food comes from except that it’s available in grocery stores in their neighborhoods.

3.1 CBIG BUSINESS PROPONENT. They may blame the government for setting the “rules of the game” with subsidies and such, and point to the fact that their obligation is to maximize the economic return to their shareholders within the rules of the game. They may also claim that they are simply trying to satisfy the demands of consumers, and blame affluence and population growth for driving the market.

LOCAL WORKERS. Local workers will likely know about the government programs (“The modern colonists who are making clearings (rozas) in the high forests, attracted by new penetration roads and sometimes by government credits”), and they will certainly know about the population pressure in the areas they migrated from.

GOVERNMENT. National governments are likely to blame political and economic systems—but not their own! The international system of global capitalism, in which they are saddled with debt and dependent on neocolonialism, is a likely target of their blame. They may say that the World Bank, USAID, the IDB, or the IMF offered them loans to develop their resources—how could they refuse, being so poor? Poverty—the flip side of affluence—could be cited as a driving force, as well as their burgeoning populations, which need jobs.

ENVIRONMENTALISTS. Here again the environmentalists are likely to produce a lengthy catalog of forces driving the process. First atop their lists are likely to be big business (corporate greed) and national and international political/economic systems that give subsidies and build roads. However, they are also likely to cite Malthusian population growth, affluence leading to dietary changes, technology such as malaria pills and chain saws, and American middle-class, beef-loving culture.

CONSUMERS. If confronted with the reality that their beef is being produced in the rainforest, North-American consumers probably won’t know what’s driving the system. They may well wonder why companies are raising cattle in the rainforest when we have unemployment and agricultural subsidies back home. They probably won’t blame their own culture, because people take for granted that they are supposed to live the way they do. They are unlikely to blame their own affluence—if anything, they may cite their tight budgets as the reason they shop around for the best beef and hamburger prices.

3.1 DBIG BUSINESS PROPONENT. Yes, this environmental problem is affecting big business because they invest in a ranch and then its fertility declines rapidly. “For a year or two after clearing, the ashes and decaying leaves and branches support reasonable crop yields but the rapidly weathering exposed soil may soon be impoverished. Eventually it is abandoned to secondary weedy growth unless major inputs are made of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides, the means for which are seldom at hand.” Note: The article is unclear whether the fertility decline applies to grasses in addition to crops. In fact, pastures do hold up longer, but even they are subject to fertility decline and soil erosion. The big businesses are likely to say that the environmental change also affects their workers, who depend on them for living wages.

LOCAL WORKERS. Yes, local workers are affected. “The modern colonists who are making clearings (rozas) in the high forests, attracted by new penetration roads and sometimes by government credits, tend to be as interested in cash returns as in subsistence. After a crop or two the roza, increasingly infested with noxious insects and weeds, is likely to be directly planted to jaragua or Guinea grass and sold to the small capitalists who follow behind. The caboclo or campesino may go on to clear another patch of monte somewhere ahead, but where a road or a nascent commercial center is close at hand, his hard-earned money is often quickly squandered. He frequently ends up as a wage earner on the same property that was once his own.” This group may also cite the Indians whom they pushed out as fellow pawns in the game who are affected by this process.

GOVERNMENT. Yes, the government is affected. It must deal with more-developed countries and environmental groups asking it to preserve the forest instead of developing it. The government must also be concerned about the livelihood of those it enticed into the rainforest, and how to pay for services in the area and still gain a steady stream of export earnings. For example, “as ranching the Amazon loses some of its gloss Brazil has been turning to a family of industrial mega-projects that promise even greater environmental impact, such as the damming of some of the region’s major rivers, beginning with the Tucuri hydroelectric project on the Tocantins and the Gran Carajas mining development in which bauxite, iron ore, copper and the precious metals are all involved. The infrastructure of cities, railroads and highways promise to

be on a Chicago-like scale.” The government should display some concern for all the stakeholder groups that are affected.

