Good Research Paper On Jobs, Justice, And Environment

The environmental concerns in this current day modern world are highly intertwined with issues relating to human economies, political, and socio-economic concerns. It is imperative that the environmental strategies must also consider the aspects of jobs, justice, and the distribution of wealth. However, there are many arguments and conflicts in this highly intertwined concerns. Many of the environmental activists shout justice for the environment while not minding the economic and political contexts. Likewise, most of the current conflicts arise from the political moves that favor the mighty corporations in the distribution of wealth, compromising the environment, and discriminating the low and poor communities. This political reality in the US and other countries are the highlight of most of the environmental activists that shout justice for the planet and the embedded human economies affected.
In the consideration of the distribution of wealth and resources, it is important to identify the carrying capacity of the land. The carrying capacity is the optimum number of the species that thrive in a certain ecosystem that can sustain without any interference in the stability and structure. It is claimed to be dependent with the culture of the number of people living in a certain piece of land, such as the agricultural practices, farming styles, and others. It also includes the issues of the economy and society when dealing with overpopulation. Lastly, the events that happen on the outside borders affect the carrying capacity of the land such as the fluctuations in the global commodity prices, deforestations, greenhouse gases, and others. There are many issues that come out in the issue of the carrying capacity and the correlation of the overpopulation with the environmental degradation. It is contended that it is the government that should “evaluate the carrying and population supporting capacity of major agricultural areas”, takes steps in the man to land ratio, “facilitating the accommodation of migrating populations into better-endowed areas” (The Ecologist, pp 101, 103).
In the current day events, especially in the US, there is a disproportionate distribution of wealth and political biases that creates discrimination to the poor and the environment. The political system failed to identify the capacity of the land and focused on the economic returns that they thought would be advantageous to the economy. Environmental injustice happens when there is a disproportionate harm done on the poor communities due to the corporations and government actions that build their toxic sites and hazardous chemicals storage in the vicinity of low-income neighborhood whether intentional or not. It pertains to the documented facts that there is exclusion on the thought about the minority communities during the environmental planning of these harmful sites by the local and national government. The reasons of zoning as argued by some companies are still results of the local governments unmindful and careless decisions in the clearance and permits for the construction of these large corporations. In the US, the environmental discrimination has been voiced out by the environmental injustice activists. They are mostly composed of the local members of the affected communities. Their concerns have been getting popular attention to the rest of the people of America. The awareness of this type of discrimination started in 1982 when there was a PCB (Polychlorinated biphenyl) disposal site constructed in North Carolina. The government officials allowed the plant to operate near the community’s water table. This environmental racism triggered the Native Americans to form an organization and battle against this issue. The environmental pollution directly affects the poor communities. The movement for the environmental injustice is mostly coming from the lowly members of the society. They are not mindful for overabundance, but they are fighting against the environmental hazards that directly affect them. They seek for a fair distribution of the environmental hazards. They condemn the economic and social inequalities that ravage their health and communities. Their insistence for decent jobs and clean environment is a radically demanding but legitimate concern that challenges the wealth distribution and discrimination in America. It poses a profound challenge to the corporations as well as with the government’s environmental policies and practices (Rosen).
In light of the achievement of sustainable development in the global context, the political aspects are the vectors for change. The meeting of nearly all of the world’s leaders in Rio de Janiero on June of 1992 with the agenda of taking care of the planet, linking the economic development with the environmental concerns reveals that there is a global concern for the environment in these days. Modern approaches for the economic growth are indeed related with the human economies and the environment. Genuine economic development, that is, the sustainable development, is only achievable by infrastructures that safeguard the environment wherein the human economies are embedded. Since the summit is the first meeting to discuss the issue about global environment concerns, getting a unison agreement and the set of actions, in the aspect of protecting the environment, increasing the global sharing prosperity, and saving human life is hardly achievable in one setting alone. It is an impeccable fact that the political reality is highly embedded in this issue. At this stage, the argument of the global version sets out difficulties such as it will cost jobs, it is expensive, and that some of the electorate would not approve of it. However, the event itself is already a mammoth step forward for a better understanding of the issues about life and the planet in the perspectives of the politicians around the world. There is a quantum leap forward in the recognition among the sectors that the interrelationship of the social, economic, and environmental trends is the new approach in setting tasks at the national and international levels (Conca, K., and Dabelko).
The environmental issues and strategies are highly intertwined with the economy and politics. It is hard to draw a hierarchy for these concerns as they are immediate issues that affects the people especially that of the poorest people. It is important to consider these concerns and come up with the most appropriate actions. The political body holds the heaviest burdens in the appropriation act since they are the ones that permit things to happen. It is imperative for the government to promote sustainable development that primarily address the environmental issues while not compromising the other aspects in the society.

Works Cited:

Conca, K and Dabelko, G. “The Earth Summit: Reflection in an ambiguous Event”. Green Planet
Blues. Westview Press.
Guha, R. “Radical american Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation (1989): A Third
World Critique”. PDF.
Hardin, G. “The Tragedy of the Commons”. From Science 162. American Association for the
Advancement of Science. (1968).
Rosen, Ruth. “Who Gets Polluted? The Movement for Environmental Justice”. Environment
97/98. Dushkin/Mc Graw Hill. (1994).
Singer, P. “What Should A Billionaire Give- And What Should You?” New York Times. (2006).
The Ecologist. “’Carrying Capacity’, ‘Over-Population’ and Environmental Degradation”. The
Ecologist. PDF.