Transcript
2
Table of Contents Introduction 3 Headmaster’s Foreword 4 Financial Architecture 5 Environment 30 Security 52 Education 68 Completing the Story 91 The Symposium Accord 105 Headmaster’s Afterword 107 Symposium Participants 108
3
Introduction “The values and practices that led to the current financial meltdown are discredited. What practical steps can our countries take over the next 30 years to help to build a global society on the rock of justice and solidarity rather than self‐interest and greed?” This was the Symposium Challenge issued by Dr Ralph Townsend, Headmaster of Winchester College, in September 2009 to sixteen students from eight selected schools: Winchester College (UK); Johannes Kepler School (Prague, Czech Republic); African Leadership Academy (Johannesburg, South Africa); Karachi Grammar School (Pakistan); Raffles Institution (Singapore); Shiyan Cooperation High School (Shenyang, China); Nada High School (Kobe, Japan); Montgomery Bell Academy (Nashville, USA). The students examined the themes of financial architecture and economics, the environment, security and terrorism, and education, in the period from September 2009 to March 2010. They came together over the internet, reading widely, discussing amongst themselves and under prompting from their teachers, and preparing written responses to essays on each topic. In late March 2010 they arrived at Winchester College for the inaugural Winchester International Symposium, to hear a series of distinguished speakers, to debate amongst themselves, and to distil their thoughts into crisp written conclusions on each topic. They then spent a final day drawing the threads of the story together into a coherent whole, and drafting their individual and collective responses to the Symposium Challenge. The collective response – the Symposium Accord – was delivered at the Grand Dinner of the Winchester International Symposium on March 27th, 2010. This document records the Symposium lectures and seminars, the debates amongst the students, their final written pieces, and the Symposium Accord. Thanks go to Ms Rosalind Gater (ALA) and Mr Roderick Russ (MBA), who kindly added their notes to those of the author. Tim Parkinson Winchester College April 2010
4
Headmaster’s Foreword Welcome to all of you who will participate in the Winchester International Symposium 2010. My hope is that the Symposium will continue to move around the participating schools year by year, so that over time we will build up a network of knowledge and friendship to be a source of educational wisdom and confidence and to be of use in our various countries and the wider world. There has been a lot of preliminary reading, reflection, and exchange of ideas among the participants via electronic communication. We are in a good position, therefore, to make the most of our opportunity to listen and respond to our various perspectives on the four major global issues identified for study, and to grow in common understanding of ways in which, over the next generation, we might help to construct a better world. Let us take up that challenge with energy and enthusiasm over the next five days! Ralph Townsend Winchester College March 2010.
5
Financial Architecture PreSymposium The students were introduced to the ideas of basic market economics and the functioning of the capitalism system, in theory and practice. Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand and the early dominance of classical economics were accompanied by the criticisms of Marx and others. They looked at the views of Keynes in the early twentieth century, and the restored primacy of the free‐market model over the last three decades. While most students were new to the subject of economics, all of them engaged robustly in the online debates. The students were asked to question the degree to which the elements of the capitalist system were at the heart of the economic crisis of 2008‐9. They examined the evolution of the crisis, and came at the issues from varied perspectives and experiences. As preparatory essays they were asked to consider two broad questions: the causes of the financial crisis, and how far free‐market capitalism was the solution to the world’s challenges.
Symposium Guest Speaker: Sir David Clementi Sir David began by looking at an overview of the global financial sector. He took students through the interconnectedness of financial institutions: banks (systemic and investment), insurance companies, hedge funds, ratings agencies. He outlined the role of government in maintaining and regulating the financial system, and invited the participants to consider their own countries’ approaches; that all the participants are inevitably affected by the globality of finance, yet all come from different traditions and backgrounds, gave immediate resonance to the wider aims of the Symposium. Sir David invited the participants to consider the causes of the financial crisis. His suggestions were: the behaviour of the institutions themselves, particularly with regard to lending practices and the devising of exotic and complex financial products; regulatory failure by governments ‐ particularly in the UK and US ‐ and international agencies; human nature; the role of globalised and interconnected systems ‐ for example AIG’s insuring the rental payment on Lehman Brother’s office building ‐ that might have transmitted problems at greater speed and with more serious consequences. He did not lay the blame at the door of capitalism per se, asking participants to consider elements of the system, rather than the system itself. He the moved to consider the responses to the crisis. The return of Keynesian reflationary policies was discussed, with the associated question of government
6
borrowing. Extremely low interest rates and money supply growth have also been used to aid recovery from the crisis. More fundamentally, he invited participants to consider how far regulatory reform was, or should be, the answer. Finally, the role for national, as opposed to international, action was considered. Students were then invited to join a seminar on the issues, debating with Sir David on where the majority of the blame should lie. All students contributed to the discussion, with ratings agencies, politicians, and bankers finding themselves in the dock. While the students’ responses tended towards blaming the ratings agencies and regulators, Sir David felt that one should perhaps look with particular scrutiny at the bankers themselves. As he quoted Chuck Prince of Citibank: “When the music is playing, it’s very hard not to dance.” He acknowledged that in the pre‐2008 world of competitive global banking, it would have taken immense strength and foresight to have withstood the clamour from shareholders and the media to partake fully in that market. After lunch, the students reconvened to discuss the issues in Moberly Library, Mr Tim Parkinson and Mr Sajjad Sayyed facilitating. They then redrafted their essays in response to the modified title below. Raffles Institution and African Leadership Academy subsequently presented their redrafted essays to the entire Symposium audience in School.
7
What Were the Principal Causes of the Financial Crisis?
How Far Can We Build a Better Solution to the World’s Challenges than Freemarket Capitalism?
Winchester College The latter part of the last few years has seen the biggest collapse in global financial markets since the 1930s. A brief description of the deep wounds inflicted upon both national economies and trans‐national corporations demonstrates the scale of the crisis: Indy Mac and Lehman Brothers in the US and Northern Rock in the UK are but a few of the banks that have gone bankrupt, whilst other prominent institutions from a number of countries such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and AIG in the US and HBOS in the UK were only saved by government intervention on a massive scale. The US Government introduced a fiscal stimulus package worth $700 billion to help the financial sector; this is bigger than the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of some G20 countries. Without this emergency intervention, these companies, vital to the global economy, would have collapsed, kick starting an economic meltdown far worse than the damage present already. Around the world share prices tumbled: the FTSE 100 index contracted by 37.1% in less than a year, while the same figure for the Dow Jones index is over 50%. The severity of the global recession for all countries, even the wealthy ones, is summarised by Frank Field’s comment at a lecture given at Winchester College that, at one point during the autumn of 2008, “the supposedly strong British economy was one day from total collapse.” It is unsurprising that these events have already been discussed by a great number of analysts, for discovering why such an economic disaster has occurred and then preventing it from happening again is of the utmost importance. Most mainstream newspapers would describe the causes of the global recession in the following way. In the years prior to 2007, greedy banks, mostly American, although some would have been based elsewhere, loaned money to high‐risk customers and then used the potential profit from them to collateralise complex and almost unintelligible investment packages which they traded with other greedy banks. However, the combination of interest rates in the U.S.A. increasing by more than 400% over a two‐year period and the rupture of the housing bubble led to these high‐risk customers defaulting on their mortgages. As a result, the baskets of credit default swaps and other products were rendered overpriced, and some of the more reckless banks went bust; there was also a general loss of confidence in the banking system following on from this. As none of the remaining banks was sure as to which companies had acted so carelessly, they hoarded capital; the banking system and hence many Western economies became unstable. In the following months, the finger of blame was pointed by governments and the media at bankers and the capitalist system, and so increased regulation is both justifiable and necessary. Although there is a lot of truth in this assertion, some vital points have been missed, and the motivation for the actions of many banks was not greed alone. Perhaps surprisingly, the potential for a crash of these proportions partially has its origins in the Great Depression of the 1930s and the government’s response to it. This U.S.
8
administration tried to encourage lending by creating the Federal National Mortgage Association which guaranteed mortgages. Over the next 40 years such interventionist policies continued to be implemented, culminating in the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA), which illegalised redlining, the practice of lenders avoiding involvement with certain ethnic communities so that they minimised risk. By the mid 90s, the CRA was effectively encouraging banks to lend to people whatever their creditworthiness, and fined heavily those who refused to comply; that this process has evolved is astonishing, as this approach seems to entirely contradict the purpose of governmental regulating policy. The result of this was the prevalence of high‐risk mortgages: in some counties, 40% of new mortgages fell into this category (2005). Banks were also more inclined to take risks because they knew that if they got into any trouble, the government‐sponsored companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would bail them out, while if the sector as a whole began to enter into a downward phase, the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England could input credit whenever they pleased. Therefore, much the fault should lie with governments, and their lax regulation. It would be a reasonable suggestion to assert that the causes of this downward spiral must have their roots in basic problems with our approach to economics, and not with the more specific details listed above. A number of commentators have declared that an economic system that requires governments to inject billions of dollars in order to prevent total collapse, yet encourages bankers to claim bonuses of monstrous proportions, cannot be the best option. The desired increase in regulation mentioned above is associated with socialism, and these commentators advocate such a system. The most extreme form of socialism is communism: in its purest form, this is the idea that society should have no class divisions, governments, or even countries. Karl Marx, the author of The Communist Manifesto, argued that capitalism is not sustainable and would inevitably be replaced in the end by a stateless, classless and hence better society. However, it is difficult to evaluate the strengths of a communist state in its purest form, as no such society has existed in reality due to practical problems relating to the implementation of such policies. Nevertheless, we can look at weaker forms of socialism, most notably the surge in popularity of Keynesian economics. This theory states that increased levels in government spending lead to a decrease in unemployment and ultimately economic success. When applied in the 1930s, Keynesian policies did create much employment and prosperity; however, similar policies failed to solve the over‐riding issues of the 1970s, most notably worsening inflation. This has been attributed to over‐abundance of regulation in Keynesian thinking, as innovation is stifled; this demonstrates that all regulatory bodies should prevent themselves from becoming over‐zealous in their actions. In conclusion, the capitalist model is not fundamentally flawed and, when applied effectively, leads to the flourishing of society. The economic problems of the latter part of this decade are partially the result of the misapplication of capitalism and the utilisation of other, less sound economic theories. It is clear that a balance must be kept between lax regulation and over‐regulation, as an extreme of either has historically led to financial disaster. Markets do not have to become intrinsically unstable, but human failures have tended to result in such situations. Evidently bankers must bear some responsibility for this crisis, as demonstrated by the manner in which they repeatedly ignored warnings that they were lending too much credit. However, governments have been unsuccessful in finding a compromise between this dialectic, and as such we have
9
had to suffer the consequences of their short‐sightedness in this area. Looking forward, we must try to make sure the capitalist model is used correctly before any attempt to change the financial architecture can be implemented in the future. Johannes Kepler School In the 19th century, Karl Marx said capital was made by accumulating the surplus value of the worker's labour. Nowadays, a direct link to labour power is not obvious any more. One can just invest capital to gain more capital, a certain risk being the price. If invested in a wrong way, instead of multiplying, capital leaves the capitalist. The capitalist may even go bankrupt – but that's a part of the game. The game's rules are known and they are generally respected. Then, what are the differences between the investment and the phenomenon that is claimed to have stood at the beginning of the financial crisis, thus at the beginning of the global economic one as well – the so‐called bubble? One of them seems an old, well‐tested practice, the other a symptom of the system's illness. Where does the bubble's harmfulness originate? Karl Marx also noticed that in an industrialized society, a product didn't represent the particular worker any more, resulting in weakening of the bond between the worker and his labour. He called it “the alienation of labour”. There definitely was a strong bond between a capitalist and his capital, though. According to Max Weber, accumulating capital meant not only an earthly self‐realisation to Protestants, but also a way of convincing themselves as well as the community of their individual positive predestination. Thus, they must have identified with their companies to a large degree. The fact is, until recently, it was common for a company to carry its founder's name and to remain the family's property for generations. In 2008, there were no Lehman brothers at the head of the Lehman Brothers any more. No wonder. Nowadays, there are usually dozens of shareholders of a company like this and they don't even run the company themselves. Instead, they hire top managers who get paid for running the company. But those identify with the company even less. Their job is to increase its value at best. Not centuries‐lasting companies, just numbers stand for their success. This seems to be “the alienation of capital”. People who don't identify with the company they work for are much more likely to engage in risky economic behaviour. The goal being maximum profit, they discover new ways of generating it. In investment, risk is the price paid for profit. In traditional capitalism, risk remains apparent, though, as it has to be acknowledged by the community; risk remains real. But recently, risk has been sold and bought. The banks have been trading mortgages. They have been laying risk over risk. At this distance from the real money, at this rate of abstraction, bubbles are likely to form. Bubbles, meaning wrong assessments of
10
value based on entangled financial relations with unclear risk rates. Yet bubbles only can grow if there is enough confidence to sustain them; if there is enough confidence to make positive rather than negative assessments. Wherever it had come from, there had been a lot of confidence in the economy when the crisis started. There was enough to inflate a pretty big bubble. Money was made from nothing, or perhaps directly from confidence. Why? There was a lack of imagination. The financial system has become too complex for ordinary people to understand and too pleasant for them to care. One can be granted a loan without any effort, without any humiliation, without begging. One can buy a new TV although one is in debt. Actually, one gets into debt in order to buy a new TV. What is more real, then? The TV on the table, or the debt that's recorded in a bank's computer? Actually, the debt is. But one just can't imagine that. The idea of national debt is even more demanding. The bailouts are claimed to have cost every citizen of the United Kingdom approximately £31000 each. They coped quite easily, haven't they? They certainly would have refused if they had been asked for £31000 in cash. But they were not. Some numbers changed only. Their TVs are still there. Choosing TV as an example is not accidental. Many years ago, Günther Anders noticed that the atomic bomb threat, the threat of total destruction, paralysed people's imagination, being too horrific for it to cope with. He said people would tend to sensory perceptions in consequence. Perhaps the atomic threat is not as hot nowadays as it was shortly after WWII. Nevertheless, other threats have emerged that are even less predictable ‐ global terrorism, global pandemics, global warming etc. At the same time, our sensual life has extended thanks to numerous inventions. We have access to high‐definition TVs, high‐fidelity audio systems and broadband internet. Now, is not there even more opportunity for escaping the cruel imagination? Is not that what we spend more and more money on? We have been grateful to the economy for providing us with these temporary escape routes. Of course, that may not be the only reason for having too much confidence in it. At any rate, we have been reluctant to doubt about it. We may take this economic crisis as a warning against a crisis even more severe. The escapes may not end at sensory perceptions, they may take people into completely artificial (yet not imaginary) worlds. Let us just take a look at the number of children playing computer games. Together wit the lack of imagination and the excessive abstraction, they indicate an upcoming crisis of reality. The world is not regarded as God's creation any more. It is no opportunity for an enlightened mind to improve, either, as it gives negative feedback on its improvements. What is it, then?
11
Our relation to the real world, our relation to the economy and the economy's relation to the real world are out of balance. Perhaps we need to restore our confidence in the real world in general. For instance, we need to resurrect the economy’s link to real value ‐ which cannot be produced by sheer financial transactions. The economic system not only allows for too much speculation; it even makes speculation on speculation possible. The ladder used by bankers to ascend from real money to imaginary value is bound to collapse sooner or later. The length of this ladder must be limited. Even though complex financial products may provide quick economic growth, they have proved to be very risky in the long run. They create a most messy, chaotic economy of which potential issues are impossible to predict. They create bubbles of imaginary money that are sure to burst. It is essential to determine what kinds of products we actually need – not for the economy to grow quickly in short term, but for our civilization to develop and flourish at a stable rate. We certainly need banks, we need loans, we need mortgages. We need banks to be reliable; we need them to hold enough real money – not imaginary money ‐ to survive minor problems. Do we need loans of loans of loans, though? Do we need rating agencies? Do we really need to reject the real world? African Leadership Academy Over six decades ago, the world was struck by a phenomenal shortage of credit, popularly known as the Great Depression. Today, the world experiences a similar plight, called the Global Economic Crisis. While the world’s financial structure is largely to blame, other factors such as the actions of consumers, firms and governments in general have a stake in it as well. The major economic challenge (Global Economic Crisis) is said by many to have been caused by the Capitalist economic system. As a solution, a free market economy should be encouraged with stricter regulations and more transparency from national governments. Firstly, the global financial structure refers to the framework of various types of financing employed by firms all over the world to acquire the factors of production needed for their operations. An integral part of this framework is the mobility of human labor and monetary capital around the world. Europe and America play essential roles in the structure by circulating monetary capital through their well established and premium financial services. Two good examples are Barclays and Lehman Brothers respectively. Africa on the other hand, provides labor and raw materials for various firms around the world and this depends on geographical factors and human capital. For instance, most African countries specialize in primary sector production i.e. mining and agriculture and they lack the capacity to provide sophisticated financial services like many countries in the developed world. The global financial structure is flexible: thus, it can be adjusted to suit growing economic trends. It is also influenced by governments of countries and political relationships. Finally, it is interconnected between several countries worldwide. This opens up transmission lines for a contagion effect in the case of an economic crisis. Therefore, the global financial structure has its players and characteristics which enhance the risk of “the contagion effect”.
12
So, due to the complexity of the Global Economic Crisis it is evident that it did not occur in one night. The fact that its origins were in the United States of America does not mean that its effects were only felt there, rather as a result of globalization the effects were far reaching. The crisis has brought individual suffering in terms of people losing their jobs because the institutions they worked for became bankrupt or were in the brink of collapse. For example, the American International Group which was given a lifeline of £11.2 billion before its near collapse had to lay off at least 1000 of its employees. Therefore it is evident that the crisis was fatal for all those who lost their jobs. On the other hand many inefficient and irresponsible people in positions of power were let go. As a result of the widespread nature of the crisis, Africa has been affected. Arguably, Africa has not experienced as severe effects as the rest of the world because its countries are not so integrated into the global financial structure. Also, its financial institutions rely mostly on domestic resource mobilization rather than on foreign borrowings to financial co-operations. However, Foreign Direct Investment to Sub-Sahara African countries has declined because either foreign investors are scared to invest or there is a low propensity to invest due to the unwillingness to take risks. For instance, a proposed takeover of a South African mining conglomerate by Xstrata has been abandoned. Furthermore, many African countries whose incomes depend on the export of commodities have been affected due to the ever falling demand for their exports. For instance, the price of copper, which is produced in the low-income country of Congo, while recovering from its lowest point in January 2009, is still 32.0% lower than its July 2008 peak. Honestly, Africa has been affected because it is linked to the global financial structure through trade links. So when analysing what had a role to play in the global economic crisis it is clearly evident that financial structure to a large extent was responsible. For instance one great financial innovation of the 21st century which was initially a bane is now a boon and it is called securitization. This is the action of a financial institution selling its loans to other financial institutions or investors. In that, the risk of a buyer not being able to pay back is passed on to another entity while the original seller of the loan goes scot free. Secondly, banks in the United States gave out loans to people who were not necessarily creditworthy. Consequently, these loan takers could not pay back and this led to a shortage of credit. Therefore, if the financial structure wasn’t a cause factor for the crisis, then shortage of credit in the United States wouldn’t have been felt worldwide. In addition the individual who borrows money without fully recognizing the consequences of their actions should also be blamed. It is also essential to mention the role played by credit rating agencies in the global economic crisis. Rating agencies are alleged to have conspired with banks in rating potentially bad and dangerous loans with high risks of default as good. Such false ratings encouraged securitization; the trading of loans amongst financial institutions. Eventually, these loans were defaulted; this led to the shortage of credit with which banks basically operate. More importantly, a concerted effort towards the prevention of false credit rating will be the introduction of a code of conduct for credit rating agencies. Just like there are codes of conduct for doctors, accountants and other professionals to ensure that their jobs are credible, there should be codes of conduct to ensure that credit rating agencies do their job with integrity. More so, credit rating agencies should be made independent of financial institutions – in terms of how they make their money so that this conflict of interest, as mentioned early on, will be avoided.
13
That being said, it will be very unfair not to mention the role of the media in the global economic crises. The television and radio advertisement of fancy cars, furniture and other durable consumer goods which reflect a high social class or status will resonate with many a consumer. Such advertisements propel the individual consumer to leave beyond his or her means in so many ways. One of which is the purchasing of items on credit. Consumers take loans from banks to buy items which they do not have money to pay for now. Eventually, huge sums of loans pile up on them and they end up defaulting the loans. A good way to reduce the propensity of the consumer to spend beyond his or her means, due to the media, will be to set regulations on TV and radio advertisements. For instance, the air time for a car loan advertisement can be limited below its normal time so as to reduce its effect on an individual consumer. Hence, it can be argued that the capitalist system with stricter governmental regulations is preferable. Many are the responses in favor of the planned economy. However, it tends to be too regulated. On the other hand, a free market with reference to the European style of Capitalism relatively has more regulation as compared to the American style of Capitalism. For instance, unlike in America where a worker is cut of his unemployment benefits in 6 months, a worker in France can still maintain his standard of living after losing his job. This is because, the government of France will provide unemployment benefits that is substantial to keep him going. More so, a regulation in the form of Tobin tax as recently proposed by French President Nicholas Sarkozy will prevent financial institutions from speculative buying as with securitization. Therefore, the capitalist economy with a little increase in governmental regulations will be a better solution we can get from economics. In conclusion, after carefully assessing the world economic crisis and evaluating its effects and causes in the world and more so Africa, we can confidently say that the financial structure was greatly involved in the world economic crisis. This was as a result of globalization of world economies which consist of entities such as individuals, financial institutions and governments which are key components to the global financial structure. The only way out of this grave we have dug ourselves into is through firmer regulation by governments and a strong code of ethics in financial institutions. Because at the end of the day money does not drive the economy humans do, and if the humans get it right then the money will come in abundance. Karachi Grammar School The EU while referring to the global financial crisis said:
“The major upheaval we are facing transcends the field of finance ‐ it will also change our vision of the world; it is a watershed moment that prompts the world to readjust and adapt itself”
The crisis was an amalgamation of various problems. The crux of the problem was the unregulated credit rating agencies who presented sub prime loan holders, deceptively, as prime loan holders. Banks distributed loans without any checks to these sub prime holders because they anticipated the rise in property prices and hoped that investors would pay them back‐ sadly they didn’t.
14
The immediate cause or trigger of the crisis was the bursting of the US housing bubble which peaked in approximately 2005–2006.High default rates on "subprime" and adjustable mortgage rates, began to increase quickly thereafter. An increase in loan incentives such as easy initial terms and a long‐term trend of rising housing prices had encouraged borrowers to assume difficult mortgages in the belief they would be able to quickly refinance at more favorable terms. However, once interest rates began to rise and housing prices started to drop moderately in 2006–2007 in many parts of the U.S refinancing became more difficult. In addition, banks maintained a very low reserve ratio which disabled them from having safety reserves, hence when the defaulters did not pay their loans back, the banks were not able to pay their own liabilities and the lack of liquidity posed a crises.
At the same time, the financial ministries, at the top of the tripod system, in various governments can also be blamed for creating an opaque system‐ or one with a lack of checks. At the end of the day, regulation lies with governments and governments did not try and avert the crises. What further exacerbated the problem was the press, which projected an intensified image of the crises and hence caused people to overreact and lose immediate confidence in the financial system. The result: People stopped investing.
The current economic crisis has posed many questions about the effectiveness about the economic systems the world has adopted. We can now easily doubt the usefulness of the free market system and are compelled to think of reform and to re‐structure a new global economic system. A slow and easy transition from the market economy to a mixed economy is perhaps the best solution, because the role of the government and that of the private sector is well defined‐ and hence the desired transparency is attained‐a system that the whole world can adopt, because no country exists in isolation and policies in one country, effect others around the world.
Adam Smith, the father of capitalism and free market economies, himself pointed out flaws in the current system by writing: “A monopoly granted either to an individual or to a trading company has the same effect as a secret in trade or manufactures. The monopolists by keeping the market constantly under‐stocked, by never fully supplying the effectual demand, sell their commodities much above the natural price, and raise their emoluments, whether they consist in wages or profit, greatly above their natural rate.”
It is apparent that Adam Smith was not blind, and saw the drawbacks of an unregulated market system fueled by greed and power of a few individuals who may conspire against the public in order to raise prices.
There are a few problems we have identified and their possible solutions to save the economy. It must be noted, however, that the system is cyclical, as the world economy plunges into recession, peaks and then sees recession again( As we have seen after the depression of the 1930’s, the world has once again seen a wall street crash)But we should take whatever preventative measures we can to foresee a crisis.
We see that this economic meltdown is not only an economic crisis but also a crisis
15
facing society. One that has a trickle down and butterfly effect all over the world, and hence there is need for a long‐term vision.
Man should stop the unlimited exploitation of raw materials and use raw materials in a more renewable as well as rational way. Therefore we need a different approach to nature. This can only be done if new global governance is set‐up that provides and early warning system; stronger cross‐border supervision; mechanisms for collaboration and supervision and regulation across all countries. Such a system can only come into play when the State adopts a more responsive role in economy by abolishing the free market system and acquiring a mixed economic system. Government regulation, is essential to a certain extent, because it is only the government that has the first hand interests of citizens. A capitalistic economy, is not surprisingly, full of greed, and encourages competition for maximum profits. A completely government regulated economy, will introduce too many inefficiencies, and thus when it comes to crucial utilities like health care and education there needs to be involvement from both sectors.
Despite the fact that the crisis originated with the mortgages on houses in America, and the inefficient distribution of loans, there were people in England hiding money under their floor boards, and people in Dubai being “laid‐off”‐leaving their car at airports and escaping from the slump. This emphasizes that because banks in America, continued to give out loans, even though they did not have enough money to lend out, people continued to invest in the housing, and once Lehmann Brothers and the housing went bust, so did the investors around the world. There is a need for a global solution to a global problem. There is no ONE economy that exists in isolation. America’s problems are Pakistan’s problem, and thus a system should we adapted, that takes the economies of the whole world along.
In addition, too much authority has been given to the private sector and this has led to a few financial players exploiting and monopolizing.
A proposed solution would be to make decision‐making reside with international institutions with broad political legitimacy, and adequate representation of both middle income countries and the least developed countries.( Like government bodies) We should revert to the values of an inclusive market economy by making all financial players responsible. All financial instruments and institutions must be transparent and managing them in a coordinated way at the national, regional and international level is crucial. Hence, it is evident that a mixed economy can provide the best solution to this problem as it allows regulations to be set for the private sector.
There is a fundamental defect in the free market to distinguish between “enterprise” and “speculation” (Professor Prabaht Patnaik)
Speculators are not interested in long‐term goals or the goals of the society in general, rather they are more concerned about short‐term appreciation in asset values. John Maynard Keynes wanted this link to be severed through what he called a comprehensive “socialization” of investment. Hence the State which acts on behalf of the society will ensure a necessary amount of investment essential to keep
16
employment and economic growth stable. So a mixed economy can provide an alternative solution, very different from this paradigm where “bubbles lead to booms”, hence ensuring economic stability and sound long‐term macroeconomic policies. This is where government intervention, will ensure basic amenities that a completely free‐ market will not take into account. Like for instance, catering to minority groups in the economy. An analogy would be the Routemaster bus in England, which was created on the basis that disabled people should have access to buses. A whole contingent of buses was scrapped to take the debilitated along, something a capitalistic economy would never do, as it incurs such great losses.
So how should we buffer the effects of the crisis? The priority should be placed on protecting the vulnerable and controlling inflation. Also developmental projects should not be curbed rather the State should invest more into the economy in order to safeguard employment. This can only be done if a system of mixed economy is used in the world. As this would allow the government a greater share of the economy hence a greater say in the economy. By keeping contractionary monetary and fiscal policies the government can control inflation and ensure economic growth that may later increase economic growth. Also a mixed economic system can only ensure innovation and development of new and better techniques for controlling economic crises.
