Student: Alix Soliman
Graduation date: May 2019
Type: Concentration (single major)
Date approved: November 2016
Go to concentration landing page
Summary
Aligning with conventional paradigmatic divisions, the North-South divide will be demarcated by the relative geopolitical power and global influence of a country. According to Thérien’s (1999) analysis, assessing poverty and ‘development’ in the Globalized economy is pertinent to understanding the divide. Globalization is the dynamic system of world trade, global economy, knowledge exchange, and transnational management of the earth. Historically, the concept of ‘development’ in western thought has been viewed on a spectrum; industrialized and prosperous countries known as the global North are at the top, while poor, less industrialized countries known as the global South are at the bottom. (Steger 2003). This ‘development’ spectrum must be evaluated in accordance with European imperialism and colonialism. In effect, it perpetuates a long-standing power structure, by which Globalization allows the North to take advantage of developmental inequality and exploit the South for labor and resources (McMichael 1996, O’Rourke and Williamson 1999). This labor relationship that results from a Globalized economy is known as labor arbitrage. It stems from the capitalist economy and consumer culture that dominates in the North, driving corporations to find cheaper labor and environmental resources (Princen et al. 2002). As follows, they site undesirable industries in the South where environmental laws and labor regulations are more lax (Barbier 2015). This system produces environmental externalities -negative consequences felt in one area caused by profit in another- that raise environmental justice issues. Though a highly contested and broad term, ‘environmental justice’ is defined by the EPA as being principally concerned with providing equitable protection from health and environmental hazards as well as equal power in environmental decision-making, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, country, and wealth status (Schlosberg 2007). How do global power relations exist within the contexts of Globalization, development, and environmental justice?
Climate injustice manifests the uneven dimensions between countries. Specifically, environmental vulnerability in the South increases and goals for development are stunted . While Europe and the US are responsible for emitting a disproportionate amount of greenhouse gases, Southern countries are expected to catalyze change and are often more vulnerable to the environmental repercussions. South Africa was required to commit to an emission reduction of 34 percent by 2020 by Northern countries in the 2009 Copenhagen Accord. In the poverty stricken city of Durban, South Africa, the city’s Environmental Planning and Climate Department projected that beginning in 2070, the temperature and sea-level will rise, flooding and drought periods with be more intense, and biodiversity will decrease as a result of climate change. This will cause the crucial tourist industry to falter, a decrease in food security, and a greater risk to human and infrastructure safety. The increased environmental vulnerability that individuals will face is a result of Northern countries denying responsibility. Further, Globalization of the climate change issue effectively limits Durban’s goals for development. The South African government created the Integrated Development Plan (2014) in an effort to accelerate economic, social, and infrastructural development in Durban. However, the stringent emissions reduction plan that South Africa must abide by prevents the kind of industrialization Durban needs to boost its economy. The actors in the North have the power to shrug off the responsibility of their carbon debt onto the shoulders of less powerful countries. Is it possible for South Africa to gain more power in climate negotiations? (Carmin and Agyeman 2011).
In an effort to aid African technological development in the 1990s, America began to send used computers, phones, TVs, and other electronic devices to Agbogbloshie, Ghana. Although the 1992 Basel Convention banned the export of broken devices to the global South due to hazardous waste concerns, exporters found a loophole and began to label the e-waste as usable goods. Poor farmers in rural Ghana, residents of Agbogbloshie, and children found that they could burn the refuse to extract valuable metals such as copper and aluminum and sell them back to the US to be reprocessed and reused. This is a case of environmental injustice and labor exploitation. The materials burned in Agbogbloshie contain toxins and carcinogens directly linked to illness and death. The high levels of toxins also pollute the air and water supplies. There is an apparent cycle in the e-waste issue: capitalism in the US necessitates production of newer and more desirable technology for an electronic device obsessed society, causing the lifespan of devices to drop dramatically, and these devices to be discarded at a higher rate. As follows, the US is the largest producer of e-waste in the world. Instead of building expensive recycling plants in the US to sort through the waste and extract the reusable resources, it is less costly for plants to export e-waste to where labor is cheap and unregulated. Moreover, the consumers of electronics do not see the environmental impact they have because this “dirty” industry is hidden in the global South. The necessity to make a living and the lack of labor laws force citizens of Ghana to perpetuate the issue by functioning as a rudimentary recycling plant for producers in the US (Robbins 2013).This one-sided narrative of exploitation was the story that photojournalists Pieter Hugo and Kevin McElvaney elicited in 2009 by publishing photos that Burell (2016) describes as “poverty porn” in major American magazines. However, when American NGOs attempt to bring environmental justice to Agbogbloshie by ceasing e-waste export, the US dissolves the jobs that Agbogbloshie citizens depend upon. This dependence exemplifies labor arbitrage, and the misinformed environmental justice effort manifests the disconnect between ‘good intentions’ and effective action.
