Dr.BrianEgan,DepartmentofGeography,SimonFraserUniversity overview - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dr.
Brian
Egan,
Department
of
Geography,
Simon
Fraser
University


overview
  update
/
review.
  key
themes
(conAnued).
  resources
in
historical
and
geographical
perspecAve.
  northern
gateway.


reserve
readings
 Mather,
A.S.
and
K.
Chapman.
1995.
 Environmental
resources .
New
York:
 PrenAce
Hall.

 Mitchell,
B.
(ed.).
2004.
 Resource
and
environmental
management
in
Canada .
 Toronto:
Oxford
University
Press.

 Rees,
J.
1985.
 Natural
resources:
alloca6on,
economics,
and
policy .
New
York:
 Routledge.

 Tietenberg,
T.
and
L.
Lewis.
2006.
 Environmental
and
natural
resource
 economics .
Boston:
Pearson.



student
interests
  field
trips.
  guest
speakers
from
different
perspecAves.
  films.
  workshop;
group
discussion;
debate
and
dialogue.

  social
and
poliAcal
factors;
poliAcs
of
resource
issues;
poliAcal
ecology.
  sustainable
alternaAves
for
resource
use
(e.g.,
oil
sands).
  local
and
global
examples;
different
resource
case
studies.

  role
of
different
actors
(private
sector,
state,
etc.).


resource
scarcity
  absolute
(Malthusian)
scarcity
=
insufficient
physical
quanAAes
 of
a
resource
are
available
to
meet
human
demands.
  Lack
of
food
leads
to
starvaAon,
lack
of
water
to
drought.
  relaAve
(Ricardian)
scarcity
=
physical
quanAAes
of
a
resource
 exist
to
meet
demand
but
problems
related
to
quality
of
 supply;
meeAng
demand
requires
exploiAng
lower
quality
 resources.

  e.g.,
food
producAon
may
require
farming
areas
poorly
suited
to
 agriculture,
requiring
greater
effort,
inputs,
expenses.
  e.g.,
depleAon
of
easily
accessible
fossil
fuels
means
focus
shibs
to
 other
sources
(e.g.,
tar
sands,
natural
gas
from
fracking).
 


resource
scarcity
(categories)
  physical
scarcity
 =
resource
supply
is
finite;
scarcity
depends
on
amount
of
 resource
available
and
level
of
demand;
within
overall
limits,
cycles
of
 scarcity/abundance
are
possible.

  economic
scarcity
 =
scarcity
responds
to
market
forces
(i.e.,
supply
and
 demand);
except
if
people
can
afford
to
pay
more.
  geopoli1cal
scarcity
 =
groups
(naAons,
companies)
can
control
resource
 supply
to
achieve
certain
poliAcal
or
economic
ends.
  e.g.,
OPEC
and
1973
oil
crisis.
  parAcularly
feasible
where
resource
supply
is
geographically
concentrated.

  scarcity
as
quality
 (rather
than
quanAty)
 of
resources
 =
a
diminishing
 supply
of
“prisAne”
forests,
for
example,
or
loss
of
biodiversity,
or
a
 dwindling
capacity
of
the
atmosphere
to
absorb
pollutants
(including
CO 2 ).

  scarcity
of
prisAne
or
unimpaired
qualiAes;
  generally
unresponsive
to
market
forces;
other
(non‐market)
responses
needed
to
avoid
scarcity


sustainability
 
“ sus  tain  able 
 adjec6ve
 1 
 Ecology
 (esp.
of
development)
that
 conserves
an
ecological
balance
by
avoiding
depleAon
of
 natural
resources
(sustainable
agriculture;
sustainable
 forestry).
 2 
that
may
be
maintained,
esp.
at
a
parAcular
level
 (sustainable
income).”