Raffles Institution
Definitions and Introduction Before discussing the issue in question, it is only proper to define its key related concepts. Sub‐prime mortgage is considered to have “high credit risk”, which means there is a high possibility that money lent out may not be returned. These borrowers of sub‐prime usually hold previous records of delinquency, foreclosure or bankruptcy, have a low credit score, and have a debt service‐to‐income ratio of 50 percent or greater. Taking these higher risks into account, the interest rates of such loans are also higher than prime mortgages. Speculators thus find higher rewards in such investments, but at their own risk that the borrowers default. (1) The financial crisis of 2008‐9 has been linked to the failure in sub‐prime in the US housing market. In this essay, we endeavour to understand the crisis by examining basic assumptions of free‐market capitalism, followed by an analysis of the financial structure and free‐market capitalism, and an evaluation if economics will provide us with a solution to the world’s challenges. Free‐market capitalism holds two assumptions – first, of perfect knowledge by both buyers and sellers, and second, that buyers and sellers act rationally. (2) We argue that the absence of these two conditions contributed to the crisis. Perfect knowledge and the rational human being
17
Lax underwriting standards were a key factor that contributed to the growth of the sub‐prime mortgage market. Non‐documented loans (loans without requirement of full documentation of income) and stated income loans (loans that do not require verification of borrowers’ incomes) were made increasingly accessible. From 2005 to 2007, half of all sub‐prime borrowers were also estimated to have provided limited documentation of their incomes despite having poor histories of credit. (3) This meant that the high risks that investors believed their products had, were even higher than the investors expected. Investment banks cleverly repackaged sub‐prime mortgages with high risks into mortgage‐backed securities (MBS), which are then sliced to several “tranches”, collectively known as collateralised debt obligations (CDO). These are labelled as either investment grade bonds (with low risk), mezzanine (middle risk), or equity (high risk). Equity‐tranche bonds would usually earn the highest profit but also suffer from the highest risk. Where mortgages are defaulted, the equity is first lost, followed by mezzanine, and finally the investment grade tranche. In short, banks turned poor and high‐risk mortgages into marketable financial products which were also poorly regulated. Many people believed these to be safe due to their diversification, and thus, fell for them. (4) (5) Yet as Figure 1 (see appendix) shows, though household incomes in America remained fairly constant, borrowed money from mortgages actually fuelled a rise in the consumption of these households. This invariably led to an increased financial burden mortgage and thus, a concomitant increase in mortgage defaults. In California, mortgage defaults were up to 67% in second quarter of 2006, just before the financial crisis. (6) This clearly demonstrates that the people’s knowledge of the finance system was not as perfect as the people themselves, including the mortgage holders and the speculators that bought the bundled debt believed. The financial structure was also responsible for misleading advisors. Credit rating agencies such as Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Group Inc. inaccurately rated CDOs, such as the one by Credit Suisse with the highest possible rating, AAA, even though they were high‐risk bonds that counted as toxic assets. Moody’s itself reported that 50% of the CDOs sold in the U.S. in 2005 contained subprime debt, and on average, 45% of the contents of those CDOs consisted of subprime home loans. (7) These ratings led many investors to buy these CDOs, plunging themselves into high‐risk territory. Having examined how the flawed assumption that human‐driven markets are always able to correctly price assets led to the flawed decisions of investors worldwide, let us examine another aspect of the economic system’s corruptibility – the irrational actions taken by the members of this system, and their consequences. In economics, buyers and sellers are assumed to act rationally. The crisis has on the contrary shown that man is not a rational creature, as evidenced by the burst housing bubble in America. The human motive behind this irrational demand that exploited the system for easy money seems to be a profiteering mentality among the bidders and buyers of the global market. This mentality, greed, is not a new phenomenon. Having limited resources and a market with unlimited wants puts a price on almost everything. A high demand for a very limited resource drives up its price. Add the
18
expectation for further price profiteering to this strong desire for the scarce resource, and prices skyrocket. The seller thus engages in selling at very high prices; buyers snap up the resource in anticipation of further rises in prices. This starts an upward trend of prices, due to an irrational fear of further increases, and expectations of profiteering at even higher prices. Such price bubbles are not uncommon. The Tulip Bubble in 17th‐century Holland saw wartime bounty from the War for Independence and newfound revenue from the East Indies spice trade flowing into the market. These flowers, then a horticultural wonder for their intense colours, drew high prices and were soon exploited by profiteering businessmen. By 1633, a farmhouse was sold for three rare bulbs, and by the winter of 1636, a Violetten Admirael van Enkhuizen bulb was sold for a record of 5,200 guilders, almost twice a wealthy merchant’s annual income. (8) Such a price margin is obviously skewed, and would be immediately ridiculed by today’s florists. But the trends of the market remain constant – people are still paying irrationally high prices that create bubbles in the system.
Possible solutions and the road ahead If these two assumptions of free‐market capitalism are fundamentally unsound in the real world, and the market cannot self‐recuperate, what can we do to induce the healing of our economic landscape? Economics can provide us with a better model than free‐market capitalism. Professor Chang of Cambridge argued that if markets need the state, it is better to have the state intervene regularly than prevent a free‐market mess from developing. The trade‐off for not intervening is a costly clean‐up which we witnessed in recent months such as the US$787 billion bill enacted by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (9). A possible solution lies in Keynesian economics, where government regulation and intervention in the economy through methods such as fiscal stimulus can assure the stability of the economic system. Keynesian economics has worked before, in what was termed the Golden Age of Capitalism that had high economic growth around the world from 1950 till 1973. It was displaced by Monetarist economics, headed by Greenspan, championing free‐market capitalism. As Keynes puts it, the root cause of recessions is insufficient aggregate demand. That is certainly what we are experiencing now. This lower demand results in decreased production, which in turn leads to higher unemployment, and even less demand. This vicious cycle can be adverted when an event or policy increases aggregate demand, which may come from any four areas: consumption, investment, net exports, or government purchase. (10) However, as consumer confidence and investor confidences are at an all time low, and due to the fact that America was experiencing a trade deficit before the crisis, increases in aggregate demand are unlikely from consumption, investment and net exports. The only way to move forward is to increase aggregate demand by government spending. The Obama Administration has already kicked in plans for in the U.S., as well as other governments all around the world. The main problem with this is the long term budget deficit the government may suffer, and how they cope with this in the future. For this, economics has no immediate solution.
19
More significantly, economics cannot solve the problem of an “irrational man”. In fact, this problem seems to be “built into” the system, as the finance structure is underlain by the profit motive. This ‘will to profit’ soon develops into and feeds unregulated greed, masked by the attraction of an expected booming demand. Enshrining this is the American‐style economy, a politically unregulated demand and supply system, which has been adopted in parts of the world. A precedent for this was set by the powerful European nations centuries earlier, whose economies rode the expansion of their empires in the global trade system. Colonial‐era sources show that the European societies’ insatiable thirst for eastern textiles, teas and spices, and exotic art pieces created more than 10% of employment in the colonies. (11) Yet, we are reminded of the harm that greed brings far outweighs its benefits. The side‐effects of a greed‐based economic system have hit the poor hardest. According to Martino, these are those who have “little or no margin to absorb its effects”. (12) Examples abound from the recent uncertainty and collapse of the economic system, which dealt the world two heavy blows. First, the displacement of people in terms of massive unemployment, and the emigration of ‘economic refugees’ to the countries that have managed to stay afloat by government intervention. Second, there is the loss of faith in the rich nations’ ability to support themselves, let alone prop up the world economy. Both of these impacts do not bid well for poor and struggling nations. Are there ways to solve greed, or manage it? The future is bleak at this point in time, especially if we are looking for an economic solution. One could, perhaps, introduce monetary policies to cool the markets whenever prices exhibit strong ascending trends, in order to harness the economic impetus of greed while stemming its ill‐effects. However, while this may reduce the ugly manifestation of greed’s darker side, it will not do anything to cure the root cause of the problem. Furthermore, such regulation encounters problems on the counts of scale, practicality and principle. In response to the immediate question of who should regulate the economy, a global board is out of the question, as it would not be able to meet the needs of individual nations, many of which are still desperate for recovery. Leaving the regulation in the hands of each state would also not be a viable solution, as it would inevitably breed nationalistic economies and go against the grain of global cooperation and development. Furthermore, the very act of regulation will be difficult to implement with a generation educated in the ideals of a free and open market, and it would take a complete makeover of the capitalist system to seek to accommodate greed to this extent. The only thing we can do, then, is to increase the transparency of markets, while instituting a code of moral obligation that will guide the actions of major systemic banks and investment banks in the financial system. What we propose to solve the former is to encourage governments to take up the task of credit rating, which will safeguard the investors of their nation while providing an alternative and more objective viewpoint to private credit rating agencies. Thus, while investors may still turn to private credit rating agencies to assess the risk of financial products, these assessments can be confirmed and validated by government credit rating. To solve the latter, we propose to draft different codes of ethics for major systemic banks and investment banks, such that they remain true to their function of safekeeping and investing private funds, but can also find opportunities for profit in the
20
process. In other words, for major systemic banks, their main duty will be to protect the people’s savings and possibly turn a profit in the process, while for investment banks, their main duty will be to turn a profit while not harming the consumers of their financial products. This ensures that consumer rights are valued by the above banks, and misleading practices will be less rampant. While both proposals do not solve the inherent systemic problems completely, they will help to alleviate the situation. In conclusion, maybe it is not a new system that we need. The old system, though has its flaws and failures, embodies the values of freedom and prosperity that the current world economic stage is built. It does, though, put us to shame by assuming that it will be controlled by rational, conscientious beings with perfect knowledge and who will not abuse its liberality. While world leaders meet to discuss economic strategy, and international institutions such as the World Bank pull us out of our crisis, we might as well take a reality check and assess our greed for what it is. Is this truly a necessary evil, and can we afford to continue breeding it? Perhaps with the suggested measures, we will still be able to derive profit from wise investments, but do so in a much safer financial environment. Appendix
22
References (1) Sengupta, R., & Emmons, W. R. (2007). What is subprime lending?. Economic Synopses, 13. Retrieved from http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/es/07/ES0713.pdf (2) Lakoff, G. (2006). Thinking points: Communicating our American values and vision. NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. An excerpt on the chapter, Morality and the Market, is available on the website: http://www.cognitivepolicyworks.com/wordpress/wp‐content/uploads/2009/06/ThinkingPoints_Chapter5.pdf (3) Krinsmann, A. N. (2007). Subprime mortgage meltdown: How did it happen and how will it end?. The Journal of Structured Finance, XIII(2), (4) Tustain, P. (2007, July 2). Investment landfill: How professionals dump their toxic waste on you. Retrieved from http://goldnews.bullionvault.com/files/Investment_Landfill.pdf (5) Tomlinson, R., & Evans, D. (2007, May 31). CDO boom masks subprime losses, abetted by S&P, Moody's, Fitch. Bloomberg News, Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ajs7BqG4_X8I (6) Godt, N. (2006, August 3). Mortgage defaults up 67% in California. MarketWatch, Retrieved from http://www.marketwatch.com/story/mortgage‐defaults‐up‐67‐in‐california (7) Ibid. 5 (8) Dash, Mike. (2001). Tulipomania: the story of the world's most coveted flower. Crown Publishers. (9) Chang, H. (2008, October 20). The economics of hypocrisy. The Guardian, Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/20/economic‐policy‐us‐bailout (10) Mankiw, N. G. (2008, November 30). What would Keynes have done?. The New York Times, BU4. (11) Tracy, James D. (1997). The Political Economy of Merchant Empires. Cambridge University Press. (12) Thavis, John. (2008, October 8). Greed helped cause global financial crisis, say two Vatican officials. Catholic News Service, Retrieved from http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0805112.htm (13) Figure 1 ‐ U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Federal Reserve | ‐ The Washington Post ‐ October 15, 2008 Taken from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp‐dyn/content/graphic/2008/10/14/GR2008101403507.html Shiyan Cooperation High School Adam Smith, father of the free‐market capitalism, as discussed in The Wealth of Nations, thought with the commodity economy that the market mechanism has a spontaneous function adjustment, and allows various people to pursue the choice which maximizes oneself benefit does also cause the social resources naturally to obtain the most superior disposition.
23
As the crisis of capitalism bursting out in 2008, we go back on whether the free‐trade policy is good for the global economy. Of course, it is undoubtedly true that the non‐regulation has created a prosperous economy and pushed it ahead in the past hundred years. However, the vices of it have exposed through this crisis obviously which makes us chew the cud.
The essence leading to this crisis, I think, is the character of consumers and borrowers themselves, desiring to acquire more. The people who are greedy but have no ability to refund the money they borrow are lack of the responsibility to the whole society. Then the rating agencies’ poor rating on the bad loans made for a tremendous deficit in the economic system gradually. The country which wants to redress this phenomenon supplies much more money, which leads to inflation.
Well is it really related to the government or the economic system itself? Of course it is. If the government regulates more strictly, maybe the crisis of 2008 can be avoided. But this problem always lies deep there. In other words, nowadays, there is a chance in front of us to find a better alternative system for the global economy.
The banking system has really done a great harm to the economic statues, and the root for this time’s crisis which we believe is that the bankers were to be blamed. Major systemic banks and investment banks didn’t really react in line with their high reputation. All this forces us to find a new way to develop our economy which is much fairer and better. As far as it was to be concerned, we should put the free‐market and planned economy together, so that the government can both regulate in the macro‐control and at the same time let the market develop freely to some degree. The government must master the market to make sure there is no problem. Maybe to some people, they think if the government does so, there will be no freedom for the companies and slow down the speed of the development of the market. However, there is no definite freedom in the world. So the problem we are facing now is what is to maintain the balance between the free‐market and government regulation so that the economy can develop freely and healthily. From a global perspective, 1860 to 1880, the 20‐year period ‐ the golden age of free trade ‐ was the era of compatibility of free competition and capitalism. With the transition from free competition to monopoly, free trade was gradually replaced by the protection of trade. The decline of free‐trade era was from the 19th century, 80 years to 60 years before World War II. After World War II, the United States greatly enhanced its economic strength, strongly advocating trade liberalization through lower tariffs, elimination of quantitative restrictions, non‐discriminatory implementation of the principle of reciprocity, in its influence, set up the " General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade” and the International Monetary Fund Agreement, as the center of the international economic and trading system. After more than 40 years of contradictions and conflicts, from a global point of view, great reduced tariff barriers, trade, relaxation of quantitative restrictions, trade liberalization progress. However, other forms of trade barriers have greatly strengthened, and the new trade protectionism is increasing and trade liberalization as an economic power of trade expansion tool. So this gives prove to the free‐market capitalism that does not make the most superior disposition. If we have a look in China, by the year 2008, the economic growth during
24
the past thirty years was enormous. China is in the state against the free‐trade policy, it made perfectly clear that the Chinese government took their part in the developing economics which was called Macro‐Economic Control. Though the economic crisis this year China has approved a good level of standard and set up a good kind of example for the countries whom were fighting against the problem.
Therefore, the Macro‐Economic Control can be adapting to the whole economic world, the market and according to the abilities of the market. And the free‐trade can be developed by themselves in the premise of following the law or others. All the features of the economy are to bring benefits to the citizens. Only by doing so can the economy system supported by the consumers, which ensures the economy of a thriving and prosperous prospect. The consumers are to the economy what the water is to the boat. Only when there is water can the ship float and bring its effect into full play. So what we are forced on is how to give merits to the consumers. We can not deny that greed can lead to an immense bonus. But as you may know, as soon as a thing reaches its extremity, it reverses its course, which Lao‐tzu, a famous philosopher in Chinese history, argued, just like the diagram of the universe. Then to make the greed bring advantages to us, we can limit the companies by laws, in other words, we should make the economy function under a legal system. Then, the government and the market curb and promote each other.
The crisis today seems to have touched many countries around the world, it would far from be healed from it was several month ago. I don’t really know when it will come to an end, but as far as it seems, there is still times we need to go through. I don’t really have the confidence if the main countries continue run a policy of free‐trade. Unless they figure out the point that they have to give up in this mistake in order to put them in a better situation. That is the key point which I think to finish this crisis. In conclusion, we have to focus our eyes on the whole not just the margin that the few people gain. I state that we ought to welcome both the free‐market and the planned economy in order to modify the old economy.
Nada High School
Free‐market capitalism, as defined by the Longman Dictionary, 4th Edition, is “an economic system in which prices are not controlled by the government”. This means people are allowed to pursue profit freely and constantly, and also means prices for
25
services and economic growth is dependent on individual and independent willingness to participate in the economical society. This is why capitalism is heavily based on human behaviour. And the most important of them is the concept of greed. Greed is the feeling that makes one want to strive for more; in this case, wealth. This creates competition between two or more parties in society, which leads to even more greed and competition, stimulating the economy. What is important here when it comes to free‐market capitalism is the fact that even if one satisfies ones greed by gaining a certain material, it only creates a foundation for more greed and hunger. Thus, greed is constant appears in human behaviour again and again. For example, if we take the economic model, one is a part of the economy through earning and spending money. Even if we earn money and spend it on something, this just means the necessity to buy more, whether it is for living requirements or enjoyment. This is what moves the free‐market economy, and is also what became the issue in the financial crisis for 2008‐9.
As land prices went up, banks started to lend money to people who would otherwise be considered dangerous to lend to, whether it was because the person had a criminal record or because they had a bankruptcy history. This is due to the fact that, in the case a client were not able to return the money, the banks were able to sell the mortgaged properties for a price that would still allow the bank to have a profit from the transaction. Also, as a consequence of the risks, interest prices were extremely high and this system became very popular for many banks in America. Investors saw opportunities in these banks, and bought large packets of numerous mortgages as investment. This was backed by the many rating agencies who gave credit ratings that were, in normal cases, seen as being safe to invest in. As more and more people borrowed, insurance companies started to introduce plans that set a monthly fee which a client could pay, insuring them that in the case they could not return the moneys borrowed, they would be insured. At the same time, hedge funds invested greatly on investment banks like Lehman Brothers, and many people including experts thought that this complex intertwine of many corporations and parties was almost invincible and ideal. The problem occurred when the amount of properties owned by banks all over America started to go beyond the consumer demand and property prices started going down. As prices started going down, more and more banks started to panic, as people who borrowed money started ditching the deals, fearing the decrease of property values. This downward spiral led to many banks collapsing, as well as many hedge funds and insurance companies, and finally, investment bank giant Lehman Brothers went bust and shocked the world in 2008. It is nearly impossible to point to one person or party to blame for the situation, but the fact that the human behaviour of greed, as well as fear was a large factor that influenced the economic system into collapse cannot be denied. Greed for more and more money led to risky transactions by banks and individuals to an extent that shook the glass too heavily. Thus, it is possible to say that the basic principles of a free‐market capitalist economy collapsed on itself. One can say that the reason for the crash was because regulators were not watching the movements of banks carefully enough, or that rating agencies gave false information to banks and investors, but an absolute blame cannot be placed on anyone. Greed for more money by banks and borrowers, and also fear of potential loss, i.e. greed, is what shook the financial structure.
26
But does this mean greed is a bad thing? As repeatedly said, greed is a major principle in the growth and movement of a capitalist economic model, and criticising such a fundamental basis is just simplifying the issue. It is also simplifying the issue to blame one party for the issue. Experts and influential economists such as Greenspan, as well as rating agencies did not expect a situation of such scale and it is ex post facto reasoning to blame sudden events like the financial shock of 2008‐9 on their forecasts. What though, must be done, is clear analysis of past situations such as this, so preventive measures and efforts to sustain damages to a minimum may be taken in the future. For example, many experts believe that the financial crisis of 2008‐9 may have been of smaller scale if corporations and economists had carefully analysed the human behaviour in similar cases such as the bubble burst in the 1990s in Japan. Human behaviour cannot be calculated using mathematics or economic principles and only by inspection of past cases can we predict to an appropriate extent the damages and effects of a financial crisis as the one of 2008‐9. I believe that the capitalist model has brought much good to the society, as seen in the golden ages of capitalism in the 1970s, as well as the defeat of the socialist, communist models of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. Historical events have shown through the ages that capitalism is the most ideal economic model that is available today. Gaps may widen between the poor and rich, and the value of a human may be heavily unequal, but it has proven to survive the ages of time and create leading countries. One day, a novel idea may arise that proves itself superior to the capitalist model of today, but as of now, what the economy can provide as a possible solution against the world is, sadly, not much. Governments must analyse mistakes and causes of previous financial crises and take precautionary restrictions or changes where necessary, such as the strengthening of the regulating system, but at the same time make sure that there is enough freedom for greed, as well as fear to exist. And this, I believe is the main reason the doctrine of moral hazard and such is necessary and inevitably important in keeping a capitalist economic model healthy and hopeful for the future. Free‐market capitalism works, because it sometimes doesn't, and criticising it for crises like this one is not the way of solving the economic problems, but instead, running away from the truth and just gathering together capitalism as a whole and blaming the entire model is a negative approach to problem‐solving in today's standards.
Montgomery Bell Academy
The global financial crisis of 2008 and 2009 is just that: a crisis of finance. Flaws in the global financial structure caused the downturn. Capitalism is still the best economic system available. The financial crisis is a byproduct of capitalism only in the sense that finance is a byproduct of capitalism. Ultimately, faulty financial institutions in the U.S. and around the world doomed the global economy; despite its flaws, the capitalist system remains the only economic engine available to get the world out of the recession.
27
Before Adam Smith coined the term capitalism in On The Wealth of Nations, global financial structures were causing problems. In the 1630’s, a bubble inflated in the Netherlands that ultimately popped in 1637. Called the “Dutch Tulip Bubble,” it foreshadowed the inflation of similar bubbles up to the present day. From the early 18th century bubbles in France and England to the dotcom bubble at the turn of this century, bubbles in every sector of the economy have been inflated, burst, and oftentimes pulled the rest of the economy down with them. This cycle is often a vicious one: one of the primary causes of the housing bubble that began this financial crisis was interest rate cuts in response to the dotcom bubble. Since bubbles are hard to predict, track, or fix, it is more helpful to look at the system that allows bubbles to occur. As Froeb and McCann note, “Bubbles are, by definition, prices that cannot be explained by normal economic forces… it is clear that once started, expectations about the future play a role in keeping bubbles going.” (Froeb and McCann, 143). Speculation about future price increases is at the core of what little economists know about why bubbles occur (Froeb and McCann, 143). This speculating tendency in financial markets and banks resulted in the famous Keynesian casino analogy and explains much, if not all, of the current financial crisis. The current crisis resulted stems from two sources: the housing bubble and the overextension of credit in the financial sector. The housing bubble occurred as a result of government policies, like those of the Clinton Administration in the U.S., which encouraged lower income homeowners to buy houses by reducing borrowing qualifications from government entities like Fannie Mae (Froeb and McCann, 144). Logically, this program led to a dramatic increase in demand for homes and, as a result, home ownership overall. Prices increased dramatically and continued to do so until the bubble began to burst in 2006. Banks lent at very favorable rates, especially considering the low‐income nature of many of the applicants. As Froeb and McCain explain, “Mortgage lending was thought to be safe because if the borrower defaulted, the house could be sold for more than the amount of the loan.” (Froeb and McCann, 145). The housing bubble reveals a deadly tendency among financial institutions to overextend credit and bet incorrectly that a loan is safe. While the burst housing bubble partly explains the current crisis, the credit overextension that it reveals is at the core of the crisis. The casino nature of financial giants like A.I.G. and Bear Sterns, in this crisis, caused the downfall in a broader sense through a serious overextension of credit and faulty speculation, among other things. Bankers and other members of the financial industry were crucial in creating an environment that encouraged faulty speculation and ultimately led to the crisis. Credit rating agencies also played a vital role in the foundation of the crisis; although their job was to properly rate the credit of banks, profit motive and a conflict of interest between the two prevented the credit rating agencies from doing so accurately. This inaccuracy caused a false hope in the credit of many banks. Inaccuracy also spreads into the fields of accounting and law, as both fields allowed banks to “window dress” or “cook the books”, also instilling false confidence in the strength of the banks. The canary in the coal mine, as it were, was the country of Iceland. Three privatized Icelandic banks entered the investment banking world just after 9/11 and the dotcom bubble. Increased borrowing and deposits from other countries, as well as a domestic consumption binge as a result of the rapidly growing economy, made Iceland the fastest growing economy in the world in 2003 (Froeb and McCann, 137). But because the deposits in Iceland’s banks were greater than the entire national income of Iceland itself, depositors began to rush to withdraw their money; this run on the banks heavily
28
depreciated the value of the Icelandic krona, caused prices to soar, and culminated in 2008, with the International Monetary Fund running a broke Iceland (Froeb and McCann, 138). While the Icelandic example is extreme, it does reveal that the flaw in the system, and the result of the global crash was the nature of the financial system itself: by encouraging a short‐term focus at the expense of long term goals, the financial sector caused a massive overextension of credit that culminated in the entire sector “bursting” in 2008. Because of such failures in the financial sector, the solution must be increased regulation of the market. Oversight is a good first step, but only government spending can really get money moving again. While the worst seems to have been weathered, the size of output gaps internationally poses the threat of a double recession. Current stabilization has been caused primarily by rises in inventories. Unless liquidity returns, another recession looms. Nationals must ignore balanced budgets and deficit spend. The amount of interest on government debt, even the massive U.S. debt, seems manageable. Even countries under stress from the burden of debt would benefit from a short‐term increase in liquidity. Current austerity measures repeat the failures of policy that were prevalent in the IMF’s resolution of the East Asian financial crisis of 1997. Spending now will be necessary for nations to overcome their long‐term debt burdens. Absent government injection of capital, the markets will be under‐producing and tax revenues will collapse, resulting in greater difficulty managing the system. The current crisis implicates the risk‐taking tendencies of our financial sector, but does little to implicate free market capitalism itself. As Fareed Zakaria points out, “[capitalism] is the worst of all economic systems, except for the others.” Throughout the crisis, the sectors hardest hit were finance and anything finance related. Major U.S. companies from Microsoft to Nike, using smart business models and conservative techniques, are still as profitable as before, relatively speaking. (Zakaria). While increased regulatory approaches, like de‐incentivizing reckless risk‐taking and preventing leveraging large banks are sensible, those approaches only implicate the financial sector (Zakaria). Capitalism weathers crises and emerges stronger and more resilient. 30 years of growth followed the Great Depression; 20, the stock‐market crash of 1987. The same East Asian emerging markets that collapsed in 1997 are now crucial to world economic growth. Indeed, slow growth encourages countries to turn again to capitalism, because it is an empirical growth machine. The current crisis instills doubt about our current economic system. And well it should. But with no proven alternative, countries have little choice but to expand markets and horizons under capitalism. That great challenger known as communism is now all but dead, with its two former stalwarts now key components of the famed BRIC capitalist countries. Although there are some notable exceptions to the capitalist rule, many of these countries, most prominently China, are only nominally non‐capitalist and exhibit many characteristics of a capitalist country. The other two BRICs – Brazil and India – are growing economically by expanding the reach of the market, especially into the slums, and lifting people out of poverty. Indeed, to weather this crisis, countries will have to expand markets and increase globalization. Many have argued that the primary reason this crisis did not escalate into another Great Depression was because of the globalized capitalist system we enjoy today. Primarily because our financial institutions are flawed, expanding the reach of the market and globalization are crucial to rescue us from the depths of the current crisis and reinvigorate growth. Zakaria sums it up
29
nicely: “The simple truth is that with all its flaws, capitalism remains the most productive economic engine we have yet invented.”