China broke out of the “iron rice bowl” by opening up to foreign direct investment and transitioning to a capitalist economy. After cutting the bureaucratic red tape and allowing companies from the global North to build factories and hire Chinese workers, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was able to maintain its power while dramatically improving the quality of life index and GDP (Gallagher 2011). Economic and political science scholars argue that China’s rapid reform from economic independence to industrial Globalization was a win-win-win. The CCP can claim to work for the people, the Chinese working class has increased access to jobs, and Northern corporations can find cheap labor and thus make a larger profit off of their goods (Meredith 2007). Many environmentalists see the rapid globalization and industrialization of China as a case of environmental injustice and a climate change threat. Due to China’s dependence on foreign corporations for jobs, the corporations have the power and authority to pay unfair wages and implement negligent health and safety standards (Robbins 2013) Moreover, the expansion of factory development in a concentrated location is linked to an extreme increase in greenhouse gas emissions. The abundance of smog has caused respiratory diseases to become the leading cause of death in China (Watts 2005). Further, greenhouse gases decrease the health and function ecosystem services in China and globally, making them a target in climate change debates despite the fact that it is Northern manufacturers producing the emissions.
Bibliography
Barbier, Edward. 2015. Nature and Wealth: Overcoming Environmental Scarcity and Inequality. Houndmills, Basingstoke Hampshire; New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Burrell, Jenna. 2016. “What Environmentalists Get Wrong About E-waste in West Africa.” The Berkeley Blog. Accessed November 11, 2016. http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2016/09/01/what-environmentalists-get-wrong-about-e-waste-in-west-africa/
Carmin, JoAnn, and Julian Agyeman. 2011. Urban and Industrial Environments : Environmental Inequalities Beyond Borders : Local Perspectives on Global Injustices. Cambridge, US: The MIT Press.
Gallagher, Mary Elizabeth. 2011. Contagious Capitalism: Globalization and the Politics of Labor in China. Princeton University Press.
McMichael, Philip. 1996. Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective. Sociology for a New Century. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Pine Forge Press.
Meredith, Robyn. 2007. The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us. New York: W.W. Norton.
O’Rourke, Kevin H., and Jeffrey G. Williamson. 1999. Globalization and History: The Evolution of a Nineteenth-century Atlantic Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Princen, Thomas, Michael Maniates, and Ken Conca. 2002. Confronting Consumption. Cambridge, US: The MIT Press.
Robbins, Paul. 2013. Environment and Society A Critical Introduction. 2nd ed. Critical Introductions to Geography. Hoboken: Wiley.
Schlosberg, David. 2007. Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Steger, Manfred B. 2003. Globalization: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thérien, Jean-Philippe. 1999. “Beyond the North-South Divide: The Two Tales of World Poverty.” Third World Quarterly 20 (4): 723–42.
Watts, Jonathan. 2005. “China: The Air Pollution Capital of the World.” The Lancet 366 (9499): 1761–62. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67711-2.
Questions
- Descriptive: How do the histories of globalization and industrialization relate? What is the current state of the labor and power relationship between the North and South? What are the current and historical objectives of environmental justice and how are they being addressed globally?
- Explanatory: Historically, how have European imperialism and colonialism influenced the current state of North/South relations? How does capitalism function in the North and South? How do people in the North and South understand “development”? How do institutions, countries, corporations, and individuals fit into this power structure?
- Evaluative: How does the siting of industrial practices lead to uneven environmental degradation? What are the social and environmental health ramifications of inequality? What are the benefits and drawbacks of Globalization and transnational labor? If a Globalized economy exists, how feasible is it to Globalize a standard of equity as well? How do power relations shape the possibility for environmental justice?
- Instrumental: If any, what institutional and/or economic changes should be made to improve conditions for marginalized countries and societies? What social and/or ideological changes could be made? What action is being taken already, how effective is it, and how could it be augmented? How can the ‘environmental justice’ movement be expanded to address global inequality?
Concentration courses
- SOAN 265 (Critical Perspectives in Development, 4 credits) spring 2017. Explores global development projects aiming to end poverty, improve living standards, and ensure the freedoms of individuals in the Global South, while questioning mainstream solutions.
- SOAN 350 (Global Inequality, 4 credits) not listed. Addresses relationships between “First World” and “Third World” societies, including colonialism and transnational corporations, food and hunger, women's roles in development. Evaluates approaches to overcoming global inequality.
- SOAN 365 (The Political Economy of Green Capitalism, 4 credits) not listed. Explores the effectiveness of environmentally motivated technologies in mitigating global environmental problems (such as uneven development) when these technologies become materially organized as capitalist markets and commodities.
- IA 238 (Political Economy of Development, 4 credits) not listed. Introduces theories on the role of the state in economic development and questions how policy contributes to the wealth gap between the North and South. Addresses major economic and political problems affecting developing countries, such as labor exploitation.
- IA 350 (Social Justice in the Global Economy, 4 credits) not listed. Examines the concepts of social justice, environmental sustainability, and fair trade within the context of the international political economy (IPE). Questions how states, international organizations, NGOs, and the private sector have promoted or challenged further incorporation of concepts in the IPE.
- SOAN 305 (Environmental Sociology, 4 credits) spring 2019. Evaluates industrialization, urbanization, and consumption with regard to ecological degradation, environmental justice issues, and social movements.
Arts and humanities courses
- HIST 261 (Global Environmental History, 4 credits). Pre-approved A&H course; no justification required.
- PHIL 215 (Philosophy and the Environment, 4 credits). Pre-approved A&H course; no justification required.