Smart Growth Tools- Hackettstown

In New Jersey, Asian and Pacific Islanders are growing in population by 50.63%. In general, the population is growing 4.5%, while the white population is decreasing by 6.16%. This continues to show that population characteristics are always dynamic.
But, as the population continues to change, so does the economy. The income has decreased 10.95%, but for people in the 90th percentile, their income has increased 33.56%. 
Additionally income levels for people of color are $9 less than white workers in general, in New Jersey. 

Looking more specifically at the population of Hackettstown, it is pretty heavily populated, in a state that has the highest population density already. Focusing on public transportation could help the people in Hackettstown, since it would cut back on using cars that emit lots of carbon dioxide. Additionally, since it's a really rural area, public transportation would help connect areas as well as assist people getting places faster and more efficiently. 

Class Presentations Part 2

The presentations for class today are very engaging when it comes to issues in various areas across the U.S. 
Chapter 8's group did a great job presenting the issues with Hurricane Katrina that are tied to issues of transportation. Environmental affects like debris dumping and oil spills highlighted the complex issues involved. The group also did a good job highlighting the need for better transportation for those who cannot afford private transportation in a state of emergency/evacuation. The struggles of rebuilding New Orleans and the fear the residents have show the reality of an unprepared area. 
Chapter 9 was presented well, discussing the issues with the prosperous Atlanta airport. Much of the air and noise pollution causes many minority and low income groups to suffer, which will only increase if the 5th runway is installed like the group noted. The maps the group provided showed the issues with the landlocked area and how the air pollution coalesces to cause a major issue. Highway sprawl was another issue the group did a nice job discussing- how the expansion of the prosperous area can displace many people and cause more environmental damage. 
I think my group did a nice job highlighting the issues and goals of MPOs and their role in various communities. I think MPOs play an important role in making sure community issues are balanced and represented. 
Chapter 11's group was very thorough when it comes to alternative fuel usage and the "diesel issue." Nonrenewable resources end up polluting urban areas because of the cluster of industry and transportation, causing cancer and asthma. The ozone and various air pollutants that cause respiratory problems affect those in condensed areas, mostly lower-income and minority groups. The group presented the statistics and the issues well, as well as the affects. The pollution technologies were interesting, gauging the amount emitted and what people can physically deal with before being poisoned. The group also did a great job highlighting the benefits of alternative fuel sources, with less health issues and more domestically produced. These air quality issues sparked the demand for better air quality, which was great to hear. 
Group 12 discussed fiscal issues that come with housing and transportation, and how the government tries to share benefits and responsibilities equally. Without it, the group explained, the gentrification and residential segregation across centuries would continue. Brownfields and greenfields were discussed as well, and the issues and benefits of each. Brownfields were sites of industrialism that are highly contaminated, but make it easy to access infrastructure. Greenfields aren't connected to infrastructure, but it's unlikely they'll be contaminated. Smart growth is highlighted again, allowing for more stable and sustainable communities. The balance between regional and local governance was discussed, such as Regional Coalition Building and how to integrate people in suburbs and central cities, and how each form of governance is tied to MPOs. Minorities fear regionalism because it reduces political power as well as diluting cultural identity. Regionalism is advocated for, however, to get the community to work together and save green spaces areas as well as money.  

Class Presentation Reviews 1 

The presentations for this section of chapters was very informative and well put-together. 
Manuel Pastor's section was interesting, highlighting inner cities, poverty, and transportation through the lens of Latinx communities. I found the distinction of this communities issues' interesting. They also suffer from trying to find jobs, but it's a working poor class that has low wages rather than not being able to access a job. The group presenting this chapter also noted that Latinx communities are more removed so they can't get the benefits of smart growth as fast. 
I think my group did a decent job at presenting the information from our chapter. Reading this information, I found it interesting how William Johnson connected urban issues to the Civil Rights Movement, and his push to emphasize strong communities in order to make a difference. The idea of residential segregation upset me, knowing people struggle to thrive because of segregation to this day. Nashville was a neat place to study, looking at it geographically to see sprawl and suburbanization. The group did a great job presenting the case study and the issues people in Nashville face expansion/population growth. 
The 6th groups' case study of a rural, segregated area in SC posed interesting questions as to what people do about transportation and housing when they are in such far-removed places? When development takes place, a lot of land is lost, and the environment is degraded, adding new ideas of segregation and racism to the mix when considering rural areas- how to allocate pollution, who needs to move to build more suburban neighborhoods, etc.
I really liked the 7th chapters because I take Food Justice with Professor Harrison. Hearing again the struggles of finding food near homes, that is also well-priced and healthy, is always a struggle for lower-income households, especially without private transportation. As the group pointed out, this leads to obesity and other health issues because healthy food isn't easily accessed. This disproportionately affects communities of color, who suffer these health and food issues more often because of their location, income, and transportation means. 
The groups did a great job highlighting these points and issues, as well as making clear what the author of each chapter was trying to convey, and the solutions. 