30
Environment PreSymposium The participants looked at environmental issues in late 2009, in the run‐up to the Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change (COP15). Online discussion focused on global warming and other environmental challenges, and on the nature of international cooperation in dealing with them. The outcome of the COP15 debates was itself instructive and part of a wider discussion about global cooperation. This would resonate throughout the Symposium discussions, and would be of immediate and instructive relevance when the students came together to draft the Symposium Accord. The students prepared essays on the importance of the environment and climate change, the precautionary principle, and the nature of international cooperation to solve questions of global significance.
Symposium Guest Speaker: Mr Pavan Sukhdev
Mr Pavan Sukhdev brought his great experience as a banker and subsequently an environmental economist to illuminate many of the current problems facing the world as we try to manage natural resources effectively. Following on from the first day’s discussion of economics, he opened the students’ eyes to the problem of pricing the scarce resource of the environment; he drew the distinction between public and private wealth, allowing us to see how the lack of proper pricing of the former led to socially inefficient decision‐making. Rather than look at the increasingly contentious issue of future climate change, Mr Sukhdev asked us all to consider what was demonstrably happening to the world around us. He categorized major environmental problems in terms of freshwater, fisheries, and forests; food, fuel and finance. By comparing countries’ ecological footprint with global biocapacity, he drew attention to the very real unsustainability of current behaviour. Government subsidies on food and fuel use were contributory factors to inefficient resource allocation. Mr Sukhdev moved on to examine how far solutions to these environmental challenges did in fact exist and were, in fact, being developed. Microfinance schemes in Bangladesh, Costa Rica’s Payment for Environmental Services plan, China’s
31
development of solar heaters and the technological improvements driving them; all these provide ways in which environmental degradation can be addressed. The nature of national and international solutions was considered. The core of the Symposium Challenge was addressed in the very interconnectedness of economics, politics, and the environment. He enjoined the students to address the very real difficulty of reconciling economic development with environmental responsibility. Mr Sukhdev engaged the Symposium participants in a debate as to the most pressing problem facing the individual countries, and the extent to which it could be solved by government action or in some other way. The vast majority of the students felt that fuel issues were of particular concern to their nations, with remedies revolving around governmental and educational reform. Following student discussions in the afternoon, facilitated by Mr Kevin Li and Mr Yuen Kah Mun, presentations on the redrafted essay titles below were given in School by Montgomery Bell Academy and Karachi Grammar School.
32
Compare the importance of your country’s most pressing current environmental problem to the issue of climate change.
How important is international cooperation compared to individual country action in solving these problems?
Winchester College As the UN Climate Change Conference (COP15) in Copenhagen has shown, the issue of climate change is highly divisive. At one end of the spectrum, environmentalists claim that the ecological and climatic disasters portrayed in films such as The Day After Tomorrow are much closer to reality than humanity would like to admit; at the other, sceptics declare that climate change is not anthropogenic, and that dangerous climatic fundamentalism seems to pervade society as a whole. The issue is further complicated by other, more local environmental issues; should nations focus on solving their own problems of pollution and fuel shortages before addressing a seemingly more tenuous problem? At COP15, there was no general consensus as to what action should be taken: most MEDCs such as the UK pushed for change, whilst most LEDCs were resistant to any agreement which they believed could limit their future development. Five nations (the USA, Brazil, China, India, and South Africa) drafted the Copenhagen Accord, a document acknowledging the severity of climate change and declaring that temperature increases should be limited to no more than 2°C; despite this, the agreement is not legally binding, and so states can ignore it at will. To an outside observer, this divergence of beliefs might seem non‐sensical; after all, the documentation of environmental change should lie in the supposedly reliable realm of science. However, as the accusations of fixed evidence originating from hacked emails between scientists working at the UEA Climate Change Unit demonstrated, this debate has moved into the realm of politics. What all spectators do agree on is that the path chosen by governments around the world will have far‐reaching consequences. Perhaps the most important issue that needs to be examined is the evidence for climate change; truth can either dispel or vindicate the sceptic, and evaluating the danger will inform us as to what problems we should act upon. British Meteorological Office figures for global temperature suggest that over the last 90 years the average measurement of this has increased by 1°C. On a longer time span of 800,000 years the global average temperature today is slightly above centre; fluctuation between glacials and interglacials in this period has seen highs of 4°C above today’s figure and lows of 10°C below it. Sceptics argue that the warming observed over the last hundred years could be entirely natural, as in the period described above changes of similar magnitude and greater have occurred. This interpretation of the evidence is seemingly brought into disrepute when the rate of change of temperature is considered. The greatest change in temperature during any 1,000 year interval in our 800,000 year period was 2.77°C; this demonstrates that the warming observed in the last one hundred years is beyond the natural. The evidence seems to assert that global warming really is caused by human agency.
33
It is valid to ask whether a rise in temperature actually matters; after all, the average global temperature 70 million years ago was almost 15°C higher than that of today, and yet life was thriving (at least until the mass extinction that occurred at the end of the Cretaceous period). The sceptic asserts that life can, and will, adapt. There are two main flaws in this reasoning. Firstly, humanity relies upon nature in its current and specific state. In this form of nature, biodiversity and certain ecosystems perform key functions. However, both of these are highly vulnerable to external change; rising temperatures are enough to have a major impact. Secondly, it is a possibility that life will not be able to adapt as a result of the speed of the temperature change elaborated on in the previous paragraph. Evolution can be remarkable swift, but it does have limits. In short, changing global temperatures do matter. Having concluded this, the next obvious problem is concerned with the mechanism by which humans are causing a temperature rise. The most common explanation is that of greenhouse gases: increasing levels of certain substances in the atmosphere (most notably carbon dioxide and methane) lead to more heat from the sun being trapped inside this layer and hence rising surface temperatures. Data from ice cores shows that for the last 800,000 years, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has remained below 300ppm. However, in recent times this figure has indeed jumped up to 375ppm: it is almost irrefutable that this rise has been caused by human sources associated with the industrialisation of the last two hundred years. The controversy appears when explanations for how greenhouse gases trap heat are put forward. Sceptics maintain that there is either no relationship between the two, or that rising temperatures cause the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to rise. Both positions are in sharp contrast with that of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change, who concluded that there is a ninety percent likelihood that the warming seen in the latter half of the twentieth century is caused by such emissions. The first sceptical position is discredited by the ice cores: there is a remarkable correlation between carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere at the temperature at that time. The second is harder to falsify, but the fact that no explanation has been given for the process it describes suggests that the sceptical position has failed to match the evidence again. Some environmentalists argue that we should act to prevent climate change even if the evidence for it is not beyond reasonable doubt. The reasoning behind this states that the possible consequences of run‐away warming are so terrible that we are justified in taking precautions; viz. the precautionary principle. As a general rule, how sensibly this concept can be applied does depend on the severity of future outcomes, but also their likelihood. For example, refusing to walk into a darkened room on the off‐chance a murderous psychopath is inside should be regarded as paranoid, not logical. This is evidently an extreme situation, but it illustrates how the principle should be used. In the case of global warming, the evidence suggests that is very likely that global warming is anthropomorphic, and hence use of the precautionary principle is rational. It is therefore clear that climatic change is an extremely important point of discussion; however, some might argue that in the context of the U.K. we should focus on our own national environmental issues before we consider dealing with global matters. One of the biggest problems that the U.K. faces at this current time is that of energy production: much of our power is generated by either nuclear or coal power stations, many of which will be phased out by 2016. The threat of blackouts around the country is a frightening but realistic prospect. Rectifying this is vital for the ultimate prosperity
34
of our economy and as such we should focus on finding solutions. The most effective method of doing this comes from technological research and so the government must invest in this sector. Perhaps more fundamentally, the U.K. government needs to construct a new educational policy through which future generations can build a new mindset concerning a more considerate view of the environment. Nevertheless, whilst the individual problems of the U.K. must be dealt with, we must not disregard the implications of global warming, as taking such a nationalistic viewpoint would be detrimental to international cooperation. A further, more general question is raised: to what extent should states focus on their own problems instead of utilising a multilateral effort? On one level, it is true that nature transcends national borders, and that the efforts of one nation are futile if the country continues to merrily pollute and destroy. For example, it is common for rivers to pass through multiple states, and in an age where freshwater is becoming an increasing valuable resource, communication between these nations is required to prevent undesirable conflicts. However, passing universal laws and constraints would be inefficient, as the problems faced by LEDCs are entirely different to those of MEDCs, and what is necessary in one place would be a detrimental use of funds in another. Perhaps the best resolution of this dialectic is found by signing international agreements which enforce the necessity of some action, albeit with its content determined by examining these issues on a case‐by‐case basis. The human race is undoubtedly affecting the natural environment in many ways: pollution, the destruction of the rainforest and other habitats, high rates of extinction, the removal of biodiversity and many others beside. Despite the power of human influence today, we are dependent upon nature still; if we want to live in a clean and healthy world, the way in which we act must change. Essential to this is a balance between global cohesion and consideration for the individual needs of states: the latter to most effectively solve problems, and the former to ensure that tangible change does occur. Even in the presence of Barack Obama, a ‘hallowed’ figure whose election was meant to bring an end to many American (and global) problems, COP15 failed to deliver a defined target. This must not be accepted lightly; both our climate and environment are vital to us, and our inaction will ruin them.
Johannes Kepler School Together with fresh news from Copenhagen, new climatic reports, predictions and scenarios emerge daily in the media. They are warnings ‐ the atmosphere's temperature is rising and we must do something about it before it is too late. On the other side, there is a considerable amount of climate change scepticism. The warnings are exaggerated, the scenarios are extreme, the reports and predictions lie. The rise in temperature is either falsified or natural and all the proposed actions are just economically and politically motivated. Although serious concern about climate change prevails among political leaders, the two stances are both present – and they are both becoming extreme in their interaction and mutual disdain. And when at times they are not, the media just do not care. They
35
do not care about listening and understanding; what they sell are flaming speeches, scandalous opinions and previously unrealized threats. Of course, each of the sides supports its stance by a set of scientifically proven facts. These prove that the other side is wrong. They are gathered and interpreted by experts. They are right. Then, a man who is not really an expert and has not devoted all his life to climatological research, what is he supposed to think? Actually, he's not supposed to think at all, and neither is a woman of similar knowledge. They are supposed to do one thing, though – they are supposed to choose. People – TV viewers, newspaper readers, citizens, electors – are not considered qualified to think on their own. They are only qualified to choose one of the all‐knowing political leaders, which is what they do by emotions rather than reason. They identify with the particular personality and its extreme stance as they live in a world that's too complex for them to understand, yet too dangerous to to live in without understanding it. Thus, much like children trusting their all‐knowing parents, people have no choice but to trust their leaders. Much unlike children trusting their parents, people can't reach their leaders and ask them for explanation. They are provided with speeches, with books at best. Books can provide much more information on the particular stance and on the means of its justification. Books can provide information; however, they cannot provide answers, for they cannot listen to questions. A book will never change its choice of words, it will never fill in any missing details, it will never explain in another way anything that is unclear. Nevertheless, any misunderstanding appears to be the readers fault; any lack of answers, any need for explanation seems satisfiable by the author – who just is not present at the moment, but who is still known to be all‐knowing. This is a general problem of literacy, books and of the abundance of depersonalised knowledge that the world (especially the developed part of it) is suffering. What makes it especially severe in this instance is the inability of the literal as well as of the mass‐media presentation of any leader and any stance to climate change to provide the one answer that is definitely right and sincere – the one answer that both of the sides can share, the one answer that is comprehensible to all, the one answer that is certain to get from an ordinary man if he's inquired about climate change: “I don't know.” We can't be absolutely sure if there's a climate change. We do not know for sure what it is caused by and we cannot take any steps that were guaranteed to reverse the process. We do not know what effects these could produce themselves in the next hundred years as we did not know that freons would harm the ozone layer when we started using them and as in the 19. century, we did not know that industrialization would eventually lead to global warming. Besides the limited power of scientific measuring, we just can't ever see the full impact of our actions. Yet, we must act and we must take full responsibility. This is not to be regarded as some existentialistic theorization, though; it is not to be mistaken for some intellectual lifestyle; limited knowledge and the inevitable responsibility of mankind is part of everyday reality. Although our knowledge is limited, we have information at our disposal that is more or less reliable. The fact is, our lives rely on it every day. Scientific knowledge can help us.
36
In the end, science is a powerful tool – it is the best tool we have and we are entitled to use it after due consideration. We must consider and respect the limits of our knowledge. Humility must become a prerequisite for taking part in the debate. Then, we must consider positive and negative aspects of both proposed alternatives – to deal with global warning or not to deal with it – and compare them. Is there anything that climate scepticism offers besides well‐being and economic growth? Hasn't the recent economic crisis shown that these can be lost overnight? Inventing green technology, on the contrary, creates durable value as well as the reduction of any effects of human civilization on nature in general. Even if the sceptics were right and there was no climate change, the very experience of dealing with it would be worth the few percent of economic growth lost. Of course, the countermeasures will only be any use if a global consensus is achieved. But disputes about particular countries sabotaging the treaty take away responsibility from those who must take it in the first place – from the ordinary people. Both political responsibility for the actions our leaders take and the metaphysical responsibility for all creation – or a cultural equivalent of its – is to be taken by everyone. The care about climate has to enter everyone's personal conscience. Therefore, they can't delegate it to any leader who seems to possess the truth – everyone must face the unknowingness all men have in common. We need to start from the human behaviour and their opinions on the global issues. Knowledge is very important for achieving goals in the future. And the knowledge of each country is necessary for negotiating among countries. We can achieve much better solutions if the countries cooperate and if they set some basic rules to follow. Therefore we must not separate the international cooperation from the actions taken inside each country, because it would less the whole result. Each country has to solve its own problems, but they have to abide by the basic rules set on the basis of the international consensus. Although it is the best to cooperate, it is not as important as measures taken by each country to mitigate the consequences of its environmental problems. It is better to solve your own problems and do not cooperate than to cooperate on the international scale without any real results in each country. We should not separate the international cooperation from actions by each country. Some countries are morally so developed that they do not need any cooperation and are capable of solving their own problems without any treaty with other countries. But other countries do not care and they change their behaviour only under peer pressure. If the world cooperates, we could achieve the goal to improve the global environment and that is important. We cannot improve the global environment without the cooperation. Before the actual events occurred in Czechoslovakia that are together referred to as the Velvet Revolution, there had been several minor protests in the north of the country. These were driven by people’s discontentment about the state of the environment, as forests had died due to air pollution, the air had been polluted by power plants burning brown coal, brown coal had been mined in extensive surface mines devastating the landscape.
37
It is reasonable to take the environment’s state for one of the sources of the force that caused the communist regime to fall in Czechoslovakia in 1989. It was indeed the communist government’s economic policy that approved of mass destruction of north Bohemia’s landscape. After the Velvet Revolution, limits were applied to coal mining and projects were started to heal the damaged landscape. Nevertheless, the dead forests in the mountains and the ‘moon landscape’ shaped by surface mines have served as a memento ever since. They have been providing environmental damage with a public image which is straightforward, strong and touching ‐ each citizen of the Czech Republic can still go and see the effects of irresponsible energy production. The scary image of north Bohemia’s coal mines have managed to provide sufficient public support for politicians to prevent further destruction. In recent years, unfortunately, people have seemed to have forgotten about the image. Indeed, it does not appear frequently on TV, it is neglected by the newspapers. That is perhaps why politicians have come up with an idea to break the limits and extend the mining operations again, in favour of the mining companies, surprisingly. As long as there is a recognizable image in the media, there is public willingness to take action. Global warming must finally get a public image. Photos of the Arctic melting are not enough – who can tell the difference between ice and less ice? Simulations of the Golf stream stopping are too theoretical – what does red‐ and blue‐ coloured Earth mean to its inhabitants? In order to make people act, the idea of fighting global warming must get a public image – a martyr’s icon, perhaps. Perhaps we need to wait for the Dutchmen to drown. Perhaps we need catastrophic scenarios to come true, we need real events which would outdo the catastrophic movies. Do we? Showing particular impacts of global warming which touch the people may be actually better than sticking to the media which are always detached from people’s everyday lives. We need a way of showing people Global warming in the flesh. Karachi Grammar School With Artic ice caps melting, and sea levels rising climate isn’t some vague future problem that we can choose to ignore, the pace of its devastating impact on the planet is alarming. While false hopes prevail about Global Warming being an overrated problem the facts still point to it being very threatening for our biosphere. In December 2005, researchers associated with Britains National Oceanography Center reported that one component of the system that drives the Gulf Stream has slowed about 30% since 1957. This is contributed to the increased release of Arctic and Greenland meltwater which introduces a gush of freshwater that’s overwhelming the natural cycle of our Earth. Ian Plimer an Australian geologist seems to have strong reservations about the Global Warming issue that has taken the world by stride. Though Plimer does present a different perspective, his outlook comes across as somewhat limited. The arguments he presents do arouse suspicions about his real intentions as we feel that he has vested
38
interests in making the world regard global warming as an exaggerated problem. This is because Plimer himself is the director of three Australian mining companies: Ivanhoe, CBH Resources and Kefi minerals and his attack against the reality of this environmental issue is provoked by his unwillingness to pay the carbon emissions tax imposed on all mining companies. It is also hard not to notice the alarming lack of factual references and the abundant attacks against” carbon taxes” in his interview. “ The very last thing the Australian government needs is the cap and trade legislation” Though Plimer claims the carbon dioxide in the environment due to man is only “0.001%” what he fails to mention is that if the North Pole is seasonally ice free by 2050, not only will melting permafrost release vast amounts of trapped carbon into the air but according to latest research by Time Magazine: ‘This ice reflects nearly all the suns energy that hits it. As the planets ice melts more of that energy is absorbed by the earth which further raises the temperature’ which in turn contributes adversely to our environment.’ Al Gore has brought Capitol Hill the same urgent message about climate change that he has brought to us filmgoers: “We do not have time to play around with this”. Due to the vivid presentation of facts in ‘The Inconvenient Truth’ it is hard to give much weight to Plimer’s weak standoff against ‘Global Warming’. It is imprudent to try to convince ourselves that the world is not actually at the brink of a global catastrophe. We need to acknowledge the fact that our feverish planet badly needs a cure. Global Warming has been caused by a lot of things, and it will take a lot of things to fix it but there is an important role that needs to be played by the intellectuals, the politicians, the scientists, the affluent, the influential, the wealthy‐and the rest of us. We need to fight this fight while we can still fight it, we owe that much to our planet. As Time Magazine says: ‘We need to be worried, we need to be very worried’ A world government needs to be formed to tackle this problem. A “global” problem, needs a “global” solution. After the Montreal Protocol was signed, world CFC’S were banned, and the hole in the ozone became much smaller, as it started to reform itself. Chain reactions by CFC’s were stopped. This emphasizes that when the world came together to solve a problem so grave, such as global warming, the progress was exponential. Even if making this change is easier than overhauling industries, it is the principle of course that counts‐ the only way change was actually influenced was through global cooperation‐ a handful of countries would not be able to reform the ozone. It is true that developed nations are the highest polluters, but developing nations have the greatest to lose because women In these countries work on fields etc. that will be flooded 50 years from now. This requires that the whole world come together. Serious steps towards protecting the environment must be taken, for today if we continue to deplete resources, and burn fossil fuels at an accelerated rate, tomorrow when we see such drastic changes in the environment that cannot sustain our lifestyles, what good will any of this economic development be? What good will the wars we spend billions of dollars on be worth, is there is no world? There needs to be a rapid reallocation on resources to the environment.
39
The Copenhagen Summit massively increased Public awareness. The vast campaigns run around the world in the run‐up to Copenhagen by governments, NGOs and business and the media coverage of the issue and the summit have made addressing climate change widely understood.Countries from both developed and developing worlds have announced low‐carbon economic plans and are moving forward‐ people are “ GOING GREEN” In terms of success the combination of political will, economic direction and public pressure was not enough to overcome the concerns over sovereignty that many countries have in the context of international law. The final decision reflects the fact that many countries only want to be answerable to themselves. They will co‐operate, but not under the threat of legal sanction. The United States congress was once again successful in proving that it has incredible power, and good diplomacy by Jonathon Pershing and Lisa Jackson ensured that the U.S. government does not fall into another Kyoto (the U.S. Congress refused to ratify the Kyoto protocol in 1997 largely because it did not set binding emissions targets on developing countries). It is important for the world at this stage to realize that the climate issue is not a personal one rather it is a global one. Hence, concepts of individualism have to be put aside and a collective consensus has to be reached. The U.S. government came to the forum offering amounts to less than a 4% emission reduction, a domestic strategy of only recognizing that the greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat and financial support of $ 10 billion a year (note that almost $ 1 trillion have been spent by the U.S. government to protect financial institutions from the financial crisis). Mr. Lumumba Di‐Aping of Sudan, the head of the 135‐nation bloc of developing countries at the summit said: “If this is the greatest risk humanity faces, then how do you explain $ 10 billion?” he said, “Ten billion will not buy developing countries’ citizens enough coffins.” Moreover, the measures taken by the U.S. government look pale in front of the measures taken by other developed countries. For example, the European Union has proposed to cut their emissions by 20% by the year 2020 and France recently proposed a Climate Justice Fund of US$ 60 billion per year for the next 10 years. It was clear that the U.S. delegation felt that the U.S. has already done enough and now it is time for other countries to put something on the table. Pershing highlighted that the “responsibility” does not end at the U.S. border and also spoke about the assets of other countries like India’s methane bio‐digester technology, Brazil’s bio‐fuel technology and China’s trillions of U.S. debt. Undoubtedly, one of the main challenges faced by the Copenhagen summit was to bridge the gap between the “demands of the developing countries” and the “demands of the developed countries.” As the current world super power, the U.S. cannot hide behind paltry emissions reductions and laughable domestic programs. It is important that the U.S. congress (and the powerful fossil fuel industry that controls it) realizes that the U.S. has a responsibility to provide leadership on climate change. I believe it should step forward and adopt a more generous attitude towards this global issue as the clock is ticking
40
The world needs to put aside, vested interests and personal country agendas‐ for if this continues, the question will remain, “ What world?” The former President of Pakistan, Pervaiz Musharraf, while talking to the media said: “Pakistan is a nation in a hurry”. This statement sums up the main problem Pakistan faces at the moment which dealing with the dilemma of opportunity cost. Pakistan is not a very resourceful country which is exactly why our leaders have reaching a consensus when they draft their cost‐benefit analysis as all issues cannot be addressed together. For instance, Pakistan is in a state of war at the moment with the “tehrik‐e‐taliban”. A huge amount of money is being wasted on this war which could have been allocated to dealing with environmental concerns.
The most important environmental problem Pakistan faces is the uncontrolled release of pesticides in fresh water bodies which contaminate water and cause deaths due to cholera and dysentery. On a second level, this contaminated water drains into the Karachi Coast, abundant in Mangroves, and clogs their roots. Thus using pesticides triggers of a chain reaction that results in the halt of shrimp and fish production‐that further causes fish farmers to lose their jobs, and many people to lose their source of food. Fishermen notoriously explode dynamite in seas to kill a huge amount of fish, to increase their catch‐However, do not realize the wider implications of such hazardous actions. Fish are often tainted with lead and other chemicals. Consumers, often suffer from lead poisoning.
Pakistan has not been affected by global warming just yet. The problems we face are severe and often lethal, hence global warming is not really given much importance. This of course does not doubt the importance of global warming. However, we believe that the general public of Pakistan should be made more aware of this looming threat and should be made to realize the extent of this pending global calamity. This can only be achieved if the government acts in a more responsible manner and regulates the interaction between private sector motives and global warming threats in a better and healthier way.
Raffles Institution These are hard times for climate change sceptics. In a recent World Bank poll, the majority of all 15 countries surveyed agreed that climate change is a very serious problem, while 51% believe that scientific evidence for climate change is enough to take action. This growing consensus for action against climate change was evident in the recently concluded COP‐15 (though consensus for coordinated action is yet another matter).[1]
The precautionary principle
41
In debates regarding climate change, the precautionary principle is frequently mentioned as justification for action against climate change. It states that in the case of a threat to public health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause‐and‐effect relations have not been scientifically established. To ensure that the principle does not actually result in greater harm than what was avoided, possible side‐effects of the precautions and criteria to evaluate the potential threats (e.g. irreversibility) should be considered.[2] However, a logical analysis of the precautionary principle induces doubt regarding its soundness. Below is its typical argument form regarding climate change in premise‐conclusion form:
Though this argument form is valid, the argument is unsound because premise 3 is false, due to the use of the word “may”. As a counter‐example, assuming premise 3 is true, it would imply that it is justified to prevent the consumption of water, because it may cause death from asphyxiation, which is also serious, irreversible, and threatening to the human race because it is fatal. Thus, the precautionary principle’s argument is unsound, and hence illogical. The principle’s premises for taking precautions against climate change (or anything else) are based on a fear of serious consequences that may arise, but embedded in the principle itself is the exemption for the need of solidly established cause‐and‐effect relations between action and consequence. However, these very relations are crucial in ensuring that the fear is rational and not merely imagined. Hence, the precautionary principle does not justify action against climate change. The logic of climate change: justifying action
Nevertheless, lack of soundness does not mean that an arguments conclusion is necessarily false. Taking action against climate change is logical even though the principle is not because of three reasons. First, the precautionary principle is only one of many justifications for action against climate change. Sustainable development and long‐term economic benefit are powerful reasons as well, and often they come hand in hand. For example, increasing energy efficiency also means reducing the electricity bill. Jeffrey Swartz, CEO of Timberland, says, “we changed the lights to LEDs and reduced our energy consumption by 80 percent and paid the [costs of the] project back in less than 18 months.” Furthermore, times of economic difficulty also encourage environmental thriftiness. “Here's a chance for every rational CFO to look down his or her list and find 10 or 12 different ways to reduce costs and improve the environment.”[3] The Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies’ December study also showed that half of Americans surveyed
Premise 1
• The worst possible result that climate changemay cause is severe environmental destruction.
Premise 2
• Severe environmental destruction is extremely devastating, serious, irreversible, and threatening to the survival of the human race.
Premise 3
• We are justified in taking action to prevent anything that may cause something which is extremely devastating, serious, irreversible, and threatening to the survival of the human race.
Conclusion• Hence, we are justified in taking action to stop climate change.
42
would be willing to pay 15% more for a more environmentally‐friendly car and clothes detergent, implying sustainable commercial practices may significantly attract customers as well. Of course, the survey also showed that other factors also play a more significant role in choice of products such as price and quality. [4] Second, exact or complete scientific certainty regarding the consequences of climate change is difficult due to the variable nature of calculating them. Take for example the prediction of climate change’s damage costs. Nearly all cost studies expect damages to arrive only till 2075. In order to calculate for future costs, a financial instrument, the discount rate, is employed, giving a present value to future payments. The current interest rate is usually used as the discount rate, but the problem is that the interest rate rarely stays constant. Furthermore, at a long time‐span of 200 years, estimates can vary dramatically with only tiny tweaks to the discount rate. While economist Nicholas Stern (head of the stern review) predicts the price of climate change could reach 20% of per capita income, Yale economist, William Nordhaus, predicts it at only 2.5% of yearly global GDP. When predictions can vary so drastically, calling for complete scientific certainty before taking action seems unwise.[5] Third, there is already “a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change”, that climate change has been caused by humans.[6] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) recent report establishes that it cannot be doubted that the Earth is warming, and it is “very likely” due to increased concentration of greenhouse gases that are the highest in the previous 650000 years.[7] At current rates, projections for increased temperature are “a most likely value of 3°C”.[8] This means cause‐and‐effect relations are already scientifically well established. With the above in mind, a better argument can be formed for action against climate change, which is both valid and sound.
