來了來了！

HIR 2024-春季賽-主題解析

下篇來啦！

本次帶來主題解析的依舊是資深文科導(dǎo)師E老師，讓我們一起來看看吧！

本篇著重解讀

Theme B：Global Challenges and Collective Actions

Theme B -主題解析

News cycles are dominated by military conflicts, such as those in Ukraine and Israel/Palestine. However, “global challenges" expand far beyond war to include other, more humanitarian crises: discrimination, famine, natural disasters, and disease, climate-related displacement, etc. Examples of collective actions to address this broad array of issues include not only multi-state coalitions (such as UNICEF) but also grassroots activism and national social movements.

新聞報道往往以軍事沖突為主導(dǎo)，比如烏克蘭和以色列/巴勒斯坦問題。然而，“全球挑戰(zhàn)”絕不限于戰(zhàn)爭，還包括了很多其他人道主義的危機，比如歧視、饑荒、自然災(zāi)害導(dǎo)致的人群流離失所以及疾病爆發(fā)等等。

解決這些宏觀問題需要集體行動來應(yīng)對，既需要多國聯(lián)盟（例如聯(lián)合國兒童基金會）支持，也需要民間活動/組織和其他社會運動參與其中。

Theme B和以往的題就有些相似之處了，比如去年的“Technological Advancement and the World 科技進步與世界”，都是 A and B 的形式，討論二者的關(guān)聯(lián)。

很顯然，我們可以從題目中看到兩個關(guān)鍵詞，Global Challenges 和 Collective Actions

關(guān)于Global Challenges

所謂Global Challenges，顧名思義，即全球范圍內(nèi)正在面臨的挑戰(zhàn)，含義是比較直白，不用多做解釋，那我們需要思考的就是選擇什么樣的切入點。

關(guān)于Global Challenges，可能很容易就會想到能源危機、環(huán)境問題、氣候變化問題等等，這些話題其實一直也是討論得比較多的。

當(dāng)然，我們也可以不局限于此，可以嘗試從微觀的層面去思考更多問題，比如將視角放到不同的地區(qū)、地域，這些范圍內(nèi)的人們受到了什么樣的影響，或者正經(jīng)歷著什么樣的Global Challenges。

此外，我們也可以試著再拓寬一下視野，題目中提到的一些歧視、饑荒等等問題，還是基于人類社會的。我們也可以不把目光放在人類上，目光投向比如在生態(tài)、生物等等方面，去探討物種多樣性的相關(guān)話題等等。

上述的這些，都可以說是Global Challenges，我們的Theme B開題，一定要格局打開，然后再明確一個目標(biāo)~

關(guān)于Collective Actions

這個Collective Actions集體行動中的Collective其實給了我們比較寬泛的余地。可以是國際性的，也可以是區(qū)域性的，我們可以根據(jù)我們想要說的Global Challenges，來酌情選擇。

E老師也為大家舉了非常多的例子，

區(qū)域性的：G20，BRICS金磚國家，EU歐盟等等

世界性的：聯(lián)合國，IMF，World?Bank

應(yīng)對氣候問題的：COP28

這些都可以稱作是Collective Actions，我們可以首先確定想要寫的話題內(nèi)容，根據(jù)它的特點，再去聚焦是區(qū)域性地，還是國際性的，或者是某個領(lǐng)域方面的。

除了這些有明確的名稱或者組織性質(zhì)的組織、聯(lián)盟之外，題目中所提到的Grassroots Activisms等等，也是我們可以討論的目標(biāo)，比如Black Lives Matter等。

這些源于民間，通過網(wǎng)絡(luò)等渠道傳播后，逐漸形成了一種廣泛的趨勢，也可以是一種Collective Actions。

所以看待Collective Action，我們可以從多方面、角度去看待，可能是社會性的，全國性的、區(qū)域性的，或者全球性的等等。我們一定不要被詞義框住，關(guān)鍵是看如何去定義，去分析~

關(guān)于And

在明確兩個關(guān)鍵詞之后，題目中的剩下的“And”，就用的非常妙，也很值得分析。

And 這個詞，可以說就是我們需要討論的“二者關(guān)聯(lián)性”，也就是我們需要凸顯自己的分析和觀點的部分。

可能是因果關(guān)系，可能是相關(guān)關(guān)系等等，我們一定要闡述清楚，并加以論證~

總結(jié)

所以 Theme B 這道題，在我們展開分析的時候，其實需要注重其實需要注重的就是幾個關(guān)鍵點

● 首先，是明確兩個目標(biāo)，Global Challenges，Collective Actions

● 其次，在確立自己的論述主題后，我們怎么去定義這個Global Challenges

● 再次，我們需要找到它和Collective Actions之間的關(guān)系，并進行清晰合理的闡述。

以上任何一點，都是不能忽略的~

備賽要點

關(guān)于HIR的備賽要點，E老師也根據(jù)豐富的帶賽經(jīng)驗羅列了一些，希望大家可以有則改之，無則加勉~

ARGUMENT

在分析中，論點必須要是有質(zhì)量的。

我們的文章不能夠僅僅是總結(jié)、堆砌文獻資料，必須是從中有所想所得，保證有自己的分析。

STEPS

一個完整的寫作流程，可以幫助我們更順暢地產(chǎn)出文章。

希望大家按照標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的寫作流程來進行備賽，不要圖方便而忽略某些步驟：