Urban/Master Plan for Hackettstown

The Master Plan for Hackettstown has been updated a few times across the years. The 2008 Plan mentions in sections 12C that "Greater emphasis is being placed on the importance of pedestrian safety and connectivity of sidewalks and paths by State and Federal agencies." This means that the town is considering various forms of transportation, including walking, and the NJ Transportation Planning Authority highlighted a need for "walkability improvements." This town has also been considered eligible for State and Federal grants for road, transit and pedestrian improvements, some of which have already been completed. The 2013 Plan wants to "To encourage the location and design of transportation routes which will permit the free flow of traffic while discouraging location of such facilities and routes which will result in congestion or blight." Additionally, "Guiderails, pipe railing, or other appropriate barricades, shall be designed and placed at drainage structures, streams, embankment limits, curves and other required locations as specified by New Jersey Department of Transportation," showing an emphasis on safety. They also wanted a more pedestrian-oriented area that includes civic services and commercial options, along with housing and better access to public transportation. This plan also wanted to include more safety for bicyclists, as well as public transport for public places, residences, and shelters. This will help residents stay connected with easier access to various locations across the town.  

Hackettstown Advocacy

My final paper will focus on my hometown of Hackettstown, New Jersey. The All Aboard group and the Hackettstown Historical Society are both advocates for the town, helping to improve it through various networks. Since Hackettstown has many historic buildings across the area, the Historical Society helps protect them and research them to offer information to visitors. They curate artifacts, protect houses, and maintain cemetery records, helping to keep the unique historic background of Hackettstown prevalent. All Aboard is affiliated with Main Street Hackettstown, and is partially funded in part by the Hackettstown Town Council. This group "is, in many respects, similar to a Special Improvement District." It's goal is to enhance the downtown area, "and has extended loans to property owners and lent design assistance that has resulted in improvements to commercial structures in the downtown area." They also help investigate the quality of different areas around town and determine if it needs some restructuring or improvements. "The design standards should focus on preservation of existing structures and ensuring design compatibility of new structures and renovations with what already exists. Standards should be sensitive to cost concerns of property owners." (Master Plan)

Environmental Justice 

I've taken the Environmental Justice class offered here at Drew with Professor Harrison, and it is illuminating in what it shows about how society and the environment intersect. Issues of the environment cannot be separated from human activities- we shape nature as much as it influences us. However, we can also respond to the environment, and these responses are where environmental justice comes in. Groups of people are forced to bear the burden of environmental issues more so than others, due to religion, race, gender, and class. 
Environmental Justice is defined by the Environmental Protection Agency as "fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies." I agree with this statement- every group of people should bear the burdens and reap the benefits of our environment equally. Environmental injustices are when these disadvantaged groups suffer the burdens more without any of the benefits coming their way. This could be placing people of color in more flood-prone areas, building nuclear power plants near people of color, allowing the white/wealthy the privilege of larger lawns far away from air, water, light, and noise pollution. http://www.ejnet.org/ej/ highlights specific examples of environmental racism that are played out across the United States, including waste management, exposure to toxins, and atomic bomb testing. Not only are pollution, overharvesting, and environmental degradation horrible for the planet in general, but additionally, people from underprivileged groups have to bear the brunt of these issues when they may not even be the ones contributing the most to the problems. Balancing the issues and the benefits among everyone is Environmental Justice, and needs to be fought for. 