ENVIRONMENTALISTS. While environmental change is very indirectly affecting these individuals in their other roles as consumers and citizens, more important to them is that they look out for the interests of those that cannot represent themselves, namely the Indians native to the area, the flora and fauna, people and species all over the world who need the rainforest carbon sink to be retained, ecotourists, and most of all, future generations of all living things, including humans. They are also trying to drive home the importance of this issue from an ecological/environmental approach, beyond just the economics that most other groups are focusing on. (Note: Other groups may feel that the environmentalists really have nothing to lose personally in this battle and should just step aside and let those with vested interests work out a solution.) They are also likely to once again produce a lengthy catalog of those who are being affected.

CONSUMERS. No, consumers cannot really claim that the environmental change in the rainforest is affecting them. So far, it has not driven up the price of beef, they have not yet missed the medicines that may someday be derived from rainforest species, and they have not yet been affected by global warming in any way that really hits home. But if they are thinking of their children and grandchildren, they might answer “yes.” They may be only dimly aware of others who are being affected.

Steps 3–5:The position statements should be assembled from the material in Question 3.1 above.

Step 6:Stakeholder Group

Some Possible Modifications of Their Position, If Any (not an exclusive list of good answers)

Big Business Proponents

May be open to the following: Adopt superior, fast-growing foreign grasses. Give their employees small garden plots of land. National government should set aside some of the remote forests

for preservation. Build a health and fertility clinic for employees, a school, and a

soccer field. Provide wood (for a fee) to local charcoal or electricity plants.

Local Workers Few modifications, can’t afford to compromise much. They still want: Revolución! Land reform to prevent consolidation of holdings among the

wealthy. Local development projects such as roads, furniture industry, beef

processing plants. Health clinics and schools. Export earnings should stay in the local community.

Government Some of these solutions may have been on their original statements: Develop mining and industry to decrease the reliance on

agriculture. MDCs should pay LDCs for rainforest preservation as a carbon

stock and DNA stock, and pay royalties on any products developed from rainforest species.

World Bank and IMF should promote debt relief to LDCs. Still willing to give rainforest land to colonists, but also willing to

change the law so that colonists don’t have to clear the land if they can generate income to pay taxes in another way. May even be willing to allow multiyear tax holiday in order for a sustainable small business to be built.

Willing to build schools and health clinics. Develop ecotourism—needs loans from World Bank to build

airports, river ports, to set aside national parks, and to pay park rangers.

Environmentalists Few modifications. They still want: Reintroduce native species. Involve local peoples in decision-making. Set aside entire ecosystems of virgin forest, including a buffer

around it (willing to compromise on how much). Stop building roads into the forest (willing to compromise to allow

a small number). Public education of consumers in America, promote vegetarianism,

boycott tropical beef. Public education in the rainforest of the dangers of ranching,

benefits of preservation. Develop ecotourism—calls for loans from World Bank to build

airports, river ports, to set aside national parks, and to pay park rangers.

Develop markets for rainforest products such as Brazil nuts and taiga.

MDCs should pay LDCs for rainforest preservation as a carbon stock and DNA stock, and pay royalties on any products developed from rainforest species.

World Bank and IMF should promote debt relief to LDCs.

Consumers Willing to pay 1–2 percent more for imported beef if the money is used to help save cute animal species, colorful birds, giant trees, and Indians, a la Paul Newman food products or Ben and Jerry’s ice cream.

Willing to eschew beef one day a week, especially because it will help them lose weight and live longer.

Willing to take a vacation to the rainforest if the jungle camp has imported wine, soft beds, indoor plumbing, no bugs or disease, a nearby airport, thick juicy steaks, and a guarantee that they will see pythons, howler monkeys, jaguars, crocodiles, and river dolphins without having to wake up early!

D. Discussion or Essay Questions

Do more-developed countries have the right or responsibility to tell less-developed countries how to shape their environmental policies?

Is the developed world overdeveloped? Is the current level of development in more-developed countries sustainable?

Do less-developed countries share responsibility for mitigating the greenhouse effect?

Given the present global direction, do you believe humanity will survive another 1,000 years under the current system of global capitalism?

Is population control the key to solving the world’s environmental problems?

Can the world innovate its way out of its current environmental problems?

What is the likely path of the world’s environmental future: a smooth approach to its carrying capacity, an overshoot of its carrying capacity followed by oscillation toward it, an overshoot followed by collapse, or continued growth?