做好research 、寫好outline 、再寫paper

每一步走踏實了，才能夠“順理成章”，同時在此基礎(chǔ)上，再加以深入分析，千萬不要對任何的論據(jù)只是羅列出來，淺淺帶過。

《哈佛國際評論》學(xué)術(shù)寫作挑戰(zhàn)

感興趣的同學(xué)快來報名參與吧~

【翰林提供報名指導(dǎo)服務(wù)】掃碼咨詢！

推薦閱讀

我們從HIR官網(wǎng)選取了一些不同領(lǐng)域的范文，給大家進行參考，可以從中了解評審更看好的邏輯思路，從中學(xué)習(xí)好的方法論~

01Africa vs. Climate Change

Energy & Environment

Development

Climate change: one of the most pressing problems for every country. Or is it? Although it is common to hear of wealthier nations engaging in dialogue to combat the effects of global warming, climate change is not universally prioritized. While wealthier governments worry deeply about the impacts of global warming, poorer countries worry more about addressing more immediate needs, like poverty, starvation, and healthcare. According to a worldwide?survey?conducted by the UN, climate change is a priority for about half of the respondents in high Human Development Index (HDI) countries, a quarter of the respondents in medium HDI countries, and less than 10 percent of respondents in low HDI nations. Thus, climate change tends to rank higher on wealthier countries’ governmental agendas since they are better position to prioritize climate change over other concerns that are more widespread in developing nations.

In the case of Africa, although some of its countries are further along the path of industrialization and economic development than others, many nations in the region have low HDIs and are less equipped to manage sea-level rise, heat waves, droughts, and other natural disasters that are linked to climate change; thus, the effects of climate change will impact these developing nations more than developed countries that have more infrastructure and capital. At the same time, developed nations contribute far more to increasing the rate of global warming. According to the Center for Global Development, industrialized countries worldwide were?responsible?for 79 percent of accumulated carbon emissions between 1850 and 2011. Additionally, the wealthiest 10 percent of individuals?contributed?approximately half of the global emissions recorded in 2015, with the top one percent being responsible for approximately 15 percent of emissions—twice the amount contributed by the world’s poorest 50 percent. This means the poorest nations and individuals inevitably bear the heavy brunt of climate change consequences regardless of their minimal contribution to global warming.

The Case of Mozambique

Mozambique—one of the poorest countries in the world, where over?70 percent?of its total population lives in poverty—is one of the most vulnerable nations to the effects of climate change, despite not contributing much to the causes of climate change. According to the?2021 Global Climate Risk Index, Mozambique is the fifth most affected nation by extreme weather over the past two decades, as the changing weather patterns caused by climate change have triggered waves of devastating cyclones and floods. Its key economic sectors—like?agriculture, which employs approximately 75 percent of the Mozambican workforce—are severely affected by these extreme weather conditions, which, in turn, hinders Mozambique’s productivity. Needless to say, the adverse effects of climate change have contributed massively to Mozambique’s lack of economic development, as its average annual?losses?from cyclones are approximately US$440 million. In fact, Mozambique is estimated to have lost?12.6 percent?of its GDP to the climate change crisis in 2019 alone.

Given that recovering from these natural catastrophes entails families rebuilding their homes or relocating to higher grounds, poor families in Mozambique are often sent into downward spirals of poverty. Although farming communities in Mozambique often move between living by rivers and on higher ground because of the constant change between droughts and floods, when Mozambique floods, families may not have enough time to relocate. In addition, Mozambique is particularly at a disadvantage when it comes to climate change-induced natural disasters because of its geography—its close proximity to the Indian Ocean, paired with the fact that it is?downstream?from many of Africa’s largest rivers, means that Mozambique disproportionately faces hydro-meteorological disasters. As Alexandre Tique, a meteorologist at Mozambique’s National Meteorological Institute,?states, “it is difficult to circulate [...] information [regarding natural disasters] to everyone that needs it, because a very large percentage of Mozambique's population lives in rural areas.” Thus, the people of Mozambique are disproportionately exposed to the dangerous effects of climate change, and have far fewer resources to prepare and recover compared to people in more developed countries.

The Problem with Current Global Warming Solutions

To mitigate the impact of global warming, nations set targets for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. However, this seems to unfairly disadvantage developing nations like Mozambique that need to industrialize to promote economic growth. Historically,?industrialization?was the driver of economic growth for many wealthy nations in Europe and the Americas. Using cheap fossil fuels can lead to more manufacturing and higher rates of productivity in the workforce, which increases profits, urbanization, and standards of living while reducing unemployment and poverty. Underdeveloped areas of the world benefit immensely from fossil fuels, given that this resource allows them to escape poverty through accessible and inexpensive energy.

