You won’t see beautiful coral reefs, of which there are many under the sea, if they bleach out and can not be recovered rapidly. The underwater landscapes constructed by healthy coral reefs and their diverse species are one of the most surprising natural views in the world. Under global warming and anthropogenic factors, coral reefs are dying out. About 60% of the Red Sea’s reefs have been damaged (Waghorn, 2007), up to 90% of corals had been killed in Australia in the summers of 1998 and 2002, and a similar situation happened in Maldives, Sri Lanka, Kenya and Tanzania and in the Seychelles (Coral Bleaching, 2007). In accordance with the destroying speed, two thrirds of all coral reefs will be extinct during twenty to forty years in the future.
Except for big change, such as global warming, we should avoid anthropogenic factors. Overfishing is a very serious situation for coral reefs bleaching. A great many diving companies provide diving tourism without protecting norms for coral reefs and some of them even have the service of collecting animated corals for souvenirs. Those acivities hurt them directly. Beside the coasts, many fishermen catch topical fish for restaurantsand aquariums. Disused nets and decreasing number of species damage coral reefs’ growth. If we don’t try hard to protect coral reefs, these species of the bio-chain would become extinct gradually. According to Science Daily (2007), local action can help to re-build the reefs and promote their recovery. In order to maintain coral reefs and other underwater species, and to have a beautiful undersea life, building artificial reefs (Waghorn, 2007), banning overfishing (Barclay, 2007) and pushing the US to sign the Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change are good solutions.
First, putting artificial reefs underwater will provide a good number of advantages. In the article “State of Florida Artificial Reef Strategic Plan” (2003), there were several benefits had been mentioned, for instance, to ensure marine environment, human health and marine organisms are protected, restored, enhanced or sustained; to support data collection for scientific research and innovative technology; to provide future direction for the development of artificial reef policies. They can supply food, shelter protection and spawning area for hundreds of species of the fish and other marine organisms and reduce pressure on natural reefs and also provide alternate areas for divers. According to Blackburn, “Since the reef was put, diver interest has been high. About 100 divers have been visiting the reef daily and almost double the number of divers visiting nearby natural reefs” (Blackburn, 2007, para.20.). Scientist from Israel and Jordan who work together put artificial reefs underwater to build a new environment for species and escape running our ecosystem (Blackburn, 2007). This solution to save coral reefs takes 25 years less than natural processing, which requires over one hundred years. On the other hand, this is a fast way to attract undersea species, and is the best strategy to recover bleaching coral reefs. Building a new environment for undersea species is not only a benefit for the marine ecosystem, but also for our sustainable environment.
Second, enforcing the laws against overfishing is an important strategy in saving coral reefs. In Barcaly’s (2007) article, “The biggest threats to the region’s marine ecosystem are illegal fishing with destructive gear such as dragnets, small mesh nets and poles used to break coral…” (par. 13). Based on long term records, overfishing should be taken as the first factor of coral ecosystem’s killer (Davidson, 2003). Some countries have laws; however, they did not enforce them. In some developing countries, people have to fight for their live to take adventures in illegal fishing or to work for the tropical fish trade. Moreover, they couldn’t care less about how the ecosystem is changed by them. Local governments should stretch out to help the people to find alternated ways of survival and give them other opportunities for existence. The action requires local and national awareness and the education of fishermen on alternative fishing method. At the international level, to work together to regulate the trade of fishing, and to find the balanced approaches in a sustainable manner are critical. Belize and UN have focused on this issue, and have their fishermen participate to protect their underwater ecosystem (Handwerk, 2003). Cooperation is a good way for preserving coral reefs. Local governments should regard overfishing as the most important task, and address he problem of how to administer the law more effectively.
Finally, pushing pollution producing countries make efforts of reducing greenhouse gases. The US refused to sign the Kyoto protocol protecting the earth’s environment. President Bush said that they use a different way to deal with the greenhouse effect and it’s the same goal to diminish greenhouse gases. The protocol asked the developed countries who sign the s to decrease six greenhouse gas emissions during 2008 to 2010 (Kyoto Protocol Comes into Force, 2005). Therefore, these countries have to sharply reduce fuel, coal, gas and other industrial emissions of carbon dioxide. The US has 4% of the population of this world; however, their emission of carbon dioxide is 25% of this world and it is the biggest carbon dioxide emitting country. Although the US used to sign the protocol in 1998, in 2003 the president, Bush, said that to cut down the greenhouse gases will influence their economic growth, and raised unemployment, and they think that developing countries should take this as their obligation also. Some experts argue that if the US doesn’t commit to this protocol after 2012, it will not bring it to effect (Brown& Wilson, 2005). Moreover, if the US could escape this international commitment, the high-seed developing countries such as China and India, would lose the inducement to accede to it. As a result, our environment will crumble in the future.
Man-made reefs could save the underwater ecosystem, and vigilance is necessary even if artificial reefs are used, or the environment could also allow destruction by humans yet. As we know the Red Sea coast has had artificial reefs for several years for attraction a lot of related species to live; nevertheless, the ecosystem of coral reefs, fish, and other zooxanthellae were still damaged. The same situation happened in Hong Kong. The local governments’ standpoints are truly important in the building of artificial reefs, for instance, for sightseeing, for studying, for economic advancement, or for preserving the ecosystem. These purposes could have both positive and negative effects. For studying and preserving, the artificial reefs would have new kinds of zooxanthellae, and would allow people to know more about the growing trends of underwater. In this kind of purpose, the man-made ecosystem provides the marine ecosystem a living chance under the treat of global warming. In Taiwan, they put 17 artificial reefs for fishing, and marine ecosystem will become unbalanced by creating too many new environments. For tourism, the artificial reefs may be destroyed, because sightseeing people could not control their behaviors to stand on reefs or touch corals and too many people in tourism are pressured into contact with some animals. We can make tons of artificial reefs, and they should be protected and be valued. If the government doesn’ have enough sense to defend them from destruction, coral reefs will die ou for the equivalent reason, “human activities”.
In conclusion, building artificial reefs, banning overfishing and cosigning important international commitments are good strategies for maintaining our ecosystem and barely preserving coral reefs. However, people should keep the perspective of saving coral reefs in mind and holding operations to have a sustainable ecosystem. Don’t let the solutions become another disaster. Global arming threatens our environment actually. We must take action immediately. Or underwater bio-chains will bebroken and all species will become extinct in a short time.
References
Barclay, E. (2007, Oct. 31). African fishermen find way of conservation in the Koran. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1031/p01s04-woaf.html.
Blackburn, N. (2007, Aug. 13). Israeli-Jordanian team set up first artivicial coral reef in the Red Sea. Israel Ministry of Foreign affairs. Retrieved on November 23, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siki/Coral_bleaching.
Davidson, K. (2003, Aug. 16). Coral Reefs Doomed, Study Says. Commondreams.org. Retrieved on November 24, 2007, from .
Kyoto Protocol Comes into Force. (2005, Feb. 16). BBC news. Retrieved on November 25, 2007, .
Oceans Alive. (n. d.). Solutions: what we can do. Oceans Alive. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.oceansalive.org/explore.cfm?subnav=article&contentID=4710.
Science Daily (2007, Oct. 22). Coral reefs on brink of disaster, scientists urge action now. ScienceDaily. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071021225256.htm.
Waghorn, D. (2007, Oct. 25). Race to save coral reefs from scuba divers. CDNN Global News Network. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.cdnn.info/news/eco/e071025.html.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Thursday, November 29, 2007
The Ways of Saving Coral Reefs from Bleaching
You won’t see beautiful coral reefs, if they bleach out. Under global warming and some anthropogenic factors, over about 60% of the Red Sea’s reefs have been damaged (Waghorn, 2007), up to 90% of corals had been killed in Australia in the summers of 1998 and 2002, and a similar situation happened in Maldives, Sri Lanka, Kenya and Tanzania and in the Seychelles (Coral Bleaching, 2007). Global warming made the temperature higher in the air and under the sea, and almost all of the coral reefs were threatened and died. Tender and liveing in a limited range temperate, coral reefs are hurt easily by heat waves. Colorful corals and their zooxanthellae live harmoniously and have many other species around them. Enjoying the sight underwater is a wonderful trip for human beings. However, this kind of tour is limited by global warming. According to Science Daily (2007), local action can help to re-build the reefs and promote their recovery. In order to maintain coral reefs and other underwater species, and to have a beautiful undersea life, building artificial reefs (Waghorn, 2007), banning overfishing (Barclay, 2007) and pushing the USA to sign the Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change are good solutions.
First, putting artificial reefs underwater will provide food, shelter protection and spawning area for hundreds of species of the fish and other marine organisms. They also provide alternate areas for divers and anglers to use, and can reduce pressure of natural reefs. In some countries, they have put artificial reefs to build a new environment for species related to coral reefs. This solution to save coral reefs takes 25 years less than natural processing, which requires over one hundred years. Global warming threatens our environment actuely. If we don’t take action immediately to protect the flimsy corals, underwater bio-chains will be broken and some species will extinct in a short time. Another benefit of building artificial reefs is for people to know more about underwater animals and have trips underwater. To build a new environment for undersea species is not only good for the ecosystem, but also for our sustainable environment.
Second, to enforce the laws against overfishing, and to regulate the international trades of live fish are the important strategies to ban overfishing. Some countries have laws; however, they don’t enforce them. In some developing countries, people have to fight for their lives to take adventures in illegal fishing or to work for the international trade. Moreover, they couldn’t care less about how the ecosystem is changed by them. Local governments and national institutes should stretch out to help the people to find alternate ways of survival, and give them other opportunities for existence. The action requires local and national awareness and the education of fishermen on alternative fishing methods. At the international level, to work together to regulate the trade of fish, and to find the balanced approaches in a sustainable manner are critical.
Man-made reefs could save the underwater ecosystem, and could be destroyed by humans yet. As we know the Red Sea coast has had artificial reefs for several years; nevertheless, the ecosystem of coral reefs, fish, and other zooxanthellae were still damaged. The local governments’ standpoints are important in the building of artificial reefs, for instance, sightseeing, studying, or preserving. These purposes could either be ways or effects. For studying and preserving, the artificial reefs would attract a lot of related species to live, would have new kinds of zooxanthellae, and would allow people to know more about the growing trend of underwater species. In this kind of situation, the man-made ecosystem provides a living chance under global warming. For tourism, the artificial reefs may be destroyed, because sightseeing people could not control their behaviors to stand on reefs or touch corals and too many people going for tourism are pressured into contact with some animals. We can make tons of artificial reefs, and they should be protected and be valued, or they will die out.
Building artificial reefs and banning overfishing are good ways for maintaining our ecosystem and barely preserving coral reefs. However, this is not enough. People should keep the perspectives of ways of saving coral reefs and holding operations to have a sustainable ecosystem.
References
Barclay, E. (2007, Oct. 31). African fishermen find way of conservation in the Koran. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1031/p01s04-woaf.html.
Coral Bleaching. (2007, Oct. 17). Coral bleaching.Wikipedia. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siki/Coral_bleaching.
Oceans Alive. (n. d.). Solutions: what we can do. Oceans Alive. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.oceansalive.org/explore.cfm?subnav=article&contentID=4710.
Science Daily (2007, Oct. 22). Coral reefs on brink of disaster, scientists urge action now. ScienceDaily. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071021225256.htm.
Waghorn, D. (2007, Oct. 25). Race to save coral reefs from scuba divers. CDNN Global News Network. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.cdnn.info/news/eco/e071025.html.
First, putting artificial reefs underwater will provide food, shelter protection and spawning area for hundreds of species of the fish and other marine organisms. They also provide alternate areas for divers and anglers to use, and can reduce pressure of natural reefs. In some countries, they have put artificial reefs to build a new environment for species related to coral reefs. This solution to save coral reefs takes 25 years less than natural processing, which requires over one hundred years. Global warming threatens our environment actuely. If we don’t take action immediately to protect the flimsy corals, underwater bio-chains will be broken and some species will extinct in a short time. Another benefit of building artificial reefs is for people to know more about underwater animals and have trips underwater. To build a new environment for undersea species is not only good for the ecosystem, but also for our sustainable environment.
Second, to enforce the laws against overfishing, and to regulate the international trades of live fish are the important strategies to ban overfishing. Some countries have laws; however, they don’t enforce them. In some developing countries, people have to fight for their lives to take adventures in illegal fishing or to work for the international trade. Moreover, they couldn’t care less about how the ecosystem is changed by them. Local governments and national institutes should stretch out to help the people to find alternate ways of survival, and give them other opportunities for existence. The action requires local and national awareness and the education of fishermen on alternative fishing methods. At the international level, to work together to regulate the trade of fish, and to find the balanced approaches in a sustainable manner are critical.
Man-made reefs could save the underwater ecosystem, and could be destroyed by humans yet. As we know the Red Sea coast has had artificial reefs for several years; nevertheless, the ecosystem of coral reefs, fish, and other zooxanthellae were still damaged. The local governments’ standpoints are important in the building of artificial reefs, for instance, sightseeing, studying, or preserving. These purposes could either be ways or effects. For studying and preserving, the artificial reefs would attract a lot of related species to live, would have new kinds of zooxanthellae, and would allow people to know more about the growing trend of underwater species. In this kind of situation, the man-made ecosystem provides a living chance under global warming. For tourism, the artificial reefs may be destroyed, because sightseeing people could not control their behaviors to stand on reefs or touch corals and too many people going for tourism are pressured into contact with some animals. We can make tons of artificial reefs, and they should be protected and be valued, or they will die out.
Building artificial reefs and banning overfishing are good ways for maintaining our ecosystem and barely preserving coral reefs. However, this is not enough. People should keep the perspectives of ways of saving coral reefs and holding operations to have a sustainable ecosystem.
References
Barclay, E. (2007, Oct. 31). African fishermen find way of conservation in the Koran. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1031/p01s04-woaf.html.
Coral Bleaching. (2007, Oct. 17). Coral bleaching.Wikipedia. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siki/Coral_bleaching.
Oceans Alive. (n. d.). Solutions: what we can do. Oceans Alive. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.oceansalive.org/explore.cfm?subnav=article&contentID=4710.
Science Daily (2007, Oct. 22). Coral reefs on brink of disaster, scientists urge action now. ScienceDaily. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071021225256.htm.
Waghorn, D. (2007, Oct. 25). Race to save coral reefs from scuba divers. CDNN Global News Network. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.cdnn.info/news/eco/e071025.html.
Wal-Mart
You want a big Supercenter far away from your home or a convenient store near your home? I think it better to have an accessory store in my neighborhood, because it will be more convenient to buy things and I don’t have to store supplies at home. However, the developments of some chain stores focus on expanding their products and acreage (Shopping for Subsidies: How Wal-Mart Uses Taxpayer Money to Finance Its Never-Ending Growth, 2004; USA Today, 2003). I believe that the spreading Supercenters will cause traffic air pollution, less exercise, and economic downturn across the communities and neighborhoods.
Many people driving cars to Wal-Mart caused a lot of air pollution around the area. In UFCWIU (2005), “A study of estimated additional driving cost of Supercenters in the San Francisco Bay area concluded that there would be up to an additional 238 million vehicle miles traveled per year” (par.1). Most Wal-Mart stores are placed in the suburbs, and people have to drive their cars to go there. Their attraction of low price and complete products make people want to shop merely there. Moreover, so many people have to shop one time each week, have to shop when they forget to buy something, or when they have to buy something urgently. Under these kinds of random frequencies, the air becomes worse and worse, people will complain about that finally and forget the benefits they thought of before.
If the stores are near our home, we can walk to shop all the time, and don’t have to use cars. It’s a good idea of preserving our environment and maintaining our health. No convenient stores are near neighborhoods in most parts of the U.S., and there are fewer opportunities for residents to shop by foot. Having stores near houses is not only a chance for inhabitants to know more about their community, but also a chance for them to use their available time to exercise and shop. On the other hand, using cars more will make people have less time of physical activity, and spend more time and money on cars. People should think in more detail about what the ultimate consequences of a big Supercenter setting in a suburb are. Don’t forget to think more about your health than about saving money.
The large alluring factor of low price and providing jobs for the dwellers makes people want to shop there to save their money and agree with their establishment (Hoenig, 2004; Locke, 2004). According to the Dallas Morning News (2002), the enlarging of Wal-Mart brings the smaller stores in the country to lose their competitiveness and close eventually. We can find that the facts behind the superficial benefits are very serious for the common people. Despite the good effects, the bad effects are more than them, and have longer influence to local people. Local people should fight for their own economic benefit, and make a better way for themselves.
In conclusion, setting a big Supercenter to help local finances or make a better life are not worthwhile, and will cause air pollution, less exercise, and economic decline. Think about these effects and try to shoot for residents and their descendents in the communities.
References
Dallas Morning News. (2002, February 10.). The Real Facts About Wal-Mart: Community Impact. WAKEUPWALMART.com. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/.
Hoenig, J. (2004, February 10.). Welcome Wal-Mart. Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, fromhttp://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4561.
Hopkins, J. (2003, January 29.). Wal-Mart’s Influence grows. USA TODAY. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2003-01-28-walmartnation_x.htm.
Locke, E. (2004, February 22.). Three Cheers for Wal-Mart. Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3534.
UFCWIU. (2005). The Real Facts About Wal-Mart. WAKEUPWALMART.com. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/.
Many people driving cars to Wal-Mart caused a lot of air pollution around the area. In UFCWIU (2005), “A study of estimated additional driving cost of Supercenters in the San Francisco Bay area concluded that there would be up to an additional 238 million vehicle miles traveled per year” (par.1). Most Wal-Mart stores are placed in the suburbs, and people have to drive their cars to go there. Their attraction of low price and complete products make people want to shop merely there. Moreover, so many people have to shop one time each week, have to shop when they forget to buy something, or when they have to buy something urgently. Under these kinds of random frequencies, the air becomes worse and worse, people will complain about that finally and forget the benefits they thought of before.
If the stores are near our home, we can walk to shop all the time, and don’t have to use cars. It’s a good idea of preserving our environment and maintaining our health. No convenient stores are near neighborhoods in most parts of the U.S., and there are fewer opportunities for residents to shop by foot. Having stores near houses is not only a chance for inhabitants to know more about their community, but also a chance for them to use their available time to exercise and shop. On the other hand, using cars more will make people have less time of physical activity, and spend more time and money on cars. People should think in more detail about what the ultimate consequences of a big Supercenter setting in a suburb are. Don’t forget to think more about your health than about saving money.
The large alluring factor of low price and providing jobs for the dwellers makes people want to shop there to save their money and agree with their establishment (Hoenig, 2004; Locke, 2004). According to the Dallas Morning News (2002), the enlarging of Wal-Mart brings the smaller stores in the country to lose their competitiveness and close eventually. We can find that the facts behind the superficial benefits are very serious for the common people. Despite the good effects, the bad effects are more than them, and have longer influence to local people. Local people should fight for their own economic benefit, and make a better way for themselves.
In conclusion, setting a big Supercenter to help local finances or make a better life are not worthwhile, and will cause air pollution, less exercise, and economic decline. Think about these effects and try to shoot for residents and their descendents in the communities.
References
Dallas Morning News. (2002, February 10.). The Real Facts About Wal-Mart: Community Impact. WAKEUPWALMART.com. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/.
Hoenig, J. (2004, February 10.). Welcome Wal-Mart. Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, fromhttp://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4561.
Hopkins, J. (2003, January 29.). Wal-Mart’s Influence grows. USA TODAY. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2003-01-28-walmartnation_x.htm.
Locke, E. (2004, February 22.). Three Cheers for Wal-Mart. Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3534.
UFCWIU. (2005). The Real Facts About Wal-Mart. WAKEUPWALMART.com. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/.
Saturday, November 3, 2007
The Causes of Coral Bleaching in India
in “Coral bleaching” Coral bleaching happened greatly in Australia's coast and Indian Ocean, and formed an unattractive benthonic scene. Colorful corals are created by zooxanthellae. At higher water temperatures, decreasing of zooplanktons, solar irradiance, varying water chemistry, silt runoff, and infections, and coral bleaching start out and can’t cease. Different types of coral species or of zooxanthellae have variable bleaching rates, and different recovery abilities and tolerance, and their health conditions and disparate genetics influence their resistance to coral bleaching. Fortunately, we know that some reef creatures, soft corals, giant clams and sponges could expel the stressful conditions of bleaching. However, coral bleaching takes months and even years to recover from, and threatens species undersea.
India has the most wide and beautiful coral reefs, but large parts of them suffer from bleaching and aren’t as beautiful as they were in the past. In the age of protecting environments, India, a poor country, worries about slower development of economic growth, and doesn’t want to limit the emission of greenhouse gases. Their response could be understood but couldn’t be accepted. As industrial development, overfishing and sightseeing are their main economic growing forces, over 90% of coral reefs in India are damaged.
World restriction programs would be useful in fighting the pollutants that damage coral reefs. Industrial development makes huge amounts of carbon dioxide, which acidifies air, soil and oceans, and creates wastewater, waste gases and waste materials, which pollute our living environment. Particular economic growth in India has been noticed in recent years, when the United Nations cared about the effects of global warming and tried hard to seek resolutions. In order to increase average income, electronic, heavy metallic or other high-technological industries are well expanded.
Changing overfishing is the simplest way to protect India’s oceans and promote economic growth in India. In order to survive, people in India like to fish for food and could not obey the laws of the ecosystem all the time. They fish by themselves without spending money, and consider this as an beneficial way to survive. They have good skills in boating, fishing, and resisting natural forces to get their food. How to increase other abilities to earn livings could be the important points. They could begin assistance of finding jobs, guidance in getting market or creating their crops into new products, or helping them to market products in foreign countries.
Many activities on the sea, such as hydromotorcycles, banana split boats and parasailing, are the risk factors of coral bleaching. These activities are popular in India and are greeted with joy for visitors, nevertheless, these activities scare benthos to go away from their original places, change the air above the sea and the water undersea, and cause pollution, and coral reefs and their zooxanthellae would die and become bleached. The sightseeing development in India has been brought up in recent years. People would like to visit one of the top historic spots in India, and to experience undersea views. It is a valued trip to visit a view of coral reefs and animals underwater in India. However, some people have less knowledge of diving behaviors and might touch coral reefs or stand on them; caused zooxanthellae of coral reefs stay away and coral reefs without their zooxanthellae would die.
In short, the key destructive factor of Indian oceans is economic growth. This kind of situation is happening in most less-developing countries, but it could be controlled by the Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Limitations strategies would help our ocean environment come back as we go for it.
Reference
Coral Bleaching. (Oct, 17, 2007). Wikipedia. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_bleaching .
India has the most wide and beautiful coral reefs, but large parts of them suffer from bleaching and aren’t as beautiful as they were in the past. In the age of protecting environments, India, a poor country, worries about slower development of economic growth, and doesn’t want to limit the emission of greenhouse gases. Their response could be understood but couldn’t be accepted. As industrial development, overfishing and sightseeing are their main economic growing forces, over 90% of coral reefs in India are damaged.
World restriction programs would be useful in fighting the pollutants that damage coral reefs. Industrial development makes huge amounts of carbon dioxide, which acidifies air, soil and oceans, and creates wastewater, waste gases and waste materials, which pollute our living environment. Particular economic growth in India has been noticed in recent years, when the United Nations cared about the effects of global warming and tried hard to seek resolutions. In order to increase average income, electronic, heavy metallic or other high-technological industries are well expanded.
Changing overfishing is the simplest way to protect India’s oceans and promote economic growth in India. In order to survive, people in India like to fish for food and could not obey the laws of the ecosystem all the time. They fish by themselves without spending money, and consider this as an beneficial way to survive. They have good skills in boating, fishing, and resisting natural forces to get their food. How to increase other abilities to earn livings could be the important points. They could begin assistance of finding jobs, guidance in getting market or creating their crops into new products, or helping them to market products in foreign countries.
Many activities on the sea, such as hydromotorcycles, banana split boats and parasailing, are the risk factors of coral bleaching. These activities are popular in India and are greeted with joy for visitors, nevertheless, these activities scare benthos to go away from their original places, change the air above the sea and the water undersea, and cause pollution, and coral reefs and their zooxanthellae would die and become bleached. The sightseeing development in India has been brought up in recent years. People would like to visit one of the top historic spots in India, and to experience undersea views. It is a valued trip to visit a view of coral reefs and animals underwater in India. However, some people have less knowledge of diving behaviors and might touch coral reefs or stand on them; caused zooxanthellae of coral reefs stay away and coral reefs without their zooxanthellae would die.
In short, the key destructive factor of Indian oceans is economic growth. This kind of situation is happening in most less-developing countries, but it could be controlled by the Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Limitations strategies would help our ocean environment come back as we go for it.
Reference
Coral Bleaching. (Oct, 17, 2007). Wikipedia. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_bleaching .
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Ways You Can Do for Coral Reefs
“Coral Reefs on Brink of Disaster, Scientists Urge Action Now”, written by ScienceDaily, is an important statement of a call for action to overcome the destruction of coral reefs, especially to decrease greenhouse gasses immediately, which can’t be delayed at all. It mentioned reduction of several actions, for instance, local action, target reduction on greenhouse gasses, atmospheric CO2, and overfishing. Global warming caused enormous harmful results; the actions should be taken by all societies and governments right now or our world will become dirty and ugly in later days and cost more for society. Although this issue has been noticed over 30 years, the commercial and marketing behaviors are still rampant. These world killers should be limited to protect our environment.
“Greenhouse gases” is a well known phrase, but how are they produced? Does it really hurt people? Many people could not understand that daily use of electricity and cars could make a lot of CO2 in the atmosphere. Using fans, air conditioners, microwaves, computers, transports and so on, is indispensable for modern citizens. However using these things would distribute CO2 and damage oceans and the atmospheric layer. Eventually, our climate will change and species die from acidic oceans and soil. The emissions of CO2 from each kind of electric equipment is not so much, so people couldn’t be aware about this effect. The total amount of CO2 created from everyone would be much more than the environment could handle. The ways to reduce the situation are less driving, enjoying natural environment, and doing things by yourself.
Using public transports or walking should substitute for driving your own car every day. People could not live without using electricity since Edison developed lights and since the expansion of technology. People could contribute their power by taking bus, trains, subways, or walking. Try to use public transport or walk three days of each week in the beginning, and every day later. The transport system may not be as convenient as driving your own cars, but the behavior could be raised and the advantages are more than driving your own cars. People will breathe fresh air, have more physical activity to maintain health, save costs of consumer goods related to driving vehicles and most importantly they will not make as much more CO2 as they would have before. In addition, don’t forget to invite a friend or family member with you as much as possible, who can support you in keeping up the healthy behaviors. Gradually, it would become habits and lifestyle. They might say that public transportation is not so convenient or has CO2 emissions, also. Nevertheless governments would build the transport system fully and the CO2 amounts would be less when many people use one car together.
Do things by yourself, and don’t depend on technology. Go back to aboriginal lives to re-experience the natural environment, like the old generation. This doesn’t mean using coal-fire or sleeping in a cave, but walking to enjoy the wind, shadow, and trees, or washing your car, or your teeth by yourself. High-technology is necessary, but some high-technology supplies may not be so essential for humans. Electric substances, for example, elevators, televisions, dynamoelectric toothbrush, motor-driven bicycles etc, have spoiled people and created lazy people. Behaviors could be converted easily, as long as the society and governments get involved. If humans can adapt themselves to good behavior to treat our oceans and coral reefs better, we will have more lovely species also.
Solutions could be carried out as people have the determination and support. If we drive less and make use of the natural environment, our beautiful coral reefs might have larger chances to be re-built and recover. You can go snorkeling with your grand children and share the experiences you had at their age.
Reference
Science Daily (2007, Oct. 22). Coral reefs on brink of disaster, scientists urge action now. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 23, 2007, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071021225256.htm.
“Greenhouse gases” is a well known phrase, but how are they produced? Does it really hurt people? Many people could not understand that daily use of electricity and cars could make a lot of CO2 in the atmosphere. Using fans, air conditioners, microwaves, computers, transports and so on, is indispensable for modern citizens. However using these things would distribute CO2 and damage oceans and the atmospheric layer. Eventually, our climate will change and species die from acidic oceans and soil. The emissions of CO2 from each kind of electric equipment is not so much, so people couldn’t be aware about this effect. The total amount of CO2 created from everyone would be much more than the environment could handle. The ways to reduce the situation are less driving, enjoying natural environment, and doing things by yourself.
Using public transports or walking should substitute for driving your own car every day. People could not live without using electricity since Edison developed lights and since the expansion of technology. People could contribute their power by taking bus, trains, subways, or walking. Try to use public transport or walk three days of each week in the beginning, and every day later. The transport system may not be as convenient as driving your own cars, but the behavior could be raised and the advantages are more than driving your own cars. People will breathe fresh air, have more physical activity to maintain health, save costs of consumer goods related to driving vehicles and most importantly they will not make as much more CO2 as they would have before. In addition, don’t forget to invite a friend or family member with you as much as possible, who can support you in keeping up the healthy behaviors. Gradually, it would become habits and lifestyle. They might say that public transportation is not so convenient or has CO2 emissions, also. Nevertheless governments would build the transport system fully and the CO2 amounts would be less when many people use one car together.
Do things by yourself, and don’t depend on technology. Go back to aboriginal lives to re-experience the natural environment, like the old generation. This doesn’t mean using coal-fire or sleeping in a cave, but walking to enjoy the wind, shadow, and trees, or washing your car, or your teeth by yourself. High-technology is necessary, but some high-technology supplies may not be so essential for humans. Electric substances, for example, elevators, televisions, dynamoelectric toothbrush, motor-driven bicycles etc, have spoiled people and created lazy people. Behaviors could be converted easily, as long as the society and governments get involved. If humans can adapt themselves to good behavior to treat our oceans and coral reefs better, we will have more lovely species also.
Solutions could be carried out as people have the determination and support. If we drive less and make use of the natural environment, our beautiful coral reefs might have larger chances to be re-built and recover. You can go snorkeling with your grand children and share the experiences you had at their age.
Reference
Science Daily (2007, Oct. 22). Coral reefs on brink of disaster, scientists urge action now. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 23, 2007, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071021225256.htm.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
How to improve the effects of global warming
The article “Global warming threatens millions of species”, written by Shaoni Bhattacharya and published in January 2004, described that species would extinct or deplete and migrate by global warming. This article mentioned that global warming caused many plants and animals to diminish, and the rate of decreasing was so quick that some species might become extinct or be doomed and move to other habitats far away from original ones for surviving. According to the statistical model, there are three kinds of predicted situations of the changing environment. If our environments deteriorate gradually without protection, we will live with a few species or none. In the end of this article, there are several resolutions to control global warming. However, we need cooperation between governments to deal with this world problem, and global warming would be controlled with efficiency and utility.
In recent years, people feel the weather has changed in the whole world, and fall comes later. The situation would be worse as population grows and high technology is developed without seeking ways out. Governments must have power, but people should value the problem seriously as well. Population growth and developed technology are consequential trends in our lives. Accordingly, education, recycling laws and improving high technology would be the key strategies to avoid terrible global warming and to save all possible species.
Because of population growth, we need to teach people what good behaviors to treat our world are. Education can let people understand the consequences of global warming and learn the correct behaviors and attitude to protect the environment. For example, people from Asia should know that chopsticks are made from trees; if they use reuable ones they would be healthier and can protect our environment also. If they use disposable chopsticks every three meals, there would be waste trash every day and they might be damaged by these disposable chopsticks. Because some chopsticks factories have to use chemical to bleach this wood in order to market them. You might eat these chemical substances through every three meals. Actually, people can take carry-on chopsticks with them. Chopsticks are not heavy at all, and not so big to carry on. Many Taiwanese have carry-on chopsticks with them, so that they can save trees and might force the companies to change their market products to reused ones. Telling the story about how the disposable objects harm our bodies and environment can correct our behaviors and attitude, and then let the behavior become a social movement.
Countries should follow the world’s rules to make environmental protective laws and force people to obey. Don’t you think that’s correct? Some countries have forced recycling laws into every family and company and had raised people into correct habits. Many people in these countries would like to sort trash. When they come to other developed counties, which don’t have recycling laws, they can not assort trashes, too, because there is only one trashcan, and they don’t know where the sorted trash can be put. Resources would be exhausted someday if we don’t treasure our resources. For convenience, people like to use disposable substances and throw things into trashcans without thinking. This kind of behavior is not good for our earth. In this event, we know that government’s power is pretty great to protect global environments. That would be the greatest way to preserve our earth and species.
High technology could make our lives easier and create resources for us, if we try to be nice with our environment or our environment might not be nice to human beings and other species. High technology leads our future lives and affects our environments greatly. Many electrical products are developed to satisfy human beings and these products might produce pollution during manufacturing procedures and when people using it, like waste gases, radiation, water and waste materials. Some high technology companies have noticed these problems, and figure out strategies to get command of pollution. For instance, computer materials could be recycled or be created as art creations, and the output energy could be used as electricity. In the higher technology times, people will explore more precious skills to recycle energy and reduce waste.
People are the criminals and species are the victims. The way to love our earth and environment is to change human beings first, not species. In other words, we should try hard to protect our environments individually, like knowing recycling ways and how to reuse disposable things that we use daily. For the upper level, governments and companies have bigger power to preserve resources and lead people to the right way, and they can make laws and produce products with environmentally protective views. As we protect our environment more, we will have natural environment and cute species with us longer.
References
Bhattacharya, S. (2004, Jan. 07). Global warming threatens millions of species. NewScientist.com. Retrieved October 16, 2007, from http:///www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4545&print=trueabout.htm.
In recent years, people feel the weather has changed in the whole world, and fall comes later. The situation would be worse as population grows and high technology is developed without seeking ways out. Governments must have power, but people should value the problem seriously as well. Population growth and developed technology are consequential trends in our lives. Accordingly, education, recycling laws and improving high technology would be the key strategies to avoid terrible global warming and to save all possible species.
Because of population growth, we need to teach people what good behaviors to treat our world are. Education can let people understand the consequences of global warming and learn the correct behaviors and attitude to protect the environment. For example, people from Asia should know that chopsticks are made from trees; if they use reuable ones they would be healthier and can protect our environment also. If they use disposable chopsticks every three meals, there would be waste trash every day and they might be damaged by these disposable chopsticks. Because some chopsticks factories have to use chemical to bleach this wood in order to market them. You might eat these chemical substances through every three meals. Actually, people can take carry-on chopsticks with them. Chopsticks are not heavy at all, and not so big to carry on. Many Taiwanese have carry-on chopsticks with them, so that they can save trees and might force the companies to change their market products to reused ones. Telling the story about how the disposable objects harm our bodies and environment can correct our behaviors and attitude, and then let the behavior become a social movement.
Countries should follow the world’s rules to make environmental protective laws and force people to obey. Don’t you think that’s correct? Some countries have forced recycling laws into every family and company and had raised people into correct habits. Many people in these countries would like to sort trash. When they come to other developed counties, which don’t have recycling laws, they can not assort trashes, too, because there is only one trashcan, and they don’t know where the sorted trash can be put. Resources would be exhausted someday if we don’t treasure our resources. For convenience, people like to use disposable substances and throw things into trashcans without thinking. This kind of behavior is not good for our earth. In this event, we know that government’s power is pretty great to protect global environments. That would be the greatest way to preserve our earth and species.
High technology could make our lives easier and create resources for us, if we try to be nice with our environment or our environment might not be nice to human beings and other species. High technology leads our future lives and affects our environments greatly. Many electrical products are developed to satisfy human beings and these products might produce pollution during manufacturing procedures and when people using it, like waste gases, radiation, water and waste materials. Some high technology companies have noticed these problems, and figure out strategies to get command of pollution. For instance, computer materials could be recycled or be created as art creations, and the output energy could be used as electricity. In the higher technology times, people will explore more precious skills to recycle energy and reduce waste.
People are the criminals and species are the victims. The way to love our earth and environment is to change human beings first, not species. In other words, we should try hard to protect our environments individually, like knowing recycling ways and how to reuse disposable things that we use daily. For the upper level, governments and companies have bigger power to preserve resources and lead people to the right way, and they can make laws and produce products with environmentally protective views. As we protect our environment more, we will have natural environment and cute species with us longer.
References
Bhattacharya, S. (2004, Jan. 07). Global warming threatens millions of species. NewScientist.com. Retrieved October 16, 2007, from http:///www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4545&print=trueabout.htm.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Health and Physical Activity
Reference
Local Government Commission. (n.d.) Health and Physical Activity. Retrieved October, 01, 2007, from http://www.lgc.org/community_desing/health.html.
The Local Government Commission, which is a nonprofit organization working to build livable communities, wrote this article. It said that residents, especially those who are under-served, are physically inactive, which might lead to many diseases. Community design should be planned to encourage or improve residents’ health, and this issue was noticed by public health professionals, who have found some evidence about these problems. As a matter of fact, CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) had to wake some changes on land use and transportation patterns, but many cities still need to be improved.
However, LGC and California work together, and they found the most important factors for changing communities are ”economic development and increased sense of community” . Moreover, they give support to create walkable communities.
In these five reading reaction journals, we can find that healthy communities have become valued in recent years. They all found that land use and transportation are poorly developed and they are the reason why residents have less physical activity. In spite of that, government related departments, such as CDC, and some nonprofit institutes have gone deep into the problems and have dug out the key points to improve them. I’m glad to hear the news about public departments having action on this issue, and outreaching on this topic, because political decisions are the ultimate power to make healthy communities successful. Furthermore, this issue has become a worldwide known topic, and people perceive that they have their right to argue with urban planners to make healthy living environments.
Local Government Commission. (n.d.) Health and Physical Activity. Retrieved October, 01, 2007, from http://www.lgc.org/community_desing/health.html.
The Local Government Commission, which is a nonprofit organization working to build livable communities, wrote this article. It said that residents, especially those who are under-served, are physically inactive, which might lead to many diseases. Community design should be planned to encourage or improve residents’ health, and this issue was noticed by public health professionals, who have found some evidence about these problems. As a matter of fact, CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) had to wake some changes on land use and transportation patterns, but many cities still need to be improved.
However, LGC and California work together, and they found the most important factors for changing communities are ”economic development and increased sense of community” . Moreover, they give support to create walkable communities.
In these five reading reaction journals, we can find that healthy communities have become valued in recent years. They all found that land use and transportation are poorly developed and they are the reason why residents have less physical activity. In spite of that, government related departments, such as CDC, and some nonprofit institutes have gone deep into the problems and have dug out the key points to improve them. I’m glad to hear the news about public departments having action on this issue, and outreaching on this topic, because political decisions are the ultimate power to make healthy communities successful. Furthermore, this issue has become a worldwide known topic, and people perceive that they have their right to argue with urban planners to make healthy living environments.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
About Healthy Places
Reference
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). About Healthy Places. Retrieved September 24, 2007, from http://www.cdc.gov/healthyplaces/about.htm.
This article “About Healthy Places” was published on the CDC website, which described the environmental situation in the past and in recent years. In the first part, they gave the definition of healthy environments. Then they mentioned that city development or urban planning in the past has had disadvantages to humans. For instance, there are too many roads or spaces for cars, too far to walk to other destinations, and too few considerations for residents. However, governments have noticed the influences of community design, and they have become committed to making new coalitions and resolutions to relieve public health problems. Finally, they picture the future map in our communities and let people know the healthy environment knowledge.
This article told us how the community environment would be changed and made the idea of healthy environments as simple as citizens can understand well. The main points are easy to realize and be agreed upon. Nevertheless, only few people know this knowledge and they have little power and few resources to change their communities; it looks like a long road. Residents get used to the environment they live in. They might complain about using segregated lands, but they lead the usual life as time passes by without reactions. Therefore, political decision makers, like mayors who have the power to modify the way of urban planning, have the main role in opening the road, and can promote residents’ health as soon as possible.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). About Healthy Places. Retrieved September 24, 2007, from http://www.cdc.gov/healthyplaces/about.htm.
This article “About Healthy Places” was published on the CDC website, which described the environmental situation in the past and in recent years. In the first part, they gave the definition of healthy environments. Then they mentioned that city development or urban planning in the past has had disadvantages to humans. For instance, there are too many roads or spaces for cars, too far to walk to other destinations, and too few considerations for residents. However, governments have noticed the influences of community design, and they have become committed to making new coalitions and resolutions to relieve public health problems. Finally, they picture the future map in our communities and let people know the healthy environment knowledge.
This article told us how the community environment would be changed and made the idea of healthy environments as simple as citizens can understand well. The main points are easy to realize and be agreed upon. Nevertheless, only few people know this knowledge and they have little power and few resources to change their communities; it looks like a long road. Residents get used to the environment they live in. They might complain about using segregated lands, but they lead the usual life as time passes by without reactions. Therefore, political decision makers, like mayors who have the power to modify the way of urban planning, have the main role in opening the road, and can promote residents’ health as soon as possible.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
On The Rise In American Cities
Reference
Wood, D. (2007, May 2). On The Rise In American Cities: The Car-free Zone. The Christian Science Monitor, csmonitor.com. Retrieved September 18, 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0502/p01s03-ussc.html?page=1
This article is written by D. Wood, who writes that there are several cities that name suspended or stopped driving spaces and released more spaces for pedestrians, bikers or people who want to have physical activities since three years ago. The most important reasons that more and more cities do that are to make more active environments and promote active people. Although banning cars might cause some traffic problems or economic decreasing, researcheres find the situations will get better but not worse. Furthermore, to change usage spaces seems to cost a lot, but leaders should know that to transform the using purpose of basic infrastructures is simple and inexpensive. There are many small or poor cities that do it well and it has become a trend in the world, especially when global warming and the obesity rate have become serious. People have to treat the go-carless trend as an important strategy to maintain health.
To relieve suitable room sounds great, for non-car users to exercise or get enough entertainment spaces during weekends or leisure time. Overdevelopment of land made our living environment full of cars, roads and bad air. However, non-car users’ leisure spaces are not developed in adaptive proportion. To take the effect of going carless is really a complicated progress; telling the information to people from everywhere, telling them where to find parking lots, and altering the purpose of roads will cause cities to suffer from some traffic troubles directly and some unexpected problems, even if the final results are a benefit to the city and their people. During the interim time, how to reconcile local people’s views and turn their view into supportive roles is vital. The successful experiences in Europe and the US bring the other countries out to change their urban plans, above all the developing ones.
In my opinion, promoting people’s right to have fun in the natural environment, in other words, building an active environment, is more than promoting people’s health, it’s also promoting the world’s.
Wood, D. (2007, May 2). On The Rise In American Cities: The Car-free Zone. The Christian Science Monitor, csmonitor.com. Retrieved September 18, 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0502/p01s03-ussc.html?page=1
This article is written by D. Wood, who writes that there are several cities that name suspended or stopped driving spaces and released more spaces for pedestrians, bikers or people who want to have physical activities since three years ago. The most important reasons that more and more cities do that are to make more active environments and promote active people. Although banning cars might cause some traffic problems or economic decreasing, researcheres find the situations will get better but not worse. Furthermore, to change usage spaces seems to cost a lot, but leaders should know that to transform the using purpose of basic infrastructures is simple and inexpensive. There are many small or poor cities that do it well and it has become a trend in the world, especially when global warming and the obesity rate have become serious. People have to treat the go-carless trend as an important strategy to maintain health.
To relieve suitable room sounds great, for non-car users to exercise or get enough entertainment spaces during weekends or leisure time. Overdevelopment of land made our living environment full of cars, roads and bad air. However, non-car users’ leisure spaces are not developed in adaptive proportion. To take the effect of going carless is really a complicated progress; telling the information to people from everywhere, telling them where to find parking lots, and altering the purpose of roads will cause cities to suffer from some traffic troubles directly and some unexpected problems, even if the final results are a benefit to the city and their people. During the interim time, how to reconcile local people’s views and turn their view into supportive roles is vital. The successful experiences in Europe and the US bring the other countries out to change their urban plans, above all the developing ones.
In my opinion, promoting people’s right to have fun in the natural environment, in other words, building an active environment, is more than promoting people’s health, it’s also promoting the world’s.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Walking hard for many exercisers
Reference
Associated Press. (2007, Sep 7). Walking hard for many exercisers. CNN.Com./health. Retrieved September 09, 2007, from
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/diet.fitness/09/07/walkable.neighborhoods.p/index.htm.
This article described the research in Atlanta, which was done by Lawrence Frank. Frank is the chief of connecting living environment and health. His studies showed that built environment is related to human health. Recently, his research finds that walkable communities make people drive less and have lower obesity rate, no matter whether they are exercisers or not. This means that community sidewalks linking to stores, transportation or other destinations can increase walking opportunities and decrease driving possibilities because it’s easier and more convenient to walk. Although people know that living in walkable communities is healthier, it costs more. This article lays stress on the fact that the communities you live in becomes an important factor in influencing physical activity and health.
I think that most community environments in US are walkable. There are many sidewalks connected and cars would stop in crossroads until pedestrians pass by; however, the land in US is too big to walk by foot. In the light of the situation, residents can take a walk or exercise around their neighborhood but not traveling or shopping. Suburban neighborhoods usually do not have enough daily resources for residents, so they have to drive downtown. On the other hand, people who live in walkable communities can get what they want by public transportation easily without driving. In order to build a walkable community, mixed-use environment appears to be the vital issue.
Although we know that walkable communities are benefits for humans’ health, the results aren’t significant. Providing walkable communities would let people have the equal chances to get health, which is standing on the passive side, but healthy or not depends on your choices, which are on the active side. In other words, people may be healthier in walkable environments than people living in unwalkable environments; nevertheless, it’s not an absolute outcome. You can be healthier in unwalkable environments, if you try to exercise more or understand how to keep healthy.
Associated Press. (2007, Sep 7). Walking hard for many exercisers. CNN.Com./health. Retrieved September 09, 2007, from
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/diet.fitness/09/07/walkable.neighborhoods.p/index.htm.
This article described the research in Atlanta, which was done by Lawrence Frank. Frank is the chief of connecting living environment and health. His studies showed that built environment is related to human health. Recently, his research finds that walkable communities make people drive less and have lower obesity rate, no matter whether they are exercisers or not. This means that community sidewalks linking to stores, transportation or other destinations can increase walking opportunities and decrease driving possibilities because it’s easier and more convenient to walk. Although people know that living in walkable communities is healthier, it costs more. This article lays stress on the fact that the communities you live in becomes an important factor in influencing physical activity and health.
I think that most community environments in US are walkable. There are many sidewalks connected and cars would stop in crossroads until pedestrians pass by; however, the land in US is too big to walk by foot. In the light of the situation, residents can take a walk or exercise around their neighborhood but not traveling or shopping. Suburban neighborhoods usually do not have enough daily resources for residents, so they have to drive downtown. On the other hand, people who live in walkable communities can get what they want by public transportation easily without driving. In order to build a walkable community, mixed-use environment appears to be the vital issue.
Although we know that walkable communities are benefits for humans’ health, the results aren’t significant. Providing walkable communities would let people have the equal chances to get health, which is standing on the passive side, but healthy or not depends on your choices, which are on the active side. In other words, people may be healthier in walkable environments than people living in unwalkable environments; nevertheless, it’s not an absolute outcome. You can be healthier in unwalkable environments, if you try to exercise more or understand how to keep healthy.
Friday, September 7, 2007
Models for change: Lessons for creating active living communities
Reference
Cervero, R. (2007, Feb). Models for change: Lessons for creating active living communities. Planning Magazine, ppA1.
As we know, physical inactivity threatens our heath. The strategy to maintain health is what we called “active living”. This article is talking about the tasks to create active living communities, and what is ALR program doing for the topic, especially case studies, which focus on processes of policy changing, and policy innovations. Collaboration between related departments, and to put the thought of public-health into plans in the beginning are most important key points. However, it’s easy to write in words; stakeholders or researchers should understand it’s difficult to realize or to achieve rapidly and to learn the way to work together.
Creating active communities has increased recently to promote physical activity. Through the case studies, we might be able to reveal the policy processes and understanding the problems of this issue, but how to deal with the whole thing and how to collaborate are hard between different departments. Health issues are not a part of designing communities permanently, and stakeholders or staffers in diverse fields haven’t worked together very many times. I agree with the idea to create active communities for all that, it’s hard to overcome. For example, to make a good communication or a deal takes a very long time, and some troubles will happen during that time, which would be the toughest part. In my opinion, except for what this article mentioned, a perfect leader who can have the abilities of integrating and making decisions is the first key point to create active communities.
Http://www.activeliving.org/node/643
by Corina
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