Kuznets contends that all environmental impacts follow an inverse U-curve with respect to affluence, it’s just that some have not yet begun to flatten, while others reversed course so long ago that the data shows only a decline with affluence. Consider the argument for such a universal relationship.

Cornucopians, or environmental optimists, contend that life on Earth has gotten better, not worse over time, that most products are cheaper now than before, indicating they are not scarce, and that more population will create more geniuses available to solve the world’s problems. Discuss.

Compare the environmental impacts of developed and developing countries.

Which driving forces are dominant in the less-developed world? The more-developed world?

Which type of environmental change gets the most media attention? Which type do you think has the greatest impact worldwide?

Do you think the world has “turned the corner” environmentally, or are environmental conditions continuing to worsen?

What changes are necessary in the more-developed world if they are to achieve “sustainable development?” The less-developed world?

What natural ingredient is in shortest supply in your biome, thus determining the constellation of plants and animals that live there?

Give local examples of:direct biological interferenceenergy/materials redistributionpollution

Which cycles are disturbed by the above?

In the burning of rainforest, which forms of environmental change are involved initially, and which are adverse natural consequences?

What benefits does the rainforest provide?

Can multinational corporations be the mechanism through which environmental improvements are achieved?

How can the value of wilderness be measured?

What is the feasibility of continent-wide wildlife corridors in North America?

Can you think of a positive feedback loop associated with increased atmospheric carbon and global warming? A negative feedback loop?

Do you think Americans will need to change their levels of consumption for the world to survive? Will this affect quality of life and standard of living?

In addition to cattle grazing on common pastures, fishing in common waters, and emission of carbon into the atmosphere, where else can you see the Tragedy of the Commons at work? Can you see a similar dynamic at work in college dormitories, movie theaters, or elsewhere in your daily life?

One of the ideas behind the Tragedy of the Commons is that such behavior is less prevalent when the resource is privately owned. Individuals and companies have greater incentive to keep their privately owned resources in good shape by not overusing them. Can you think of any examples that highlight privately owned resources being managed much more responsibly?

The Tragedy of the Commons results from a mismatch between private and public incentives. While it is to the public benefit to preserve a resource such as the global atmosphere or the fish populations in the ocean, a company may see it as being to their private, short-term benefit to use as much of that resource as they can before someone else does. What laws or policies can be put into place to align the motivations of private companies with the public good, so that they see it as in their own self-interest not to overuse the resource?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of market-based mechanisms such as a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system in comparison with regulatory mechanisms such as mpg standards for cars or carbon emissions standards for power plants?

Apply the analogy of the car approaching the traffic light to other environmental crises, such as the article you read in Activity 2. How well does the analogy fit to those situations?

Chapter 14 introduces a number of key systems concepts for understanding human-environment systems. These terms (write them on the board) include: stocks, flows, cycles, equilibrium, and positive and negative feedback loops. In addition to these, the book leaves out one other very important system concept: delays. Some parts of a system may not respond immediately to a change in another part. How does the concept of delays help explain some of the environmental problems we studied?

Think of your geography course as a system. What are the stocks and flows, the cycles and equilibrium, and the positive and negative feedback loops?

E. Question Bank

1. True/False A positive feedback loop offsets the original change in an environmental cycle and works toward restoring the balance.

2. True/False The IPAT formula calculates environmental impact as a factor of population, affluence, and technology.

3. True/False In the generalized model of human-caused environmental change, the last box (solutions) can loop back to provide feedback to human activities and adverse consequences, but not to human driving forces or environmental change.

4. True/False In general, individuals in more-developed countries consume more resources on a per capita basis.

5. True/False Low-income countries account for a large majority of the world’s energy consumption.

6. True/False Given the following approximated data, North America has a greater impact on global CO2 emissions than Asia.

Population GNP per capita CO2 emissions per $ of GNP

North America 300 million $30,000 0.6Asia 3500 million $4,000 0.6

7. True/False Environmental impact invariably increases with a country’s level of development.

8. True/False Human impact on the natural environment results from human interference with ecosystem cycles.

9. True/False Chopping down trees in the rainforest is a form of “direct biological interference.”

10. True/False The five stages of the “human impact on the environment” model in the book are (in the proper order): (1) human driving forces, (2) environmental change, (3) human activities, (4) adverse consequences, and (5) solutions.

