Ess Ia [PDF]

Zitiervorschau

ESS IA

-the purpose of the internal assessment investigation is to focus on a particular aspect of an ESS issue and to apply the results to a broader environmental and/or social context. -it is an individual investigation Identifying the context = 6 (20%) Planning = 6 (20%) Results, analysis and conclusion = 6 (20%) Discussion and evaluation = 6 (20%) Applications = 3 (10%) Communication = 3 (10%) Total = 30 (100%) Practical work of ESS - Laboratory-based manipulation investigations - Field manipulation studies - Observational fieldwork - Exploration and analysis of secondary data, including databases - The use of ecosystem models (bottle experiment) - The use of computer simulations and other technological models - The use of surveys and opinion polls - Interviews - Case studies Task 1: confirmation 3 ESS ideas of research questions (deadline: 27 jan 2021) Task 2: prepare a colored factsheet of your IA research topic you are interested in (deadline: 08 feb 2021) – 5% of term 2 grade Task 3: submission of IA exploration worksheet with questionnaire questions (deadline:15 mar 2021) IA idea 1: To what extent are people in Japan aware of the environmental impact of meat consumption? IA idea 2: To what extent are people in Mexico and Hong Kong aware of the environmental impact of cigarette production and consumption? IA idea 3: To what is extent, is the plastic straw ban policy in Perú efficient? First changes IA idea 1: to what extend are people in Nicaragua aware of the environmental impact of meat consumption? IA idea 2: to what extend are people in Nicaragua and Hong Kong aware of the environment impact of cigarette production and consumption? IA idea 3: to what is extended, is the plastic straw ban policy in Nicaragua efficient? (investigate if there is a plastic straw ban policy in Nic) First comments IA idea 1: This is workable. Please highlight the trend and increasing problem of meat consumption in the factsheet. Think about what solutions you would like to suggest at the end of the research? e.g. compulsory school curriculum about this? mandatory labelling of meat products to warn people about the impact?

IA idea 2: No need to compare the cigarette consumption. Why do you need to compare people in HK and Nicaragua? What is the aim for this? IA idea 3: This is workable. I just want to ask whether this policy is newly set in Nicaragua? You may first compare the behaviour of people using plastic straw before and after the policy, and check whether the awareness of plastic straw impact increase after the policy is set. According to Janice, the first and the third idea are more ready to work on. Include in the factsheets: statistics, problem, plan to solve. Confirm IA idea: to what extend are people in Nicaragua aware of the environmental impact of meat consumption? ESS IA factsheet deadline 08/02 – 5% of term 2 grade Select one topic you are interested in for IA factsheet design. Please note that you may still change your IA topic later if you find another topic more interested to work on. This task is for students to explore the issue more through information searching only. Please include your research question, statistics of the environmental problem, information about the local pollution and environmental policies, public awareness and behaviors in your factsheet. Research question: to what extend are people in Nicaragua aware of the environmental impact of meat consumption? Statistics of the environmental problem https://www.statista.com/statistics/1005762/beef-veal-meat-consumption-volume-nicaragua/ Nicaragua: beef and veal meat consumption volume 2010-2019 This statistic shows the consumption volume of beef and veal meat in Nicaragua from 2010 to 2018, as well as a forecast thereof for 2019. In 2018, beef and veal meat consumption in Nicaragua amounted to 16 thousand metric tons CWE, down from 35 thousand metric tons CWE consumed in 2010.

Consumption of beef and veal meat in Nicaragua from 2010 to 2019 (in 1,000 metric tons carcass weight equivalent (CWE)7 r https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/news/why-meat-is-bad-for-the-environment/ easons From climate change to forest fires to human rights abuses, the global industrial meat industry leaves a trail of destruction all over the world. Millions of people's lives depend on a dramatic reduction in the consumption of meat and dairy. And it’s not just red meat that’s the problem. Meat – or more specifically, ‘industrial meat’ – is bad for the planet.