Mozambique’s Need for Development

While some economists may argue that less developed countries can essentially “skip” over industrialization by investing in human capital and governance, Mozambique’s economic welfare has lagged in terms of progress with respect to the developing world, partly because of its lack of accessible education and healthcare. Mozambican women have a?50.3 percent?literacy rate, and the?life expectancy?for Mozambican men is roughly 56 years. Additionally, Mozambique is underdeveloped because of the?historical exploitation?of its people and resources at the hands of the Portuguese, who controlled Mozambique until it gained its independence in 1975. For more than 300 years of Portuguese colonization, Mozambique was depleted of its people and resources, as some of its most important industries during its colonial era were the?slave and ivory trade—which had devastating ramifications for Mozambique’s economy and society. Additionally, the?Portuguese?were not interested in educating Mozambicans beyond what they considered necessary, which was left up to the Portuguese’s discretion; many schools even denied access to and purposely failed African indigenous students.

Although Mozambique finally won its independence in 1975, it has spent approximately half of its time since independence fighting multiple?civil wars,?further destabilizing its economy and depleting its population. Given how Mozambique’s tumultuous history has proved detrimental to its resources and human capital, Mozambique has had a difficult time industrializing. Furthermore, Mozambique experiences severe structural issues regarding its education system. A USAID study showed that only approximately?15 percent?of Mozambican school days are actually utilized due to issues like a lack of teachers and other structural limitations; 66 percent of Mozambican school children finish elementary school without basic reading and writing skills. Additionally, with over?70 percent?of Mozambicans living below the poverty line, many?children?are forced to either quit school to support their families or to start their own families. This poor education infrastructure makes it extremely difficult for Mozambique to invest in its human capital, creating a desperate need for industrialization. Expecting the nation to industrialize without inexpensive energy and electricity is unfair, especially considering that Mozambique’s natural gas consumption accounts for a?negligible?percentage of the world’s total consumption.

Harmful Alternatives to Carbon Emissions

People may argue that, in theory, restricting access to oil and natural gas-powered electricity plants for countries with low HDIs leads to fewer carbon emissions and helps address the climate crisis. However, stripping countries like Mozambique from access to fossil fuels means that people resort to more dangerous forms of energy. For instance, one of the most commonly used renewable forms of energy worldwide is?biomass—the burning of wood and other organic matter—which accounts for 96 percent of the global renewable heat market. Unfortunately, biomass fuel (BMF) is even worse for the environment than the usage of gas and oil. The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) states that burning biomass not only endangers the world’s forests, but also generates air pollution that can cause health problems like asthma attacks, cancer, and heart attacks, which, in turn, puts more pressure on the already-strained health services in poorer nations like Mozambique. Additionally, because biomass emissions are generated by individuals to cook meals or boil water rather than just at localized energy plants, there are greater health impacts on users, especially?women and children, since they are primarily exposed to high levels of BMF smoke in rural areas. Thus, restricting fossil fuel usage in Mozambique may simply push more people to use BMFs, which has similar, if not worse, environmental and health impacts in comparison.

Extractivism in Mozambique

Mozambique is rich in fuel; it is Africa’s?third-largest source?of natural gas. To generate income, Mozambique relies on?“extractivism”: earning money by extracting and exporting large quantities of energy worldwide. However, although this generates wealth for Mozambique, it also contributes to the growing threat of environmental catastrophes that have continued to impact other economic sectors in Mozambique. This creates a cycle in which Mozambique is forced to rely on extractivism because of the destruction caused by climate-change-induced cyclones, which are partially caused by extractivism itself. At the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference, Mozambique’s Prime Minister?declared?that Mozambique would derive 62 percent of its energy from renewable resources by 2030 in order to comply with the UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); he proposed Mozambique’s exploration of natural gas as a “transitional energy source.” The United Kingdom Export Finance (UKEF) responded by committing over $1 billion for gas extraction projects in Mozambique. Although some critics, like the environmental activist?Anabela Lemos, argue that these extraction projects do nothing to mitigate climate change effects worldwide—causing irrevocable damage to the Mozambican environment—Mozambique’s Prime Minister’s proposal is reasonable. Moving away from utilizing fossil fuels must be among Mozambique’s priorities; however, doing so would structurally change its economy and social standards of living. Thus, Mozambique should be allowed to gradually transition towards relying on renewable resources on a longer time scale than developed countries given that fossil fuels are so central to Mozambique’s economy.

Moving Forward

Overall, it is perhaps in Mozambique’s best interest to transition away from extractivism and strive to re-envision its economic growth strategies. Moreover, the international community must focus on making clean forms of energy like solar panels more accessible to low HDI countries through subsidies and similar policies. Clean energy plants should be built to prevent health issues stemming from BMF smoke. The diversification of energy sources in Mozambique will allow it to diverge from the usage of fossil fuels while improving its economy. Mozambique and other low HDI countries should not have to bear the burden of resolving climate change, especially because they have historically contributed insignificant amounts to cause global warming. Although transitioning to renewable forms of energy is Mozambique’s ideal long-term solution to the climate change crisis, developing countries like Mozambique should be allowed to continue to use fossil fuels—at least for the time being. In other words, Mozambique’s best course of action may be to rely on natural gas and other fossil fuels in the meantime; nevertheless, it should still plan a gradual transition to renewable sources of energy, and developed nations must help facilitate this transition. Mozambique should not be pressured into setting the stage regarding international climate action; rather, it should be allowed to slowly adapt to a greener way of life.

