GGR Midterm Questions - Final Copy !.docx

15 Pages
325 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Geography
Course
GGR329H5
Professor
Pierre Desrochers
Semester
Winter

Description
1. Give a basic definition of environmental determinism. What is Ludwig von Mises' take on the concept? 1.a) Abasic definition of Environmental Determinism (also known as climatic or geographical determinism) is the view that physical environment sets limits on or determines the fate of humans. The claim that physical geography, particularly climate influenced the mind set of people, which in turn defined the behaviour and culture of the society that those individuals formed. Example tropical climates said to cause laziness, relaxed attitudes and promiscuity, while variable weather of middle latitudes led to determination and good work ethics. b) Ludwig von Mises’take on the concept of environmental determinism is that there is a misconception in the interpretation that physical, geological, climatic conditions, flora and fauna of a region determines the thoughts and actions of its inhabitants. Instead Ludwig von Mises identifies the misconception of the above interpretation as geography as an active and human action as a passive factor. So geography determines the fate of humans but human action does not. Man lives in a definite geographical environment and is forced to adjust his action to the conditions of this environment. But the way he adjusts himself, methods of social, technological and moral adaptation, are not determined by external physical factors. For example the North American continent did not produce the civilization of Indian aborigines.According to Ludwig von Mises the truth in environmentalism is the cognition that every individual lives at a definite epoch or geographical space and acts under the conditions determined by this environment. The environment determines the situation but not the response. The response the actor (s) choose depends on their individuality. So geography therefore does not determine the fate of humans, but rather, human action determines the fate of humans, according to Ludwig von Mises. Ludwig von Mises arguments environmental determinism looks upon geography as an active and upon human action as a passive factor. He feels that Geography sets a task, but man has to solve it. Man lives in a definite geographical environment and is forced to adjust his action to the conditions of this environment. But the way in which he adjusts himself, the methods of his social, technological, and moral adaptation, are not determined by the external physical factors. An example Ludwig von Mises uses is that theAmerican continent produced neither the civilization of the Indian aborigines nor that of theAmericans of European extraction, Fur coats are practical in Canada but less so in Tahiti. 2. What is Ricardo Hausmann's argument as to how the fact that a country is 'landlocked' affects its growth prospects? How does he account for the plight of tropical agriculture?  Ricardo Hausmann’s argument that a country that is “landlocked” affects its growth prospects because landlocked nations may never enjoy access to internal (local) and external (international) markets. Also landlocked nations need new technologies to flourish in the global economy. Nations with populations far from a coastline tend to be poorer and show lower rates of economic growth than coastal countries. Landlocked countries, in today’s global market place would require inputs from various locations around the world, however transportation costs are high *study* shipping goods over 1 km of land costs as much as shipping them over 7extra km of sea. Landlocked countries if no physical infrastructure (roads, railways, ports) had to access navigable rivers and sea. Crossing borders costly for landlocked countries. *Study* crossing United States and Canadian border add four thousand to sixteen km of transportation costs. Landlocked countries have the challenge of co-ordinating infrastructure expenditures with neighbouring countries, political and commercial problems inhibit their passage to sea. b) Ricardo Hausmann accounts for the plight of tropical agriculture by saying because of little or no research and development in tropical agriculture, tropical countries left out of “modern- technology club,” they have little or no money to spend on research and development, so they do not know which variety or crop to plant and where it can grow, non existent expenditure of private agricultural producers, so no private funding, agricultural workers produce only a little more than what they require for personal subsistence so no exporting, cannot support large urban populations and high transportation costs in accessing world markets. In today’s global market place most industrial products require inputs from various locations. Unfortunately transportations costs are often determined by a country’s geography, therefore if transportation costs are high, local companies will be at a disadvantage it would be hard for them to export and import. Countries far from sea do not enjoy the physical infrastructure (railways, seaports) as well. Governments in landlocked countries face the additional challenge of coordinating infrastructure costs with neighboring countries. The divergence of agricultural productivity between the developed and developing world is grounded in dramatically different research and development capabilities. Geography aggravates this disparity plant varieties need to be adapted to the local climate meaning that research and development geared toward rich temperate zone agriculture is of little use in tropical areas. The tropical countries are left out of the modern technology club so agricultural sector much less dynamic in tropical areas than in temperate zones 3. What is Pinkovskiy and Sala-i-Martin's take on the various environmental determinist explanations that have been used to explain Africa's current social and economic plight?  