11. True/False Global warming is caused by the heat released from the burning of fossil fuels.

12. True/False In the greenhouse effect, CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere absorb some of the radiant heat energy from the Earth and reradiate it in all directions, including back to Earth.

13. True/False The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded in 2001 that there is still not strong evidence that most of the warming over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.

14. True/False Like the United States, most more-developed countries have refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol calling on them to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

15. True/False Due to their advanced environmental regulations, the U.S. and Canada both emit fewer carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per capita than other high-income countries.

16. True/False China emits more carbon dioxide (CO2) than other low-income countries due to its rapid growth and extreme dependence on coal.

17. True/False Governmental policy is a negligible (i.e., not very important) factor on energy usage and pollution in a country.

18. True/False A negative feedback loop offsets the original change in an environmental cycle and works toward restoring the balance.

19. True/False The hydrologic cycle is an example of an environmental system.

20. True/False As world population increases, human impact on the environment decreases.

21. True/False The carbon wedge diagram illustrates that it is possible to stabilize CO2 emissions through behavioral changes only.

22. Which of the following is not one of the three basic categories of human-caused environmental change?

a. input of waste materials into the biosphereb. redistribution or sequestering of natural resources (energy or materials)c. direct interference with biological entities

* d. burying of solid, hazardous, and toxic wastes

23. Which of the following would be considered the primary human driving force behind the desertification of the Aral Sea region?

a. populationb. affluencec. technologyd. culture

* e. political and economic systems

24. “The Scourge of Cows” describes environmental damage in what region?a. Africab. Asia

* c. Latin Americad. Australiae. United States–Mexico border region

25. Which of the following mechanisms of environmental change is exemplified by soil erosion caused by plowing a steep hillside?

a. input of waste materials into the biosphere* b. redistribution or sequestering of natural resources

c. direct interference of biological entitiesd. adverse human consequences

26. In the article about tropical deforestation, road-building into the Amazon is an example of which kind of driving force?

a. populationb. affluencec. technology

* d. political/economic decisionse. cultural values

27. Which of the following is not one of the five primary human driving forces of environmental change?

a. populationb. affluencec. technology

* d. pollutione. political and economic policy

28. Which of the following are human driving forces?

a. forestry and industryb. soil erosion and water pollution

* c. population growth and cultured. lung disease and species extinction

29. Actions that try to solve environmental problems by addressing the initial driving forces of a problem are considered to be part of the category of:

a. natural feedback loopb. mitigation

* c. preventiond. compensation

30. “NIMBY” stands for which concept?a. when natural feedback loops are not able to solve an environmental problem

* b. when people do not want undesirable land-use activities near their residencesc. when large corporations pay local residents to compensate for pollutiond. when people hope that a problem will go away by ignoring ite. when nearby impacts are a function of movement, base, and year

31. A natural feedback solution to an environmental problem is unique because it is:* a. the only one that operates independent of human activity

b. the only one that addresses the adverse consequences of the problemc. the only one that addresses the driving forces of the problemd. the most effectivee. the fastest way to produce results

32. Which order of the following fossil fuels ranks them starting with the one that produces the most CO2 for a given amount of heat energy, and ending with the one that produces the least?

a. natural gas, coal, oilb. oil, natural gas, coalc. oil, coal, natural gas

* d. coal, oil, natural gas

33. The primary mechanism causing the Aral Sea to shrink in size is:a. pollutionb. species manipulation

* c. redistribution of natural resourcesd. none of the above

34. Which of the following is not one of the five stakeholder groups in the role-playing activity?a. big businessb. environmentalistsc. local workersd. government

* e. scientists

35. In the article by James Parsons, the main human activity causing deforestation of the tropical rainforest in the Americas is:

a. agricultureb. hunting/gathering

* c. livestock raisingd. logginge. mining

36. The concept of economic development that does not compromise the world’s resource base and the environment for the use of future generations is called:

a. system equilibriumb. luxury denial

* c. sustainable developmentd. environmental intervention

37. A system in equilibrium is characterized by:a. nothing movingb. positive feedback loopsc. renewable resourcesd. equal amounts of stocks, flows, and energy-material redistribution