鏈接：https://hir.harvard.edu/africa-vs-climate-change/

02Garbage Politics

Trade

Energy & Environment

How Garbage Nearly Started a War

In April 2019, in an unprecedented move, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte threatened to declare?war?on Canada. It was ostensibly out of the blue. But the ultimatum he leveled was the latest symptom of a festering problem that had long remained neglected: the politics of garbage.

Back in 2013,?Chronic Plastics Inc.?had shipped 103 containers of household trash, plastic bottles and bags, newspapers, and used adult diapers misrepresented as recycling from Vancouver to Manila. As early as 2016, a Philippine court ruled that Chronic Plastics must reclaim their waste. The corporation—and Canada—equivocated. Three years and one threat of war later, most of the trash was shipped back to Canada.

While this is one of the more dramatic occurrences, it is hardly the first time a wealthy country has exported exorbitant volumes of trash to developing countries under false pretenses.

A Brief History of the Garbage Industry

As countries develop, they tend to produce more recyclable garbage – the average person in the United States, for example, generates?over two kilograms?of waste daily. However, disposing of that volume of recycling in a clean manner is both technologically challenging and quite expensive. In the latter half of the 20th century, Asian countries, particularly China, agreed to receive plastic waste at a significantly lower rate than that of building sustainable recycling plants, even in the long term. This relationship functioned for about two decades.

The situation took a turn for the worse in 2018 when China abruptly stopped accepting the brunt of the West’s recyclable trash upon implementing the?National Sword?policy. This required that all imported trash be?99.5 percent?recyclable. Previously, it had been absorbing over 7 million tons of recycling annually—70 percent of the United States’ and 95 percent of the EU’s trash. What could have served as a moment of reflection for the West regarding their lack of waste management facilities quickly morphed into a desperate scramble to find other countries to accept their garbage. With the West unwilling to sort their trash to the extent that it met China’s standard, Southeast Asia became the new dumping ground—namely, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia, where rates of imported garbage rose by?171 percent.

Issues soon arose from this dynamic, primarily due to deliberate ignorance on the part of the developed nations regarding the fate of their waste once it leaves their ports.

Typically, countries accepting the garbage did not have processing facilities superior to those of the West, but rather more lenient laws, less centralized governments, and less oversight. In fact, globally, just?9 percent?of recyclable waste is recycled. The vast majority is incinerated, dumped into a water source, or stored in a landfill, all of which are not only bad for the environment but antithetical to the concept of recycling. In spite of the emphasis placed on green waste management in purportedly environmentally-conscious countries, only a meager portion of recyclable goods is actually being repurposed as was intended. The premise of recycling is to send plastics to facilities where they will be reused, obviating the need for superfluous production. But there is a clear incongruence between intended recycling policies and their practice.

The Situation Today

Recently, more countries have enacted similar policies to China in response to the high quantities of waste contaminating the recyclable materials that they had agreed to process. Contamination not only makes the sorting process more tedious and expensive but actively pollutes these countries. Furthermore, such countries had become so inundated with Western garbage—recyclable and non-recyclable—that they had neither the capacity nor use for it. While China managed to reduce its levels of imported garbage by?99 percent, Southeast Asian countries have not been as successful.

The recycling industry is worth around?US$250 billion, approximately the GDP of Portugal. For many people, the value is worth the risk. In response to restrictions on the cleanliness of imported garbage, many companies began to lie about their exports, stating that the refuse was far more recyclable than it was in actuality. Garbage exporters, working in tandem with importers, have largely managed to circumvent the government restrictions. Although the authorities of these countries have attempted to curb this detrimental practice, it’s arduous and unpleasant to sift through allegedly legal collections of waste and determine if they satisfy the country’s parameters.

Effects on People and Communities

In 2019, for example, the Indonesian government flagged?2,000?shipping containers said to be delivering recyclables but were contaminated, and a quarter were returned to their countries of origin. Most notably, 60 crates were sent back to Australia claiming to contain paper but instead were filled with household waste, packaging, used electronics, used baby diapers, and used footwear. In nearly all cases, importers and exporters have a tacit agreement on the composition of the waste, and the scheme is only foiled upon government intervention. Importing such waste is punishable in Indonesia by a prison sentence of up to 12 years along with a US$1 million fine.

The consequences of these actions are threefold: damaging the environment, posing serious health risks to people in the vicinity, and exacerbating the garbage problem as a whole.