The vast majority of meat bought in the UK is produced in intensive factory farms. These farms are part of a destructive global system of mass-produced industrial meat and dairy. Through its meat production, JBS produces around half the carbon emissions of fossil fuel giants such as Shell or BP, and is driving deforestation in the Amazon. The industrial meat system requires a huge amount of land to sustain itself. Forests, particularly in South America, are deliberately slashed and burned every year to graze cattle and grow enough crops to feed billions of farmed animals. 1. It causes deforestation and forest fires Industrial meat is the single biggest cause of deforestation globally. In Brazil, farmers are deliberately setting forest fires – like the Amazon rainforest fires you may have seen in the news – to clear space for cattle ranching and to grow industrial animal feed, like soya, for farms back in the UK. 2. It causes climate change The climate impact of meat is enormous – roughly equivalent to all the driving and flying of every car, truck and plane in the world. When forests are destroyed to produce industrial meat, billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide are released into the atmosphere, accelerating global warming. The fallen trees are often left to rot on the forest floor or are burned, creating further emissions. Healthy trees are essential for absorbing carbon from the atmosphere. If we cut them down, they can no longer help us in the fight against climate change. 3. It’s pushing the Amazon rainforest closer to a tipping point Trees in the Amazon rainforest produce their own rainfall, which keeps the whole forest alive and healthy. If deforestation (for things like industrial meat) continues at the current rate, the Amazon could reach a ‘tipping point’, where it can no longer sustain itself as a rainforest. This would have a devastating impact on the people and animals who live in, or depend on, the forest directly. It could also lead to less rainfall, affecting drinking water and irrigation across large parts of South America; and changes to climate patterns in other parts of the world too. 4. It’s responsible for human rights abuses and land-grabbing Indigenous People and traditional communities – like the geraizeira communities in Brazil –  are at the frontline in the fight to protect forests. An investigation by Greenpeace Brazil showed that security forces working for soya producer Agronegócio Estrondo harassed, detained, abducted and shot members of the traditional geraizeira communities. Meanwhile, President Bolsonaro and his government tacitly encourage illegal loggers, miners and farmers to occupy Indigenous lands, by rolling back historic regulations and trying to legalise land-grabbing. Land invasions often become violent and loggers have killed Indigenous People in these conflicts. Mass meat producer, JBS, has been repeatedly linked to suppliers who operate illegally on protected Indigenous lands. Cattle ranches and soya producers in Brazil have a history of profiting from modern day slavery. That includes suppliers to JBS (the meat processing giant). JBS’ abattoirs have been linked to terrible working conditions, mass outbreaks of Covid-19 and salmonella-ridden chicken exports. 5. It’s killing wildlife

By clearing forests, destroying habitats and using toxic pesticides to grow animal food, the industrial meat industry is contributing to the extinction of thousands of species, many of which haven’t even been discovered yet. We depend on a healthy environment for our own survival. The huge abundance and variety of the natural world (sometimes called biodiversity) is essential for food, clean water and medicines. The rapid loss of biodiversity, largely driven by industrial farming, could be as big a threat to our existence as climate change. 6. It’s increasing the risk of future pandemics like coronavirus Destroying forests and other wild areas for animal agriculture is a major cause of new infectious diseases. Three quarters of new diseases affecting humans come from animals. Cutting down and burning forests brings wildlife into closer contact with people, enabling deadly viruses to pass from animals to humans. The more forest that is destroyed, the greater the risk of a new pandemic. But that’s not the only disease risk from industrial meat. Factory farms can also increase the spread of disease, both between animals and from animals to humans. The risk is higher for industrial meat farms because huge numbers of animals are crammed into small spaces, and the animals themselves have weaker immune systems. This means that viruses can develop more rapidly and have the potential to pass to humans. 7. It’s an inefficient way to eat Companies sometimes argue that industrial meat is an efficient way to produce food, but this ignores its true costs. Over a quarter of the world’s entire land area is used to graze or grow food for farm animals – food that could have been eaten by people in the first place. Just 1kg of chicken meat takes 3.2kg of crops to produce. If everyone ate a plant-based diet, we’d need 75% less farmland than we use today. That’s an area equivalent to the US, China, Europe and Australia combined. That’s because it takes less land to grow food directly for humans, than to feed animals, which humans then eat. In countries like the UK, we need to be eating 70% less meat and dairy by 2030 to prevent climate breakdown. By eating mostly pant-based food, we could feed more people – with all the calories and nutrition needed for a healthy diet – without destroying forests. But this isn’t just about people’s individual choices. Supermarkets, like Tesco, play a huge role in shaping customer demand through advertising, price cuts and special promotions. Tesco sells more meat and uses more soya for animal feed than any other supermarket in the UK. And despite committing to stop supporting forest destruction by 2020, they are still buying meat from suppliers linked to deforestation. We can’t wait another 10 years for action. That’s why Greenpeace is calling on Tesco and other companies to start playing their part. They need to halve the amount of meat they sell by 2025, and ultimately phase out industrial meat entirely. They must replace that meat with more plant-based food options, and immediately stop buying from companies owned by forest destroyers, JBS. https://kids.nationalgeographic.com/explore/countries/nicaragua/ The biggest threats to the environment in Nicaragua are deforestation, soil erosion, and water pollution. Fast facts Official name: republic of Nicaragua