Global warming and unsustainable energy sources
Currently, Singapore’s most pressing environmental problem is its over‐reliance on fossil fuels as a source of energy. Not only is this problematic in environmental terms because the usage of fossil fuels like petroleum result in increases in total greenhouse gas emissions as well as pollute the air with toxic chemicals, it is also problematic in economically terms in that Singapore, having no fossil fuels locally, must rely on other countries for nearly all of its energy supply. Hence, it seems reasonable to conclude that over‐reliance on fossil fuels is a very pressing environmental problem for Singapore. However, does the significance of this problem pale in comparison to a larger environmental issue with potentially devastating consequences like global warming? It is generally agreed that the excessively ecological footprints of countries like America
Premise 1
• Climate change is likely to cause serious and irreversible damage to the environment.
Premise 2
• Anything that is likely to cause serious and irreversible damage to the environment is extremely devastating and threatening to the survival of the human race.
Premise 3
•We are justified in taking action to stop anything that will cause something which is extremely devastating and threatening to the survival of the human race.
Conclusion• Hence, we are justified in taking action to stop climate change.
43
and China is the main cause of global warming, and as environment specialist Mr. Pavan Sukhdev explains, it is also generally agreed that a very large part of the ecological footprints comes from energy usage. This thirst for energy is mostly supplied by fossil fuels across the world. The question of whether global warming is more important than the problem of over‐reliance on fossil fuel in Singapore ignores that these two problems are essentially the same thing, and is the same thing for most of the world’s countries which rely on the combustion of coal or petroleum to meet their energy needs. With this in mind, there should be no clash in interests for Singaporean policy makers that are focusing on the environment. COP15: When national interests obstruct international interest
When various parties come together to solve a problem, there is the question of whether this issue is more important than each party’s individual interests. This relative importance will determine the quality of the answers that multiparty conferences can bring, if any. When an issue of ‘global significance’—here taken to denote international influence—ranks below the vested interests of the involved countries in terms of national priority, a conference will have negligible lasting positive impact on the problem. Climate change is and has always been a question of global significance. The past few millennia of scientific advancement have shown man that his environment is governed by laws that also affect the rest of his planet, and what he does may leave far‐reaching fingerprints. This realization has also led man to understand how human activity across the world brought about the current state of environmental desecration and its symptoms, such as rising sea levels and a widening ozone hole. Such a realization, though, has not been enough to give climate change sufficient priority in individual states. The truth remains that many developing nations, such as Argentina and Vietnam, are hard‐pressed to continue industrialization (which converts fossil fuels into carbon emissions) to provide for their people. And for these nations, the 2% of annual GDP that Stern recommends to offset saving the earth is definitely impractical. However, while these nations bear certain responsibility, the bulk of carbon emissions have been shown to come from industrialised nations such as the USA, China, Russia, as well as the EU. Rather than national development, the priorities of these nations lie in maintaining a high standard of living, a thriving economy, an efficient government and a satisfied people. These goals are shared by government and electorate, and are crucial in preserving the power and prestige of these nations. With these national interests obstructing the international issue, it is almost impossible to solve the problem of climate change by any conference. Moreover, this difficulty is doubled as different groups of nations do not appreciate each others’ interests. For example, at COP‐15, developing nations saw the developed states’ penchant for power and prestige as clearly unnecessary, and threatened to leave if their rich counterparts could not arrive at a firm, binding, agreement. Added to the melee are the handful of nations that wholeheartedly desire action against climate change, and rank this as their top national priority. These include the Alliance Of Small Island States (AOSIS), who face the threat of flooding and destruction if climate change persists. The desperation of these nations, while taken in the right direction, has the tendency of sparking finger‐pointing debates that stall progress on the central issue.
44
Subnational decisionmaking
Two alternatives remain; namely, remove the national priorities preventing effective action, or to look elsewhere to curb climate change. The first alternative is out of the question, as some nations depend on development for survival and also because these priorities are closely tied to the nations’ cultures, histories and traditional values. Solving each nation’s preliminary problems to free up time for climate action is definitely an excessively inefficient method. What can be done, then, is to shift our vision away from the international conference and consider alternative and more effective methods of making a difference. Thought could be taken in the direction of sub‐national committees and organizations. Already there are various non‐governmental organizations lobbying for action against climate change; many nations also have their official Ministries of Environment or a similar bureau. If governments can allocate resources to these groups relative to their other needs and priorities, they will be empowered to fulfill their vision, and governments can progress in other directions at the same time with minimal impediment. ‘Personalized’ approaches like the above are more likely to arrive at conclusive action than achieving a legally binding agreement by means of global conference. The resulting changes may be small, but with each nation working in its own way to target the aspects of climate change it is best poised to tackle, significant effect can be reached. If broader scopes of action are needed, then countries with similar priorities can explore avenues for cooperation. These countries may be grouped by region, concern, or by stage of national development. For example, a working body comprising the developing nations of South‐east Asia would include Myanmar, Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia, and cohesive effort could be put in to save the region’s mangrove forests. Such efforts will be more focused and effective. Another method in which small groups of nations can work together to effect action is the sharing of knowledge and scientific expertise. Developed nations can share methods of alternative energy with less‐developed nations, who may otherwise lack the technical know‐how to solve their countries’ problems. The recent example of Japanese solar panels being used in Bangladesh to provide cheap power for poor neighbourhoods is a prime example of this point. Once sub‐national, national and small‐group dialogue has been successfully carried out, and relevant action taken where necessary, countries can possibly move on to harvest the advantages of large‐scale international cooperation. Rooted in individual effort and responsibility, conferences such as the COP‐15 can then open platforms for idea‐sharing or even collective lobbying – a potential tool to ensure that no country abdicates from its role in preventing environmental change. Even if these do not work out in the long run, international conferences can at the very least raise awareness about other nations’ unique problems. Solutions can then be better tailored to save the earth. But these must begin with individual action. Environment as the top priority
Sadly, it is only when we are threatened by the environment do we realise that it is indeed the most essential of all challenges we face. The October conference held underwater by the Maldives, as an SOS message to world leaders, is symbolic of this realisation. Without our environment, we have nothing: it is the underlying basis that
45
humans and nation‐states rely on. Maldives, a low‐lying archipelago, is an AOSIS member that would likely be submerged by the end of the century if climate change persists. Without land, Maldives will probably vanish as nation‐state. [9] Of all the topics in the symposium, environment is perhaps the most long‐lasting. While the influence of education may last a generation, the impact of climate change will likely last many. A ton of carbon dioxide released can stay airborne from 100 to 500 years.[10] It is precisely for this reason that for our long‐term future, environment should be our top priority. As the Prince of Wales points out, while we could bail out banks and stimulate the economy with trillions of money in the aftermath of the financial crisis, “it will not be possible to bail out the climate—unless we act now.”[11] References: [1] The World Bank. (2009, December 3). Public attitudes towards climate change: findings from a multicountry poll. Retrieved from: http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/dec09/ClimateChange_Dec09_rpt.pdf
[2] Goklany, I. M. (2000, December 12). Applying the precautionary principle to global warming. Retrieved from http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=9106
[3] Underhill, W. (2009, December 14). A Business revolution. Newsweek, CLIV(24), 36‐40.
[4] Gfk Roper Public Affairs & Media, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. (2008) The gfk roper yale survey on environmental issues. Summer, 2008: consumer attitudes toward environmentally‐friendly products and eco‐labeling
[5] Sheridan, B. (2009, December 14). What the Future is worth. Newsweek, CLIV(24), 32‐33.
[6] Oreskes, N. (2004, December 3). Beyond the ivory tower: the scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 306(5702), Retrieved from http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686 doi: 10.1126/science.1103618
[7] The Washington Post. (2007, February 5). Global warming: The world’s scientists agree, again, that climate change is a big problem. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp‐dyn/content/article/2007/02/04/AR2007020400953.html
[8] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007). Climate change 2007: Working group I: The physical science basis, mean temperature. Retrieved from http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10‐es‐1‐mean‐temperature.html
46
[9] Euronews. (2009, October 17). Maldives cabinet holds underwater conference. Retrieved from: http://www.euronews.net/2009/10/17/maldives‐cabinet‐holds‐underwater‐conference
[10] Ibid. 5 [11] The Prince of Wales. (2009, December 14). Nature must come first. Newsweek,
CLIV(24), 26‐30.
Shiyan Cooperation High School
Compared to global warming, China is facing the air and water pollution, water and soil loss, sandstorms etc. The main and the most important issue facing China, I believe, is the air pollution. The early industry in China really developed the country’s economic power, but the question that remained unsettled that has caused a really bad situation is China’s air condition. What causes the pollution that disturbs the Chinese so effectively, why is that happening in China? We need to have a look through at the status of China’s use of fuels. Up to 53% of the power comes from coal. The coals which the Chinese use produce most of the chemical element that give a bad result to the air condition. Result in SO2, NO2 and NO, it has really made the air even worse. Just a few days ago, Beijing happened to experience the strongest sandstorm this year. It affected most of Northern China; although this really was harmful weather and environmental condition for the north, you can see the positive effect of the sandstorm. The wind carries the sand and the chemical elements which are the nutrition to the fish and seaweed in the Japanese Sea, the fish and seaweed over there needs the nutrition comes from the chemical elements, if there is no such sandstorm you won’t expect fish swimming the that area ‐ I believe the Japanese would be furious about no fish to eat. Other kinds of problem such as the water and soil loss, and sandstorm I just mentioned at the beginning of the essay that only happens in parts of China. If you look up in the atlas, you could find that most area in North‐west China is in a surface of deserts. The areas there are far away from the sea; the mountains resist the rain from getting to the places, dry and high temperature difference occurred yearly, you don’t expect to have a climate which could make things better. On the other hand, the global warming which happens around the world wasn’t felt much by the Chinese this year, for China is facing the coldest year in the last 50 years. Our hometown Shenyang coldest day this year’s highest temperature is only ‐30 degree Celsius. So I don’t believe that the global warming causes China really have to take action to fight back against “2012”. But China has promised to reduce 45% of the production of carbon dioxide; we will do as we have spoken. A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. Just months ago happened in Copenhagen occurred a total disaster under the name called “to save mankind’s last
47
chance”. Unfortunately, all we get was a non‐binding agreement reached at the meeting. The Chinese Government has established the goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions taken in accordance with national conditions. Copenhagen Climate Conference of the international political influence is enormous, and it completely changed the international relations has become a watershed in international relations. Never had any session of the General Assembly been able, like Copenhagen, to attract so many heads of state and to attract so much international attention. The major impacts on international relations were in the following categories: Copenhagen Conference, the United States wanted China to take more responsibility to frustrate the intent of the General Assembly, all of the U.S. public opinion overwhelmingly criticized the Chinese government, no one thought of the media in developed countries in the past 200 years of carbon emissions. Sino‐US relations will further deteriorate; the carbon tariff will thoroughly upset the Sino‐US trade relations. Despite European attempts in the General Assembly to act as the dominant force, the protagonist of the General Assembly, the United States and China, played a leading role instead. After the endless accusations of China's, Europe has already imposed the punitive tariffs, Sino‐British relations were further strained due to British nationality drug traffickers, China‐EU relations will not be as good as before. The developed countries and developing countries split the alliance; reducing carbon emissions will take a period of time and is bound to affect economic development. China and India and other developing countries in order to avoid "being discharged", formed a temporary alliance, while the developed countries split apart. International relations were not clarified. I argue that we need both international cooperation and individual action at the same time. In my view, it is certainly vital that we should have cooperation among different countries to solve the problem about the environment of the world. As we all know that we just have the only one world to share, we must handle this problem together to create a more attractive environment for all the world’s creatures. For instance, America, a developed country, manages to improve its environment. But if only the American environment becomes well, but other countries are still polluted seriously, then, the world’s environment will improve, but significant other environmental problems will remain. The environmental problem is beyond all the countries not only for some countries such as America, China and Indian. There are some other countries as well which produce fewer pollutants. If they do not improve their environment, too, the problem still cannot be solved. So we must have a global cooperation to work out this problem. Then you may think that we also have some international organizations such as COP, but it was not carried out successfully, which proves that there are some shortcomings in the cooperation. I do not deny that every country is so selfish that they want their
48
country is much more developed than else and every country has dissimilar position, so it is difficult to achieve the aim of environmental improvement together. However, only if we operate with all the counties, can we welcome pretty pure environment. During the cooperation, we can set a standard for different countries according to their nation conditions. And the meeting can limit the time that they finish it. But different countries have different problems of the environment. Though the discussion about the environment, we konw that there are a huge of different problems in different countries. So the details about the way to work out the problems must be discussed by each countries themselves as they have a deeper understanding about thier problems and the nation conditions. Therefore there must be an individual action. What’s more, the countries that have the same environmental problems can get together to think of the best way to solve the problems. In conclusion, we need international cooperation as well as individual action. Only if we carry out both of them, can our world become better and better.
Nada High School Global warming is a major issue of concern in Japan, and the decrease of CO2 emissions, as well as the use of clean energy, are all ways Japan is trying to find a solution to global warming. We believe the main issue, or, the most important environmental problem in Japan is the mindsets of the Japanese people, and this is based on the presupposition that Japan is cooperating with the rest of the world in trying to resolve the global warming issue. Due to inventions and new plans for ecological alternatives becoming very popular and well‐known throughout Japan, most people in Japan understand the rights and wrongs in preventing global warming. For example, gas stations in Japan are starting to incorporate electrical supplies for electrical cars, as well as water for eco‐cars. More and more people in Japan are taking ecobags to supermarkets when they shop, and are being cautious than ever in turning the lights off when a room is not used, or when they’re deciding what kind of toilet paper to buy. But we believe this is not the correct stance against global warming. Yes, these are positive effects for the prevention and solution to global warming, but the idea that playing “green” and living healthy is a cool thing, is just proving the fact that Japanese people are not really striving for a change in society as much as, say, making oneself look like they are good people. To prove this statement, our school is supposed to be a school for the top students of Japan, but people do not do very well in tests that test their knowledge of global Warming. Also, television never questions the reason why CO2 emissions are bad, and I doubt many people in Japan know why they use ecobags. “Environmentally Friendly” is not a standard people should follow, but just another advantage in buying new electrical appliances. New ways of thinking are needed to create new economies and solve the environmental issues, but the people’s ideas about being “ecological”, just seem to be statuses and fashion statements that build upon the old ways of thinking. An example is
49
the recent fishery problem. People are very positive about resolving environmental issues, and according to Mr Sukhdev, Japanese politicians are very informed about environmental issues, but when issues like fishery, which becomes a minus to one’s lifestyle come about, Japanese people get very defensive. The reason for this is because currently, people in Japan are not concerned about issues 30 years ahead. This may not be something that restricts itself to Japanese ways of thinking, but it certainly exists in Japan. People are not willing to sacrifice lifestyles and change old ways of thinking that seem to have had no problem, for predictions. The problem with the global warming issue is the fact that “something might happen” and not “something is going to happen definitely”. And what is also a problem is that Japanese people are then sceptic about the effects of global warming. Japanese people may like driving environmentally friendly cars but are sceptic about events 30 years in the future, and this paradoxical way of thinking is leading to civilians misunderstanding their stance on the global warming, and environmental problem. To conclude, education systems need to be changed so that people may understand the environmental issues as well as global warming properly. Then people do not have dilemmas with their stances, and maybe, another way of persuading people, than threatening them about the events 30 years ahead may need to be thought of. If successful, this would lead to Japan leading the world in solving environmental issues, and be world standards for prevention of global warming. Therefore, the change of mindset is in the long‐term going to be much more effective in solving environmental problems and global warming than directly trying to solve global warming. We believe the individual countries’ participation for the resolution of the environmental issues is necessary for international cooperation, because for an international cooperation, there needs to be many individual countries with the same aims and goals. In the case of environmental issues, if individual countries show their enthusiasm towards solving the environmental issues, this would make international cooperation easier to realise. Also, with the case of environmental issues, many countries intertwine with each other in many issues. An example is food, where Brazil exports to countries like America. In cases like this, cooperation between, at least, America and Brazil is inevitable in solving the environmental problem that exists in cattle crops in Brazil. Even cases that seem like problems in individual countries are not that easy. For example, according to Mr Sukhdev, the insecticide, pesticide problem in Pakistan relates heavily to international relations between Pakistan and other countries, and is not a singular country issue. Also, the large problems at hand such as global warming are impossible to solve just from one country’s actions, and require the help and participation of many countries. This is why events like the Kyoto Protocol and COP15 are considered significant, and goals like the Millennium Development Goals can bring the world together to solve major issues. The individual countries’ participation and stance towards environmental issues is the most important in solving the environmental crisis. It is necessary for every country in the world to have the same knowledge and understanding of the environmental issues in front of them and have similar ideas on the resolutions. Then, international cooperation becomes possible, and thus, an actual result in resolving these problems becomes possible. It is impossible to compare individual action to international cooperation because, for one, individual action depends, to an extent, on international
50
understanding, and also, individual action and international cooperation is on different vectors. Major changes cannot occur without international cooperation, but individual action maybe what makes a country one that has its concerns on environmental issues and one that starts a chain of international cooperation.
Montgomery Bell Academy
The United States rests firmly on her car; there is nothing as fundamentally tied to the development and advancement of American society as the automobile. The vast expanse of the American continental inland was rapidly brought down to a size that could be consumed by every family with a car and a week off. After the Second World War, a suburban middle class formed, drawn away from the city by the desire for a large home with a garage. The long drive between work and home was a worthwhile sacrifice. The only cost was gasoline—and it was, for our forefathers’ proposes, infinite. And now it isn’t. It would be ignorant to believe that the American people would, in some act of restraint, surrender their ability to drive; it has become an integral part of what they hold to be a self evident unalienable right—the pursuit of happiness. Since the oil will go and the cars won’t, reform is the only viable option. Oil must be replaced to placate its demand. Replacements are available. Automobiles can be retrofitted to burn ethanol or other fuels. Oil subsidies should be cut and reinvested in renewable subsidies as to smooth the transition to renewable energy, whether it be in cellulosic ethanol or electric cars. But the alternatives must have strong scientific basis lest they repeat the failures of corn based ethanol subsidies that have had little net energy yield and disastrous effects on food prices and are now protected by the political interest and representation of mid-western farmers. The crisis of American fuel typifies a tragedy of the commons, exemplified by anthropogenic climate change. Individual agents thinking that they are both insignificant in the grand problem and that others will easily take advantage of what they don’t utilize caused these twin crises. No single coal company or driver can be blamed as someone else would use petrol or burn fuel. Furthermore, the American car culture has been a critical producer of green house gasses guilty of causing climate change. However, the problems differ in that the United States can solve its energy crisis internally yet the fate of the earth and her climate lies not in any hall of power or on any president’s desk but rather in a collective decision to break with our past failures. International cooperation vs. individual action is an interesting debate that is tough to resolve. Many problems can be addressed and resolved by individual countries; Kenya, for instance, could fix its forest issues with the correct political will and mindset. Customization can and should take place at a national level, as it can allow nations to fix problems as they come along. Most problems, though, will require a more international approach. As mentioned before, oftentimes the problem for a country trying to fix an internal environmental issue is one of political will and an incorrect mindset. As a result, international cooperation can and should provide the necessary motivation and momentum to fix global, national, and local environmental issues. In countries where forests are being
51
depleted, international cooperation or encouragement can provide a framework for moving forward in the correct manner, guidelines by which to do so, or even the requisite technology or financial assistance to fund such rehabilitation projects. Water shortages provide another appropriate example, as many water basins or large rivers are separated by borders. The Nile, for instance, travels through Egypt, most obviously, but also Sudan and parts of Uganda and Ethiopia. Addressing water shortages on the Nile cannot effectively be managed by any one country alone because such shortages necessarily affect all countries. International cooperation, usually in the form of a treaty, is then necessary to manage the expectations and desires of all countries affected by such a water shortages. Intervention from abroad also allows for impartiality and less bias, as countries unaffected by a water shortage can more easily view the problem and assign solutions objectively. The situation where the issue of international cooperation is most hotly debated is global climate change. Global approaches to limit carbon dioxide emissions and fix global warming have been attempted, but most have failed. At Kyoto, all countries, with one notable exception, agreed to cut emissions. The notable exception—the United States—decimated both the credibility and solvency of the treaty. Multilateral approaches to global climate change are necessary because of the obvious global scale of the problem. Solutions must be completely multilateral, though, which means countries like the United States cannot refuse to cooperate. The largest industrial nations like the U.S. and China must take the lead on such issues; if the U.S. and China led the way on an international agreement, other countries would have a strong incentive to follow suit. The status quo, though, is bereft with finger pointing and free-riding, as the U.S., China, and others refuse to really respond to the problem until everyone is doing so. As a result, solutions to the problem must be led by individual countries but be multilateral in spirit and final approach.
52
Security PreSymposium Students discussed ideas of terrorism and various governmental responses to terrorism, both in terms of legal and military action. They looked back over the last decade to evaluate the interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, and to judge how the debate has evolved. They read Eric Hobsbawm’s book of essays: Globalisation, Democracy and Terrorism. Their varied cultures and national experiences made this topic one of the most interesting and freighted. As written work, they prepared responses to two questions: How far the increase in terror in the last decade has been a result of global forces of change; and the correct balance that a government should seek to strike between the resistance of terror, and the respect for its and other citizens’ rights.
Symposium Guest Speakers:
Lord Carlile of Berriew; Lord Justice Longmore Sir Andrew Longmore began the morning’s debates by outlining the fundamental concept of the Rule of Law: the idea that all men should be bound by and benefit from law administered in courts. He outlined the major principles underlying the Rule of Law: the separation of judiciary and legislature; judicial decisions enforced by the state; no imprisonment without trial; trials should be fair; laws should be general and not specific; laws should be prospective and no retrospective; powers should be granted to authorities only by the legislature; the officials of state are to be held personally liable for their acts. While he noted there was widespread agreement on these principles, the individual practice of nations varied according to their tradition and culture. The UK, lacking a written constitution, for example, did not have these principles all enshrined in a common document. Sir Andrew drew participants’ attention to the particularly problematic effect of terror and emergency provisions on the Rule of Law; this was a theme developed by Lord Carlile. Lord Carlile outlined his appointment and role as the UK’s Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, and took students through a brief history of terror legislation in the UK, with reference to the principles of the Rule of Law outlined by Sir Andrew. He was particularly critical of the tendency of governments to adopt emergency legislation in the face of terrorism.
53
Lord Carlile took participants through the UK’s recent debates on the critical and freighted question of the maximum duration of detention without charge. This issue was at the heart of the students’ work on terrorism and security, and exemplified the balance a government must strike between the competing needs of its justice system. Students were invited to discuss the acceptability of certain security measures that a government might take to protect its citizens. Surveillance, detention on suspicion, and deradicalisation through education were deemed by most as acceptable within certain limits; the questions of the acceptability of torture and of military intervention, however, revealed great diversity of view. On balance students seemed much more willing to countenance exceptional legal use of torture – in the ticking‐bomb scenario – than were Lord Carlile and Lord Justice Longmore. After lunch, the students reconvened to discuss the issues in Moberly Library, these discussions faciliatated by Ms Rosalind Gater and Mr Roderick Russ. They then redrafted their essays in response to the modified title below. Winchester College and Johannes Kepler School subsequently presented their redrafted essays to the entire Symposium audience in Mob Lib.