The most lethal instance, though, occurred in Nigeria in 1988. An Italian business realized that it was US$4.3 million cheaper to ship?8,000 barrels?of toxic waste to Nigeria than to process it in a plant governed by EU regulations. Their company proceeded to transport their 4,000 tonnes of waste to a local’s property after exchanging US$100 monthly for permission to do so. He, of course, was under the impression that the garage was not contaminated. After a chemical mishap, waste seeped into the local farmland, poisoning the rice crop, killing 19 people, including the property owner, and harming dozens more.

In terms of the environment, the more the?garbage industry?operates extrajudicially, the more destructive the effects on the environment will be. Even while the participants operated within the confines of the law, a large portion of recyclable materials was dumped in a landfill or incinerated. Furthermore, companies deceptively exported contaminated waste mixed into the garbage; deliberate or not, this is preventable and is a major factor in the decisions of these countries to stop accepting Western garbage. Now that the garbage trade practices operate increasingly illegally, there is even less oversight in terms of what is imported, how it is processed, and by whom. It’s important to note that the cost of recycling is far greater than dumping all the waste in rural Southeastern Asia or burning it or manufacturing new plastic to replace it, all of which are detrimental to the environment.

Landfills?pepper rural land across Southeast Asia, where they engender devastating consequences. The incineration of vast amounts of plastic produces foul, toxic smoke. Furthermore, as plastics are irresponsibly deposited in landfills, they degrade, and microplastics start forming and circulating in the locality. Needless to say, both of these wreak havoc on the health of humans and animals in the vicinity. Essential water sources in rural villages have been documented to be veiled in a film of microplastic as a result of these practices.

Comments From Affected Individuals

According to a Malaysian mother named Evon, who lives near one of these dumps, this harmful dynamic has?directly affected her family: “My son is always getting sick. I’m scared it will become more serious.”

Another Malaysian woman suspects that the river running through her village (and many others) serves as a mechanism for disseminating the waste given how it is downstream from landfills. Not only does their water quality drastically decline, but garbage and microplastics flow directly into their village via the river. She hopes that they don’t “become the next cancer village.” When asked what she thought about the situation as a whole, she?insisted?that Malaysia does not want to be “an international rubbish bin.”

Interestingly, there is some local support.?Bangun, a poor village in Indonesia, sits nearby a landfill. Up to 40 dump trucks deposit garbage there daily. Two-thirds of its inhabitants rely on it as a source of income, scouring the trash for goods to sell. This pattern is not uncommon, especially in poorer villages where goods have a higher relative worth. Keman, who lives in Bangun, credits scavenging in the dump for funding his three children’s university tuition. Although it’s easy to view this behavior as yet another insidious manifestation of inequality, it goes to show that there’s far from a consensus even among those bearing the consequences firsthand. Additionally, the fact that thousands of people are financially dependent on there being constant flow of garbage further complicates the matter.

Future Possibilities

This dynamic does nothing to solve the environmental problem; all it accomplishes is cutting costs in richer countries by outsourcing their problems to poorer countries that have even less of an infrastructure to manage them and thus bear the consequences of Western convenience. Perhaps in the short term, richer countries benefit, but it is only a matter of time before popular support in southeast Asian countries impels the government to enact an?import shutdown?similar to that of China. After this shift, the West will have a considerably more difficult time finding a destination for their enormous quantities of waste; they will finally be forced to directly reckon with the crisis they caused. Delaying the construction of sustainable and efficient recycling plants serves only to postpone the inevitable, myopically prioritizing transient ease over what would be a beneficial solution for everyone.

Or, alternatively, we could use less plastic.

鏈接：https://hir.harvard.edu/garbage-politics/

03The European Green Deal: Addressing the Intersection of Climate and Racial Justice

Finance & Economics

Law & Diplomacy

Emerging from the European Commission in December 2019, the?European Green Deal?represents one of the European Union’s boldest initiatives to combat the climate crisis. Backed by almost all EU member states and officially endorsed by the European Parliament as of June 2021, the twenty-four page deal outlines the EU’s collective objective to entirely eliminate greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. This particular objective?requires?all EU member states to reduce emissions by at least 55% from their levels in the year 1990, mandating that substantive progress be made within the next ten years to curb harmful greenhouse gas emissions. The deal is closely aligned with the economic priorities of the EU, a linkage?underscored?by the European Commission’s president, Ursula von der Leyen, who in 2019 noted in reference to the deal, “Our goal is to reconcile the economy with the planet.” As the largest economic bloc to implement a set of agreements directly addressing the climate crisis, the European Union has made significant progress in galvanizing support for environmental awareness and action at the governmental level.