* e. stocks are replenished by flows

38. A state of being in which forces of change are in balance is called a:a. cycleb. feedback loopc. positive feedback loopd. input-output system

* e. equilibrium

39. Places always have small, yearly environmental changes, but as long as these fluctuations are within their normal range, the overall system is said to be:* a. in equilibrium

b. securec. a cycled. a biospheree. in a positive feedback loop

40. In the article “Wilding America,” what are proposed to preserve Mountain Lions in southern California?

a. nature preservesb. limits to development

* c. wildlife corridorsd. more deere. fire prevention

41. The idea that small parcels of land must be connected to improve biodiversity has roots in the

theory of:a. migrationb. land usec. evolution

* d. island biogeographye. agricultural change

42. In the IPAT model for CO2 emissions, population was measured in persons, affluence was measured in GDP per person, and technology was measured in ___________. (Hint: Try writing out the formula. The units of the right side should be the same as the units of the left side.)

a. kg of CO2

b. kg of CO2 per person* c. kg of CO2 per dollar of GDP

d. kg of CO2 per square milee. kg of CO2 per mile

43. The purpose of the IPAT model is to:a. explain how environmental change affects human societyb. explain global warming

* c. explain the multiplicative nature of human factors impacting the environment d. classify the adverse consequences of environmental changee. explain the cyclical nature of positive and negative feedback loops

44. Current effects of global warming include all of the following except:a. sea-level riseb. thinning of Arctic Sea icec. retreat of nonpolar glaciers d. lengthening of growing seasons for crops

* e. fewer severe droughts and heavy-precipitation events

45. Which of the following is a positive feedback loop in global warming?a. more CO2 in the atmosphere leads to higher plant growth, which takes CO2

out of the atmosphereb. higher temperatures lead to more evaporation, which leads to more clouds, which reduce the temperature by shading the Earth and reflecting sunlight back towards space

* c. more CO2 in the atmosphere leads to higher temperatures, which leads to more air conditioning by humans, which leads to more energy use, which adds more CO2 to the atmosphered. more CO2 in the atmosphere leads to higher temperatures, which heat the oceans, which absorb CO2 out of the atmosphere

46. At more than 360 parts per million, the global CO2 concentration:a. is the same as the preindustrial levelb. is at the high end of the normal range of the last millenniumc. has finally leveled off

* d. is approaching levels not seen in the last 60 million years

47. Based on the flowchart you did in completing Chapter 14 (Aral Sea article), in which of the five categories in the model of human-caused environmental change would you find “central government dictates crops, water use”?*a. human driving forcesb. human activitiesc. environmental changed. adverse consequencese. solutions

48. Based on the flowchart you did in completing Chapter 14 (Aral Sea article), in which of the five categories in the model of human-caused environmental change would you find “83% of fish species disappeared”?a. human driving forcesb. human activitiesc. environmental change*d. adverse consequencese. solutions

49. Based on the flowchart you did in completing Chapter 14 (Aral Sea article), in which of the five categories in the model of human-caused environmental change would you find “drinking water contaminated by pesticides”?a. human driving forcesb. human activities*c. environmental changed. adverse consequencese. solutions

50. Based on the flowchart you did in completing Chapter 14 (Aral Sea article), in which of the five categories in the model of human-caused environmental change would you find “summers hotter, winters colder”?a. human driving forcesb. human activitiesc. environmental change*d. adverse consequencese. solutions

51. Based on the flowchart you did in completing Chapter 14 (Aral Sea article), in which of the five categories in the model of human-caused environmental change would you find “population 40 million and increasing”?*a. human driving forcesb. human activitiesc. environmental changed. adverse consequencese. solutions

52. Which of the following are human activities that directly damage environmental systems?*a. forestry and industryb. soil erosion and water pollutionc. population growth and cultured. lung disease and species extinction

53. Which of the following are adverse human and natural consequences in the model of human-caused environmental change?a. forestry and industryb. soil erosion and water pollutionc. population growth and culture*d. lung disease and species extinction

54. Which of the following are examples of environmental changes directly brought about by human activities?a. forestry and industry*b. soil erosion and water pollutionc. population growth and cultured. lung disease and species extinction