Blog #15- An Inconvenient Truth

Watching An Inconvenient Truth, it was great seeing how well the elements of climate change were arranged in a way everyone can understand. Al Gore, being charismatic and informed, was really helpful in showing the impact humans have on the earth, such as the chart that went off the screen, the ice melt, desertification, the coral bleaching, the flooding, and the heat waves. He put them in a very human and urgent perspective, showing that things need to change now or we won't have a choice. Having so many different sources, like clips of Al Gore, videos, statistics, different research elements, and clips of other politicians, showed how connected everyone is to this issue, and that it is necessary to discuss and act on now. 

Copenhagen 

Denmark has multiple sustainably-oriented cities. One of which is Copenhagen, surrounded by water and green areas like parks, was the European Green Capital in 2014. This city in particular aims to be the fiest captil that's CO2 neutral by 2025.

As of now, Copenhagen has many large green spaces, clean air and water, many bicycles, and a variety of organic food. 71% of hotels in the city are eco-friendly certified, with plans for water, laundry, waste, energy, and food. Organic food is prevalent, with 17% of total food in the city being organic. 75% of food in public institutions (daycare, nursing homes, schools) is organic. 

Many people use bicycles in Copenhagen. People bike to work, school, and stores, and this isn't income dependent. Only 29% of the homes there own a car, but there are more bikes than people even own a car. In comparison, there are more bikes than inhabitants in Copenhagen. 

These goals and realities help show the sustainability of a city in Denmark, where people's health and happiness coincide wirh environmentally friendly, sustainable practices. 

Denmark supports the Fund, a group committed to helping countries obtain food security and environmental sustainability. Africa's Development Fast Track is being assisted by the Fund to increase agricultural productivity and decrease poverty. This helps people live more sustainably, and with more nutrition and food security. This millions of dollars grant helps the infrastructure of the African countries in need. This helps their economy as well as their food supply.

Denmark's environmental health is decent, but not great. People's health is generally very good, with a high Human Development Index and high life expectancy. Additionally, the country invests in good mental and physical health. They have great economic opportunities with various careers, many scholarships, programs to maintain skills, a good medical program,and good education for medical careers. Their happiness and health is great, however their environmental health could be better. Sachs mentions in his text that agriculture is the main contributor to pollution, and Denmark's industries are largely agricultural. Their pesticide and fertilizer use could be better managed, and then the people's happiness and the environment's would both be great.

Denmark and Education

Education is an important aspect of sustainable development, because through it, we are able to adopt new practices, engage with different ideas and perspectives, and develop a wide range of skills the use across the globe. Environmental education is a rising topic of interest in the world, and the more people seek education, the more they'll be able to help with environmental issues and engage with each other in meaningful conversations. 

Denmark's official site notes, "High quality education at all levels is essential to ensure competitiveness in today’s globalised world." Because of this, Denmark prioritizes education to include innovation and high standards of learning, "preparing their students to play an active role in a globalised, knowledgebased society." 

Basic education is required for all Danish citizens, and secondary school prepares people for higher education. Over 50% of a year group go on to higher education. Denmark applies "innovative research and teaching" to their schooling, along with interdisciplinary practices and project-based experiences. "Most Danish higher education institutions benefit from their co‐operation with business, industry and research institutes, creating an enriching and vibrant learning environment for their students." This means students, schools, and businesses all learn from each other and work together to bring about an environment where creativity and problem-solving occur often. 

Denmark also allows people from outside the country to study there, fostering a sense of acceptance and globalization to keep new ideas flowing. 

"There is a strong tradition of lifelong learning in Denmark. Many Danes participate in adult education to improve their knowledge and skills in order to advance professionally or change career. The workforce is thus constantly upgraded to meet the needs of the labour market." This means the people and business shift constantly in reaction to new ideas and concepts, showing adaptability and openness to different practices. 

This good education system, linked with the ability to work with business and other countries shows Denmark's ability to work on sustainability issues with others, fostering new ideas and practices that can be of use to helping the environment, the economy, and the people around the world. 