Goals and Gaps

The European Commission?states?that the European Green Deal has three main objectives: 1) no net emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050, 2) economic growth decoupled from resource use, and 3) no person and place left behind. While admirable in its ambition to target the expansive issue of climate change, the lofty goals, particularly the third objective, have?garnered?considerable criticism. Despite the EU’s pledge to include and incorporate all populations as it pertains to climate, the vague language is a far cry from tangible implementation. Furthermore, environmental activist groups?are becoming?increasingly more vocal, arguing that, contrary to the deal’s objective, people and places are undoubtedly being left behind. In the spring of 2021, the European Green Deal was the target of intense?criticism?by the Equinox Initiative Toward Racial Justice, a collective of activists of color launched in March of 2021. The core mission of the group is to?center?the voices, experiences, and perspectives of communities of color within EU policy and legislative decision-making. The key criticism levied against the European Green Deal by the Equinox Initiative is regarding the deal’s?failure?to include race in its policies, as well as its role in perpetuating “green colonialism” in the Global South. “Green colonialism” commonly?refers?to the exploitation of the natural resources of marginalized populations by manufacturers and corporations of the Global North. This can manifest in varied and nuanced ways, but it ultimately disproportionately affects the standard of living of those living in exploited regions. By failing to include the perspectives of those most acutely impacted by the climate crisis, both within the EU and beyond, the deal in its current form falls short of comprehensively addressing the full scope of the crisis.

The Dangers of Wood Pellets

While the European Green Deal addresses the climate crisis with broad strokes, the plan fails to specifically reference particularly harmful practices that remain key tenets of European infrastructure and manufacturing. Europe’s wood pellet market, a core pillar of European biomass initiatives, is a primary driver of the oppression of particular communities. Largely regarded as a sustainable alternative to burning coal for energy, wood pellets have?emerged?as a key product to fulfill Europe’s energy demands and advance the EU’s goal of incorporating “transition fuels.” Wood pellets have garnered support as a form of renewable energy, as trees can be replanted, yet the larger picture is far more grim. The manufacture and production of wood pellets for the European market has?exploded?in the Southern United States, where forests are expansive and regulations are fairly loose. In only a few years the industry has grown to produce more than 10 million metric tons of wood pellets for export to Europe. The manufacturing hotspots, however, are disproportionately within close proximity of Black communities, leaving these populations to languish in areas of?increased?pollution and a crippling loss of biodiversity. The smog and toxic levels of fine particulate matter near these manufacturing facilities?leave?residents vulnerable to health risks such as heart and respiratory disease. The problematic practice of wood pellet manufacturing, while aiding in the EU achieving its climate goals, remains largely short-sighted, with policymakers turning a blind eye to the lived realities of those suffering the detrimental consequences.

Turning Inward

While public discourse is increasingly shifting toward acknowledging the failures of the European Green Deal as it relates to racial injustice beyond the borders of the EU, limited attention has been given to acknowledging the intersection of racial and environmental justice within the EU itself. The deal’s action plan does not explicitly incorporate tangible action steps to address ways to aid the communities of color in European cities and suburbs disproportionately affected by air pollution. The vague and broad language of the deal that calls for “no person or place left behind” skirts around directly acknowledging the experiences of minority communities living in industrial and highly polluted areas.

While now outside of the EU in a post-Brexit world, the racial and environmental intersection has long been especially salient in England. A UK study conducted in 2016?revealed?that Black communities in London are more likely to breathe toxic levels of air pollution than their white or Asian counterparts. More specifically, the study showed that African and Caribbean people living in London account for 15.3% of those exposed to nitrogen dioxide levels that exceed legal EU limits, yet these populations only account for 13.3% of London’s total population. The Black population of London is largely concentrated in South London, specifically the areas of Southwark and Lambeth. These boroughs, where homes cluster around busy roads, also report the highest levels of nitrogen dioxide and air pollutant levels. Such disproportionate impacts of air pollution on communities of color highlights the need to address these issues through both a racially-conscious and environmentally just lens.

Within the EU, communities of color face similar plights. In the summer of 2020, anti-racism campaigns in France collided with those advocating for environmental justice. ?A coalition was subsequently formed within French suburbs?urging?policy changes regarding race, climate, and their intrinsically linked roots, causes, and ramifications for communities of color. Beaumont-sur-Oise, a Parisian suburb, was the site of a large march in July 2020, with participants demonstrating against not only racial injustice and police brutality, but broader issues related to climate. The march united around the overarching?message?of, according to the environmental advocacy group Alternatiba’s spokeswoman, Elodie Nace, “We want to breathe.” Nace?noted?in an interview with France 24 that Alternatiba’s main objective is to change the societal perception of environmentalism and center Black voices in conversations relating to climate change. Broadening environmental discourse to include communities of color is especially imperative as France’s least affluent suburbs, home to immigrant and minority communities, suffer disproportionately from the effects of air and water pollution.

The Parisian suburb of?Pantin, for example, was named the most polluted suburb in France by the World Health Organization in 2016. More recently, a 2020?study?at the Paris School of Economics on inequality in exposure to air pollution in France revealed evidence of cross-sectional and longitudinal inequality in exposure to fine particulate matter. It also found that in urban areas, census block deciles of the lowest income levels faced a disproportionate burden of exposure. Additionally, results indicated that the share of immigrants in particular census blocks is positively associated with fine particulate exposure, suggesting a prominent ethnic gap.