54
Citing two examples, one from the U.K. and one from another country, discuss the difficulties in achieving a balance between the individual’s right to be protected by the state and the individual’s
right to liberty. Winchester College As the newspaper ‘O Jornal do Brasil’ wrote after the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, we live in an ‘age of fear’. Terrified of the potential devastation that could be caused by a well‐placed terrorist attack, Western governments have passed laws granting themselves increasingly intrusive powers so that they can prevent such atrocities; this in turn has led to the formation of an atmosphere of suspicion that pervades much of society. The rise of terrorism on the global scale, particularly Islamic terrorism, has created a plethora of issues that need to be discussed. Why do large groups of individuals want to destroy Western countries and bring death to their citizens? What is the best way of negating and possibly even removing the problem? Most relevantly to this question, to what extent should we lose our freedom in order to guarantee security? How we chose to approach the posed problems will shape how society develops globally; it is therefore imperative to consider these issues as delicately as possible. One of the biggest issues that affects both the U.K. and the rest of the world today is undoubtedly that of terrorism. The UN defines terrorism as any act “intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non‐combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act”. This definition demonstrates an important fact about the acts of terrorists: they act in order to change some aspect of the target country. A number of candidates have been highlighted as possible causes of such a conflict of views and the violent response associated with terrorism: economic deprivation, the lack of education, the uncontrolled growth of the internet, invasive ideologies, warfare and even warped personalities. Two main approaches have been used to combat terrorism: fighting fully‐formed terrorist organisations with legislation and encouraging de‐radicalisation at the grass‐roots level of society. Examining particular cases of both these approaches demonstrates the way forward in this debate. In the U.K, the government has often utilised the former, top‐down method to combat terrorism. In practice, this has involved tightening security at airports and military intervention in the usual problem areas. However, this method has three problems. Firstly, such a scheme does not resolve the problem at its heart: instead, it treats the symptoms of different issues which will be discussed later. It is impossible to protect ourselves from all these threats and inevitably terrorists will try and occasionally succeed in their attempts at mass murder. The problem ultimately lies in the sort of society where terrorists are recruited, and that is where we have to look to stop it. Secondly, by acting in such a way, governments tend to negate the liberty of their citizens. In order to prevent an unknown few from doing acts with horrid consequences, the authorities have to treat the masses with suspicion; for those who have done nothing wrong, this viewpoint is dispiriting. In the short term, such tactics are necessary; without them, Westerners would have suffered a good deal more than
55
they have. However, as the case of Jean Charles de Menezes demonstrates, much care needs to be taken. Record numbers of CCTV cameras (over 4.2 million in Britain, 2006) are being installed, whilst we are being monitored in an increasing number of ways. Benjamin Franklin once said “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both”; governments must ensure that any growth in security measures does not backfire on them. Such change must be kept under control, as the countries described in George Orwell’s 1984 and the associated ideas of ‘Big Brother’ are chilling in both their attitude and their governance. So the U.K.’s method of dealing with terrorism seems far from ideal. Interestingly, Barack Obama advocated the opposite approach when discussing how to negate the risk of home‐grown terrorism in Yemen. Terrorists often come from poverty‐stricken backgrounds and it not too difficult to see why. In this age of globalization, even those in Yemen with very little are exposed to Western culture, whether it is through the medium of word of mouth or via a glance at a shared television; to those struggling to survive, observing the relative extravagance of the West would immediately provoke a response of indignation. Due to the lack of incoming aid, the budding terrorist starts to hold Western society responsible for all of his and her problems. When another external force such as Al‐Qaeda provides both more justification and the means with which to strike out, the opportunity will be taken without hesitation. In many parts of Yemen, schooling is neither a priority nor even possible. The shortage of teachers and suitable buildings contribute to this deficiency. This has unfortunate consequences: without education, it is less likely that individuals will be able to examine the deceptions of extremists objectively. For example, in the case of Islamic terrorism, illiteracy means that in some cases people cannot read the Qur’an for themselves; it has to be read to them, opening a gap for dramatic misinterpretation. The other factors listed above do not cause individuals to turn to terrorism on their own, but in combination with the first two can accelerate the process. Witnessing the terrors of war only increases the feeling of anger against those who have considerably better quality of life; in addition, accessing weaponry in a war zone can be done more easily. Most importantly, the success of violence in this arena generates the mistaken belief that it the best way to achieve their goals. The number of terrorists who innately want to cause harm from the beginning is small; it is slow indoctrination that brings them to this position. The solution to all these problems can be found by resolving the second one of education. If better education can be brought to the areas from where potential candidates for terrorism are likely to originate, then the numbers of new terrorists will decrease markedly. The study of history demonstrates the dreadfulness of hostility, whilst in the case of religious extremism, exploring both the original holy texts and well‐regarded scholarship shows the path down which believers should tread. In addition, better schooling provides a way out of poverty for the individual; those who manage to gain educational qualifications are at an immediate advantage in terms of finding jobs, both in their place of origin and in foreign states. Some intellectuals have questioned this causal link, most notably in a 2002 report by Alan Kruger of Princeton University; he gives a number of examples that seem to show that terrorists tend to have more education. There is no doubt that his report is thorough, but his evidence does not distinguish between sources of education, as his distinguished associate Claude Berrebi writes in a later report on the same topic. A terrorist may well have received more ‘schooling’ than a typical citizen, but if his teacher was an extremist, the
56
benefits listed above will certainly not materialize. It is by engaging at the grass‐roots level and by advocating academically sound teaching in countries such as Yemen that change will come; it is important to note that success can be obtained without negating human freedom. The quip ‘the age of fear’ used earlier is perhaps a little strong, but the negative output of newspapers has raised public anxiety to levels that are possibly unnecessary. The issue of terrorism is not so much an issue of global social reform as Eric Hobsbawm argues in his book Globalisation, Democracy and Terrorism; it is more a product the social and economic inequality. We do not have to suffer the effects of terrorism; by resolving education and poverty, on a global scale, we can make our world a more prosperous, happy and secure place whilst protecting the individual’s right to be protected by the state and the individual’s right to liberty. Johannes Kepler School Deprivation, chaos, fear – these are the words that emerged in news all around the world in the last decade more than ever before. Why do we hear about terrorism every day? Why did it appear so suddenly and stroke us completely unprepared? There is no doubt that the world is changing. We cannot tell whether we are making our planet a better place or not. The twentieth century was full of motion, development, but also of cruelty. Inventions in all industrial branches enabled us to do more, to achieve more. But they also provided every potential activist or radical with more than just a piece of iron forged into a sword as it was in the Middle ages. Nowadays, the piece of iron is transformed into a cheap AK47 and other easily accessible weapons. The fact that everyone with an internet connection can access a bomb manual really changes our situation and the situation of people pursuing their goals through violence. In the past, they were just small groups with common interests armed with swords and spears. They could express their disapproval with anything, e.g. a reign of their king. They could go and destroy something, but the damage was not outrageous. The contemporary society is under threat of rebels, too, but they have a different appearance. Firstly, they are called terrorists. Although we are not facing any large‐scale threat, terror is something that really scares us and surrounds us in the media. Secondly, they are causing more and more damage when they strike, since they have the access to recent inventions. And mostly, they are trained to strike at all costs. What would happen if terrorists obtain a nuclear weapon? The government should protect its people from terrorism. But each human has also an individual right to be free and the government should not limit someone’s freedom. It is sometime difficult to distinguish what is better. I will give you one example from the Czech Republic. Recently, there was quite a big dispute about the US radar, which was to built in the Czech Republic. The United States was negotiating with the Czech government about placing one of its radars in the Czech Republic as a part of the global shield over the western countries to protect them from potential missiles from Russia and the eastern world. The radar was supposed to help to protect the Europe, including the Czech country. Therefore it was in the Czech government concern to build this US radar to protect the Czech people, because it is their right. But Czech residents felt
57
offended by government’s effort to enforce the radar in our country and they thought that their freedom is limited. Hence we wanted a referendum to decide, whether the US radar should be placed in our country or not. We thought it is our right to decide it, not only the government’s right. But from the government’s point of view, it would not protect only our country, but the whole Europe. But the threat it would cause to Czech people if the radar was built was not a good future for us. We would much rather hide in our Czech Republic hole without any attention from other countries and terrorists. As we are living in the present global world, everything is linked. Terrorist leaders are a bit untraceable with their use of information technologies. They can control their terrorist attacks from anywhere. In most cases they are very numerous and well organized so that it is quite hard to completely defeat them. Maybe we could defend ourselves against their suicidal vassals, but we cannot prevent leaders from planning new attacks. We have to resolve this cultural conflict with other steps than only military interventions. We have to look at the causes of this misunderstanding and do our best to comprehend them. We are living and we will have to live with terror on a regular basis. Terrorism is only a way to express dissatisfactions and spread fear to achieve some political goals; it is a kind of quondam rebellions. There is no other option but to acknowledge it and cautiously take measures to set up a long‐term, sustainable defence against terrorism. The then president of the United States George W. Bush stated outright some years ago that we were at war. Of course, "The War Against Terrorism" may be considered rather a trade‐mark for selling certain political content. Nonetheless, it seems clear that since 9/11, we have been indeed fighting a phenomenon referred to as terrorism. We fight it as the members of the civilization it means to affect on the whole. Besides military engagements in distant conflicts that only maintain an arguable connection to actual terrorism, how do we fight? What weapons do we use in our fight? It seems that our arsenal consists predominantly of security measures ‐ or rather of the very measures of increasing security. After every terrorist attack, governments rush to introduce new, previously unseen types of surveillance and monitoring, providing better control over possible threats and over the society altogether. Sometimes these actions go against personal freedom, intimacy and human dignity ‐ which is mostly understood as the cost of saving lives. Do these actions really save lives, though? Security measures taken after terrorist attacks have always swiftly focused on the particular security gaps utilized by the particular attack. But have not terrorists shown to be quite clever and ingenious? Why would they strike in the same way twice, much less in the same place and shortly after the first attack? Why do we have to put all our shampoo and toothpaste in a plastic bag when flying from Paris to London? Is not our simple awareness of the risk of dangerous liquids enough to make this way of taking down a plane obsolete? The number of security leaks terrorists can use to threaten our lives is infinite. We cannot stop all of them, our society cannot be terrorism‐proof. It can very well be terrorism‐resistant, though. An active resistance, an effective, sober work of security
58
services, for example, can cut the risk down. In fact, several terrorist attacks have been prevented thanks to it recently. There is something rather pathological in taking further security measures after a terrorist attack has actually been prevented. But this is what our society does ‐ instead of rejoicing and feeling some relieve, we think about more and more airport controls. One of the countries that have been affected the most by terrorism is the United Kingdom. The attacks in London Tube have remained in the public memory. The public using the Tube is actively reminded of them by a public announcement every two or three minutes ‐ this public announcement encourages people to report any suspicious behaviour. Even though this announcement may seem normal and ordinary to people who use London's public transport on a regular basis, from a traveller's perspective it seems at least disturbing. Are not people likely to report behaviour that is suspicious enough, anyway? Or have they proven to be unable to do so, wherefore they need to be reminded, just like children need to be told regularly not to cross the street in a hurry? Or is it perhaps the city that has become too dangerous even for sensible, responsible adults? Is therefore the only means of preventing new terrorist attacks actually arousing more fear and suspicion? Is the only means of fighting terrorism feeding our fear? The word terrorism is derived from "terror", which is practically a synonym to "fear". If we took a look at the very word more often, we would perhaps remember that killing people is not the substance of terrorism. Arousing fear is its substance, used to pursue more general goals. One of the goals is presumably shaking the very bases of our culture. So far, the terrorist strategy has been successful. We go on giving up freedom and dignity while merely feeding our fear ‐ pretending to be saving lives. We easily forget that over thousands of years, billions of people have suffered and died for the western tradition to survive and for freedom to be cultivated. Today, we can pretty much enjoy its fruits. But still, our culture may need people to die for it ‐ dozens a year is not that much. Though, terrorist attacks can be prevented. Secret intelligence service can operate without people being aware of it. In fact, it is its purpose to operate silently, without disturbing regular life, without arousing fear. It is its purpose to enable us to live our lives quietly, to preserve our customs and the confidence we put in our culture. Karachi Grammar School With the recent rise in terrorism, and the authorities inability to curb it, terrorist suspects have often gone ‘ missing’ in Pakistan. Pakistani organisations working on behalf of families of those who have disappeared claim there are at least 563 cases. From affidavits and testimonies the reports reveal a pattern of security or other forces arbitrarily detaining people (some of them children, in one case a nine‐year‐old boy), blindfolding them, and moving them around various detention centres so they become
59
difficult to trace.“We don’t know if those subjected to enforced disappearances are guilty or innocent, but it is their fundamental right to be charged and tried properly in a court of law,” said Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International’s Asia Pacific director. “By holding people in secret detention the government of Pakistan has not only violated their rights, but also failed in its duty to charge and try those suspected of involvement in attacks on civilians.” The report is the latest in an ongoing campaign by Amnesty International to end the practice of enforced disappearances worldwide.In 2006, Amnesty International documented dozens of cases of enforced disappearances in Pakistan, focusing on people who were picked up in the counterterrorism measures adopted by Pakistan in the context of the US‐led ‘war on terror’. During the initial stages of the war on terror, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf dismissed Amnesty International’s allegations by stating: “I don’t even want to reply to that, it is nonsense, I don’t believe it, I don’t trust it.”He added that his government had detained 700 people but that all were accounted for. Sceptical isn’t it? In March 2007, President Musharraf again asserted that the claim that hundreds of persons had disappeared in the custody of Pakistani intelligence agencies had “absolutely no basis”.He said that in fact these individuals had been recruited or lured by “jihadi groups” to fight.“I am deadly sure that the missing persons are in the control of militant organisations,” he said. The report urges the newly elected government of Pakistan – which has pledged to improve Pakistan’s human rights record ‐ to end the policy of denial, investigate all cases of enforced disappearance and hold those responsible to account “By holding people in secret detention the government of Pakistan has not only violated their rights, but also failed in its duty to charge and try those suspected of involvement in attacks on civilians”, said Zarifi. The Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani emphasised the coalition government’s commitment to upholding human rights. He is urged to act immediately to resolve all cases of enforced disappearance,” said Zarifi.“As a first immediate measure, the new government should ease the suffering of the relatives of the ‘disappeared’ by either releasing the detainees or transferring them to official places of detention.” Similarly, in the US, the Patriot Act was famous for infringing on civil liberties to ensure National Security. The Patriot Act has come under fire for a number of reasons. It was passed very quickly and Congress spent very little time reading and debating it. By some accounts, less than 48 hours passed between the presentation of the bill’s final wording and the law passing in both houses of Congress. Senator Russ Feingold, a Democrat , seems to have been the only senator to vote against the act, while several members of the House of Representatives joined his dissent or abstained from voting. There are fears that the Patriot Act reduces or removes many of the civil liberties enjoyed in the United States and guaranteed by the Constitution. The right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures are the most notable infringements due to the expansion of the government’s ability to conduct wiretaps, obtain NSLs and perform searches without notification. The detainment of material witnesses and terrorist suspects without access to lawyers hearings orr any formal
60
charges are seen as erosions of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, rights of due process and trial by jury, respectively. Critics also charge that the Patriot Act unfairly expands the powers of the executive branch and strips away many crucial checks and balances. The lack of judicial review, or secretive reviews subject to strict gag orders are the key elements of this criticism. There are also fears that the law will be inappropriately used against non‐terrorist criminals. In fact, it’s been used to remove homeless people from train stations, to pursue drug rings and to collect financial data on random visitors to Las Vegas. Hence, even though it is very difficult to restrict terrorism, for the government it is essential to prevent terrorism to the maximum. Raffles Institution If ‘globalization’ was the catchword of the late 20th century, ‘terrorism’ is rapidly becoming that of the 21st. The spate of terrorist activities—beginning with the September 11th incident in 2001—has grown into a trend, with cycles of relaxed security, attacks, pointed fingers, claimed responsibility, and renewed security almost every other year. To what extent, however, is this progression of events a result of globalization? The answer to this lies in the nature of globalization. Globalization can be defined as the ‘worldwide integration of humanity’ [1], where culture, technology and knowledge are spread throughout the world by communication and trade. Such a phenomenon can be traced back to the efforts of early explorers to expand the boundaries of human knowledge, or of early missionaries to spread their religion to the ‘heathen’. The elements of each civilization were transmitted to the host region in the process, leading to change, and in some cases, conflict. These two effects arise from the highly subjective nature of culture, technology and knowledge. Positive change occurs when a group in the host nation believes that what is being transmitted to them is better than what they have, and conflict occurs when the group in the host nation does not. In this sense, change and conflict are the two broad categories that reactions to globalization can be grouped under. In the past century, there has been marked increase in the rate of globalization. With the end of the Age of Empires, pegged as the start of World War I in 1914 by many historians [2], globalization outside the imperial context began to occur on a much greater scale. This was aided by the rise of Multi‐National Corporations (many of which arose as the result of America’s capitalist system), as well as the internet. As both of these mediums were developed largely by the Western world, it became inevitable that many elements of Western culture were spread to receiving countries, where they began to command the local perspective. Many forms of terrorism began as a reaction to the abovementioned spread of Western culture. Terrorism is, then, a form of conflict, which involves a group of people who do not accept the foreign, globalizing culture. The term “terrorism”, though, also denotes that this reaction manifests itself beyond a mere expression of discontent to include
61
actions of revenge against the foreign culture. The reason for this is that indigenous factors (such as history, religion and race) have conditioned the local perspective to view the transmission of a foreign culture as a personal insult against the host region. The globalizing world cannot ignore the fact that over years of history, there are groups of people who have developed conservative societies with rich cultural pride. When a foreign culture is introduced to such a society, in a manner that may or may not be invasive, the influence that the inherent culture holds on the society is affected. This leads to the perception that the host culture has been usurped or diluted, giving rise to popular discontent, which can become a powerful driving force behind the damage done by terrorist groups. Terrorism, then, is partly a response to globalization, in that the arrival of a new culture acts as the trigger for heightened tension and retaliatory action. Still, one must keep in mind that such a response is only provoked because of indigenous factors that create a volatile setting in the host region. These two factors play an equally important role in determining the nature and magnitude of terrorism worldwide. Surveillance as a solution to security In fighting terrorism, it is always tempting to increase surveillance as a security measure. Though it is frequently assumed that increasing state surveillance will lead to increased security, both material and psychological, little consensus exists among researchers regarding the actual effects of security cameras in terms of crime rates, which leads to implications for the effects of surveillance on reducing the risk of terrorist attacks. Studies by Poyner [3] and Brown [4] show that surveillance cameras are effective in decreasing property crime but not violent crime. As terrorist threats are violent in nature, does this mean surveillance makes no difference? Though an airplane check definitely would diminish risks of airborne terrorist attacks, it is hard to say the same for a camera planted in a quiet alley. Additionally, such measures that also try to bolster psychological security can result in the city being less pleasant to live in. Instead, creating fear, paranoia and distrust among the people. [5]
Surveillance should also adhere to certain rules so that it is not self defeating. Even when certain liberties need to be “infringed” upon for security’s sake, it should not be done in an accusatory manner against any community. For example, Welsh politician Kim Howells’ advocacy of “more intrusive surveillance programmes in certain communities” in Britain would clearly erode the trust and respect of British Muslims that were already sceptical of the government and police. Rather than leading to increased security from terrorism, it would lead to anger and alienation. Groups should be well‐integrated with one another to deal with terrorist threats. Baselessly accusing certain communities of supporting terrorists would only increase the appeal of joining the extremists. [6]
Privacy or security? The issue of privacy is often mentioned in arguing that surveillance should not override citizen rights. However, it cannot be denied that the most fundamental of human rights is the right to be able to live. In other words, the right to life is a prerequisite for all other rights. Hence, to use an analogy, the right to life naturally should supersede other rights like the right to privacy. If security ensures the right to life but might infringe on other rights like privacy, what balance should the government take on security compared to citizen rights? Governments should “infringe” upon citizens rights for security as necessary but must
62
respect the citizens’ consent if the majority do not support their action. As proposed by Locke, Rousseau and others in their idea of the Social Contract, governments rule by the agreement of the people. Men agree to obey the government, pay taxes and sacrifice certain rights of their own in return for the State’s protection of their rights. As the power of government comes from the people, the government must naturally answer to the people. Even if the government does not follow the people’s wishes, thus stirring the people’s dissent, they would be voted out of office, or alternatively, in non‐democratic societies, the government can be overthrown. [7]
Furthermore, as long as the government’s choice to override citizens’ rights is for a legitimate cause regarding a rationally‐assessed threat, the citizens will naturally be willing to consent. Additionally, as security can be a matter of life and death, the government can also explain their rationale and convince unimpressed citizens with evidence that the threat is significant enough for their actions to be taken. The importance of soft power In the end, security is not just about rifles and metal detectors, or the physical and military aspects of security. In being overly obsessed with hard power, America is ignoring what is just as crucial in security: soft power, or winning the hearts and minds of people all over the globe. As statistics show, even after the September 11 attacks, American expenditure on public diplomacy in Muslim countries were merely $150 million in 2002, approximately the same as Britain or France despite America being larger than the two countries combined! If America just spent 1% of its military budget in 2004, then it would have quadrupled expenditure in soft power. [8] It is true that America cannot use soft power to attract Islam extremists, for that hard power is necessary, but America can use soft power to attract moderates and stop converts to terrorism. Moderates can play a pivotal role in the war on terrorism as allies because they desire “jobs, education, healthcare and dignity as they practice their faith”, [9] something which no fundamentalist regimes established by Islamic extremists have shown capable of providing yet. On the other hand, the extremists will resort to nothing but violence for their goals in destroying the “great Satan”. By combining hard and soft power into “smart power” just like it had done in the Cold War against the Soviets with the Marshall Plan, America, and the world, can win this war again. References [1] Richard L. Harris, "The Global Context of Contemporary Latin American Affairs," in Capital, Power, and Inequality in Latin America, eds., Sandor Halebsky and Richard L. Harris (Boulder: Westview Press, 1995) [2] A Brief History of Globalization; Time Magazine, 20th March 2006, from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1174759,00.html [3] Poyner, B. (1983). Design against crime. London: Butterworth. [4] Brown, B. (1995). CCTV in town centres: three case studies. Crime Detection and Prevention Series 68. London: Home Office Police Research Group. [5] Koskela, H. (2000). 'the gaze without eyes': video surveillance and the changing nature of urban space. Progress in Human Geography, 24(2), 243‐265. [6] Sabir, R. (2009, November 4). Spying on muslims will incrase terrorism. The Guardian. Retrieved (2010, February 09) from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/04/kim‐howells‐muslims‐surveillance
63
[7] Social Contract Theory. The University of tennesee internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved (2010, February 08) from http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/s/soc‐cont.htm#SH2c [8] Nye, J. S. (2004, March 30). Why 'soft power' matters in fighting terrorism. The Washington Post, A19. [9] Ibid. Shiyan Cooperation High School In the nineteenth century, the world was in a state of colonization, industrial revolution and economical growth. The world market has formed during the ages. British and other European countries’ markets and consumers rose to the edge of western Asia e.g. Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan. War then started the flames and the populations’ productive power came down directly. People in such colonies had to fight their anti‐colonization wars that caused a loss for the country’s reconstruction after independence. Afterwards, the economic states of these countries concerned have been an absolute disaster. Problems remained unsettled and still there are people fighting for their survival and personal rights. In 1971, the first Afghanistan war made the cause even worse, turbulence from then became a daily life for the refugees. I believe the action taken by the Soviet Union, was an event of colonisation in the modern world. It was against the resolution made by the UN and was really part of a new stage in world politics. The headline news occupying the attention of the modern world most is probably the Middle East. Israel and Palestine (which mostly represents the Arabic world) are the most unstable countries (or area). What is the main controversy between the different sides? In addition, what is the responsibility each side should take?
Religious difference The revenge of war The statues of Jerusalem The border demarcation issues Jewish settlements Water supply & management
All the statement above consists up the conflict of the case. Islam, Christianity & Judaism, 3 different beliefs and 3 different ideologies, how can there are not be struggles?
The Iraq war & the Afghanistan war The war started in 2003 made the difficulties caused in 2001 even worse. After the Taliban regime was overthrown, the armed forces controlled by the Taliban continued their fight against the Americans. Suicide bomb attacks and other terrorist attacks made a serious threat to the peace and personal rights of the global world.
64
“Weapons of Mass Destruction” made the Americans restlessness over the first five years of the century, but where are they? Did the US find the weapons? The answer to the question is no or not yet. The two wars really have brought the struggle of safety up to a new level. Our point of view: The question: why are there people fighting against the government? Why must they risk their lives to fight for a thing looks so uncertain? There is an old saying in China: hunger breeds discontent. That means: if one is in deep hunger, you do not expect the one to do anything rational. Then, it is clear that the root cause of the state is the economic problem. The economic base determines the superstructure. If people have enough fortune to spend, enough food to choose, will they do anything against the human development? Some people will say that the ideologies of religions’ difference lead the situation to an unforgivable condition. The Taliban also believed that the Christians put the Islamic religion into a time of struggle. Yes, the religions did play a very important role in the conflict, but you can see in the world today, up to 10 or more religions exists, how could the others remain in harmony but Islam do not? That is the religious tolerance. I can stay in a way of peace due to the living quality I am having. Then, why will I fight for something I already had? Now we put more focus on the balance between the human rights and the differences on a common crime and terrorist attacks.
How do you separate a local crime to a territory attack? Why do countries like to put the terrorism into an emergency state? To me, terrorist attacks may bring harm and fear to the whole society, but I do not think the judgment towards the measurement to the penalty should be separated, it is all a kind of crime. Pleases let me set an example, one murdered someone for particular reason, once the one is connected to terror, the law which taken from the judge are totally different, but the action the one take is the same. It is a contradictory to the democratic world. That is treating unfairly the criminal himself.
In the world today, the law should protect everybody’s humanity and rights but the law itself is sometimes against the human rights.
Nada High School
In Japan, people are more worried of direct attacks from foreign ground, such as nuclear missiles and ships entering Japanese oceans, than what is usually seen as terrorism, which are sudden attacks from inside the country like the 9/11. Thus, people in Japan do not really have a fear of sudden attacks in their homes from foreign parties. The government also assures the citizens that even though certain threats like North Korea has committed terrorist attacks on Japan in the past such as kidnapping of up to an estimated 120 people in the period of more than 30 years, these problems are being taken care of to their best, and people do not need to have a sense of emergent fear for problems such as this. Of course, as a country that follows American standards of security and government, there has been an increase of security in airports for
65
example, but instead of feeling that these precautions are against individuals’ liberty, people are assured that they are safe.
Another reason for this attitude is because Japan stays away from violence as much as possible. This is not a subjective overview of Japanese behavior, but a regulation based on the Constitution of Japan. After WW2, Japan declared never to have war or fight against other parties. This has prevented Japan from taking actions in the North Korea issue, and this has become both a good thing and bad thing for Japan. According to Katsu Furukawa of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Japan's Korea policy has been characterized as a mix of "strategic caution" and "opportunistic policy." Although the Korean Peninsula has long been critical to Japanese national interests, observers predicted Japan was "unlikely to play a proactive role" and would remain "cautious, reactive, and adaptive to the process of reunification as it develops." This means Japan has addressed other countries to take a role in trying to solve the North Korea problem, as was seen when China and North Korea, as well as USA had meetings in 2009. The Japanese government though, has introduced “defensive weapons” such as missiles to destroy other missiles, not as a military force, but as a defensive means against worst‐case scenarios. This has caused controversies in Japan and many civilians argued that this is against the Japanese Constitution, but again, these measures are inevitable for Japanese civilians’ safety. What is interesting though, is in countries like Singapore, people feel security and safety when government intervenes with one’s lifestyle. This to an extent is very similar to Japan; unlike the stereotype that government intervention leads to the loss of individuals’ liberty and freedom and unhappy people, people of Singapore and Japan instead feel safer when measures such as these are taken. In Japan at least, counter‐terrorism laws not only exist for countering terrorism, but also to suppress terror in the society. For example, people in Japan feel safer and protected when they see police doing random checks in the street. Yet, obviously there are countries where this may not apply so easily. These are countries that consider an individual’s liberty as being very important. As was seen in the article on the Deseret Morning News, Americans may feel their liberty is being threatened by government measures to counter terrorism. In cases like this, it may seem undeniable that a certain balance of one’s liberty and one’s safety must be sustained. But this may not be the case if people are informed of the effects of these counter‐terrorist measures. For example, one may not be so unhappy with putting their shampoo in plastic bags before going on planes if they are informed of what this exactly prevents, and why doing this has a significant effect in countering terrorism. In the cases of counter terrorism laws that are sometimes discriminatory against certain individuals, the public, and also the individuals themselves must be informed that this is for the good of the country. If a fugitive for example was on the run, and his characteristics were distinguished by a long moustache, would it be discriminatory if police stopped every single man with a long moustache? It is appropriate that in order for safety, sometimes certain individual’s are treated differently. What though, must also be enforced, is education of the police, and other authorization that have power to enforce these laws. Section 44 of the counter‐terrorism laws that allow for police to search cars of people who they find suspicious of terrorism without a warrant or consent, is a case where corruption of this kind can be seen. Where in Ireland, only about 120 cases have been seen where this was used, London, where there are only
66
double the population, approximately 150,000 cases where this has been used have been recorded. As far as terrorism issues are concerned, there is no particular threat in London that could allow for such a high amount. This is clearly misuse of regulations. Police must be informed of why and how they use these powers, and also need to respect the individual’s rights. In an ideal society where power is used appropriately, strengthening of counter‐terrorist measures are not going to breach human liberty, but add to the safety, both physically and psychologically, of the civilians. In conclusion, one must accept that for safety, there needs to be steps that may clash against human liberty, but also accept that safety is the fundamentals that make society. Yes, one’s individual liberty is vital in a capitalist society, but an individual’s safety and wellbeing, as well as countering fear and terror among civilians is absolutely necessary for society, and this must be insured for any liberty to exist at the first place. If this means enforcement of counter‐terrorism laws that may touch on liberty issues, people in society must embrace it positively. Montgomery Bell Academy A pastel blue sky was the backdrop of chaos. The center of global trade all but vaporized in a meticulously planned outbreak of hatred. As the dust settled, the once certain advance of capitalism was on the precipice of reversal. The September eleventh attacks revealed the reactionary countercurrent that had formed against the mainstream of markets and western political values. The root cause of these Islamic fundamentalist movements remains unclear. Some historians and political scientists have described modern Jihad as the continuation of bitterness left over from colonialism; others call it an inevitable clash of civilizations—that the ideologies of liberalism and fundamentalism are inherently in opposed and globalization precipitated conflict. The specter of terrorism demands an array of pragmatic responses. These may not be mathematically perfect, nor should they necessarily be so. The response to terror should be twofold, it should encompass both proximal and root causes of violence—security and something deeper. As the west raise their shields to protect their peoples and markets from hateful conflagration, we should in the same motion hold out a welcoming hand to the desperate masses from which the enemy draws its ranks. It is important to understand how the management of terrorism affects the regulated populous. In the United States, several successful and unsuccessful counter‐terrorism policies were put into place. While international intelligence ploys are said to have prevented several attacks, many domestic strategies have been used primarily for purposes unrelated to terrorism, au fond doing little more than violating the personal liberties of Americans. The policy that caused the greatest public consternation was part of the USA PATRIOT act. It gave enormous leeway to law enforcement officials to wiretap and investigate without immediately informing those who are searched, and in many cases, not obtaining a warrant. These provisions were written with the assumption that law enforcement knew both who the terrorist were and that these increased powers would be used exclusively on terrorist suspects. In the end these new powers were used to regulate parts of the population unrelated to terrorism, often on
67
the hunches and assumptions of police agents rather than any semblance of due process. It is precisely this lack of legal oversight that is dangerous; it enables the state to violate the liberty of its citizenry unabated. Only a system that provides clear oversight and procedurally regulates the police powers of the state could feasibly avoid the slow encroachment into privacy of its citizenry. Yes, investigating terrorists secretly may be critical to collective security, but the law must protect those with hollow charges against them; therefore warrants should be issued by a detached legal arbiter. While no such system would be objective or perfectly fair, it may be enough. The situation in the U.K. is different than that in the United States. In the U.K., the two most controversial issues are control orders and functional search and seizure powers. The latter is under intense scrutiny, especially because the vast majority of cars and people searched were of Middle Eastern descent. Many legal theorists in the U.K. argued that such laws were discriminatory and targeted at a specific population. The laws, because of this controversy and the belief that they sacrifice individual liberties too greatly, are expected to be abandoned in time. Control orders are a much less one‐sided issue. Control orders are more lenient in that they put suspected terrorists on house arrest, usually for a preordained length of time. When control orders were originally enacted, the police or authorities were not required to divulge information to the controlee. In fact, the controlee was usually completely unaware of the evidence compiled against him. The authorities claimed that revealing whatever intelligence they had acquired against the controlee would either hurt a potential informant, like a family member, or potentially damage electronic surveillance. Controlees and their representatives argued that not revealing the extent of the charges or the evidence compiled deprived the controlees of individual liberties and the ability to defend themselves properly. Eventually, despite the claim that the control orders were designed to protect the security of the entire United Kingdom, judges began to lean towards protecting individual liberty. The tendency now is to require some disclosure of charges or evidence against the controlee and to limit both the scope and time limit of the control order.