Denmark's social inclusion is being reworked as of now. In the past 15 years, Denmark has aimed to be more inclusive of people not originally from the country. Before, it was largely centralized, but they're looking to make their framework more "mainstream" to include even more people. There were less immigrants enrolled in education programs, about 3% lower than people of Danish origin. Refugees and women have the lowest employment rate in Denmark.
Now, they're looking to "strengthen the reception of newcomers," help immigrants find employment, improve immigrant children's education, "develop vulnerable and segregated urban areas," and prevent marginalization. In 2012 they launched an integration barometer and found they needed to make a more balanced mainstream policy to meet needs across the country but fitting them to the regions. More social programs and better integration policies are being implemented to reach these goals.

Denmark, like every other country, is subject to some planetary boundaries. Using the FAO website, we can see that their main exports are food related, the top items being pork, cheese, bacon, food wastes, and pastries.

Their main imports are beef, pastries, wine, palm oil, and a few other food items.

Their total land area value is 4,309, and a little more than half (2,414) is used for crops, as seen on the AQUASTAT report on the FAO site. This means that their main exports are dependent on more than half of their land area. Looking at a chart of their fertilizer use, they utilize about 81 tonnes per 1000 ha for their crops, which is a lot when considering their main exports depend on their food production. They also use 1,497 tonnes per 1000 hectare of pesticides, which isn't terrible, but still harmful. So, two planetary boundaries concerning Denmark would be agricultural pollution and change in land use. Because they're so dependent on agriculture for their economy, they use fertilizers and pesticides to help maintain a steady stream of goods, which can be harmful to the environment in large quantities. Additionally, they're using a little over half their land for agriculture, which means there was a shift into that at some point in the past. This shifted the landscape, clearing out plant and animal species to make room for the production of food. These limitations could effect Denmark if their crop yield suddenly goes south, because a lot of their land is already used for their main investment.

Comparing Denmark, Luxembourg, and Germany

 When looking at Denmark, Luxembourg,and Germany in tandem, it is observed that all countries have a good GDP, banking, and infrastructure. They are also all EU members, so they communicate and cooperate with other countries around them; all of them are also considered low on the charted corruption of each country, showing a sound government. Their background's are similar, all looking to control the Holy Roman Empire, as well as being close to each other. 

However, these countries differ a bit. Luxembourg is land-locked while Germany and Denmark have coastal access, making trade easier for the latter two. Additionally, Luxembourg has a small population in a small country- the other two have decent-sized populations, and their area is larger, so they can hold more people. Germany entered the industrial era later than the other two and is a newer country, so needed to catch up a bit. 

Because each country has a good economy, they can afford to worry about environmental concerns. Other countries may be looking for money to feed and house their citizens, while Germany, Denmark, and Luxembourg have enough money to do that already, so can focus on other issues. Their sound governments also allow for more progress and discussion on sustainability issues, and their good education allows for more people to be aware of the need for a healthy environment. 

Denmark as an Economic Developer 

Denmark, during its peak of colonization from 1536 until 1945, had bases in Europe, South America, Africa, and Asia. They built small areas for trading and defense in Africa, and had a small colony in the southern coast of India. Some of their colonized islands were sold to the United States after a time, but Denmark kept up some trading posts in India, since a main source of revenue was the spice trade.

England was first to go through the industrial boom, and because Denmark is so close, they were able to quickly accrue the benefits of this industrialization and economic development. Denmark was focused on agriculture for a long time, until the 1950s. Because most of its residents were wealthy, the ratio of agriculture to labor gave Denmark an unusually strong advantage when it came to agriculture and economic benefits. 

There are 9 Fortune 500 companies in Denmark. Maersk, a shipping and energy company; Novo Nordisk, a pharmaceutical company; Carlsberg, a brewing company; TDC A/S, a telecommunications industry; Jyske Bank; Novozymes, a bio technical company; Sydbank, a large bank; Coloplast, a health industry; and Vestas, a wind turbine manufacturer, are all the Fortune 500 companies based in Denmark.

Besides people, Denmark's main sources of industry and production are oil and gas. Main exports include industrially produced and manufactured products and agricultural products. They have no foreign debts because all countries they trade with owe them more than Denmark owes other countries. Although Denmark's main sources of industry are gas and oil, they also focus on wind and bio energy, so other main exports are machinery. 