A Burning Problem

A large portion of urban and suburban pollution within the EU?stems?from harmful practices, such as the widespread use of garbage incinerators. For years, the EU?has burned?millions of tons of garbage, promoting the technique as a means to turn waste into usable energy. Proponents of the tactic cite the benefits of transforming “waste to energy,” yet environmental advocacy groups, including ZeroWaste Europe, are?urging?an immediate cessation of the practice. According to a member of the Brussels-based NGO, Janek V?hk, burning garbage is a leading source of polluting energy, one that “undermines the EU’s 2050 net-zero emissions target.”

A 2010 study?published?in the European Journal of Public Health on inequalities and environmental justice as it relates to waste management zeroed in on the dire impacts of waste management. Researchers reviewed literature published after 1983 and found consistent indications that waste facilities are disproportionately located in areas in which deprived communities reside. The study?called?for an identification of revised waste management policies to minimize the health risks associated with living in close proximity to waste management centers, namely garbage incinerators. Despite such studies and an increasingly vocal coalition of opposition, incinerators remain a large part of European waste management strategies. With many nations failing to?implement?the best pollution-control systems, the toxic pollutants and emissions from garbage incinerators remain inadequately regulated, continuing to wreak havoc disproportionately on communities of color in close proximity.?Trends?in incinerator use do not appear to be slowing down, with even a few European countries, including Greece, Bulgaria, and Romania setting plans in motion to build new incinerator plants. Without a change in policy, communities living near waste management centers remain vulnerable to the hazardous impacts of such harmful practices.

The Path Forward

The European Green Deal represents a significant step forward in European efforts to combat the climate crisis, yet gaps remain, especially at the intersection of racial and environmental justice. The objective of eliminating greenhouse gas emissions is undeniably admirable and represents the EU’s commitment to a cleaner, more sustainable future. Even as these strides are made at a legislative level, however, there must be sincere efforts implemented to address pervasive inequities stemming from the climate crisis. Key issues demanding policy revision include the air pollution and wood pellet production disproportionately impacting communities of color. By centering the voices of those most acutely impacted in conversations about environmental policy, the most crucial aspects of climate change could assume a role at the forefront of legislative discourse. Seeking alternatives to entrenched practices that perpetuate inequities for deprived areas and populations and subsequently incorporating such alternatives into legislation is imperative for implementing a comprehensive climate plan -- one that truly leaves no person and no place behind.

鏈接：https://hir.harvard.edu/the-european-green-deal-addressing-the-intersection-of-climate-and-racial-justice/

參考建議

同時，我們也從The Global Horizon發(fā)表平臺，為大家搜羅了一些素材文章作為參考~幫助大家拓寬視野，增添對于國際社會的了解~

01One of the world’s biggest cities may be just months away from running out of water

Politics

International Relation

Mexico City is facing a severe water crisis exacerbated by a combination of factors, including geographical challenges, urban development issues, leaky infrastructure, and the impacts of climate change. Residents like Alejandro Gomez are experiencing prolonged water shortages, with intermittent supply that is barely enough for basic needs. The crisis is driven by years of low rainfall, longer dry periods, and high temperatures, which have strained the water system already struggling to meet increased demand. The city's reliance on a centralized water system, coupled with over-extraction from underground aquifers and inefficient water management practices, has worsened the situation. Drought conditions have led to significant reductions in water reserves, particularly in the Cutzamala water system, prompting fears of "day zero" when taps run dry for large parts of the city. While authorities downplay the severity of the crisis, experts warn of escalating tensions and unequal access to water, with wealthier neighborhoods often less affected. Addressing Mexico City's water crisis requires a multifaceted approach that integrates short-term interventions with long-term planning. Solutions proposed include better wastewater treatment, rainwater harvesting, fixing leaks, and implementing nature-based solutions. However, the implementation of these measures is slow, leaving many residents uncertain about the future. Investments in water infrastructure, sustainable resource management, and climate adaptation measures are essential to build resilience and ensure the city's water security in the face of future challenges.

Link:edition.cnn.com/2024/02/25/climate/mexico-city-water-crisis-climate-intl/index.html

鏈接：https://www.theglobalhorizon.press/news/details/one-of-the-world-s-biggest-cities-may-be-just-months-away-from-running-out-of-water

02Northern Alaska Is Running Out of Rock

Technology

Author Emily Schwing discusses the scarcity of gravel in Alaska's North Slope, as it presents a significant challenge for development and infrastructure projects. Despite the region's abundance of natural resources, the limited availability of gravel impedes essential construction endeavors, including road building and housing development. As demand increases due to the impact of climate change such as thawing permafrost and coastal erosion, the need for this crucial material becomes even more pressing. The rising costs and logistical difficulties associated with transporting gravel exacerbate the problem, with some projects facing bids as high as $800 per cubic yard. The situation is particularly critical for remote communities like Utqia?vik, where gravel is a fundamental component of their infrastructure. Efforts to address the gravel shortage include developing new gravel pits and exploring partnerships between the state and local governments. Additionally, gravel plays a vital role in supporting the oil and gas industry's infrastructure needs, as demonstrated by projects like ConocoPhillips' Willow Project. While some areas in Alaska have ample gravel resources, the vast expanse of the North Slope presents challenges in locating suitable gravel deposits. Overall, the dwindling supply of gravel poses significant obstacles to sustainable development and economic growth in Northern Alaska.

