Tuesday, 31 March 2009

Last blog promt

What do you think are the main threats to securing sustainability in the future in this country?

What defines sustainability in this country? Most would assume sustainability is about making things last; recycling, walking instead of driving, turning the heating down and so on. But can a country’s economy be sustained this way? Can a society be sustained this way?

From the UK Governments Sustainability Strategy the overall impression is that the environment is most important aspect of sustainability (although there are various targets for employment).
From this point of view, the increase in migrant workers in recent years has decreased the availability of housing putting pressures on the need to build more- often on green field sites.
North Northamptonshire has the highest housing growth rate in the country after London. This is due to the Governments plans to have 3 million new homes by 2020. Is this social target threatening the sustainability of our green field sites?

The current recession can be seen as a positive boost to help encourage people to be more sustainable. Such things include walking or cycling to work or school due to the increase in living costs fuel prices. More noticeably, people are buying less in the case of food, mainly things that were wasted any way. Also, more people will be staying in the UK for their summer holiday due to financial restraints.
However the current recession may hinder the Governments plans to reduce such things as carbon emissions due to lack of jobs, such industries will remain open.
The recession will also obviously impact our country’s economy, reducing our market and therefore make it unsustainable.
Peoples enthusiasm to change their lifestyles for the sake of going green is a huge barrier to overcome. Many world leaders have previously chosen to ignore the fact that climate change is happening- and has had an impact on our country's population as a result. People are reluctant to change and therefore preventing sustainable development.

Thursday, 5 March 2009

Blog prompt 9- Sustainable community


Blog to what extent your ward/SOA resembles a 'sustainable community' and what extent you don't think it does. Give some evidence from your observations (or your memories) of this judgment.

Sustainable communities
According to the ODPM 2003 These communities should;
Be economically prosperous
Have decent homes at a price people can afford
Safeguard the countryside
Enjoy a well-design, accessible and pleasant living and working environment and
Be effectively and fairly governed with a strong sense of community.

According to government statistics Kettering 010D (Lower Layer Super Output Area) population is 984, 837 of which are all economically active. This means that 85% of this super output area’s population is employed making the employment percentage higher than the countries overall 67% employment rate.

According to the 2001 statistics 522 households were recorded in this super outlet area, none of which were; shared dwellings, In an Unshared Dwelling: Caravan or Other Mobile or Temporary Structure, or In an Unshared Dwelling: Flat, Maisonette or Apartment: In a Commercial Building. From these statistics and my knowledge the majority of the homes in this output area are detached making house prices substantially higher than other areas in the town of Kettering.

This super outlet area is on the outskirts of Kettering and close to the a14 and other main roads such a the a6 (Barton Road) making accessibility in and out of the town relatively easy. With regards to working environments, there are very few, if any workplaces within this outlet area apart from local shops as it is on the outskirt of Kettering.

People around this area are often very community proud by having their ‘community watch’ program it enables them to be active within this super outlet area. There is also a small woods in which local people are able to walk through and often clean up any rubbish that there may be around.
Overall I think this super outlet area in Kettering is a fairly sustainable community. There is not much in this area apart from detached housing and therefore with no other traffic apart from locals, makes it a very safe environment in which to live.

Thursday, 19 February 2009

Blog promt 8- education for sustainable development is valuable?


To what extent do you think that education for sustainable development is valuable?

Do you agree with Haigh (2005) that Geography is best placed to deliver this curriculum?

What are your feelings about this module?


‘The goal of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014, DESD), for which UNESCO is the lead agency, is to integrate the principles, values, and practices of sustainable development into all aspects of education and learning.’ -United Nations


As the strain on resources throughout the world continues, the need for education about sustainable development is more of a requirement now than ever. The United Nations has set out a worldwide plan in which individual countries are given their own goals about the teaching of sustainable development. These individual goals for countries are essential as different issues arise regarding a country.
Some views will differ on whether or not sustainable development should be taught in education. Some theorists believe that global population is irrelevant and that technologies will continue to extend enabling us to ‘feed the world’ with what resources we have. Whereas others disregard this and believe that the world is over the optimum population.