 Canadian
Oxford
Dic6onary,
2004 


cost‐benefit
analysis
  mainstream:
  What
are
the
economic
costs
and
benefits
of
a
parAcular
decision
or
 project?
What
is
the
most
‘efficient’
use
of
a
parAcular
resource
or
 asset
(e.g.,
capital).
Primary
goal
is
economic
efficiency.


  criAcal:
  How
are
the
costs
and
benefits
of
a
parAcular
project
distributed
in
 society?
Who
gains
the
most?
Who
pays
the
highest
price?
What
kinds
 of
costs
(and
benefits)
are
leb
out
of
the
cost‐benefit
analysis?
What
 about
costs
and
benefits
over
longer
periods
of
Ame
(e.g.,
future
 generaAons)?



resource
geography
  how
are
resources
distributed
geographically?

  what
effect
does
geography
have
on
resource
use?
  mobile
vs.
immobile
resources.


  mobile
resource
users.



expansion
of
resource
use
  expansion
from
highly
localized
to
extensive
(global)
use
of
 environmental
resources.
  over
long
term,
five
major
transiAons
in
human‐environment
 relaAons:
  from
basic
subsistence
(hunAng‐gathering)
cultures
to
 agriculture‐based
ways
of
life
to
modern
industrial
society.

  changes
in
human‐environment
relaAonship
driven
primarily
 by
changes
in
forms
of
social
organizaAon,
technological
 changes,
and
changing
ecological
condiAons
(changes
in
 availability
of
environmental
resources).
 


energy
use
and
sources
  hunter‐gatherer
cultures:
2000
kilocalories
per
person
per
day.
  early:
solar
energy
via
plants
and
animals.
  advanced:
as
above
plus
stored
energy
in
biomass
(fire).
  agriculturalists:
10,000
to
12,000
kilocalories.
  early:
as
above
plus
domesAc
animal
power.
  advanced:
as
above
plus
wind
and
water
power.
  industrial
society:
70,000
to
120,000
kilocalories.
  early:
as
above
plus
power
from
coal.
  advanced:
as
above
plus
power
from
oil
and
natural
gas.
  Contemporary:
as
above,
plus
nuclear
power.

  increased
energy
use
reflects
increased
environmental
impact.


the
world
economy
  trade
in
resource
and
commodiAes
expanded
rapidly
starAng
 in
18 th 
C,
in
types
of
products,
quanAty,
and
geographical
 extent
of
trade
networks.
  a
global
system
of
producAon,
processing,
and
consumpAon;
iniAally,
 Europe
at
center
of
new
world
economy.

  previously
restricted
to
high
value
products
(silks,
spices),
long‐distance
 transport
of
bulk
(low
value)
commodiAes
became
possible.
  e.g.,
in
late
19 th 
C.,
wool
from
Australia
and
New
Zealand
feeding
Britain’s
 woolen
mills.

  “ecological
imperialism”
–
transformaAon
of
distant
places
reflecAng
 European
ideas
and
desires;
import
of
European
geneAc
material
(plants
 and
animals),
land
use
pracAces,
ideas
about
property
and
economic
 relaAons;
producAon
orieneted
towards
European
consumers.





core
and
periphery
  world
divided
into
core
and
periphery
regions
(someAmes
 called
‘heartland’
and
‘hinterland’),
at
global,
regional,
 naAonal
scales.

  raw
(or
semi‐processed)
resources
flow
from
periphery
to
core.
  manufactured
gods
flow
from
core
to
periphery.

  ulAmate
expression
of
core‐periphery
relaAons
=
colonialism
and
 imperialism.

  core‐periphery
reflected
in
‘developed’
vs.
’underdeveloped’
worlds.





progress
traps
  unforseen
consequences
of
progress
(in
technical
sense).
  e.g.,
nuclear
technology
=
nuclear
weapons.

  tendency
of
“advanced”
human
socieAes
to:
  expand
unAl
they
hit
and
exceed
natural
limits
(e.g.,
of
food
supply,
 ability
of
ecosystems
to
absorb
waste).
  organize
themselves
in
a
hierarchical
system;
wealth
and
power
 concentrated
at
top.
  overshoot
and
collapse.


environmental
aqtudes
  the
way
we
think
about
the
nature
or
the
environment
is
 criAcal
to
the
way
we
think
about,
use,
and
manage
 environmental
resources.

  three
broad
perspecAves:
  dominaAon:
nature
is
a
storehouse
of
potenAal
resources
to
 saAsfy
human
needs
and
wants.
nature
as
separate.
  stewardship:
dominion
over
nature
but
condiAoned
by
obligaAon
 to
care
for
nature;
nature
as
both
separate
and
universal.



  deep
ecology:
humans
are
part
of
nature
with
no
special
rights.
 biocentric
view,
no
such
thing
as
resources,
intrinsic
value
 arached
to
all
forms
of
life.