68
Education PreSymposium The students considered education as their second online Symposium topic, to coincide with the BBC’s Hunger to Learn series. The participants’ countries have (had) a variety of approaches to the question of state education; this was the first area the students discussed and on which they wrote. Questions of state versus private provision in less economically developed countries are especially freighted, yet this issue is also contentious in more affluent countries. Education at the individual level – students’ experiences, expectations, and priorities – was a second area the students explored. Finally, and perhaps most relevantly in conjunction with the other Symposium topics, students were asked to examine the contribution education could make towards a world of increased harmony and integration.
Symposium Speaker: Dr Ralph Townsend
Dr Townsend began with an overview of education as the key to knowledge and understanding, to the process of “drawing out” one’s potential. He took students through the four revolutions in education: the invention of writing, then its systemization, the printed word, and finally the explosion of information technology of the modern era. Of all human inventions, he suggested, those pertaining to the transmission of information – education in its most elemental sense – have been history’s most important. With this in mind, the unevenness of the global distribution of education was a serious impediment to human dignity and the development of free societies. He moved to look at the role of education as that drawing out of talent, and then asked the students to consider the role of values in education. Many of the Symposium topics had stressed the need for a re‐evaluation of priorities and understanding, and Dr Townsend asked the students to consider the centrality of morals and values in their own education. This led to a discussion of the role of faith and its place in an education system. The permanence and durability of the world’s great religions was emphasized, as was the role of tolerance between them. Growing secularization of the European continent has to contend with increasing radicalization of religion in other parts of the world; there was, Dr Townsend contended, a critical role for education in bridging this gap
69
and increasing global understanding; how far there might be the possibility for a covenant of hope between the world’s faiths and between its communities. Dr Townsend asked students to consider whether there was merit in the idea of a global curriculum; if so, to imagine what would be its constituent parts, and the degree to which there could be consensus towards and approval of such a curriculum. The students were then invited to discuss the shortcomings they perceived in their own educations and educational systems, Many drew attention to the overarching pressure of exams, and the reduced role for development of the deeper being, or of tolerance and understanding of difference, particularly for those of different socio‐economic groups. Dr Townsend concluded with three quotes from students’ work submitted before the Symposium: “Income inequality … makes governments responsible for the education of their poor citizens”(ALA); “Education is temple, elevator, and insurance agency” (Johannes Kepler); “..harmony and integration… heart understanding lies in cultivating empathy towards the needs and concerns of others.” (Raffles Institution) After lunch, the students carried on their discussions in Moberly Library, aided by Mr Martin Kapoun, Ms Jarmila Skampova, and Mr Peter Ferguson. They then redrafted their essays in response to the modified title below. Nada High School and Shiyan Cooperation High School presented their redrafted essays in Moberly Library.
70
Using two examples from this week’s Symposium topics, discuss how education can contribute to a world of increased equality and
integration. Winchester College The ability to learn is fundamental to all human beings. When early hominids realised that they could dig for roots more easily using crafted tools rather than their hands, they took the first steps towards becoming a force with the power to shape the planet. Considering the role that learning had to play in our success as a species, education has rightly taken a central position in the lives of many humans throughout our history. It is necessary that we determine the role that education ought to play in the future, as the direction and the success of our species is intimately linked with decisions made on this topic. Most individuals from all cultures would agree that education can contribute to a world of increased equality and integration; the practical implications of this link are still a centre of debate. It is in the interest of governments to provide all children with a certain standard of education: years of work at school provide skills and knowledge that will ultimately lead to individuals performing their jobs more effectively, which for most will be beneficial to the government itself. In terms of fulfilling this objective, the value of a more general education is debatable; indeed, limited resources are arguably being wasted on teaching children topics which will be irrelevant to their later lives. The response to this criticism is threefold. Firstly, a more general education allows children to experience a wider range of subjects for a longer period of time, and hence they can make more informed decisions about future career paths. Secondly, wide bases of knowledge give most adults the option of changing profession and still possessing the necessary knowledge of their new vocation. Thirdly and most importantly of all, educating youths has a multitude of social benefits: for example, a more thorough understanding of biology educates students about healthy living, reducing the burden on national health services, whilst study of ethics and history demonstrates the horrific consequences of racism and prejudice; this encourages tolerance and social cohesion. Strength in other subjects such as literacy, numeracy, physics, chemistry or languages also has a positive effect. As one of the aims of government should be to create a society which flourishes as much as possible, these factors cannot be ignored: children tend to be less prejudiced than adults, and hence more receptive to differing points of view. For example, education reduces the risk associated with the development of terrorist organisations (as many scholarly articles attest), a situation which obviously promotes the aims of the essay title. Another case can be seen when considering environmental change: by teaching individuals the true nature of this problem, it can be shown that many of the conflicts relating to the negotiation of the seemingly required economic change are unnecessary and counterproductive. It is also important to consider the form that education takes in a country, as this will affect its success. In the U.K, the education sector has been split, with a state and a private system. There is currently a disparity in quality between the two: in the 2009 A‐Level league tables (as constructed by The Times), 16 out of 25 of the top schools are
71
independent schools, despite only 7% of children being educated in them. Bearing this in mind, it is not surprising that wealthier parents send their children to private institutions. Ideally, governments should frown on private education, as it usually gives a significant advantage in terms of the quality of teaching to the wealthy. In reality, this has been reflected in the British establishment by the introduction of quotas for the numbers of state school students in further education. However, this is both a superficial and unfair solution of the problem: such decrees fundamentally limit the intellectual freedom of universities, with deserving students being ignored and less commendable ones gaining places. In light of the increasingly large numbers of bursaries being offered by public schools as a result of a revision of the Charities Act, bright children from poor backgrounds can obtain an education worthy of their ability, and so quotas biased against such places become highly undesirable. This conflict between public and state is not inevitable: in Germany, such is the quality of the grammar schools that there is no need for highly capable students to look elsewhere. An ideal system would be a universal meritocracy, where the most intelligent students (whatever their background) are placed in the same classes. This would allow this group to learn most effectively. However, the practicalities of such a system would require much consideration: the best children do not live in the same place, so either national (and global) infrastructure would have to be improved dramatically, or an unsatisfactory regional scheme would be required. In order to amalgamate the children of the wealthy into a state system, standards of teaching in state would have to be raised substantially. This requires large quantities of revenue that the government simply cannot acquire without unpopular tax raises or diverting money from other uses. Raising the taxes of the rich alone is also not a viable option, as this would drive away the very people whose children the government are trying to integrate. It would seem that in practice, a private education system will remain necessary; even in Germany, 6% of children attend private schools (albeit usually for the reason of indiscipline). The government does derive some benefit from it in that the financial burden of universal state education is reduced. The value of education on the individual level does vary from person to person. Education shapes individuals’ personality, as it allows them to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses; it also creates boundaries as to what is acceptable in society and provides reasons for such values. Learning can be an enjoyable, interesting and stimulating experience. However, over the last fifty years the nature of education has transformed. The current system in the U.K. is heavily examined, with the final three years of school being almost entirely consumed by GCSEs, AS and A levels. This dependence on testing is detrimental to learning: too much time is spent on revising for exams and studying exam technique. By the end of sixth form, nearly a year has been wasted, possibly accounting for Britain’s mediocre 2007 performance in the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment; valuable teaching and learning could be carried out in the time spent preparing for exams. The methods that feature in modern teaching have also changed with the introduction of new technologies such as email and the internet. Technology is more of a help then a hindrance: while the problems associated with computing (such as plagiarism and electronic distractions) can be overcome with a little self and external discipline, the benefits are irreplaceable. The internet is a fantastic resource that is available to nearly everyone in this country, while another facet is the ease of communication. Email allows students to communicate with their parents and friends despite being miles away, and also promotes organisation. If responses are constructed to the issues described above,
72
then everyone will find the experience of education more rewarding: a happier society results. One of the biggest debates that rages in society today is the problem associated with the teaching of creationism. On one side of the fence sits the Christian fundamentalist, calling for creationism to be taught on an equal footing with evolutionary theory; on the other stands lurks the ardent atheist, calling for the complete dismissal of such theories. As is often the case, both extremes are flawed. It is true that creationism should not be taught as a scientific theory, as it contradicts the nature of the scientific method; however, Richard Dawkins is unjustified in attempting to slay it completely, as on a philosophical level it is just as self‐consistent as science. The non‐cognitivist R.H. Hare argues that both fields have their own ‘bliks’, their own set of unfalsifable assumptions, and hence using one to criticise the other is pointless; his assertion is a valid one. As demonstrated here, education removes incorrect scientific, religious and philosophical assertions about the world, a position leading to mutually enriched understanding between cultures. It is through education that advancement in all fields happen; if it is available to all, then the widest possible group of individuals can construct coherent theories and conceive of new ideas, building on a solid base. Therefore it is important that a strong, effective system is implemented and that as many children as possible benefit from it. On a fundamental level, education can teach us that differences in opinion can be constructive. To conclude, it is only through global cooperation on this topic that humanity can reach greater harmony across the globe. Johannes Kepler School The creationism vs. evolution debate, the question on the role of private education, the issue of human capital‐investment all inevitably lead to one important question: What exactly do we expect the education process to achieve? What is the purpose of education? We can think of different answers. All of them are correct, each to a certain extent depending on the particular cultural and political background. Also, various answers have prevailed in history, setting different goals for education and forming the education system. Maria Theresa's law making school attendance obligatory in the Habsburg dominion in 1775 was most probably motivated by the need of the absolutist state's bureaucracy to reach every citizen with written regulations. Literacy was promoted as a means of control, education altogether was meant to teach submission. The ideological and manipulative effect of education is difficult to avoid and easy to misuse. The communist dictatorship, for example, demanded students to repeat the rigid formulas of the ideology, to learn the history of the communist movement and the leader's biographies by heart, to hide one's opinions behind a mask. Also the conflict between creationism and evolutionism in science lessons is burdened with ideology
73
and manipulation on both sides, as only religious fundamentalism can collide with science and only overconfident, overestimated science can aim to falsify religion. In developed western countries, there's usually more freedom and more room for the individual's decision. This doesn't always lead to a more sensible choice, though. By numerous young people, the goal of education is admitted to be social respect and money; a grade is more valued than real knowledge. Therefore, many recur to cheating and virtually buying the grades for money, as apparent from the recent Western‐Bohemian University affair. This can only strengthen social tension and the feeling of injustice among those who cannot afford this behaviour. We should look for other goals of education than a higher salary. Teachers and doctors in the Czech Republic may act as an example, as they are heavily underpaid. Nevertheless, thousands of intelligent young people apply for studying medicine and pedagogics every year. Why? Many dream of making a career overseas, of course, but the majority chooses these fields of study simply because they take money for secondary. For primary, they take the calling. The Czech sociologist Jan Keller describes three roles education has played so far by three metaphors: the temple, the elevator and the insurance agency. An insurance agency's meaning is to secure what is present. Today, a certain level of education often is regarded as a conditio sine qua non by the family. Its meaning is to secure the family's present social status. Since many mid‐class families share this policy, competition is getting more and more rapacious and the level of education taken for necessary is getting higher and higher. Eventually, this causes an extensive pressure on children. They are sent to bilingual kindergartens, they attend school as soon as possible (or even sooner), they always attend the best school possible, no matter how far, and they have to engage in a lot of extracurricular activities. The child may seem to be strongly motivated and very ambitious, but in fact, this isn't but the pressure of the family. There's no reason for a true motivation to develop ‐ there's no reason for a calling to be heard, as no one listens. Regarding education as an elevator ‐ as a way of getting higher in terms of social status and wealth – counts with some opportunity, at least. But a calling is most likely to be heard in a temple. A calling is both an opportunity and an obligation. It's not an obligation to one's family or to one's social status, it's an obligation that originates in being chosen for education, in being initiated. For education, one is always chosen, one depends always on some gift, on some talent that makes it possible for the person to study in the first place. Therefore, education will always be a temple. Denying this only hinders people from hearing the calling. It is apparent that professions keeping initiation rituals and vows (doctors, judges, soldiers, priests) are more likely to act as callings. It's also apparent that children from developing countries value their education much higher as they are aware of the exclusive opportunity they have been given unlike most of their friends. Not surprisingly, they would rather become nurses and teachers than bankers or entrepreneurs. For them, the school is definitely a temple. Education does not necessarily contribute to equality. Education, in fact, can create a much more unequal world through brain drain. Not only helps this maintain the level of economic inequality, but the best students from less developed countries are actually
74
extremely overburdened by the society’s command to go to the best universities like Harvard, Cambridge and Oxford. Young people who are unsuccessful in this global hunt for talents – or global hunt for exclusive education from the other point of view – may be very miserable. In countries like India, unsuccessful applicants for international scholarships are known to commit suicides on a large scale. However, they may also seek appreciation in extremely devoted communities opposing the western way of life – they may become terrorists, for they lack the natural bond with their culture, they lack the natural, peaceful bond with their community. They lack a place in their community, they lack self assurance. They lack the calling. A calling makes an individual find his or her proper place in the society. However, everyone must not only hear a calling, but also integrate their calling into the global harmony, which definitely is an admirable, culturally independent goal of education. In fact, music in general is perhaps the most essential common denominator of all cultures, it is the kind of expression every human being is most likely to respond to. All cultures seem to have a type of music. Everybody can be taught music, even if they do not possess the intelligence required to learn foreign languages, mathematics or cultural studies. People at every age can be taught music, wherefore it is not limited to countries with widespread secondary education. Harmony of the callings must be achieved. Therefore, music is vital at any age. Musical expression has traditionally been a part of a community’s religious life – it has been a means of creating and maintaining the community itself. If today the church, for example, doesn't take care of at least a few hymns a week, the school should. Listening, participating, becoming part of the community ‐ no one can aim at achieving harmony who has never experienced the feeling of one's voice sharing the same wavelength with other's, of one's voice being unique and important, yet taking part in a greater, amazing performance. African Leadership Academy “Knowledge is power. Information is liberating. Education is the premise of progress in every society, in every family…” Kofi Anan, 7th Secretary General of the United Nations. From the words of this great man, it is only prudent to argue that national governments should be responsible for the formal education of their citizens because of the benefits they, the citizens, enjoy. That being said, economic and political factors compromise this responsibility. Income inequality in society also makes governments responsible for the education of their poor citizens. Though several factors motivate people to get them educated, holistic education makes them agents of positive change. Finally, giving a more global and practical outlook to the world’s educational systems will rid the world of its plights and conflicts. So, when governments invest in education, they begin the long process of manufacturing their professionals. These people then work to increase the GDP of their
75
nations. For instance in 1998 Mauritius had a literacy rate of 83.8% and a GDP of about 4 billion dollars. However with a literacy rate of 96% as of 2007‐2008 the GDP has risen to 8.65 billion. This suggests a direct relationship between education and a country’s economic progress – all other things being equal. In addition, governments derive revenue from the taxes they impose on the incomes and economic activities of these professionals. Therefore governments benefit from the education of their citizens and must be chiefly responsible for it. Today, national governments are aware of the importance of the education of their citizens. However, political agendas and economic restraints hinder them from fully ensuring citizenry education. For instance early this year in Ghana, a 4year high school educational reform planned by a previous government was disregarded by a newly elected government because it claimed to have had its special agenda. Yet, the said high school reform was to give students enough time to cover and deeply understand the topics in their syllabi rather than to rush them through in 3years. Also, economic resources of governments are scarce so they might not be able to fund the education of citizens. Yet, governments may encourage private‐public partnerships to fund education at all levels. Therefore overcoming these political and economic restraints is an extent to which governments can be responsible for educating their citizens. National governments have to subsidize education for their citizens who cannot afford it. This is because; income inequality is inherent to society. Hence, there shall continue to exist, the so called “rich” and “poor” schools in countries. The introduction of free primary school education in Malawi in 1994 led to an increase in the number of school going children from 1.6 million to over 3 million. When governments subsidize education, they increase the literacy rate and quality of life of their citizens. So subsidizing education is another measure of national governments’ responsibility towards citizenry education. Education on an individual level is invaluable. In most African countries education is approached with the view of learning as many facts as possible rather than enhancing thought and creativity. This imbalanced view, leads to many students being pressurized by themselves or their family and friends to go to school with the intention of making lots of money in the future. Whatever the reasons, holistic education which involves extra curricula activities tailored to individual passions is invaluable. This is because, the learner is then able to critically think, examine and apply class taught concepts to life. A good example is at the African Leadership Academy where a business oriented student uses an entrepreneurship class concept to set up a café on campus. By this, the student is not only applying what he or she has been taught in the classroom to life, but also improving the lives of the students and faculty around him or her by providing them with food. So, holistic education at an individual level is important because it improves the lives of learners and those around them. Specifically, a holistic education on areas such as the environment and the financial structure in an aim to increase equality and integration in the world. More often than not, people tend to destroy the environment – cut trees, over fish, burn fuel, etc – because they are ignorant of the negative consequences. However, if they were more knowledgeable they will treat the environment with more as they will know its (the environment) the destruction will be detrimental to mankind. Therefore one purpose of holistic education is to teach basic principles of environmental conservation which will not only benefit the individual but the community and the world at large. It is fair
76
to acknowledge the fact that some people tend to destroy the environment despite their knowledge of it. Nonetheless, not educating people at all will lead to greater destruction. Similarly, the recent crisis with the global financial structure could have been prevented with holistic education. If the educated per say, were made aware of how their consumption behaviours could trigger an economic recession, they wouldn’t have taken large loans and mortgages, spent beyond their means and finally traded high risk loans amongst themselves. Clearly, the global financial crisis was caused by inappropriate consumer and financial behaviour which could have been prevented with the financial knowledge that an education is expected to provide. Moreover, education enhances the employment, innovation and earning of individuals. Hence, education bridges the inequality gap between the rich and the poor to a substantial if not to a complete extent. Therefore education, in and of itself, is a tool that can be used to tackle problems of the environment and global financial architeture. Therefore, giving a global and practical outlook to education may lead to a world of increased harmony and integration. First, the educational curricula of schools in different countries when influenced by distinct cultures, people and places will go a long way to reduce stereotypes and foster cross‐cultural understanding. This is why many top Universities strive to have a diverse student body so that students can get a wholesome and international experience while studying in school. For instance in 2008 the University of Virginia won an award for excellence in student recruitment for having the most diverse student population as an incentive for other universities to do the same and to applaud its efforts. Secondly, study abroad programs should be introduced to students in different countries at an early stage than the university. This will ensure that students have a good understanding of what is happening around them and in the world. In Kenya the Alliance High School has partnerships with Brooks (America) where they send one or two students every year for a semester abroad. Lastly, peace education can be incorporated into the syllabi of schools worldwide so that students know how to resolve conflict. Cedarberg primary school (Port Elizabeth‐ South Africa) offers peace education which is funded by the General Motors South Africa foundation. That being said, avenues must be created to allow students to practice the skills learnt in peace education. For instance, students can participate in the student politics to solve conflicts. After carefully assessing education in general, it can be said that governments ought to be responsible for the formal education of their citizens. This is because the government directly benefits from an educated populace in terms of economic growth and innovation. Secondly, education on an individual level is important as it improves the lives of the learner and those in his society. Finally, a world with harmony and integration is possible when education is given a global and practical outlook and when peace education is taught in schools. “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Nelson Mandela. Sources http://www.uneca.org/aisi/nici/country_profiles/Mauritius/mauritab.htm http://unstats.un.org/unsd/default.htm
77
http://www.sdnp.org.mw/~phindu/primary/primary.htm http://www.newsfromafrica.org/newsfromafrica/articles/art_902.html http://www.america.gov/st/diversity‐english/2008/January/200801291112461CJsamohT1.049221e‐03.html http://us‐cdn.creamermedia.co.za/assets/articles/attachments/24447_gmsa.pdf Karachi Grammar School Education in the broadest sense is any act or experience that has a formative effect on the mind, character or physical ability of an individual. In its technical sense education is the process by which society deliberately transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills and values from one generation to another. Education is imperative to bridging divides within societies‐ because it essentially prevents the rich from leaving the poor behind‐ it takes all men along. In developing countries like Pakistan, because the government does not have enough money to allocate for schools (75% of the Federal Budget is spent on defense!), there is not suprisingly a dearth of schools. To fill this gap, religious schools called “ Madrassas” spring up at an exponential rate. What these schools do is attract young boys( primarily) and girls with the promise of “free” education, accommodation and food. These madrassas are actually terrorist recruitment centers. They promise free education but they deliver distorted Quranic education. Brainwashing young children to become suicide bombers, to give their lives “For God” because apparently the Quran demands this. Because these children know no better, terrorism is not out of the norm for them‐ they believe suicide attacks or “ Hamlas” are justified. Increased government involvement and increasing government responsibility can integrate a society that is tainted by terrorist attacks and animosity. The root cause of the war on terror is a lack of “ proper” education. If governments in third world countries were to take more responsibility there would definitely be greater integration within people all across the globe ‐ as what is tearing them apart would cease to exist. On a second level, in order to understand the significance of education on a world of increased equality and integration, it is important to understand what globalization is and what it aims to achieve. Globalization is an ongoing process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have integrated through a globe‐spanning network of communication and trade. The term is sometimes used to refer specifically to ‘economic globalization’. However, globalization is usually recognized as being driven by a combination of economic, technological, socio‐cultural, political, and biological factors. Hence, it is clear that the ‘engine’ of globalization is fuelled by a plethora of activities which are all linked to education. Education is the glue which can bind all nations together and create a generic language which can allow the global‐society to proceed as one big block.
78
However, in today’s world one cannot reach a consensus on any matter if one does not consider its economic implications. The relationship between education, social enterprise, business and the economy is rapidly interlinking, the importance of which is widely recognised by government, academics and practitioners. The educational systems throughout the world today act like machines creating robots to serve the needs of the economy. This has significantly reduced the importance of education and has diminished its original purpose, which was to make people respect and made aware of other’s traditions, cultures, values and religions. Another problem a capitalistic system of economy breeds is its inherent characteristic of widening the gap between the rich and the poor, the “well‐educated” and the “illiterate”. This is particularly vivid in our country, Pakistan, where private education and public education are different in almost every way. A free market economy will inevitably lead to an inconsistent distribution of income throughout the population which will result in some people being able to afford private education and some not. A person’s education is one of the most important factors in determining whether or not they will become a productive member of society. That is why when considering an education the quality of the education is almost as important as the education itself. And, as mentioned earlier since the educational system today focuses on producing people who will be successful in the highly “economical society” we live in, those who go to public schools will be unsuccessful in life. Hence, the world today has been caught up in a vicious cycle where the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, in terms of both money and education. Francis Bacon, a renowned painter, said, “Knowledge is power”. It is power enough to reform societies‐ to bring them together. Standardized curriculums in some countries could possibly bring provinces together. It is through something so enlightening as knowledge that people can come together, that the era of fundamentalism can be put to an end. Indeed, education is a fundamental human right and can cure global problems if provided to everyone. Raffles Institution “The foundation of every state is the education of its youth.” – Diogenes Laertius Human and social capital are indispensable in the pursuit of national development. Human capital refers to a person’s manifestation of economic value by his skills and knowledge, while social capital refers to one’s social network. An OECD economic survey of Denmark reveals that building the former leads to value‐added production, entrepreneurial success, advanced research, as well as a highly skilled and flexible workforce for any nation. [1] On the other hand, an OECD symposium on education reveals that the latter boosts political and civic engagement, institutional and interpersonal trust, tolerance, political knowledge and ultimately, voter turnout. [2] Since education imparts skill and knowledge, and broadens one’s worldview, it is the most effective way of raising human and social capital in the next generation. Thus, as Laertius proclaimed, education is the cornerstone of national development. However,
79
separate ideologies determine the extent of a government’s commitment to education. This is evident in the great variety of successful educational systems. For example, the laissezfaire approach of the US dictates that a large portion of education is funded by the private sector. In 2009, half of the 5% GDP spent on education came from private sources.[3] This is worlds apart from the social democratic system in Sweden where private spending in education is marginal[4]; only 0.2% of Sweden’s 6.2% GDP expenditure on education came from private sources.[5] Definitely, results also differ: in Sweden, high standards of living, low social inequality and quality education are maintained by a high tax rate; the US has many peaks of excellence (evidenced by the Nobel results and the US’s leading technology and economy), but social inequality is more pronounced. It is hard to say which educational model is better, because this depends on the government’s own objectives. Minimally, the government should standardise curriculum as this ensures the quality of education. Contrary to popular belief, this does not expand much resource, and even the poorest countries in the world can fulfil it. Burkina Faso, for instance, has a standardised national curriculum[6] and provides teachers for primary and secondary schools. [7] However, there are many styles of standardizing curriculum and some governments choose to provide upgrading for teachers, authorize textbooks and hold state examinations. In Singapore, the Primary School Leaving Examination is compulsory for all primary school students, and the National Institute of Education holds mandatory teaching courses.[8][9] As a general guideline, though, government spending should be focused on providing for educational “hardware” – infrastructure and teaching resources, and “software” – teachers and the curriculum. This should occur in stages. Initially, “hardware” spending would be more important, to provide basic facility. “Software” spending should acquire a higher priority after this has been done, to add substance to the schools. Eric Hanushek, an education specialist at Stanford’s Hoover Institution, says that “the most effective policy is good teachers”, and thus it makes sense for developed countries to shift away from building new schools. Instead, improving teacher selection and concentrating on methods to best aid weaker students would achieve the best overall results. [10]
Education on the global scale Our world of economic globalization severely lacks a sense of harmony and integration by which we can connect with people of other cultural backgrounds. This can be tapped to establish environmental projects, reduce multilateral conflicts and rebuild our collapsed financial system, all of which require international effort. Internally, harmony and integration will strengthen existing communities and retain cultural values amidst increasing commonality. Education can bring about these ends by the promotion of connectivity, equality and a shared experience. Education can provide the tools for connectivity by training both head and heart to understand others. Head understanding involves teaching one language as an effective knowledge‐sharing tool. For example, English teaching connected Singapore, Japan, Korea and Hong Kong to the Western economy, and allowed them to ride on the judicial, financial and political systems of the West. Today, the former two are the top Asian nations on the Times index of stable and prosperous nations[11], and in 2008
80
Singapore, Tokyo, Hong Kong and Seoul were the four Asian cities on the Global Cities Index[12]. While such evaluation is disputable, teaching the lingua franca undeniably provides for increased connectivity. Heart understanding lies in cultivating empathy towards the needs and concerns of others. The Harvard Business Review lists skills such as listening ahead of the speaker, ‘listening between the lines’ and making sensitive remarks as essential for today. Many schools today include these in their character education curriculum, or actively emphasize them in the classroom setting[13]. To quote Benjamin Franklin, “...nothing is of more importance for the public weal, than to form and train up youth in wisdom and virtue”, and such training obviously includes equipping the next generation with sensitivity.[14] This comprises an awareness of others that does not compromise on students’ openness to interaction. Even if empathy is not taught, it can be learnt. Leaving the child with peers who are unique in appearance and character encourages him to embrace diversity and cooperation. The classroom facilitates an open exchange of ideas that also creates an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect.[15][16] Without first learning these, the child will become inept at finding his place in his society, let alone connecting with the world. In this light, education is essential in fostering harmony and integration.[17] Besides enabling connectivity, education as a system is a social equalizer, in that it delivers to the less‐privileged a higher level of knowledge than previously available, and hence grants them more opportunity for social mobility.[18] On the larger scale, education can narrow the margin between what the children of developing and developed countries can learn, and this leads to increased global integration. Simultaneously, because equal opportunities are offered to all, educational institutions become hotbeds of diversity. Over the last twenty years, minority enrollment in American colleges has leapt 120 percent, and the Asian and Pacific Islander enrollment at four‐year universities is 1.2 million.[19][20] This testifies to the creation of miniature global communities, through which students are exposed to the other traditions and values, and mutual acceptance is bred. Educated, respectful individuals graduate to become the backbones of their homelands, and reinforce the value of tolerance in their own communities. Finally, education promotes harmony and integration by the virtue of its shared experience. All students who have gone through classroom education, can share to some extent this learning process. This enables the countless exchange programs that take place today, where students are transplanted into a classroom environment apart from their own to connect with local students. The initial introductions by the participants of the Winchester International Symposium, for instance, have already shown that topics such as one’s favorite subject or teacher are familiar to all the others. On this basis, education has given us a platform for discussion and sharing. This indirectly engenders harmony and integration. Practically speaking… Having laid the ground rules, we are left with the question – what exactly do we teach? The scope of the Symposium has given us a range of topics to choose from, from which we can draw the following examples.
