What is it?
In their critical thinking question 2 that concludes "Thirstier than Ever", Warwick and Rogers (2018, pp. 161) invite us to apply the ideas in the reading to our own experience and ideas.
____________________________________
The question
- We have already shared our ideas on ranking the four methods for effectiveness in dealing with water shortages. The reflection we went through in doing this should be useful preparation for the following question, on which we now want to share our ideas.
- Do you think personal solutions, such as changing your diet, are effective or should governments and companies solve the problem?
You have 15:00 minutes to plan, write, and edit a response to question 2.
____________________
A useful strategy - as usual
Imagine you are writing for someone who has not read the question you have chosen to answer or the article that the question follows up. Your aim is to clearly communicate your response to that reader, so it might help to paraphrase the question at the start of your response to it.
_________________________________
Reference
- Warwick, L. & Rogers, L. (2018). Skillful 4: Reading & Writing, Student's Book Pack (2nd. ed.). London: Macmillan Education
Some people might think that because the issue of water shortage is so large, it needs to be dealt with by governments and companies rather than by individual actions, but I can't agree with that.
ReplyDeleteI certainly think that there is a major role for governments and large corporations to play, such as by changing their manufacturing processes, and changing tax structures for companines that, for example, switch to CO2 cleaning to reduce water use. However, since companies depend on consumer demand, they will only be motivated to change if it's what consumers want. I like the example of lab-grown meat that Emma mentioned — if, as Yok and Yujin also suggested, those sorts of advances produce a product that is effectively real meat but grown in a lab with relatively little water use, it could strongly appeal to consumers, prompting them to change their dietary habits, not to vegetarianism, perhaps, but certainly to much less traditional meat. Companies with large research budgets are needed to make things like this a reality, but those companies will only invest in the research and development if they think consumers will buy the products. Personal solutions, individual behavioural changes, are, therefore, also essential to make the solution work.
And in the case of lab-grown meat, governments also play an important role: they have to approve and regulate the novel new products so that consumers have confidence in them enough to switch to them. The government could also help by giving tax incentives to companies that are working on producing these sorts of innovative new products that reduce the demands we make on water.
DeleteAt first, I thought individual actions were not going to affect anything in the big picture, but you already persuaded me. I agree that companies' decisions mostly depend on customer needs, and when individual actions are gathered together, they create a strong wave of change.
DeleteIn order to deal with water shortages, I think individual solutions might be better than governments’ or companies’ action. One of the reasons is that when people are willing to change their habits without enforcement from others, they tend to continue doing their own solutions consistently. However, when it comes to measures from governments or private sectors, employees feel they are forced to do irritating procedures such as recycling plastic. Therefore; they will try to avoid doing some regulations when they have a chance.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I also think that it is clear there are some groups of people who do not want to help reduce the impact of lack of water. Thus, it might be reasonable that the government and companies should take action to deal with these types of people to make them abide by the public policy.
I agree with you that individual solutions will has better long term outcome as they are not forced to change. In the other hand,there are minor population who realize they would change their behaviors to mitigate this issue. This make our population still require a role from government and big cmopanies to help us deal with this issue
DeleteI think personal solutions, such as changing your diet, can be effective, but they need campaigning and a lot of influencing. Governments and companies should be the head of this campaign to make it more effective for citizens.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I think this method needs more than just participants and support. it might relate to the average level of education of people.
So I think personal solutions like changing your diet are not an effective method.
For me, I think to be more effective it is better to let the governments and companies solve the problem first then later on we can adapt with personal solutions. Most of the problems are related to the production. According to Skillful, the problems come from the manufacturing sector and the agricultural sector. It will be more impact if the government create some laws that control or the campaigns to convince people to recycle more or other things. The companies can also provide choice of product to choose. Maybe, the companies can lower the price for the product that eco-friendly. After, I think the consumers as in person will definitely change their habit for sure.
ReplyDeleteFor me, personal solutions such as recycling and reusing things are an effective methods themselves. Recycling and reusing can lessen the demand for the products. From the article Thirstier Than Ever mentioned that by recycling just one newspaper can save water. However, they might not be that effective to the world if there are only a small group of people using these methods. On the other hand, governments and companies may have an ability to control things in a larger scale. But if we narrow it down, if we are to change, we still have to do those personal solutions first.
ReplyDeletePersonal solution and government support will help solve water shortage more effectively. For example, recycle is a way that many country apply this method in their routine. Such as Japan, USA, Korea where there have many way to manage their trash disposal that can reduce the amount of garbage and also reuse many products again. Recycle is a way that need massive practices to make it becomes effective. Only a person do recycle will not affect and make thing different. So what the government can do by lunching the rule to control majority to do the same practices. For example, Today in super market in Thailand, they don't provide free plastic bag anymore when you shop, so whether you buy it or bring your own bags. This way is effective way to reduce plastic uses in our routine. In addition, government can promote and acknowledge young generation to keep the habits in practices. This can help people change their habit easier. Doing it alone by ourselves with a good intention, it might be not enough to create a different. Therefore, government should create a sustainable plan and apply it as rules and regulations for citizen to follow.
ReplyDeleteI think we can reduce water shortages by personal solutions with the help of companies and the government. Changing our diets to plant-based food may need to be done in a larger scale in order to solve the problem, because even if we change our diets by ourselves, live-stock is still being consumed by millions of people. By reducing their animal-based products and changing into plant-based products, companies helping in a larger scale could help solve this problem easier and more effectively. Recycling, by buying second-hand clothes, or recycling newspaper, as a personal solution can also help; however, with the help of big corporations and the government recycling can have a more profound effect on water shortages.
ReplyDeleteI think that goverment or influential companies generating ecofriendly policies can be far more effective than changing individual’s habbit to be more ecofriendly. From my experience, I used to go to two countries which their governments apply some policies which has never been introduced to where I live.
ReplyDeleteA good example is our Asean neighbor, Singapore. When I was there, I realize how clean their public spaces was. I was very wondering, so I ask the local and find out that they has a strictly rule generated by the goverment, not allow putting any trash to public spaces. The fine from disobeying is very serious, making majority of population follow the laws.
In contrast, I think chaging individuals behaviors can produce just a little effect. The population is expanding so fast that the supply can sustain the needs. This lead to many issue such as overpopulation, unavailability of education. The latter is why I think that this could produce small effect. There are a lot of people who still not aware how negative impact our behaviors can produce to enviroment. So if you change your behaviors, there are still more than 90% who dont follow you.
I think policies produced by government or big company that can force people to change their behaviors can be more effective as the idea I stated above
I think that governments and companies are more effective than individuals to solve problems about water shortages, because they have more powers to control how people consume. Governments, for example, can issue policies that make people to change their behavior. In the last term, Yok has summarized news about Sweden government that has issued policy on allowing the children there eat sweet candy on Saturday only, resulting reducing tooth problems and developing good habit of eating.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you. Especially, in our country, I think that majority of the population don’t pay attention to their behaviors which can have negative impact to our environment.For example,many of my friends use electronic device excessively. They don’t close air conditioners when they are not in their rooms. So I think our population still rely on government policies to control their behaviors.
ReplyDelete