Denmark is parliamentary and representative democracy-run. It is a monarchy with a milti-party system in which no party in particular has held majority since early in the 1900s. Most bills aren't passed without negotiations and cooperation. Denmark is a welfare model country, thus focusing on issues with its citizens and honing in on local government. People in Denmark have been very happy with their political situation and is considered by other organizations globally to be one of the least corrupt countries.

Now, since Denmark was a colonizer, using other countries to aid its own growth, it makes sense that it would be doing better. Additionally, it was able to reap the benefits of the industrialization from England without having to be the first country to implement it. Additionally, it was able to use the techniques for better production from England while balancing its agrarian traditions, keeping it environmentally healthy while being able to grow their economy. It has a good number of wealthy companies, some of which are focused on environmentalism, reflected in their push to help create renewable resources. Their good economy, well-run government, and push for sustainable energy all help their environment, and in turn keep stimulating their economy. 

Denmark

Denmark's GDP is good- not as much as America's some-odd trillion, but enough for their prosperous small country. Their Human Development Index number is very good- one of the best in the world, meaning they have good education, great mental and physical health, and overall a satisfying lifestyle. Their life expectancy, in turn, is good, at 81 on average between females and males. Women there are pretty well educated, only about a year less than women in the United States. Their population is almost stable, with 1.7 births per woman. Since it isn't two children per woman, their population is slowly declining as of now, and the urbanization is a decent rate.

Two things that have interested me, found on Gapminder, are the environment and society aspects of the country. When looking at the worldwide annual CO2 emissions, Denmark emits a very small amount, roughly 37,000 tonnes, as opposed to the giants of carbon emission, China and America, who emit 9,628,000 tonnes and 5,122,000 respectively. Also charted on this graph are the life expectancy of each country in relation to their carbon emissions. Denmark's is 80, one higher than the U.S, and four years higher than China. 

Next, I looked at military expenditures, charted also with life expectancy (since money not funding the military usually goes to programs benefiting people and their health). Denmark spends 5.58 million, with a life expectancy of 80, while China spends 1.35 billion and the United States spends 312 million. While the life expectancy differences are much, these studies show correlations that increase human happiness/well being.

Sustainability

Sachs' book describes the need for sustainability, as well as walks the reader through how people view the term "sustainability" differently. Chapter 1 starts by mentioning that sustainable development is "a way of understanding the world and a method for solving global problem." That's a good starting point, a bit vague to encompass all of the complexities, while stating the goal of sustainability. Sachs then talks about the growing number of people and their economic troubles, like finding food, homes, and work, which has been a challenge since the globalization of the world market.
Rio's Earth Summit defined sustainability as a development that doesn't affect present and future generations' needs. This means making sure everyone has the resources they need to survive, without fear of running out of them. Sachs also mentions the goals of sustainability when focusing on well-being. Poverty, inequality, social mobility, discrimination, and social cohesion are all problems faced in society, and sustainability should be used to make sure social inclusion occurs. Government functions, equality, and efficiency are all important factors of living sustainablly.
These are all great ways to understand sustainability, but I'm a bit concerned that these definitions don't mention the environment, just how people will be affected. So, Sachs mentioned the GDP, and how it doesn't account for harm done to the environment, like air and water pollution. Sachs then delves in to the importance of sustainability in ensuring clean drinking water, nutrition, and power to homes, and how it greatly affects areas considered "pockets of poverty" (32). Lastly, Chapter 1 discusses the issues with not living sustainablly, like climate change and altering the ocean's chemistry and the water and nitrogen cycles. "Human-induced climate change" (34) has shifted us into the Anthropocene, where we focus on ourselves outside of the environment we need to survive. Charts of the ever-climbing carbon emissions are shown, as well as the importance of fixing this issue being listed.
Sachs' definition of sustainability focuses on creating the most good for the most people, ensuring it stays that way for generations. This definition also includes reasons why this is important, and the issues involved need to be worked on. However, I think a good, encompassing definition of sustainability is working to improve our lifestyles so that it creates the most good for ourselves as well as the rest of the planet, including the biotic and abiotic factors that help us survive. By including the good of plants, animals, ecosystems, biomes, habitats, and landscapes of the earth, it is better for us, as well as ensures the safety and renewal of the things we need to become closer with, to understand how necessary they are to our continued growth and happiness.