55. China’s one-child policy is an example of what type of solution to environmental problems?*a. preventionb. technological changec. natural feedbacksd. land-use changee. mitigationf. compensation

56. Waste recycling is an example of what type of solution to environmental problems?a. prevention*b. technological changec. natural feedbacksd. land-use changee. mitigationf. compensation

57. A coyote population that thrives off an increase in the wild rabbit population due to being fed by a friendly suburban resident is an example of what type of solution to environmental problems?a. preventionb. technological change*c. natural feedbacksd. land-use changee. mitigationf. compensation

58. Zoning the area around Phoenix Sky Harbor airport for light industry instead of residential communities is an example of what type of solution to environmental problems?a. preventionb. technological changec. natural feedbacks*d. land-use changee. mitigationf. compensation

59. Paying the medical bills of Phoenix residents affected by a recent chemical warehouse fire is an example of what type of solution to environmental problems?a. preventionb. technological changec. natural feedbacksd. land-use changee. mitigation*f. compensation

60. Cleaning up the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska one rock and bird at a time is an example of what type of solution to environmental problems?a. preventionb. technological changec. natural feedbacksd. land-use change*e. mitigationf. compensation

61. The IPAT formula calculates environmental impact as a factor of...*a. population, affluence, and technologyb. people, attitudes towards the environment, and technologyc. people, approach to development, and technologyd. population, automobile technology (i.e., level and type of exhaust)

62. Which of the following is not a type of solution in the model of human-caused environmental change?a. preventionb. technological change*c. energy/material redistributiond. mitigation

63. Actions that attempt to reduce the adverse consequences of environmental change are part of which of the following categories?a. natural feedback loop*b. mitigationc. preventiond. compensation

64. Based on the water use article by Frederick which you read in Chapter 14, make a case for what should be done about the problem presented. Argue from the perspective of the following stakeholder group interest: local workers. Remember to define exactly who you are within the confines of the local workers category before you present your argument!

65. Based on the water use article by Frederick which you read in Chapter 14, make a case for what should be done about the problem presented. Argue from the perspective of the following stakeholder group interest: government. Remember to define exactly who you are within the confines of the government category before you present your argument!

66. Based on the water use article by Frederick which you read in Chapter 14, make a case for what should be done about the problem presented. Argue from the perspective of the following stakeholder group interest: environmentalists. Remember to define exactly who you are within the confines of the environmentalist category before you present your argument!

67. Based on the water use article by Frederick which you read in Chapter 14, make a case for what should be done about the problem presented. Argue from the perspective of the following stakeholder group interest: consumers. Remember to define exactly who you are within the confines of the consumer category before you present your argument!

68. The level of uncertainty around trends of historical changes in surface temperatures, sea levels, and snow covers is:a. increasingb. unchanged*c. decreasingd. random

69. The country that emits the most CO2 per year is:a. USA* b. Chinac. Indiad. Russia

70. All of the following are true of the carbon wedge diagram except:a. each wedge represents a technology that can lower annual carbon emissions by 1 billion tons per year within 50 years timeb. without introducing these technologies, carbon emissions could continue on the path to doubling within 50 years time*c. if the world can succeed in stabilizing emissions to a “flat path” for the next 50 years, global temperatures would stop increasingd. no single technology is capable by itself of reducing carbon emissions enough to stabilize global emissions

71. All of the following are technologies that can produce one billion tons of carbon reduction per year in 50 years except:

a. increasing the fuel economy of 2 billion cars from 30 to 60 miles per gallon* b. replacing 1,400 natural gas power plants with coal plantsc. stopping all deforestation globallyd. lowering residential and commercial electricity use globally by 25%e. use one-sixth of the world’s cropland to grow crops for ethanol for 2 billion cars (using little to no fossil fuels for fuel or fertilizer in the process)

F. Related Issues

Other articles that are well-suited for the role-playing activity are:

• Cameron, Silver Donald. 1990. Net losses: the sorry state of our Atlantic fishery. Canadian Geographic, 110: 29–37.

• Derr, Mark. 1993. Redeeming the Everglades. Audubon (Sept/Oct): 48–56,128–131.

• The Atlantic Monthly seems to be a particularly rich source of suitable online articles—see Web resources in the book.