Form of government: republic Capital: Managua Population: 6,085,213 Official languages: Spanish, English, indigenous languages Money: gold Cordoba Area: 49,998 square miles (129,404 square kilometres) https://www.centralamericadata.com/en/search?q1=content_en_le:%22meat+consumption %22&q2=mattersInCountry_es_le:%22Nicaragua%22 Nicaragua: Increases in Meat Exports  The guild has stated that producers are accelerating the shipment of cattle to slaughterhouses in order to increase production and take advantage of the increase in the international price of meat. Central America Consumes More Pork Meat In the last five years annual per capita consumption of pork in the countries of the region increased from 4.6 kilos in 2012 to 5.3 kilos in 2016, and growth was driven mainly by Panama and Costa Rica.  Between 2012 and 2016 regional pork consumption has maintained an upward trend, growing from 205 thousand tons in 2012 to 249 thousand tons in 2016, which is an increase of 21%.  In 2016, 73% of the pork consumed in Central America corresponded to local production, while 27% was meat imported mostly from the United States and from other countries outside of the region.  Last year Costa Rica was the country with the highest annual per capita consumption, with 14.4 kilos, followed by Panama with 12.4 kilos, Honduras with 4 kilos, Guatemala with 3.7 kilos, Nicaragua with 2.7 kilos and El Salvador with 2.1 kilos.  In 2016, Costa Rica, Guatemala and Panama accounted for approximately 83% of the regional pork production, while the remaining 17% was produced in Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador. New Trends in Meat Consumption Due to the fact that preference for "vegetable" or plant-based meat is growing quickly in major global markets, food industry business groups have begun to make investments to meet this novel and growing market niche. Foods that were once considered the exclusive consumption of vegans or vegetarians are now becoming popular, and in the case of the United States, in supermarkets it is increasingly normal to see meat products made from plants. You may be interested in "What kinds of Foods Do Costa Ricans Prefer?" Elfinancierocr.com reports that due to the fact that "... hamburgers, sausages and plant-based chicken are becoming increasingly popular and are available in fast food restaurants and grocery stores across the United States, a new group of companies has begun manufacturing 'meat without meat'. In recent months large food companies like Tyson, Smithfield, Perdue, Horme and Nestlé have introduced their own alternatives to meat, so supermarket shelves have been filled with hamburgers, meatballs and plant-based chicken nuggets." Bruce Fiedrich, head of the Good Food Institute, explained that "... When companies like

Tyson and Smithfield launch plant-based meat products, that makes the plant-based meat sector no longer a niche and becomes commercial. They have gigantic distribution channels, enthusiastic consumer bases, and they know what meat products to offer to satisfy them." According to reports from CentralAmericaData, exports of fresh, chilled and frozen beef from Central American companies recorded a 3% year-on-year decline in 2018. Figures show that during last year regional sales to companies in the United States totaled $227 million, an amount that is 11% higher than that reported in 2017, a rise that contrasts with the fall in exports in general. https://news.mongabay.com/2020/06/nicaraguan-beef-grazed-on-deforested-and-stolen-landfeeds-global-demand/ Nicaragua is one of the world’s most heavily deforested countries, having lost about a fifth of its forest cover since 2000. Its indigenous regions were particularly badly hit, with deforestation rates as high as 27% over the same period. illegal settlement where non-indigenous Nicaraguans have invaded indigenous communal lands, cleared the forest, and brought in cattle to graze. Traveling through the indigenous territory, the boat glided past towering mangroves and stretches of forest lining the Kukra River, where turtles, herons and blue morpho butterflies provided flashes of color against the walls of green. Here and there the forest gave way to clearings and pasture along the riverbank. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Nicaragua Agricultural Policy In 1979 the new Sandinista administration quickly identified food as a national priority in order that the country's chronically malnourished rural population could be fed. The government planned to increase production to attain self-sufficiency in grains by 1990. Selfsufficiency in other dietary necessities was planned for the year 2000. For a variety of reasons, however, including the private sector's retention of 60 percent of arable land, the Sandinista government continued to import food and grow cash crops. In 1993 the goal of self-sufficiency in food production was still far from being achieved. To generate essential foreign exchange, the Ortega administration continued to support an upscale, high-tech agroexport sector, but returns on its investment diminished. By 1990 only one-quarter of the pre-1979 area planted in cotton, one of the leading foreign exchange earners in the 1970s, was still under cultivation. Despite an established priority for food production, food imports to Nicaragua grew enormously from the mid-1970s to the mid1980s. In general, the Sandinistas made little progress in reducing economic dependence on traditional export crops. To the contrary, faced with the need for food self-sufficiency versus the need for essential foreign exchange earnings, the Ortega administration, demonstrating scant economic expertise, continued to prop up the country's traditional agroindustrial export system. They did so despite expensive foreign imports, diminished export markets, and a powerful opposing private sector. Revenues from traditional export crops continued their rapid decline throughout the 1980s. Despite this drop, agriculture accounted for 29 percent of the GDP in 1989 and an estimated 24 percent in 1991. Agriculture employed about 45% of the work force in 1991. https://www.foodexport.org/get-started/country-market-profiles/central-america/nicaraguacountry-profile