81
First and foremost, the situation of terror and security today can be taken as a negative example. As we have seen, this is a rapidly globalizing world, and an understanding of other nations’ histories and cultures is essential for any student to eventually step onto the world stage. Hence, this understanding should definitely be part of any curriculum. Conversely, an incorrect understanding of another nation’s history and culture, and teaching it with wrong values or intentions can have disastrous results. In the Madrassas (Islamic religious schools) of the Middle East, for example, a flawed stereotype of Western history and culture is taught in the context of religious fundamentalist values, which possibly leads to terrorism. This goes against the grain of global equality and integration. Equality, because those who are trained in these schools continue to lack literacy, proper values and scope in other areas of curriculum like the sciences and humanities; and integration, because the violence and disorder caused by terrorism pose severe threats to the state of global harmony. What education means to us As members of the next generation, education has inevitably become very much part of our existence. In many aspects, education or education‐related activities have become the centre of our focus, and how well we perform in this system goes on to affect our career and future social standing. Even those who are not within the system find themselves concerned over friends and relatives who are struggling to cope with its demands, and some even change their lifestyles to accommodate these. Given the above, we cannot help but wonder if excessive emphasis is being placed on education, both by the government and the society – to the extent that youth today are being harmed rather than trained, and in some cases the incentive to learn is killed altogether. Also, increased emphasis on developing a rigorous, standard education system has led many to lose sight of the far‐reaching and practical benefits that education can bring to the individual and to the society. Then again, can there ever be too much put into the nurturing of the next generation, who will soon form the backbone of society? We personally feel that all systems in this world are created towards an end, and in their implementation this purpose cannot be left aside. A balance has to be drawn such that education can bring about maximum benefit to the individual child, the nation and the world at large, but also maintain the well‐being of the same three. This is the best‐case scenario which would both push national development and foster integration, and this is what we should strive for. References: [1] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2009). Economic survey
of denmark, 2009. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/25/43978821.pdf
[2] Campbell, D. E. (2006). What is education's impact on civic and social engagement? .
Measuring the effects of education on health and civic engagement: proceedings of
82
the Copenhagen Symposium (pp. 25‐31). http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/61/37437718.pdf
[3] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2009). Education at a
glance 2009, oecd indicators. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/41/25/43636332.pdf
[4] Rojas, M. (2005). Sweden after the swedish model: from tutorial state to enabling state.
Stockholm, Sweden: Timbro. [5] Ibid. 3 [6] For example, the curriculum for primary school can be found on this webpage (in
French): http://www.meba.gov.bf/SiteMeba/scolaires/programme.html [7] Primary school teachers are trained at the Ecole nationale des Enseignants du
Primaire, while there are a variety of diplomas or certificates that a secondary school teacher can choose from, such as the Certificat d’Aptitude au Professorat des Collèges de l’Enseignement general.
This information is accessible from UNESCO at: www.unesco.org/iau/onlinedatabases/systems_data/bf.rtf
[8] National Institute of Education. (n.d.). History of teacher education and nie's evolution
and progress. Retrieved from http://www.nie.edu.sg/nieweb/about/loadMain.do?id=General Info&pid=4325388
[9] The Singapore MOE authorised syllabus can be found on this following website:
http://www.moe.edu.sg/education/syllabuses/ [10] Theil, S. (2009, August 10). Dumb money. Newsweek, CLIV (6/7), 34‐37. [11] Times Online. (2008, March 25). Top 50: the most stable and prosperous
countries in the world . Retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article3617160.ece
[12]A.T. Kearney, Inc., The Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Foreign Policy journal and
Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC.: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4509&page=1
[13] Bregman, Peter. (2009, October 27). Harvard business publishing: the
martial art of difficult conversation . Retrieved from http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/bregman/2009/10/the‐martial‐art‐of‐difficult‐c.html
[14] U.S. Department of Education (2009).Character education: our shared
responsibility . Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/character/brochure.html
[15] Jenkins, Diana. (2009). Disadvantages of homeschooling outweighing the
potential benefits of a classroom . Retrieved from
83
http://ezinearticles.com/?Disadvantages‐of‐Homeschooling‐‐‐Outweighing‐the‐Potential‐Benefits‐of‐a‐Classroom&id=2786776
[16] Christine Howe and Neil Mercer, University of Cambridge. (2008,
February 9). Teacher training resource bank children’s social development, peer interactions and classroom learning. Retrieved from http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/viewArticle2.aspx?contentId=14085
[17] Technical and Vocational School Guide. (2009).Online vs classroom
education. Retrieved from http://www.technical‐vocational‐schools.com/online_classroom_learning.aspx
[18] Social Action Australia. (2008, May 2). Education the great equalizer.
Retrieved from http://www.socialactionaustralia.org/2008/05/02/education‐the‐great‐equalizer/
[19] Douglas Amyx, Louisiana Tech University, Dennis Bristow, St. Cloud State University. (2006). Journal of diversity management: the importance of cultural diversity in the educational environment scale (icdee): development and testing. Retrieved from http://www.cluteinstitute‐onlinejournals.com/PDFs/2006436.pdf
[20] Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, . (2002). Jouranking america's
leading universities on their success in integrating african americans. Retrieved from http://www.jbhe.com/features/36_leading_universities.html
Shiyan Cooperation High School
Education is the process of learning and knowing, which is not restricted to our school text‐books. It is a holistic process and continues through our life. Even the regular happenings and events around us educate us, in one or the other way. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the existence of human beings is fruitless without education.
Education is at present a rather heated topic for people all over the world. Every wise country is supposed to put education as a great cause in its development. It is the education that brings all the 8 countries from the world together here. The importance of education is quite apparent. Education is the knowledge of putting one's potentials to maximum use. One can safely say that a human being is not in the proper sense till he is educated. The training of a human mind is not complete without education. Education makes man a right thinker. It tells man how to think and how to make decision and only through the attainment of education, man is enabled to receive information from the external world; to acquaint him with past history and receive all
84
necessary information regarding the present. Without education, man is as if in a closed room and with education he finds himself in a room with all its windows open towards outside world.
The first thing I would like to articulate is the word ‘goal’ may not be appropriate here. Our experiences teach us that some agreeable consequences cannot to be re‐established as a goal to achieve. But that cannot stop people picturing what the ideal education should be like.
In our opinion the essence to education is to nurture one’s sense and imagination, to waken it, and then to sharpen it. That’s the basis. A poet is not a real poet if his eyes have not touched every thread of clouds, and a painter is not worth his salt if he never gets lost in the patches of the colours. One should obsess the curiosity to perceive the world.
Then there comes the way of thinking. Perspectives may be varied. But critical thinking and creativity is crucial. The goal of education is not to form one’s thought solidly, but to emphasize the weight of independent thinking. To keep a cool mind towards both the current fashion and the treasure left by our ancestors. Only in this way the intelligence of man can be inherited and carried forward correctly.
(Another essential thing is courage. J.K. Rowling once, while delivering her commencement address at Harvard University, said:’ Talent and intelligence never yet inoculated anyone against the caprice of the Fates.’ Fear makes stress and depression. It can destroy youths and gifts.)
Mostly to the students, the essence of being educated is known widely.
Knowledge is Power.
Learning is the most powerful tool in the world. The more you know the better you get along in the world. Unless you have a decent education jobs will be scarce and you will struggle for the rest of your life trying to make ends meet. You don't have to be rich to survive, but you sure do need your education to stay ahead of the tax man, hunger, and ending up out on the streets of the city. Education is wonderful and with every turn of it you learn something interesting. Wiki Answers is an example of how you can help others by what you know, but also learn from others. It keeps your mind active and on the ball. As we age (and we all do) unless you keep your mind active you will have a poor quality of life. Knowledge keeps you alive and young. There is also the knowledge of life. Some people who have never had the opportunity for a fine education can be wiser than the ones that have a good education because they have learned much from life the hard way. Education is wisdom and having an education and closing your eyes and heart around you is the first turn to ignorance of the mind.
Getting paid for better jobs
Having an education will allow you a better chance of getting a job that pays a above minimum wage. Youth these days need to know the consequences of not finishing high school.
85
Formal education, together with plenty of work by the student can produce qualifications and credentials that are essential for most types of better paying jobs.
Then how far should government be responsible for ensuring the education of its citizens? Countries have their own education system, the education which the citizens take as a must varies between the countries. On Monday, we just discussed the economic statues of different sections of the world. We believe that the government ensuring the education of its citizens depends on their own economic power. In China, all citizens must attend school for at least nine years. The government provides primary education for six years, starting at age six or seven, followed by three years of junior middle education for ages 12 to 15. This is called Compulsory Education. Sociologists said the world in over 190 countries have achieved more than 170 free and compulsory education. The gradual extension of compulsory years of basic education has become the world universal truth. As noted in the UNESCO in 1991, "World Education Report", in which data are available in 169 countries, the median number of years of compulsory education for 7‐8 years and is generally 6 years from Africa to North America, Europe and the former Soviet Union 10 years, compulsory education be extended to second‐class education, first phase (junior high) in more countries than compulsory education covers only the first level education in the country for more. 1998 "World Education Report," showed that: a few data are available in 171 countries, compulsory education, the average life span of 8 years, the average age has reached 7.2 years in North America, Europe, and the average life span of major developed countries 10‐12 years.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development published in 1998, " Education ‐ OECD Indicators," a book that, in the vast majority of OECD countries, virtually all young people have at least 11 years of basic education, but participation in patterns are different. Most countries have begun to compulsory education at the age of 5‐6 years to complete the age of 14‐18 years old. Due to the increase in the unemployment crisis, and do not have adequate educational preparation of young people is difficult smoothly, those who completed 16 years of age for compulsory education in the country are increasingly turning to students to continue to remain in school until they complete high school education, that is, steady decline in school‐leaving age at 17 or 18 years old. Second, what contribution can education make towards a world of increased harmony and integration? It depends on different perspectives because it is not definite. From different standing points, you will surely get two contradictory conclusions. On one hand, I consider that good education means education in different areas. A well‐educated person has a broad vision of life and high intellectual potential. An educated person even with technical education is able to admire masterpieces in art, music, literature, etc. I assert that such person will be able to communicate with individuals of different ages and nationalities. I think that good educated people rarely make some rude or brutal things in their life. (For example, it is a notorious fact that during the Civil War in Russia in the beginning of 20th century the majority of educated people were either killed or deported to other countries. Uneducated people filled important posts in the government and the army. As a result many ferocious events happened‐ some cities were destroyed, citizens killed, houses ransacked. There is a possibility that history could have changed if more knowledgeable people would rule a country.)
86
Thus, I can conclude that education only benefits people. It makes a student think, find interactions among different problems and find their solutions. An education also promotes social harmony and provides stability. On the other hand, in order to get an excellent knowledge in any sphere, a student has to study a lot, learn not only the key facts of this or that subject, but understand basic causes and consequences of any event. Let us consider, for instance, such subject as literature. Students study various literature works at school or university, learn how genuine people reacted on different events in public or their private life, and how these events reflected in their works. Undoubtedly, to understand master's point of view, students have to question a lot and may be even criticize some literature works. I suppose that no matter if a student questions or criticize some works; it is very useful for him. Only deep understanding of a subject can enable him to do that. But to the world’s education, private schools and public schools are in a kind of competition; will that be an unfair treatment to poor economic states’ families? For the following reasons we believe there should be both private schools and the public schools at the same time Firstly, the cost of compulsory education for such huge number of people is so large that the government perhaps cannot offer. Naturally, the private schools come with the tide of fashion to reduce the cost of the education that the government offers. And then the saving money can do the other things which can bring more benefits to the public. Next, the private schools can also bring more competitions in the area, which can promote the quality of the education in varied schools. Every different school can provide different education to the citizens. Then we can choose the education more suitable to ourselves. In China traditional exam‐oriented system still exists in public high education. The colleges lay stress on students’ exam scores. In order to work for their degrees, students always bury themselves in books and large amounts of tests. By contrast, the private school pays more attention to the creativity of students and all‐round development. The students are encouraged to do develop their practical ability and originality. Unlike public school, private school can provide you with individual attention, and give you advice on choosing your favourite major and job. So somehow we should combine the public school and private school together to improve the education state of the country. The criticism I would like to make is the system of examination and the policy the universities to enroll students from the different provinces. During the present Chinese education, there is only one criterion to select the elites , namely, by examination which can’t judge the ability of the students completely. In that case, the usual education simply focuses on the grades the students can achieve without so much development of characteristic profoundly, that means, all the educators put the terminal examination as the first goal.
87
In our view, the global education curricula seem to be not realistic because people from different backgrounds and cultures make it hard to find only one attitude towards the one individual affair. And simultaneously education is far too distributed. They can’t accept the enormously idealistic distinctions from countries of contrastive social situation. It is the education that brought us 8 countries together here to have the precious opportunities to discuss the global environmental problems and terrorism and etc. without which everything will be in vain. Education is as if the windows which make us broaden our horizon to perceive the world more deeply here. It is education that makes the basis of the understanding of those problems just like environment and terrorism. We believe during 14 to 18 it is essential to enhance the ability to adapt to the society, for we can’t be protected restricted to school all the time. At the same time despite our youth, it is necessary for the young people to recognise a responsibility which is the basis of a citizen for the future society, after all we are the new reformers and centres in the innovative eras. Nada High School I believe that everyone will agree that education is a major part of every topic that was discussed in the symposium. Education is what begins a society; a society of people with common views and same ideas. And it is also what sustains a society. The definition of education is much more than to educate someone and it is the very building blocks of any topic that concerns the society. In this symposium, we discussed 4 large topics; Economics, the Environment, Terrorism and Security, and Education and Religion. All topics deserve to be discussed in the education perspective, but the two topics that require a new mindset are the environment, and religious differences. With the environmental issues, people are not educated of the emergencies of global warming, as well as each country’s environmental problems. These problems are even becoming so serious that in some cases, it becomes a part of our lifestyle, such as the insecticide and pesticide problem in Pakistan. The main problem today when it comes to environmental issues is the ignorance of people in first‐world countries, who are ironically the people who do the most damage to the environment. If I name some countries as an example, many people in the USA or Japan for example do not find emergency with the problem of CO2 emission leading to the rising of waters. And this may be a natural reaction; people in USA and Japan cannot see waters rising, and people are not worried about their country being washed away. What is required is more education of the issues and affairs of countries that are being affected, and knowledge to an extent that will allow for people in first‐world countries to feel the emergency of the problem at hand. For example, if case studies for Madagascar or Indonesia were done in the USA, and they were able to become personal with Madagascar or Indonesia, then people may find the environmental issues of today are more important and become aware of the effects of their acts.
88
In the case of religious differences, differences in beliefs and ideas about very fundamental subjects such as the meaning of life are questioned and challenged by other religious parties. Human dignity is literally attacked because two religions do not have the same opinions on traditions or books. Dr Townsend explained that for a sustainable society, there needs to be a respect between religions and parties. If I take a quote from the film, Remember The Titans, “I don't care if you like each other of not, but you will respect each other.” This is the attitude one must have against another religion. People need to understand that some people do not agree with personal beliefs and this is natural because people are from different cultures and different ages. May I add, this goes the same with controversial topics such as Atheism, where belief in a religion in itself is going against Atheism and vice versa. As religious issues become a touchy subject, I believe that Atheists should also get the equal respect as a person, and not condescended by ideas that are considered correct because it is “the general consensus”. If people are educated about what kind of beliefs people in other countries’ believe, and educated about why these people believe things that way, then, people may understand each other in cases where there might be conflict if otherwise. In both cases, an education of differences has become vital to the problem solving. Respect for other parties, even if one does not particularly agree with it is inevitable and necessary. Respect for individual character and personality must be the main goal for every single party in the world, which touches on some of the issues brought up by Dr Townsend today about a global curriculum. A consensus that respect for any party in the world, whether it is the problem in Pakistan and India or in the Middle East, may be the only resolution for an age where information technology is becoming a large part of one’s lifestyle and globalization is allowing for more and more people to intervene with each other. In fact, I believe in inequality and unbalance. Inequality is the fundamental basics of a free‐market capitalist economy model, inequality is what respects cultures and sustains cultural differences and personalities which make globalization solutions for today’s problem‐solving, and inequality is the absolute origin of human evolution. Even in one capitalist society, it is inevitable that poor people are born and rich people are born, and history has shown that this truth has withstood time and proved capitalism’s strengths as an economic society model. People must understand inequality is what supports us and agree that this financial gap in society is not “injustice” but a natural phenomenon. I recommend all people against this inequality to move to North Korea or some other communist society. I would also like to emphasize again that what we need is not equality but respect and understanding of the one’s own situation and another’s. Naturally, this means integration between many countries, and integration between the economic highs and lows of a society. If everyone were to be the same, there would never be space for discussion or teamwork, which depends on different opinions from different individuals. To conclude, I do not agree with the topic question that presupposes an increase in equality if there was education, but present a solution much greater; which is an increase in respect for different unequal parties and understanding. Integration will resultantly follow, and then globalization and answers to many world issues. This also answers the 3rd question that was presented by Dr Townsend, which was, “what areas of study are essential for a modern 14‐18 year olds curriculum?” If I repeat, education is what changes, ends, and begins a society, and social problems such as the ones
89
presented in the Symposium cannot be solved, at least in the long‐term if mindsets of the society are not changed from the very bottom, by use of education. Montgomery Bell Academy Unsustainable lending is largely to blame for the credit crisis. The banks were largely to blame for their extension of credit beyond advisable amounts, but those actions can be blamed on the poorly structured competitive environment in which they were lending. Those who bought homes at far too high a price cannot be described as rational actor responding to a poorly structured environment. They lacked any conception of the effects that their loans would have. It may not be a lack of education in the traditional sense, but it is a lack indeed. General school may no be the cure as it makes little sense to try to teach the finance of today to the borrowers of tomorrow. However greater individual awareness of personal finance must be somehow implemented, whether it be through public service or private consulting or else modern capitalism will continue to exploit and create an underclass perpetuating substantive inequality. The general ignorance that allowed for the credit crunch to take place typifies a deeper societal problem. There is a lack of understanding, awareness and interest in both individual and societal problems and concerns. Thoreau wrote that the mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation. The modern era has resulted in enormous wealth but a fundamental disconnect from value. Introspection has ceased to be the norm. We live in what seems to be the twilight of humanity. People no longer pursue any meaning but submit themselves to transient empty hedonism. This self-indulgence tames the human spirit and undermines the desire to enrich ones own knowledge for its own sake. With this interest, other worlds cease to be interesting. Complacency becomes the norm to others. Any sense of community falls in to disrepair as individuals cease to feel compelled to the other. This dog eat dog attitude begins to be instilled in grade school as competitive worldviews are inculcated in the human consciousness. Capitalism is not to be blamed but rather the extension of its reasoning into realms only tangentially related to economics. A paradigm shift must take place to prevent this extremism. Children must be taught to challenge values and hierarchies. Only broad and open-minded education can prevent what many have described as bourgeoisie complacency or its opposite, fundamentalism. Education can be a crucial tool in alleviating terrorism. Two main problems exist that contribute to terrorism: high poverty and low education. Improving the economic situation of a country, whether through natural economic development or outside aid, can decrease the conditions that make radicalization possible and the educational level as well. Education and poverty level are vitally linked in a chicken or egg relationship. Improving the education level in a vacuum, though, is crucial to preventing terrorism for two reasons. In hotbeds for terrorist recruitment, hatred of the enemy, whomever that may be, and ignorance of the true message of the Koran is high. Oftentimes, where an educational gap exists, local madrassahs fill in to provide education to young children. As these children grow up, they are brought up in an environment fraught with misinformation, dogmatism, demagoguery, and hatred. Madrassahs channel resentment or alienation felt by these normally poor students into outright hostility and the seeds of terrorism. Students are taught a bastardized Koran; anger towards the most convenient enemy, a faith in jihad, and a misguided belief in atrocities like suicide bombings. Young children cannot read but can assemble a Kalashnikov. Proper education can and should play a crucial role in addressing these terrorist breeding grounds.
90
The governments of countries with large terrorist populations should either work to improve literacy rates and the level of education or call upon more wealthy countries to provide the funding to do so. In the battle to for the hearts and minds of these young children who can either join society or destroy it, education must play a large role. To end fundamentalism and ignorance, education and its eye-opening and enlightening powers must be improved, expanded, and used in the correct way.
91
Completing the Story Presymposium Having studied the four main Symposium themes individually, the students moved to consider how far they interact, and how far global and common solutions to these problems are possible. Before arriving in Winchester they were asked to think about their individual approaches to the topics as whole; they were also ready to debate together and to see how far their ideas would evolve during the week of the Symposium. They were to join together on the final day of the Symposium to draft a common statement of response to the central Symposium challenge: The Symposium Accord, as well as individual school responses.
Symposium Guest Speakers:
Mr Brad Gioia; Principal Wang Zhaohe; Mr Chris Khaemba The principals gave their views on the week’s topics and experiences, suggesting different emphases as the students prepared to come together to draft their individual and common statements. Mr Brad Gioia gave his remarks in the context of eight observations he had made during the week, and eight suggestions for the students’ consideration. He reminded us firstly of the key combinations that guarded the most precious Winchester College archives, and how this resonated with an idea of unlocking knowledge. Winchester College’s Chapel window’s restoration, with Australia erroneously inserted into a globe of the world, reminded him of our duty to the planet. The deletion of the Pope’s name on the first page of the archives, to avoid offence, was a lesson in creativity, he suggested. The fine and fitting modern doors to Chapel reminded him of how well the new can mesh with the old. The inscription in School was an exhortation to the young to study hard with dignity and creativity. Winchester’s motto of Manners Makyth Man should provide us with the spirit of cooperation and communication. William of Wykeham, the founder of Winchester College, was an example of the leadership required to start something that will endure. Finally, he retold the story of Winchester’s earth being used as the foundation for Eton College; he was particularly appreciative to be on Winchester’s own soil. He stressed eight lessons for the students:
92
• He noted the affection the Symposium Guest Speakers had had for Winchester College and for their chance to speak at such a school and occasion .
• A number of times during the week the importance of boundaries and influences had come up; these could be encapsulated in the idea of values.
• Self‐questioning should always be encouraged. • One can achieve many things with both small and big steps; one should not just focus
on the latter. • One should take time for reflection. • Personal convictions, integrity, and personal responsibility are key traits. • One should be proud of one’s own school and to see their potential as forces for change. • We have a great deal to teach one another; integration of our different cultures and
aspirations is important.
Principal Wang Zhaohe wanted to stress one area of the week’s discussions in particular: education. Education is the most important element for the development of leadership and the potential for change in the future. It embodies and adds to the true wealth of a nation; education is to the nation what crops are to the soil. China’s education system might be biased towards the examination system, but of critical importance is the development of the whole person. Benevolence, consideration, and the values of decency and tolerance make the truly educated person. Concern for others, and for the environment in which we live, are essential if we are to solve the problems facing the global society. He ended his remarks with a Chinese proverb: “One more school, one less prison”. Mr Chris Khaemba exhorted the students to embrace their diversity and use it as a strength to understand and embrace the challenges of the global society. They should cultivate our common ground, embracing and respecting those whose views and cultural traditions are different. His experience of the week had left him profoundly impressed by the need adequately to value nature and account for the environment and for humanity’s effects upon it. The students were encouraged to look at our impact on the natural world. As agents of positive change, the students from the Symposium schools are all in unique positions to influence the world around them. They should return to their communities with energy and insight and use their experiences at Winchester to influence positively their home societies. They should build on the statements they make, and on the Symposium Accord, to be themselves part of the solution to building a more just and integrated world. The students then gathered in Moberly Library to debate amongst themselves the essential elements of a common statement. The accompanying teachers gave two‐
93
minute suggestions on the essential elements of the discussion; then the participants began to work amongst themselves, without prompting. They had to find a formula of words with which they could all agree, and do so with a pressing time constraint. As individual schools they were additionally to draft individual responses to the Symposium Challenge. These individual responses were presented in Moberly Library at the end of the day; The Symposium Accord prepared was presented at the Grand Dinner.
94
The values and practices that led to the current financial meltdown are discredited. What practical steps can our countries take over the next 30 years to help to build a global society on the rock of justice and solidarity rather than selfinterest and greed?