Link:www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2024/02/alaska-north-slope-gravel/677340/

鏈接：https://www.theglobalhorizon.press/news/details/northern-alaska-is-running-out-of-rocks

03White House Aims to Reflect the Environment in Economic Data

Economics

The importance of the environment is reflected in universal messaging and is explicitly measured through different metrics, but this is not true in regard to our measurements of economic activity. One way that author, Lydia DePillis, describes the potential impact of the environment on the economy is through the example of a massive storm. A huge storm leaves behind huge devastations, such as “muddied rivers” and “denuded coastlines,” but, according to the author, this type of devastation might also be a source of economic growth. Due to the realization that much economic information could be ascertained from these environmental incidents, the Biden Administration revealed a 15 year plan to measure for humanity how much benefit healthy ecosystems could provide, giving information on which sectors to invest in, and which pieces of legislation are most urgent at any given moment. Capital accounting, as this process is referred to, can be dated back to the 1910s as economists began to consider similar points of concern; it began to really take shape in the 70s to 90s as government bureau’s began to consider how environmental health could be formally incorporated into statistical models and tools. Despite this long history, there are still critics that stand against this plan on the grounds that there is no objective way to measure the impact of natural disasters.

Link:www.nytimes.com/2023/01/20/business/economy/economic-statistics-climate-nature.html

鏈接：https://www.theglobalhorizon.press/news/details/white-house-aims-to-reflect-the-environment-in-economic-data

HIR哈佛國際評論賽

全球頂級社科學(xué)術(shù)期刊《哈佛國際評論》旗下，國際問題研究領(lǐng)域?qū)W術(shù)競賽標(biāo)桿。

HIR《哈佛國際評論》，成立于 1979 年，致力于通過出色的寫作和編輯選擇在學(xué)術(shù)和政策之間架起橋梁。曾收錄了43 位總統(tǒng)和總理、4 位秘書長、4 位諾貝爾經(jīng)濟學(xué)獎獲得者和 7 位諾貝爾和平獎獲得者的專題評論。

HIR的主題始終圍繞著人類命運共同體的相關(guān)話題展開，并且是自命題，可選擇領(lǐng)域也是非常廣泛~

不論我們是想要檢驗自己寫作能力水平，或者是對時政話題感興趣，有自己的觀點想法想要表達，或者是看重哈佛背書這一背景，希望通過參賽借力，沖擊頂尖名校，HIR都是一個非常不錯的項目~

1適合學(xué)生

全球9-12年級高中生

2參賽時間

春季賽報名截止：2024年4月25日（中國學(xué)生）

春季賽提交截止：2024年5月31日

春季賽決賽答辯：2024年6月29日

3命題領(lǐng)域

HIR作為一個自命題學(xué)術(shù)論文，主題不需要出現(xiàn)在文章題目或內(nèi)容中，只要選題角度和寫作內(nèi)容能夠反映競賽主題理念即可。

命題方向包含但不局限于：農(nóng)業(yè)、商業(yè)、網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全、國防、教育、就業(yè)&移民、能源&環(huán)境、金融&經(jīng)濟、公共衛(wèi)生、科技、太空、貿(mào)易、交通運輸?shù)?3個領(lǐng)域。

4競賽要求

▪?字?jǐn)?shù)限制：字?jǐn)?shù)800-1200（不包括圖表、數(shù)據(jù)表或作者聲明）

▪ 內(nèi)容議題：提交的內(nèi)容應(yīng)針對某個不被關(guān)注的全球性主題，提出自己的觀點并進行充分的分析論證。

▪ 寫作風(fēng)格：優(yōu)秀的參賽作品需要具備全面性、批判性，遵循事實情況，進行合理地論證與分析。

1. 標(biāo)注對書籍和文獻的引用

2.文章必須是AP風(fēng)格

▪ 答辯環(huán)節(jié)：

公布入圍名單后，入圍參賽者即為決賽入圍者，需要在答辯日，向評委會進行 15 分鐘的演講和口頭答辯。

▪ 注意事項：

● 注意賽事時間線與時差

務(wù)必注意賽方時間是基于美東時間，各個節(jié)點日期當(dāng)天的11:59 P.M. (EST)。同學(xué)們做賽事規(guī)劃務(wù)必考慮到時差，避免錯過時機哦~

● 賽事設(shè)有答辯環(huán)節(jié)

在公布入圍名單后，入圍同學(xué)則自動進入“決賽圈”，需要籌備完成15分鐘左右的答辯，突圍沖獎！同學(xué)們需要有所準(zhǔn)備哦！

5獎項設(shè)置

大? 獎

金、銀、銅獎

以及各類單項獎

Commendation Prize

Outstanding Writing Content / Style Prize

High Commendation Prize

關(guān)于HIR，想要有更針對性的賽事規(guī)劃

掃描上文二維碼咨詢吧！