Would teaching people about sustainable development actually be worth while? With reference to this course I think that it would be well worth while teaching others about sustainability. Although a lot of the subject taught is prior knowledge for me, it has encouraged me to think about my impact on the world. One person can make a difference if every other one person chose the right options too.
Had I not chosen A Level geography my knowledge about sustainability would be limited, and I’m sure that many children in education currently have no understanding of what sustainability is.
Making people aware of the current issues that surround their futures could make them more willing to change their opinions and others in order to set out better lives for the future.


Although sustainability is linked to many subjects taught in education geography is probably the most relevant to sustainable development. Sustainability is of course about our world, our population, our ability to feed our growing population and simple day to day activities which is geography. But delivering this idea of having to cut back on paper, walk- don’t drive will give people negative impressions of what the subject of geography is all about.


http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=27234&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html -United Nations

Friday, 30 January 2009

Blog Prompt 7- Good Crunch, Bad Crunch

As we face global economic downturn industrial production falls, unemployment rises, we spend less, we travel less, we consume less.
However, in terms of sustainable development goals, isn't this a good thing? Shouldn't we take this opportunity to learn to live within our means?
To what extent do you think that there are good things to come from the current economic recession?

Let me apologise now for the longer than usual ranting blog.


One politician had recently stated that this recent recession could do us good in Britain and people would learn from this- something that was not achieved in the 1980s recession. Would people in fact stop taking things for granted that people in other countries do not even have access to? Will people be smarter and save (or even just being more sensible with money) rather than splurging on unnecessary items such as top of the range cars and expensive handbags?


It is a fact- the credit that was available to people in the western world (especially Britain) in the previous few years was excessive and by the banks curving their lending it will eventually help to stabilise the economy and ‘rebalance the markets’. -Ernst & Young


It’s been splashed over many of the big name newspapers that Britain has been living too good for too long and this is time for a change. However, who is benefiting from our losses?
As with the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the rapidly growing economy had been blamed for this sudden drop in the stock market. Is this a similar scenario for the credit crunch and upcoming recessions?
Surely someone had to benefit from the 1929 stock market crash and if not where did all this ‘money’ go?


The main positive topic of discussion regarding the credit crunch in Britain is that a continuing fall in house prices is likely, meaning that first time house buyers, if not all home buyers, will have better opportunities to buy affordable housing for the first time in Britain for several years.
However issues related to this include if this recession continues how are people going to get mortgages (if they still have jobs that is) with the banks still tightening their lending?
Whilst discussing this with someone who works for a home building company, she had said that people were still interested in buying homes however, were unable to get mortgages that they could have gotten a year previously.
It must be argued that house prices were never going to continue increasing and in my opinion; something is only worth as much as what a person is willing to pay for it. With a decrease in spending, and banks tightening their lending this was likely to slow things down quicker.


Within this issue though, are property developers snapping up these bargains? I know in America house repossessions are far more common than in Britain; home auctions are held daily, and driving down the street the word ‘repo’ flashes past at least once on every street. This leaves the market open for people with a bit of money that are willing to take a risk, could very well profit from peoples’ losses. But again- people with a bit of money, who aren’t feeling the strain as much as everyone else are benefiting, not those that are experiencing losses.


Then it comes to what companies and business sectors could possibly benefit from recessions in multiple countries? Well, discount supermarkets for example, such as Aldi and Lidl have seen significant increases in their sales already, and of course Wal-Mart- already a well established supermarket in America. Wal-Mart has already seen sharp increases in its share price from the end of 2007 until mid 2008 which is set to continue rising.
Other sectors that benefit from this is oil companies when they increase their prices, but how much do they really benefit? Their oil is not going to be around for ever and then where will that leave these companies and countries in which they are based? For anyone who didn’t watch ‘Piers Morgan on Dubai’- Dubai has already realised that its oil is running out, and has started establishing its tourist market, and a very unique one at that.

One last point to make- China is of course benefiting from its fast growing economy (growing far more rapidly than any western country ever did). Benefiting from our losses? Needless to say, their economy will slow down eventually one day, hopefully along with their Co2 emissions thats polluting our fresh British air.

Further reading:


http://www.access-accounts.com/news/industry-news/ernst--young-credit-crunch-may-benefit-economy.aspx -Ernst & Young


For those that aren't big Piers Morgan fans:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2009/jan/30/last-nights-tv

http://british-tv.suite101.com/article.cfm/piers_morgan_on_dubai_itv1

Piers Morgan fans:

Didn't have enough time to search for a nice artical about him.