I hope to research the sustainability needs and efforts of either Denmark or Germany, because I've heard some good initiatives from both, including using garbage as energy and giving money to residents with solar panels. It would be interesting to see issues they still have, as well as gauge how much better off environmentally they may be with their proactive sustainability.

The Bet/Book Review

The Bet was written in a way that explains the complicated issues of overpopulation in a simple, chronological way. Sabin does an excellent job remaining as unbiased as possible, showing the merits and drawbacks of being overly optimistic and too worried about overpopulation and the future of humanity. Additionally, Sabin shows the harm media can do to people just trying to share their findings. Ehrlich spoke on various T.V shows and gained so much attention that he became a celebrity, and the only voice people would listen to when it came to population consultation. The media was also generalizing much of what Ehrlich said so it became posed as radical ideas of reducing the growing population. This media attention sparked the interest of Simon, who also joined the media through his views that contrasted Ehrlich's. The two actually agree on a lot, like measures need to be taken to make sure we don't overshoot our carrying capacity, and that technology can assist us in the process. However, where they disagreed, the media enlarged that to make it a battle with two polarized sides- pitting them against each other when they were advocating for the same thing. Granted, the processes they came up with were largely different, but the idea behind was the same. 

Sabin does a good job showing the struggles of sharing a viewpoint without it being twisted for the media, and also provides good examples of other advocates of each side and their research, with helpful graphs and background. A part of the novel I greatly appreciated was the background information Sabin added to Ehrlich and Simon. It helped keep in mind that they're still people, and that they're upbringing has a lot to do with where they stand. Simon lived around a lot of people so saw them as beautiful when abundant. Ehrlich lived in the countryside, so was more fearful when there were large groups of people. 

Christensen's review of Sabin's novel summarizes the ideas behind the text well enough, "We see the 

evolution of Simon’s ‘cornucopian’ view of ongoing population growth supported by human ingenuity; his open conflict with Ehrlich’s steadfast ‘neo-Malthusian’ argument that there are real ecological limits to growth; and how both standpoints have influenced US environmental politics." This article also puts into a larger perspective of how much this bet meant to Simon and Ehrlich. Even after Ehrlich lost, Christensen notes that Ehrlich said he doubted England would be around in 2000. Christensen is also able to show the surrounding political and environmental elements that shaped the bet, mentioning the presidential elections immigration, energy, and climate change. "Ultimately," Christensen explains, the bet is used to explain the whole messy evolution of US environmental politics from the early 1970s, when Republican Richard Nixon was an environmental champion, to today, when Republican environmentalists are an endangered species." So, Christensen sees Ehrlich and Simon's competition through a political lens, viewing how their bet shaped the legislation of the United States across their bet until today. Additionally, Christensen notes that Sabin thinks the split in environmental policies comes from the shift in political parties, and thus uses this novel to show the cause and effect environmental issues and solutions. 

"Sabin bemoans the polarization that is the very structure of a wager, as if it were an important cause of the larger divide. But bets can be useful — they can clarify what is at stake and, by doing so, help us to frame thinking about the future of the planet." Here, Christensen notes the his issue with The Bet- he feels Sabin's issue with polarization isn't helpful. Christensen finds that the bet, and thus the polarization of the sides, allows people to see both sides as well as what each side is worth. Additionally, Christensen ends his article noting that the senior science advisor to Obama was against Simon in the bet, while Obama himself says he's hopeful for the future. By pushing that fact and Obama's quote together, Christensen is trying to imply the complexity of environmental policies, and how closely tied to politics environmental issues are. 

Personally, I like The Bet- it's a helpful book that shows the issues with just choosing a side, and what can occur if you're more interested in the media than in the facts. Christensen's review has merit- he sees flaws and interesting points for the book, but only interprets the text to be about the politics of environmentalism, and no the social factors that Sabin also discusses in detail. 

Kenya's Restoration Project 

Author Hayden Higgins wrote an article for The Daily Climate about a great initiative in Kenya. Just this past week, Kenya announced its plan to restore 12.6 million acres of the land in their country that are degraded due "poor land use, including overcultivation and overgrazing." Much of the land in Kenya has gone through desertification because of this, but a team of researchers found that over 65 percent of Kenya’s land is "suitable for restoration."