Winchester College It is impossible to deny that the world currently faces a host of serious problems, from the implications of environmental change to the risk in Western societies of the effects of terrorism. Whilst it is easy to rationalise such issues, and look at them academically from a position of remoteness, we cannot emphasise the reality of inequality, poverty and suffering enough. As of August 2008, 1.4 billion people are living below the poverty line: they cannot even afford the most basic necessities of sustenance and sanitation. In the face of such destitution, it is hard to conceive that any solutions exist; nevertheless, humanity has within its grasp real and practical answers which must be applied as soon as possible. By balancing global cooperation with the action of nations and individuals, and effectively managing a combination of long and short‐term solutions, in thirty years’ time we can make both a tangible and significant difference to the livelihoods of every human being, whether they live in the most affluent areas of London, or in a slum in Johannesburg. The first topic that was considered at the Symposium is the financial crisis and the relating global recession. Markets around the globe contracted alarmingly quickly (the Dow Jones shrunk by over a half in less than a year), whilst a number of famous investment banks such as Lehman Brothers’ collapsed. In the aftermath, it has become clear that the economic downturn which the world witnessed was not the result of a random fluctuation in markets: mismanagement, poor practices in the workplace and lousy regulation all had their contribution. The observed problems can be solved in short and long‐term timescales by different methods respectively: governments should adapt economic, fiscal and monetary is such a way as to minimise the immediate impact, whilst also ensuring stability over a greater period of time by educating future generations about the nature and risks inherent to banking. Climatic change has received high levels of attention in the media due to controversy about the veracity of the claims of climate scientists in the light of noticeable changes to the world around us. However, the problems associated with the environment run deeper than this: humanity is transforming the natural world in terms of pollution, deforestation, loss of biodiversity and freshwater resources. The resolution to these troubles lies in a reformation in how we view economics. The distinction between private wealth (the wealth of individuals and corporations) and public wealth (air quality, natural resources) has been disregarded; by reintroducing this to economic models, we would find that a ‘green’ economy becomes an ideal approach. The problem of terrorism threatens global harmony, as any society in which fear of external attack predominates cannot function to maximum efficiency. The principle cause for concern is radicalised terrorism, particular from the Middle East: again, the
95
solution to this lies in providing education for the individuals most likely to be susceptible to terrorism organisations. It seems that the key to all these problems lies in providing a certain standard of quality education for all human beings, whatever their class, gender, ethnicity or wealth. This can be achieved by wealthier nations providing effective funding to train individuals in less affluent areas to become teachers whilst bearing in mind the short term measures needed to deal with the immediate symptoms of our problems; this will promote the development of independent, responsible global citizens who will form the base of the universal society, as was the purpose of the Symposium. Johannes Kepler School People do not feel sure about their lives and their perspectives. People are confused by the virtual and detached issues of economics. We must simplify the economic system; we must make it accessible for people. We must ensure that the economy is there to serve people, not the other way around. We must create a legal framework of transparent rules, we must get rid of all unnecessary elements like the rating agencies which only promote self‐interested speculations and seeking individual profit. People are confused ‐ and they are afraid. They fear the ungraspable, ubiquitous problem of terrorism. We must prevent people from feeding their fear with irrational, useless anti‐terrorism measures. We must acknowledge the inevitability of the danger we are facing and act reasonably. Introducing laws abolishing extreme anti‐terrorism measures at airports and in public transport is necessary. We must focus on secret surveillance rather than public, as the latter only arouses more fear and suspicion. People are confused and worried about their environment. They feel hopeless in fighting global risks that are discussed by politicians. We need to seek the smallest unit which could cooperate across countries. It has to be international, yet not detached. We have to introduce real, quite small projects for the individual areas, where people live. A change of the global world begins with people itself. If we introduce, for instance, projects concerning people’s proximity, we can attract residents’ attention and interest and they will start to change the environment surrounding their homes. If everyone starts to care about their surroundings, the global change could be achieved. To reach this point we need to stop the arguing between environmental politics and economics, find a common ground, work together on practical matters (changing the people’s proximity) and e.g. reduce brown coal mining all over the world. We need to be led out of our confusion, our fear and our isolation. We need to be educated. Education has to be based on community, wherefore we must improve native systems of education rooted in local culture and religion rather than introducing western‐like schooling which is likely to meet rejection. We must promote the basic human values of
96
creative approach to life, cooperation and listening. Music education can help promote harmony on a global scale, across cultural and social differences. African Leadership Academy Theme: Improved education for general population to support all areas discussed
‐ Free primary education for all children aged between 6‐13 years by 2030. ‐ Empowering parents to support learning of children from birth. ‐ Increase adult literacy rates at a community level, especially in rural areas at a
minimum of 70% literacy. ‐ Application of knowledge ‐ general exposure, through media, to problems caused by
climatic change which are currently unseen.
Theme: Multicultural awareness and respect in a globalised world. ‐ Encouragement of the learning of other countries’ (geography, history and culture) in
schools by all, to create awareness and understanding of new perspectives. This should be implemented by 2030.
‐ The coming together of students from schools from all over the world to discuss and find solutions to global issues. This not only gives the students the awareness they need of global issues but also the cross cultural understanding required for a world of harmony and integration.
Theme: Drawing from the past to demystify the present and shape the future. ‐ Encouraging reference to past knowledge (sciences, literature, experiences etc) to as a
basis for solutions to global problems. For example lessons and strategies applied during the great depression of the 1930s could be taken in dealing with the current global financial crisis.
Theme: Economic empowerment of the citizens of the world. ‐ Encouraging microfinance schemes worldwide, in an aim to financially empower
individuals with the hope of greater economic development for the world at large as permitted by the world financial system. For example The Grahmin Bank in Bangladesh and Equity Bank in Kenya which gives out small loans with reasonable interest rates or conditions of payment
Karachi Grammar School A global society would have its’ pillars ground in understanding and communication. In the bipolarized world of today this seems almost possible‐ but in the past week delegates from eight different countries have come together in Winchester to draft a solution to Global problems‐ and that too peacefully. The youth have set an example for country heads‐ the first step to solving global crises is to have productive dialogue between important global players like Pakistan and America.
97
This would be the first step to global peace because Pakistan is currently a hub for terrorists. Through conducive talks, we can take a step towards taking action‐ but before action there must be detailed information. This can trigger off internal peace within countries and can reduce economic, social and political polarization‐ recognizing everyone’s rights and breeding tolerance. Global terror can only be curbed through systematic action, and cooperation. That also requires dialogue between countries. The root cause of terrorism is a lack of “proper” education. We propose mass education campaigns in developing countries‐ and a mass spread of awareness in the developed countries to inform the “developed” that Muslim does NOT equal terrorist. An independent judiciary should be employed that can fight for peoples’ rights. The rural urban gap should also be reduced to breed more equality in society‐ and this can only happen if there are a greater number of schools in rural areas to ensure good quality of life. In the financial arena, markets should be regulated. There should be more focus on real and human capital, rather than on different financial instruments which are devised to create speculative gains. To achieve this, central banks and governments should assume responsibility and should regulate financial systems because earlier deregulation and resulting competition has created greed and speculation which threatens to destabilize the global financial system. At the time of the financial crisis most American and European Banks were not only extremely low on liquidity but also highly leveraged which led to a confidence crisis. To deal with this problem central banks through a series of prudential regulations monitor the portfolio of systemic banks. Checks and balances must be put in place to remove speculative elements from the Market. Transparency and standardization of economic and legal documentation is the key to a more integrated global society. Hedge funds need to stop functioning as investment banks, regulators need to regulate the economy for the benefit of the general public and the finance ministries, well, need to start working. There needs to be candidacy in terms of documentation of bank statements and other accounts that leads to trust. Aristotle said “ The whole is more than the sum of its’ parts.” The only way to get a “whole”, complete solution is through global cooperation. Let’s work at it. Raffles Institution On a superficial level, Singapore might be crowned the epitome of success. Its economy is driven by one of the busiest shipping routes in the world, combined with an ever‐growing tourism sector and a pool of well‐educated professionals in various areas of research and development. These have given it the second‐highest GDP per capita in Asia, which it has managed to achieve without compromise on national security and effective infrastructure. These qualities have actually contributed to the nation’s attractiveness to foreign investors, creating a diverse landscape of multinational corporations and home‐grown businesses. Taxes on goods and services are as low as 7%, but service standards remain on the rise.
98
This sunny picture of a prosperous island‐nation, however, belies deep‐rooted problems. In an effort to upkeep the image of a Garden City, authoritarian laws create restrictions on chewing‐gum, public gatherings and any form of protest. Strict censorship is placed on all forms of entertainment, and multiple areas of cultural heritage have been levelled to make room for urban development. A highly‐competitive education system streams students by ability from the age of ten, and even in the elite schools only an hour a week is devoted to character education, which is often done in an unsatisfactory manner. The greatest problem in Singapore, though, is a flawed national mindset that lacks awareness of the global perspective, focuses more on the systems of the nation than their content, and falls far short in terms of independent or creative thought. These give rise to a sadly pragmatic apathy about important issues. This is, however, a problem that can be solved by education. Education is undoubtedly the core solution to all of today’s problems in the areas of environment, financial architecture, security, and of course, education itself. Why did the financial crisis happen? A fluctuation to the extremes of laissez‐faire market capitalism has led to the emergence of financial products that are intentionally obfuscating and try to cover up the fact that they are in fact toxic despite getting away with AAA ratings by credit rating companies. Such an example is evident in Lehman Brother’s notorious minibonds or Credit Suisse’s collaterized debt obligations, which would not have gotten away tricking unwary investors had the American government increased regulation. The same goes for poor banking practices that resulted in the overleveraging and subsequent collapse for many banks such as Iceland’s Landsbanki. However, we must not make a passionate dash to the other extreme of overly strong governmental regulation in the economy or another financial crisis stands to be brewed. After the golden age of capitalism under a Keynesian paradigm of economics in American government, the American economy entered severe stagflation in the 1970s, leading to the other extreme of financial crisis—a government regulated one. This recession caused an aversion to government interference that has lasted all the way up till this financial crisis, and provided ample and fertile ground for the financial crisis of today. How then does education solve the problem of veering to extremes, and shortening the boom and bust cycle? Moderate education provides stability by facilitating the existence of a balance or equilibrium between two extremes. As can be seen in the case of the financial crisis, problems happen when we veer to extremes like excessive regulation or no regulation. Similarly for the environment, excessive focus on development without regard to environmental protection will hurt long‐term interests, but initially investing too much in environmental protection without regard for short‐term cost will hurt short‐term interests and result in an extremely excruciating beginning. It seems that there is a key tendency in the Western philosophical paradigm to focus on absolute truths, as is the case for Modernism, or to focus on certain inalienable rights or principles like in the case for liberty, equality and fraternity, the tripartite motto of the French Revolution, or in the case of economics, sacred idol of free market. However, this tendency for unbalanced extremes has proven itself to be dangerous and this is why it may be helpful to actually consider Eastern philosophical concepts that have an aversion for extremes and that lean towards moderation. Balance, a key principle of
99
Taoism, and the middle way, a key principle of Buddhism, should be now considered as valid alternatives to the current Western paradigm. What we advocate is not the imposition of the above beliefs, but the possible application of the principle of moderation in education. A moderate education, as such, has three practical components. The first of these is a provision of a broad global perspective to the next generation. Keeping in line with the theme of moderation, such a perspective would not include the tainted views of culture and history that are used to justify terrorist practices in fundamentalist schools, but emphasize a balanced and respectful approach to all peoples and nations with the value of peace and the possibility of harmony. These can be done through the influence of well‐informed educators who can impart knowledge of the outside world, or by granting students first‐hand experience of other cultures, which should be state‐funded if necessary. These will leave students with a deep appreciation of the great diversity and need that exist around the world. Understanding the world will also place students in a better position to resolve conflict, develop fair international systems and care for the earth, thus creating positive effect in the fields of security, financial architecture and the environment. The second practical component of a moderate education is the redefinition of academic success. This needs to be done by removing the current focus on the educational system and the specific examinations that come with it, and placing emphasis on broad academic standards and the depth of holistic learning. Equal importance should at the same time be given to developing the student physically, mentally and character‐wise. The effect of this will be to lower the pressure and competitiveness of the current system, and to create space for students to pursue their academic interests and reach new levels of achievement in different fields. This ties in with the concept of a global perspective discussed earlier, by ensuring that students receive a broad range of quality education. Also, students will be encouraged to pursue learning for its sake, rather than for the sake of achievement or distinction. The eventual outcome is to produce students who are truly learned as opposed to merely having studied, and who bear a high level of empathy for others. Independent and critical thinking is the third method to achieve moderation in education. People are all predisposed to think in a certain way from their experiences, their history, and their culture. To remove the box in thinking that we usually place ourselves in, education needs to encourage independent thinking that is not inclined to blindly follow a particular doctrine or dogma prescribed by nation‐state or cultural background. Education also needs to encourage critical thinking to question these assumptions or pattern for thought that people are predisposed to follow. In Singapore’s education system, policies such as National Education encourage unquestioned trust in the State, while in countries like the USA or the UK, there needs to be an increased awareness of their cultural bias in order to overcome an overly narrow perspective on issues such as security, environment and financial system. This will result in moderation in thought, which leads to increased empathy, increased ability to respect different cultures, and most importantly, a global society of harmony and integration that recognizes cooperation and compromise is ultimately in the interests of all.
100
In conclusion, we believe that a moderate education is essential to solve the existing problems of our society, and must be implemented in order to effect positive change within the next thirty years. It is our hope that such measures will create a society founded on justice and solidarity rather than self‐interest and greed, and secure a bright future in terms of financial architecture, security and the environment for our world. Shiyan Cooperation High School Based on different backgrounds and cultural diversity, every country has its own solution on solving important issues and major global events. Before any practical steps countries could take to improve the internal condition of the world and own states of developing and environmental situation, countries are to respect the justice and the different bases of the countries, to seek common ground while reserving differences. Environmental problems, education systems, financial issues, security and terrorism may be the four most heated topics in the world. In the next 30 years, the four topics above may not be the major problems of the planet, but practical steps should be taken in order to get the work done for global society. The practical way of dealing with the environment is to use of the economic regulation to the high‐carbonic industry for more taxes. On the other hand, more policy can be given to environmental friendly estates. China is now the second high country to discharge pollutants. I think China is taking a step ahead as the government has promised to reduce the carbon‐dioxide. The global world can benefit from the action of China. Due to the unfair system of Chinese education system, the Ministry of Education in China ought to realize the unbalanced states in different provinces. Considering the economic states and the tradition Chinese culture, step by step, the government can import advantage of educational systems from other countries and combine it with the virtue part of Chinese traditional idea of educating. So, the generation will be a contribution to the global society. Other than these, the following two topics, financial & terrorism are not in a common Chinese issue, but in order to contribute to the global society, China has to be a more responsible role in the modern international relations. In the next 30 years, China has a long way to go, as the biggest developing country; China’s economic growth will be in a peaceful way like now. We believe the development of China will become a stone base to the state of the future international family. Nada High School
101
We believe that a global society is defined as, the societies of the world considered as a single entity as a result of globalization. But today, there have been many problems as the world becomes more globalized, such as the recent financial crisis, the rise in religious fundamentalism and the intolerance of terrorism and the damaging of global warming and environmental problems, which is threatening the integrity and harmony of a globalized society. To realize this goal of a harmonized global society, we cannot just present ideals, but we need to focus on practical short‐term and long‐term solutions to these complex problems. We recognize that there is no such thing as one solution that will work in every single country or society in the world, but we can take steps, even if they are small, that may lead to a resolution that everyone can agree on.
As a short‐term solution measures need to be taken to restore the problems. Short‐term solutions are like the foundations of a house, so that long‐term solutions can be met. The major short‐term problems of today are; the financial crisis and security of civilians in society, as well as the environmental problems in certain countries and corrupt education in others.
With regard to the economy, strengthening the regulation systems and changing of the economic laws is required so that the financial crisis of 08‐9 will not occur again. To be specific, strengthening of the regulation systems, so when bankers create financial products that are possibly a danger to the economy are discovered before it becomes a problem and stopped. Also laws that strengthen regulation, such as making sure credit scores are not changed by bankers.
In security and terrorism, we believe that liberty of individual rights must be taken into consideration, but to solve the short‐term fears and terror of civilians, I believe an increase in security measures will not create friction against civilians but instead make civilians feel safer in society, as have been the case in countries like Singapore and Japan, because the fear of attack is the problem at hand and not the attacks themselves particularly. What we need for short‐term solutions is to remain cautioned about the problems
Also with short‐term environmental issues in countries like Pakistan, increased effort by the government is obviously required, even if it means financial damage to the government. First‐world countries must be aware of these moves and help financially or by using manpower such as sending in doctors to help those in medical need. Awareness of issues like this is not something that must be done short‐term but something that must be aimed for 30 years ahead. It is not appropriate to educate a child not to do dangerous acts when the child is in emergent help. The priority in emergency cases like this is obviously direct medical help, and we believe this is the case for environmental problems today.
When these short‐term goals are realized, then long‐term solutions can be realized. An ideal economy where no one suffers from other people’s greed, an ideal security system that respects one’s liberty but also secures one’s safety, and an ideal environment where global warming and environmental problems that harm people disappear and is sustainable, require a complete change in society. For this to be realized, a long‐term solution to change society is needed, and education is the key. If we can educate people, it will allow them to increase their standard of living. For example, a basic education of a farmer so that he can make more money in poor countries. If we increase their standard of living, it increases their human dignity. If we
102
increase the dignity of individuals, it will lead to a harmonious global society. Also, if people are educated so that they are aware of problems 30 years ahead, then global warming can be tackled without many parties with different opinions about the issue. Education about the various parties and cultures, as well as backgrounds of countries will lead to understanding and respect of people who do not agree with one’s beliefs and principles. Like in the case of a micro society, where everyone agrees on what are good values and bad values, supporting each other and acknowledging each other as a friend, this concept is an essential part of globalization and a global society, because a global society depends on understanding of large groups and an agreed consensus that doesn’t clash with one another. When this is realized, we may then be able to understand that for a sustainable global society, the principles of it cannot exist purely on one’s certain self‐interest or greed.
Montgomery Bell Academy Practical steps must be taken to address the issues facing the world today. It is important to remember, though, that the current situations in many countries are wildly different. What is realistic for a first world country is often not realistic for a third world country; what can be achieved quickly in an authoritarian regime takes much debate and gnashing of teeth in a democracy. In some countries, the support of the populace is much more relevant to any policy action than in others. As such, ascribing one solution to all problems in all countries is not realistic. Rather, we must focus on two distinct areas: the micro, where we as individuals can strive for change, and the macro, where our countries can set broad goals to be pursued. On an individual level, our Symposium has taught us to celebrate difference. Our cultures, experiences, socio-economic standing, schooling, and even ages are different; yet we have learned that those differences can be channelled into productivity and consensus. This experience should translate into micro-level initiatives to value justice and dignity. While we acknowledge that globalized capitalism ensures the inevitability of greed, we as individuals can and should explore avenues that value equality, nonetheless. Whether it’s enabling microfinance or non-profit organizations, volunteering at a local level, starting your own charity that focuses on literacy or math and science skills, we all have a part to play. While it is hard to imagine what our individual goals will be, especially since they will all likely be different, we must promote equality, freedom, and justice in any way we can. An example from American television seems apt. In “The Wire”, a police major named Bunny Colvin attempts to create a legal-drug zone in his district in order to alleviate the chaos and calamity wreaked by the drug trade. His macro approach works initially, but then is destroyed by political backlash and unforeseen consequences of legalization like the spread of disease and, eventually, an outbreak of violence. Bunny is seen a year later working in a socialization program at a school. Now recognizing the importance of his individual contribution to the larger battle against the drug trade, Bunny mentors and adopts a drug hopper named Namond, whose father was a hardened killer. Namond has a kind heart, though, and Bunny is able to transform the boy from a potential victim of the Baltimore streets to a successful student and debater in under a year. This example provides an appropriate lesson for our Symposium: while we can take macro approaches to many problems, oftentimes it is the individual approaches that are more successful long-term. Whether it is raising the awareness of global warming or fighting to improve literacy in a community, we all have a part to play.
103
We must still take macro approaches to many of these issues, though. Education must be at the crux of any strategy to achieve global justice and equality. While a global curriculum is impossible and probably a bad idea, we can still encourage a global goal for education. Prior to any global educational goal, we must develop world economies. Third world nations cannot effectively devote resources to education until their economies have developed enough to make an educational push realistic. Whether this economic development comes through first world aid, integration into the global economy, or local microfinance remains to be seen. Most likely, a combination of the three would allow individuals and governments to focus on education. As governments can the resources, through whatever means, to focus on education, literacy must be a priority. Curriculums can and should vary globally, but literacy has a global importance. While literacy means different things in different lands, the ability to adequately read and write one’s native language is vital for a person’s upward mobility in society, personal dignity, and sense of equality and value. Secondarily, awareness and understanding should be the focus of education globally. This goal will have perhaps different meanings globally; but it should share a common value of awareness of world problems and events and respect for difference. This educational awareness provides a broad framework for moving forward on world issues. We can and should cut emissions, protect forests, and prevent pollution, but a prerequisite to real environmental change is acknowledgement and understanding of a problem by our leaders and citizens. Similarly, we should protect ourselves against terrorism. But the pen, or in this case the book, is mightier than the sword: a sense of understanding and respect for other cultures will combat both the ignorance of the madrassahs and the Bush administration. Specific must be part of any plan to address the problems of the world; but before we take specific steps, we must use education as a tool to improve equality and justice and raise awareness of and respect for difference.
The recent financial crisis is the result of a poorly set playing field. The competitive environment created a lose-lose situation for banks. They could either lend bad loans and fail tomorrow or not do so and fall out of competition. In order to create of stable future in which prosperity for anyone can prosper regulations and oversights must be put into effect to check the animal spirits that allow for failure to occur. Domestic legislation reforming the broken system is the natural starting point; however as time and markets progress, Organizations like the IMF and World Bank should be strengthened by the world’s nations to provide objective oversight and international regulation and enforcement for a more integrated global financial structure. These organizations however must not repeat the failures that they enacted during the East Asian financial crisis in which many developing economies were sacrificed for the benefits of western banks. Financial structures should be organized in a way that assures both that developing countries have access to credit and that they do not over extend their credit. This would ensure mutual prosperity for the banks of the developed world as well as allow for needed credit in the developing world, by harnessing the creative ingenuity of the world’s markets.
The need of credit is certainly not something exclusively held by international corporations and nation-states. Integration into financial markets may be the solution to world poverty. Microfinance structures involving small loans to small scale businesses have lifted many out of poverty. The aforementioned regulatory bodies could be used to protect the entrepreneurs of the developing world from predatory lending and facilitate the flow of capital ultimately saving many from grinding poverty. Such a model would shift the focus of global aid from a government to government structure to a more individualized one. Instead of a world in which large loans are given to misguided government policies that try to cause trickle down growth but only result in debt, markets can form naturally and provide a base upon which innovative, adapted and integrated markets can form. The internet will be a critical tool in
104
such a market’s arsenal. It will connect billions to one another and give them perspectives on economies and their place and potentials in them.
The fundamental driving force of successful society is individuals seeking their separate interests—ignoring this principle can only lead to failure or collapse. Attempting to pursue solutions outside of this framework ignores the mechanics of change. The lofty goal of justice is reliant on this reality. To condemn greed and self-interest, however, undermines progress and advancement of societies. We should celebrate and harness the desire of individuals to aggrandize themselves, to build a brighter future for all. A modern society must be based on greed and self-interest; however it can be directed by higher ideas, and driven to the height of possible achievement.
105
SYMPOSIUM ACCORD The world today is riddled with serious problems that endanger not only the lives of those in less developed countries but also those in prosperous nations; these threaten the natural world in which we live. These issues can be broadly divided into the categories of education, financial architecture, environment and security. While this Accord may not be able to eliminate these problems completely, we aim to provide practical means by which they can be addressed. The world has changed much in the past millennia, and will continue to change rapidly within the next thirty years. Hence, it is of paramount importance that we implement these changes with speed and efficiency. The general method of implementation should take on a bottom‐up approach, which centres on education and an awareness of the world. This includes the respect, tolerance and appreciation of diversity which characterises our global society. We, the privileged members of the Winchester International Symposium, advocate the following:
1. Financial architecture – a. We move to simplify and increase the transparency of our financial
system. b. This should be achieved by the strengthening of a watchdog institution in
each nation, or formation of the same where it is not already present. c. The above institution should be strengthened by enforcement powers
such as the access to all records and the imposition of a strict minimum reserve ratio, which would allow it to curb profiteering banking practices.
d. A code of conduct should also be enforced by the above institution to emphasise the core duty of each component belonging to our financial architecture.
2. Education – a. We move to create an international framework which aims to teach basic
ability, a spirit of curiosity and an awareness of world issues in all nations.
b. Basic ability includes, but is not limited to, literacy and numeracy: these facilitate a dignified lifestyle.
c. A spirit of curiosity includes, but is not limited to, independent and critical thinking: these are honed by practice and experience.
d. An awareness of world issues includes, but is not limited to, the basic principles of financial architecture, the environment and security.
e. The above components will be taught as part of a core set of subjects that can be adapted to the needs and cultures of each nation.
3. Environment – a. We move to introduce the concept of public wealth to world economies
such that the value of the environment will be appreciated by all.
106
b. This should be achieved by the enforcement of a pricing system relating to environmental commodities, such as natural habitats, non‐renewable resources, and biodiversity.
c. At the same time, subsidies for non‐renewable resources should be cut in nations worldwide, and educational campaigns should be implemented to create general public awareness.
d. The above points will be part of an international framework similar to that of education, with the same adaptability depending on the geopolitical situation of each nation.
4. Security – a. We move to curb the problem of terrorism at its source by proper
education to provide cultural and communal understanding in all countries.
b. This will reduce misinformation about cultural differences, and provide proper global perspective.
c. Micro‐financing schemes, which can create employment and encourage entrepreneurship, should be introduced in less developed countries to combat and reduce poverty.
d. The above should be balanced against finding contentment and dignity at one’s current social context.
In conclusion, Jane Addams once said that “the good we secure for ourselves is precarious and uncertain until it is secured for all.” Let us not forget those who are in need, as we progress towards justice and solidarity for the global society.
107
Headmaster’s Afterword
I think it is true to say that the International Symposium held in Winchester in March 2010 exceeded all expectations! This was due to several factors: the seriousness of mind of the participating students, the thoroughness of their preparation, the enthusiastic support of the teachers who accompanied them, the high‐quality contribution of the guest speakers and the uncompromising character of the Symposium which had no time for sound‐bite or technological gimmick but insisted on the disciplines of reading, listening, discussion and co‐operative writing. This had the effect of creating a level of engagement and enjoyment rare in gatherings of this kind. There was a palpable atmosphere of joy‐in‐learning and an exhilarating sense that lasting friendships had been struck.
The Symposium Accord is evidence of fruitful study and cause for confidence that the next generation of leaders can help build a better world. Our network of ten schools around the world will in some way play its part in that as year‐on‐year we continue to meet to seek mutual understanding and the formation of a common mind. Long may our meetings continue!
Headmaster of Winchester College
108
Symposium Participants African Leadership Academy Oswald Codjoe Mr Chris Khaemba (Dean) Beryl Obiero Mr Chris Bradford (Founder) Ms Rosalind Gater Johannes Kepler School Ondrej Cerny Mr Martin Kapoun David Koubek Ms Jarmila Skampova Karachi Grammar School Adeem Mufti Dr Graham Platts (Headmaster) Aaminah Qadir Mr Sajjad Sayyed Montgomery Bell Academy Campbell Haynes Mr Brad Gioia (Headmaster) Wesley Wilson Mr Roderick Russ Nada High School Kensho Tambara Mr Peter Ferguson Shinichiro Yamazoe Raffles Institution Ting Wei Tai Ms Lim Lai Cheng (Principal) Theophilus Kwek Mr Yuen Kah Muen Shiyan Cooperation High School Frank Han Mr Wang Zhaohe (Principal) Melody Ma Mr Kevin Li Winchester College James Apthorp Dr Ralph Townsend (Headmaster) Archie Bott Mr Keith Pusey (Registrar)
Mr Tim Parkinson
top related