Thursday, 29 January 2009

Traffic Survey

Joint blog- Adam and Faye
As a group in class, we planned what was to be included in the survey and how the traffic count data was to be collected.

Our group split up and two of us did the traffic count and the other two asked people the surveys. The two counting the traffic stood by the barriers at the entrance of the main student car park at Park campus. However due to our specific aims- only students’ cars were included in the count and lectures cars were distinguished by white permits. This was fairly difficult to do as the stickers were sometimes unable to be seen.
Some of the results may not be accurate as visitors may have been included in the traffic count and therefore not necessarily students.

The traffic count did not surprise me as not that many people car share- they seemed to travel alone. Also the time of day may have influenced peoples' decisions to arrive about half an hour prior to a lecture. For example someone may decide to arrive earlier to avoid rush hour and allow plenty of time for traffic or any incidents that may occur.

The surveys were quite conclusive about the fact people didn't think that students should have to pay to park during the day or night at Park campus.
However it did surprise me that more people commuted a further distance to the campus than was previously anticipated.

Another surprise from the surveys is that very few people that lived on campus parked cars in the car park- and in fact didn't even have one.
When we asked about the frequency of peoples methods of transport to the campus, car was an unsurprising winner however bus ranked highly among the results. This may be because bus fairs are subsidised when a student shows their student card.

Thursday, 11 December 2008

Blog Prompt 5- To what extent can individuals (i.e. you) make a difference?

There are several ways in which individuals like ourselves can make a difference, this can be as little as recycling a plastic bottle or to more extreme lengths; changing our whole lifestyle.
As previously mentioned in my blogs, recycling is now a regular good habit in my household since the introduction of recycling boxes. Before they were introduced however, we did recycle newspapers and glass bottles at our local supermarket where recycling points were provided. I am pretty sure that if these recycling boxes were not given out we would have continued to do this although, the recycling boxes have made it a lot more convenient. It is arguable that not all people would have recycled before the introduction of recycling schemes however now given a more convenient option people are much more likely to respond.

There are several things we, as individuals can do everyday to be more sustainable. Waking up and having a shower rather than a bath will save water, as will turning the tap off while brushing your teeth. The biggest waste of water is not from burst pipes, dishwashers or washing machines but from leaking, dripping taps. A simple ‘fix it’ would solve the problem with no more wastage of water, a simple task that an individual can probably do within minutes.

More on the subject of water, I am continuously reminded about ‘grey water’ by Nigel Freestone and the fact that we use perfectly good drinking water for uses such as; washing our cars, watering plants, washing our dishes and clothes and of course in our toilets. There is not much we can do as individuals in the case of this except raise the awareness to local water suppliers that the use of two water supplies to a household, one for grey water and one for drinking water, would be much more sustainable.
Many European countries and Australia do in fact reuse bath water to flush their toilets, the bath water is filtered and stored and then pumped through into the toilet.

Although there is not much we can do about this point, we can reuse water for watering our plants and even collect what little rain we receive over the year in water tanks that are sometimes provided by local councils and use this water for similar uses.

Even more about water, other things that can be done is to only boil the water you need in the kettle at a time, and a point that Prime Minister Gordon Brown made when we were approaching these hard times, is when boiling vegetables ensure the water level is just above the vegetables for efficient energy use, a comment that was not received well, or rather laughed at by the public but stands true.


As I sat driving in my car by myself this morning on the way to university, I realised how many other people sit driving in their cars by themselves. Car after car, and all these people driving in the same direction. Of course public transport, when available is not the most comfortable or cheapest way to travel, so people are more likely to use their cars.

In America, whilst driving down the interstates, signs with ‘Ever tried car pooling?’ followed by an 0800 number are a common sight. Carpooling became encouraged during the second World War when fuel was limited and propaganda was even used. We often think of Americans as gas guzzlers but when have you ever seen a ‘car pooling’ sign along any of our motor ways?

The website http://www.carshare.com/ enables people in the UK to find others with the same or similar routes to share a car to work, school or university. However, again the topic of convenience occurs again when you have to rely on a lift, or are relied upon to give someone a lift everyday.