Higgins writes about how this project "will help government, civil society and business leaders ascertain how they will achieve it." Suggested by Higgins was having Kenyan leaders look at the areas they want to restore and determine how they want to go about restoring the area, and advised planting trees and other vegetation. Higgins most likely comes from an environmental background, seeing how their comments are well-informed and ideas about restoration are helpful. For example, Higgins also notes the benefits of this restoration, including reduced carbon emissions by 3.7 percent, a good step toward Kenya's goal of reducing their CO2 emissions 30% by 2030.

Higgins' identity is probably one that is college educated and from somewhere in United States, and has studied journalism first and foremost. Much of what they discuss is taught in college environmental classes, and the perceptive is one of someone who doesn't live directly in Kenya (using "they" and "them" instead of "us" or "we"). What is discussed of environmental policies in the U.S is largely reflected in the ideas Higgins presents, and their background is most likely journalistic over environmental simply because of the way they report the information- more factual than celebratory and reported in easy-to-understand terms than scientific. 

The article also discusses how the restoration will improve life economically, assisting farmers by giving them more nutrient-rich soil. This is also good for many different groups of people, Higgins reports, such as "members of nomadic tribes that make their living by grazing livestock and growing food crops in the rangelands." Higgins definitely studied journalism to be able to report this concisely, but also studied environmentalism because of the way they analyze the various facets of impacts this restoration will have, socially, economically, environmentally, and politically. 

Environment in the News
An environmental issue that's been bothering me most recently is the North Dakota pipeline, because is disregards the people living on the land as well as their right to clean drinking water. An article from The Daily Caller mentioned how Energy Transfer, the group trying to make the pipeline happen, is appeasing protesters. However, many other reports, like the one from ABC News, mentioned that people trying to keep this work off their land have been attacked. Chris White, the Daily Caller's article writer, said that Energy Transfer was going to "extraordinary lengths to avoid trampling Native American ritual sites." However, early in the development, the pipelines construction ran through sacred burial sites of the tribes of American Indians who live on that land. The judge for this case didn't stand with the Standing Rock Sioux because they couldn't prove how the pipeline would harm the burial grounds. However, a good idea of this would be if the judge and the writer of this article considered if there was a pipe full of sludgy looking oil being pumped through a cemetery where they're family members were buried, and part of the area were dug up to make room for that pipeline. White also wrote that the tribe "haggled" with developers, trying to see if the National Historic Preservation Act would actually protect them, posing this group as trying to win something over on the developers. There's no haggling about this, the tribes in North Dakota are struggling to find ways that developers can't continue their work, even though there's clear proof of damage and danger from their project. White's main focus in this article is posing how much money would be lost from this project, which is only money the company has invested so it doesn't mean the country would be losing those funds. Additionally, White writes how this pipeline would be the first of its kind, trying to make it seems like a waste if we don't follow through.

However, White's background is most likely journalistic, so he doesn't realize that this will effect him, too. The pipeline is being built from the Bakken Shale formation, which also coincides with the spot for the North Dakota watershed. So, if the pipe they're building has a crack in it, which is will at some point, it could be leaking 309,000 barrels to 1 million barrels a day into the water millions of people use to drink. Which then goes into environmental issues of clean water and pollution, as well as economic issues of lost revenue and damage control. It also gets in to politics, as to who will respond and how to the disaster. And this issue is already environmental and political, since a group of people in America is under threat, since the developers didn't even notify the tribes that they were considering their land a site for construction. It's already environmental because the construction work has already contaminated the drinking water, and thus harmed the living organisms, people included, in that area. So I think different perspectives need to be put into play to write this issue correctly, not just looking at it from a financial point of view. Additionally, it's not a big deal if we can't transport oil, because it's a nonrenewable resource and will run out, so it'll be harmful on the economy when that happens. If this project ceases, maybe people will consider renewable energy more seriously, too. So we can consider the social repercussions to events like this as well.

Malthusian Perspective 

After reading and discussing both perspectives of overpopulation, it makes it clear that this is a complex issue. I believe we are connected to our environment, which means we need to take responsibility for what we are doing to our surroundings. This includes living sustainably, where we have enough resources, whether for food, shelter, or clothing, while still leaving some in nature. Overpopulation strains our resources, but so do people who don't live sustainably. Many wealthy families who have a few people in their group consume and waste more resources than some poorer families who have more members. I can understand the Malthusian perspective of a threat to survival, but I think that one of human beings' best qualities is our adaptability. When we see a situation going badly, we find solutions, and we adjust because it will help us survive. I think the concerns for lack of resources are well founded, and overpopulation definitely contributes. But, I think the problem is more to do with how we interact with our environment- if we use what we need we should be fine, but since people over-consume it can become a problem. Ehrlich mentions that threats to the environment include "excessive consumption, pesticide use, disease, and the ecological limits that he thought constrained future food production" (Sabin 11). So, if we're worried about survival, we should focus more on studying diseases to eradicate them, stop wasting food, stop using pesticides, and stop using the monoculture crop method of growing food, since it makes plants susceptible to diseases and creates a capitalist market for feeding people. That in turn means that people, and in fact countries, can be chosen for whether or not they deserve food. Ehrlich himself believed this to be a solution- "Countries should be separated according to whether they 'can't be saved' (Haiti, Egypt, India), were 'walking wounded' (Libya, The Gambia), or 'should receive food' (Pakistan Tunisia)" (Sabin 25). Additionally, it hurts enterprise because food is grown by large corporations instead of smaller businesses, so people have less say of what's in their food and how it's produced.

This leads in to Simon's argument, "Whether population growth is too fast or too slow is a value judgement, not a scientific one" (Sabin 62). The value we put on resources, on the earth, and on people are what define how we're going to respond to these issues. If we focus on people as being intelligent and innovative, overpopulation shouldn't be a major concern, since people are smart enough to understand the best options and how to counter major issues. Rita James, Simon's amazing wife, discussed (transracial) adoption and immigration in her career, as well as was an advocate of women's rights, an important section of the overpopulation debate. Instead of the inhumane ideas Ehrlich proposed and other Malthusians thought was a viable option, Rita and Julian promoted advertising birth control, keeping it optional, as well as strategized government-run monetary incentives for having less children, because "even in family planning, he thought, people make 'rational decisions'" (Sabin 77). Simon also proved that statistic for overpopulation are not "straightforward and clear-cut" (Sabin 80), so there are many ways to stay adaptable to fixing overpopulation. So, overpopulation is a major issue, but there are ways to counter it humanely. Additionally, it's over-consumption and the way we treat the environment that caused these issues, so we should focus on them before trying to decide who gets to eat and why others deserve it more.

Work Cited

Sabin, Paul. The Bet: Paul Ehrlich, Julian Simon, and Our Gamble over Earth's Future. New Haven: Yale UP, 2013. Print.

Passaic River Cleanup 
After reading the article from The Washington Post about the Newark river cleanup, there are some mixed thoughts that come about. I think it's a good initiative, but I think they should use their funding to solve the issues at the source. If the EPA could stop businesses from dumping waste into the river, it would make the cleanup easier on them since the source of the pollution would cease. There were some questions about this initiative, too, as to whether or not the barrier and slabs will hold during storms. I think it's an interesting and well-intentioned idea, but I think the funds could be used more wisely.
This is an important topic to most people in the class on a personal level, since many students come from New Jersey, and even from Newark. Over the summer, I worked with a Nature Camp in Madison that was based at Memorial Park. We headed to the river a lot over the summer, and it was full of broken glass an garbage, which was really disappointing to the counselors and kids alike. Each week of the camp talked about different subjects, one of which being water. So, we taught the kids the importance of clean water through different crafts and fun facts, so that they know how dependent on water we all are. Additionally, we had speakers from the Great Swamp teach a class, and they brought a 3D model of the Passaic River to show the kids how much this river means to so many people.

3D map provided by the Great Swamp

So, reading this article about the river cleanup gave me mixed emotions. I'm happy people are doing something to help a large group of people- I just hope it's a project that is stable enough to make a lasting impact for many generations.