This is related to consumer habits. The Nicaraguan diet is high on carbohydrates but low on proteins, vegetables and fruits.  More than 65% of the local population’s daily calories are derived from carbohydrates.   https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12571-018-0877-1 The livestock sector is a major driver of climate change, accounting for 14.5% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. In addition to the climate impact of livestock rearing, global meat and dairy consumption patterns drive deforestation and land degradation, accelerate species and habitat loss, and account for 27% of global depletion and pollution of freshwater (Alexander et al. 2015; Machovina et al. 2015; Gerbens-Leenes et al. 2013). Excessive consumption of meat, particularly red and processed meat, has also been linked with the rising global incidence of obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases such as type-2 diabetes, heart disease and certain cancers In addition to increased GHG emissions, rising demand for meat implies a greater land footprint for the livestock sector.  The public awareness gap Despite the climate, environmental and social costs associated with global patterns of meat consumption, there remains a significant public awareness gap around the climate impact of meat production compared with other sources of GHG emissions such as deforestation and energy use in buildings A multinational online opinion survey undertaken by Bailey et al. (2014) to examine levels of public awareness and understanding of climate change and its drivers finds that participants around the world are twice as likely to identify the transport sector as an important contributor to climate change compared with meat production, despite the two sources accounting for a roughly equal share of global anthropogenic GHG emissions (see Fig. 2). The share of participants stating that meat and dairy production contribute little or nothing to climate change ranged between 18% and 42% across the 12 countries, with Russia’s participants demonstrating a particularly significant awareness gap around the importance of the sector as a source of emissions (see Fig. 3). This awareness gap presents a problem to on-going and future efforts to shift meat-eating habits: Bailey et al. (2014) find that lack of awareness contributes to indifference and inertia, and that low awareness of the climate impact of a given behaviour translates into a lack of willingness to consider changing that behaviour. Bailey et al. (2014) also find that closing the awareness gap is likely to be a precondition both for voluntary behaviour change and for a positive response from the public to government-led interventions encouraging dietary shifts. The vast majority of survey participants identified as meat eaters (see Fig. 4); but those participants with a greater awareness of the climate impact of meat and dairy consumption displayed a markedly higher propensity either to be taking action to reduce diet-related emissions or to consider taking action in the future (see Fig. 5). https://www.numbeo.com/pollution/country_result.jsp?country=Nicaragua Index Pollution Index: 

61.03

Pollution Exp Scale: 

110.93 Pollution012061.03 Pollution in Nicaragua Air Pollution

37.50 Low

Drinking Water 52.17 Moderate Pollution and Inaccessibility Dissatisfaction with Garbage 73.75 High Disposal Dirty and Untidy

71.59 High

Noise and Light Pollution

61.36 High

Water Pollution

76.14 High

Dissatisfaction to Spend Time 51.14 Moderate in the City Dissatisfaction with Green 56.82 Moderate and Parks in the City Purity and Cleanliness in Nicaragua Air quality

62.50 High

Drinking 47.83 Moderate Water Quality

and Accessibility Garbage Disposal Satisfaction

26.25 Low

Clean and Tidy

28.41 Low

Quiet and No Problem with Night Lights

38.64 Low

Water Quality 23.86 Low Comfortable to Spend Time 48.86 Moderate in the City Quality of Green and Parks

43.18 Moderate

https://vegsoc.org/info-hub/why-go-veggie/environment/ https://www.peta.org/about-peta/faq/how-does-eating-meat-harm-the-environment/ What are the solutions for reduction of meat consumption besides educational campaign? Can there be more promotion of green diet options? What can the government do more besides education? Can there be some policies? Some incentive to change people’s diet? More subsidies in promotion of organic vegetables and menus? You may ask all these in the questionnaire.

https://www.extension.iastate.edu/Documents/ANR/LikertScaleExamplesforSurveys.pdf https://cases.open.ubc.ca/environmental-impact-of-meat-consumption/ https://land-links.org/country-profile/nicaragua/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Nicaragua#Statistics https://kids.nationalgeographic.com/geography/countries/article/nicaragua https://www.britannica.com/place/Nicaragua/Education https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/07/true-cost-of-eating-meat-environmenthealth-animal-welfare