This was the case when a colleague of my Mum was unable to use his car to get from Kettering to Bedford to go to work. Living in Kettering she did not mind giving him a lift for the few days that he needed but as he lived on the other side of Kettering it meant her having to leave and extra 20 minutes early to beat the traffic around town. Also she regularly stayed late to get work done and miss the rush hour traffic on the way home, however she did feel that she was not able to do this as someone was relying on her for a lift home, although I am sure he would not have minded. Such situations like this and changes of work schedules can make car sharing difficult for all people involved and this is possibly the reasons why some people are put off car sharing.


There are still more things we can do as individuals such as turning off unused electrical items, not leaving TV’s on standby, cycling instead of driving, buying local produce, shopping at sustainable shops such as the body shop, and of course there are hundreds of things that we do not even think of doing day to day. But as one individual will it make a difference whether I do these things or not? No probably not, but if all the individuals in the world did this and changed their way of thinking, of course it would.

Thursday, 20 November 2008

Blog Prompt 4- UN debate

When researching about South Korea sustainable development strategies were hard to come by at first. South Korea’s government website does not supply any information about such strategies and information that was found about these policies came from non government organisations.
When first thinking about what strategies the country had in place I actually had no idea what they potential could be as I did not know about the country’s economy, population or climate. The first main strategy that was found was about sustainable communities in the country and trying to education the population about the need to sustainable development. Korean houses are mainly made out of wood traditionally unless they were in the city areas then they would be high rise buildings. This is arguably not sustainable as wood, although trees can be replanted is not a sustainable way to build houses.


The other main point was the amount of public transport the country has available to the population and how much It does in fact promote people to use it. This of course encourages people to use public transport instead of their cars to get to either work, school or when going on holiday. Tourists are also encouraged to use these transport systems rather than renting a car.

The main point that we tried to get across was about the ‘hydrogen economy’ that South Korea and the company Hyundai had come up with. The idea is that by 2040 South Koreas high carbon emissions are to be reduced substantially because of this new, more environmentally friendly ‘hydrogen economy’.
Other than these three points there was not much to find about Koreas sustainable development policies. For example I was expecting to find information about recycling when researching about these policies.


I think the approaches of all 14 countries were very good, however, like our presentation, some of the countries should have maybe focused on the main points about sustainable development issues and strategies rather than supplying non-relevant information. I came to the conclusion that less developed countries had more ideas about sustainable development strategies than developed countries that are in fact causing the problems. Is this because less developed countries are affected more by the impacts of climate change and developed countries are affected by having to cut back on things they have previously never needed to and therefore they do not want to?

For example the USA (has the highest carbon emissions in the world) does not seem at all concerned about reducing these emissions because of course its economy relies on polluting the world. Similarly, although China is not officially a developed country its emissions are still the second highest in the world and again the country did not seem concerned about reducing these anytime soon. They were however concerned about preserving their panda population, which of course is a national treasure in China and results in millions of dollars from the tourism industry- just a noted point. Continuing on, Beijing had to clean up its air, but it is questionable would China have reduced its emissions and done this if it were not for the Olympics? These views of course are not at all related to the people presenting these findings.

Completely opposite is the Solomon Islands which currently has no sustainable development plan in place at all due to financial restrictions. However the country does seem to have numbers of ideas that it would be willing to put into place should they have the financial resources. It is a shame to see that the richest countries in the world- including South Korea, do not seem to have any practical plan in place (with the exception of Denmark) that do in fact have the money to make a difference, whereas those countries willing to opt for sustainable development strategies cannot afford to do so.

I think our presentation overall, went well with the exception of ‘umming’ and ‘ahhing’. On our handout there could have been more information elaborating in the idea of a ‘hydrogen economy’ so people understood what it was but other than that I think the information that was supplied was all relevant.

I did previously know quite a lot about the idea of sustainability, but by doing this assignment it made me realise that sustainability in practise is quite different from sustainability ideas as a country’s social, economic and environmental issues all need to be taken into account before putting any strategy into place.

Working as a pair did not seem to work as communication was a problem so I did end up doing most of the work, which in this case I did not seem to mind so much as it enabled me to thoroughly understand our country’s policies. However presenting the findings of our country was fine.

On the up, I did enjoy the assignment as it gave us all an opportunity to learn about sustainable strategies in a different way and to gave us experience of standing up in front of a group and speaking, which some, if not all, including myself find it a bit nerve racking.