(3) Stephens adopt a system framework for solving environmental problems. Is it appropriate for developing countries or countries with limited financial resources to adopt a “system framework” in solving large-scale problems such as environmental problems?
Large-scale problems such as environmental issues pose a serious threat faced by the world today. Deforestation, excessive usage of natural resources such as fuel-based products, air pollution which results from the harmful gases produced by factories and vehicles, as well as the imbalances in the ecosystem, are the major causes of environmental pollution. If these problems persist, the world will be faced with grave concerns of global warming, depletion of the ozone layer, rising sea levels and drastic changes in the global weather. Adopting a system framework is imperative and crucial in solving such problems. A system framework refers to a framework where the people involved view technology as an interdependent component of an organization (eg. society) that impacts on other technologies, activities, organizations, users, decision-makers, and other people. Thus, adopting a system framework for solving large-scale problems, such as environmental-related issues, is beneficial to both developing and developed countries. However, developing countries with limited financial resources might not be the most suitable candidates to adopt this system.
First of all, one important and common factor that influences a society significantly is the use of technology. Developing countries are small and have limited resources available for their use; thus, certain technology requiring large amount of resources will not work in their countries. In Stephen’s article (2006), the carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies used to capture, transport and store carbon dioxide yield great potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Unfortunately, the technology costs are high and require high operating energy, thus a developing country adopting this technology will be likely to fail (Stephen, 2006). A good example is the Ketzin, which is a “dozy village” of 4000 people nestled in the Havel countyside. Ketzin was chosen as “the site of mainland Europe’s first large-scale adopting CCS demonstration project”. However, there is “no news at the moment” that it has made a difference in climate change. This is being predicted to remain the same for the next few years (Putting Carbon, 2006). Consequently, developing countries will benefit more in the long run by using a technology which costs less albeit with less effective results. According to Cathy Majtenyi (2008), nationals in Cambodia use ceramic water purifiers and peat stoves for safe drinking water. Users are satisfied with the “low-tech innovations which require fewer resources, are less expensive and easier to maintain than conventional technologies” (Maiteny, 2008). They have less of an impact on the environment and improve the lives of people in poor countries by saving them time, money, and other resources.
In addition, the financial factor is also an important factor influencing people and their education and employment. Developing countries are financially limited as compared to developed countries, thus developing countries, more often than not, have difficulty in hiring skilled laborers to operate machineries such as in coal-fired power plants, controlled by technology. In order for most technology to attain positive results in contributing to environmental preservation, highly educated technicians and operators are essential to maintain the equipment and to operate it efficiently. Other than that, the education system needs strengthening to educate more skilled laborers. Jacek Podkanski, a senior energy technology specialist says “First comes efficiency, then CCS,” which implies that in order for a country to adopt an advanced technology, there must be a basic supporting skills present and constant maintenance work in order to yield positive contribution to the society (Putting Carbon, 2006). However, hiring skilful laborers from developed countries or training laborers require time and cost. Furthermore, in Lisa’s article (2008), it is stated that there will be job losses in certain sectors when developing countries adjust to the shift from low technology to high technology (Schlein, 2008). Hence, it will be better if developing countries maintain their level of technology used to improve their employment rate and financial state.
Moreover, the economy of developing countries is weaker in contrast with the economies of developed countries. Weaker countries such as China, Brazil, Russia and India do not have the means to solve large-scales problems without aid from richer countries such as the US, Japan and Canada that are in the first place, have been said to be mainly responsible for such issues. Furthermore, to impose such an unnecessary burden on them would cripple their economy when they can focus on trade in order to boost their economy. Mr. Bush, the president of United State, once mentions, "We are in this together. We will come through it together. (We are) confident that the world's major economies can overcome the challenges we face." He was emphasizing that there should be a collective effort between developing and non-developing countries, with richer countries providing more monetary assistance and technology (Wood, 2008).
Even though developing countries are financially limited, a system framework is still important to solve large-scale problems because it is imperative for efforts to bear results. Large-scale problems are often too tedious and unsolvable purely by other means. "Technological progress is ultimately probably the most important driver of incomes, of growth in developing countries," said Andrew Burns, the lead economist at the World Bank, and main author of a recent report on technology in developing nations (Rodgers, 2008). The spread of technology in the developing world will not necessarily bring western-style progress or prosperity. According to Molella of the Lemelson Center (2008), "they're changing these cultures the way they are changing the West” and they don't always have to “serve the purposes of progress”. Therefore, it is “clear that fewer lives are mired in poverty”, and “more are benefiting from the opportunities made possible by the spread of technology” which is needed for “efficiency and effectiveness”, as it is “an integral part of every organization”.(Rodgers,2008)
In conclusion, we are aware that adopting a system framework is a solution to many large-scale problems. However, the reasons mentioned above are limitations as to why it is better for developing countries not to adopt a system framework. Although it might pose a threat to large-scale problems to the world, forcing a system framework on these countries might further aggravate their problems. Therefore, sticking to the same technology works best for developing countries.
References
Majtenyi, Cathy (2008, May 19). Low Technology Solutions Find Favor in Developing World. Voice of America. Retrieved October 19, 2008, from
http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2008-05/2008-05-19-voa25.cfm
Putting the Carbon Back. (2006). pp.620-623
Rodgers, Bill (2008, May 17). Technology Boosts Income, Reduces Poverty In Developing Countries. Voice of America. Retrieved October 19, 2008, from http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2008-05/2008-05-17- voa25.cfm?CFID=54440909&CFTOKEN=15840507
Schlein, Lisa (2008, Sep 24). New Report Finds Green Economy Could Create Millions of Jobs. Voice of America. Retrieved October 19, 2008, from http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-09-24-voa47.cfm
Stephens, J.C (2006). CCS: Research is not enough. In The world energy book. (pp.15-18). London: World Energy Council.
Wood, Barry (2008, Oct 12). Developing and Industrial Countries Endorse Plan to Stabilize Financial Markets. Voice of America. Retrieved October 19, 2008, from http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-10-12-voa6.cfm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment