Globalisation is the development of technologies and the shrinking of the world, ecological interdependence, cultural homogenization, crumbling of national boundaries and the development of world markets, economical interdependence and dominance. In this post, we shall examine how globalisation leads to ecological interdependence and the crumbling of national boundaries, as illustrated by the example of slash and burn. Globalisation results in ecological interdependence as no country is cut off from the rest of the world. All countries are engaged in global relations in one way or another, be it economical, political, social, cultural, or environmental. Globalisation leads to the crumbling of national boundaries, which also meant that globalisation leads to ecological interdependence. The crumbling of national boundaries can be seen in how environmental and health hazards travel across borders, thus having far reaching effects on more than one nation, but the entire regional/global community.
Slash and burn, despite ensuring a cheap and convenient way of obtaining natural nutrients, aften results in environmental hazards such as haze when the fire gets out of control. The article above highlights how slash and burn leads to haze and as a result, health problems. Consequences of slash and burn are also especially highlighted. The regional community is affected when monsoon winds carry the haze to neighbouring nations. Thus we can see an example of globalisation - crumbling of national boundaries. The state has lost much of its ability to control the movement of haze across borders. When the state alone is unable to curb the problem, regional organisations have to interfere to bring the problem under control. With globalisation, ecological interdependence is common and the sovereignty of nations is challenged. We can see this in the example of the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution. The ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution is an environmental agreement signed in 2002 between ASEAN nations to bring haze pollution under control in Southeast Asia. This shows how ASEAN has to interfere in order to solve the haze problem. An agreement was passed so as to bring the haze situation under control and prevent similar events from occurring in the future.
What are its impacts on the global/ regional community?
Indonesia is an agrarian society with about 80% of the 200 million people population living in rural areas. Majority of this 80% of the population practises farming as a way of survival. Since subsistence farming is the easiest and best method to sustain huge families, it is often practised in rural areas, with shifting cultivation being one of the more popular farming methods. As mentioned in the previous section, slash and burn ensures farmers a cheap and convenient way of obtaining natural nutrients for their crops without having to purchase expensive chemical fertilisers. Therefore it is widely practised in Indonesia. During harvest seasons, after farmers harvest their crops, they set fire to their piece of land to burn the unwanted parts of the crops away. In the meanwhile, they will begin to farm on another piece of land. However, though they only intend to burn a small piece of land, the fire eventually gets out of control and burn up a much larger area. Even if each farmer only burns a small piece of land, with such a huge population a huge area of land would have been destroyed. However, as the fire gets out of control, the area of land being burnt is hard to imagine!
Slash and burn has resulted in an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, thus polluting the environment. This activity not only depletes the number of oxygen providers, but also reduce amount of carbon dioxide being removed by trees. As plantations are cleared, average daily temperatures increase immensely, thus triggering off El Nino. Global warming is increasingly accelerated too. Is it not an irony that while the global community is trying to curb greenhouse gas emissions, one part of the Earth is effortlessly increasing its greenhouse gas emissions?
Moreover, slash and burn has resulted in haze, which leads to health and environmental problems not only within Indonesia, but also among regional countries. Visibility is greatly reduced to a few hundred metres away in neighbouring countries, which leads to an increase in road accidents. Inevitably there will also be an increase in the number of asthma cases, or other health problems like eye irritation and cough.
More importantly, there will be an immense dip in the tourism industry in the region as there will be much fewer people willing to come to Southeast Asia to tour. Many flights will be cancelled due to the haze. As the Pollutant Standards Index (PSI) continues to rise, Singaporeans will reduce their outdoor activities. As noted in the article, during the 2006 Southeast Asian haze, billions of dollars were lost. Therefore we can imagine the damage done to our economy due to the haze.
Also political relationships were strained as leaders from Singapore and Malaysia criticised the inability of the Indonesian national government in stopping the fires. Indonesia suffers the criticism of the regional and global community for being the cause of the haze. Moreover, in 2006, the Indonesian government announced that it is unable to stop the bush fires. As a result, Indonesia suffers from more humiliation as its government is increasingly being labelled "incompetent".
Finally, I would like to also make a point that it is mentioned in the article that the government never implements effective measures to curb the situation. In 2006, Indonesia officially announced itself unable to stop the fires and suggested a regional fund being set up to help it handle future similar situations. The fires were so intense that the Indonesian government claimed itself unable to help. Instead, neighbouring countries like Singapore and Malaysia have to send aids over. Thus we can see that just an environmental hazard actually have the power to render a government incapable.
As such, we can see the immense impact of the haze not only on Indonesia, but also neighbouring countries. The nations suffer from the drastic consequences of the haze, be it economic, political, social and environmental. None of the nations stand to gain. Therefore more has to be done to ensure the ceasing of similar events in the future.
Reflections
Being an Environmental & Health Expert, I would like to express my utmost disappointment how the Indonesian government handles such situations. For example in 2006, the Indonesian government mentioned about it being unable to control the haze situation and suggested the setting up of a regional fund to help bring similar situations in the future under control. I believe that the Indonesian government should not have given up or mentioned in public about being unable to control the haze situations. This will only lower the self-esteem of the people and cause them to be demoralised. The role of a state government is to serve as the executive function of the state and lead the nation to peace and prosperity. Instead of guiding citizens to national prosperity and peace, the Indonesian government gave up when it faced difficult situations. Is this what a government supposed to do? No, I do not think so. Maybe what the Indonesian government could have done is to gather the strength of the people in fighting the bush fires. With a large manpower, the fire would have been put out in a much shorter time.
I have no intention of criticizing any party responsible for the haze situation. However, I feel that perhaps preventing such fires from occurring would be a better choice. Farmers living in rural areas do not have a clear idea of the consequences of their actions. What they are interested in and wish to do is to feed their families. Therefore they need to understand that what they do are not beneficial. Thus I believe public education can be implemented to help raise awareness about the disadvantages of slash and burn. Incentives and rewards should also work hand in hand with public education to better facilitate its efficiency. Farmers might stubbornly refuse to stop clearing land by fire unless they stand to gain from it. Therefore the implementation of incentives and rewards should also be implemented together with public education. This will thus encourage them to switch from slash and burn to a more expensive yet environmentally friendly way of clearing land. Also, the price of chemical fertilisers and machinery can be lowered so that poorer farmers can afford it. Then, more farmers will be able to afford chemical fertilisers and machinery. As a result, they will not require natural nutrients or clearance of land via slash and burn. All these actions can help reduce the occurrence of slash and burn fires.
Finally, I hope that I have provided a clearer view of what slash and burn is, and how it is related to globalisation. Also, I hope that I have addressed the impact of slash and burn on the global and regional community, as well as my reflections on this issue. I'll end off with a quote by Henry Ford II. "No society of nations, no people within a nation, no family can benefit through mutual aid unless good will exceeds ill will; unless the spirit of cooperation surpasses antagonism; unless we all see and act as though the other man's welfare determines our own welfare." Thank you.
Yours,
The Environmental and Health Expert
serene!