Pinkovskiy and Sala-i-Martin’s take on the various environmental determinist explanations that have been used to explainAfrica’s current social and economic plight is that geography and history, that is environmental determinism does not matter significantly for the ability of Third World African countries to grow and reduce poverty. In Pinkovskiy and Sala-i-Martin’s *study* while poverty levels start out matching the environmental determinist hypothesy, the poverty rates for countries on either side of the breakdown tend to converge, with the disadvantaged countries reducing poverty significantly to catch up to the advantaged ones. Therefore neither geographical nor historical (that is, environmental determinism) disadvantages are obstacles to Africa’s current social and economic plight, poverty reduction. • It has been suggested that geography and history matter significantly for the ability of African countries to grow and reduce poverty. Some argue that coastal countries, or countries that are mineral-rich, will perform better than landlocked and mineral-poor countries in general. Others argue point to adverse geography as a cause of slow development: in particular, countries that have unfavourable agriculture should be poorer than countries with more favourable conditions. Others have suggested that troubled history may have a persistent effect on growth performance. o However, Pinkovskiy and Sala-i-Martin argue thatAfrican poverty decline has taken place everywhere, in countries that were slighted as well as in those that were favoured by geography and history. For every breakdown discussed above, the left panel of the corresponding Figure shows GDP in countries to each side of the breakdown, while the right panel shows poverty rates. o While the levels of the poverty series start out matching the hypotheses set out above, the poverty rates for countries on either side of the breakdown tend to converge, with the disadvantaged countries reducing poverty significantly to catch up to the advantaged ones. Neither geographical nor historical disadvantages seem to be insurmountable obstacles to poverty reduction. 4. What is Diamond's take on traditional 'environmental determinist' arguments?  Diamond believes that there is no objective evidence for neither racial nor genetic superiority. • Furthermore, Diamond does not believe that a person’s climate will stimulate their inventiveness. Just because a person lives in a cold climate does not mean the climate will stimulate inventiveness. Even though Europeans live in colder climates compared to those living in warm climates they inherited agriculture, the wheel, writing, and metallurgy which all come from warm climates. Colder climates do not make you smarter. • There is also the belief that lowland river valleys in dry climates depended on irrigation and centralized bureaucracies. But this is not the case.Archaeological studies have shown that complex irrigation systems did not accompany the rise of centralized bureaucracies, but followed after a considerable lag. This means that bureaucracies were in place before the irrigation systems. • Another type of explanation ED provides lists the immediate factors that enabled Europeans to kill or conquer other peoples, especially guns, steels tools, disease, and manufactured products. These explanations are on the right track as those factors were directly responsible for European conquest. However, it is incomplete because it only offers a proximate explanation identifying immediate cause. It invites a search for ultimate causes: why were Europeans the one to end up with guns, germs, and steel and not theAfricans? 5. What is the megafauna 'overkill' hypothesis? What are the main arguments in its favour? •  The megafauna overkill hypothesis is a theory developed by Paul Martin. It is also known as the Blitzkrieg Scenario. • It states that wherever humans went, it has always been accompanied by the extinction of large animals (Megafauna) • How?: Humans look harmless. However, humans have weapons and lots of experience hunting large species in other continents. Furthermore, humans could create fire forcing habitat change. The animals inAfrica co-existed with humans so they knew the danger of humans and stayed away and this is why they did not go extinct. • Arguments in favour:   o Following human arrival, MF disappeared everywhere in all habitats. o There are North American kill sites for Mastodons and Mammoths o In Cuba, MF had managed to survive until humans showed up. o The disappearance of lesser species can be attributed to the changes in the traditional food chain/habitat at the time due to the disappearance of megafauna (prairies had reverted back to forests). Furthermore there was indirect human influence like bringing rats which changed things significantly for the natural habitat.  6. What are the main arguments against the megafauna overkill hypothesis? What are the alternative explanations for the disappearance of megafauna outside ofAfrica? What is Diamond's position in this debate? •  ArgumentsAgainst: o Not enough humans to wipe out all the MF o Certain MF still around NorthAmerica today such as Elks, Bears, and Bisons. o Humans and MF co-existed for a very long time. o Minifauna (rodents) also disappeared. o Archaeological evidence only points to a few kill sites. o Some African MF do not fear humans.   • The alternative explanation provided by critics is perhaps it was due to climate change. One such climate change being a severe drought on an already dry Australia causing an extinction of megafauna in Australia. Diamonds Position:   o Diamond believes it cannot be pure coincidence that the arrival of humans always seemed to coincide with the exctinction of megafauna. How come these animals survived all this time before, but it was only with the arrival of humans did they go extinct? How come climate change did not cause the extinction of the megafauna already? The main arguments against the megafauna overkill hypothesis, humans were too few, certain megafauna still around north America (Elk, bears, bisons,etc), Humans and megafauna long co- exisence, minifauna(small rodents) also disappeared, archaeological evidence (few kill sites), someAfrican megafauna do not fear humans. Other possible causes Climate change (23 ice rd age) humans arrived at time of profound climate change when plants were already carbon starved, Natural causes germs from dogs, rodents etc. Problems with Blitzkrieg Scenario - Humans were too few - Certain mega-fauna still around – NorthAmerica (elk, bears, bison, etc.) - Humans and mega-fauna long coexistence - Mini-fauna (small rodents) also disappeared - Archaeological evidence (few kill sites) - SomeAfrican MF – no fear of humans Other Possible Causes - Climate Change (23 Ice age) o Humans arrived at time of profound climate change when plants were already carbon-starved - Natural causes o Germs from dogs, rodents, etc. Possible Reconciliation? Overkill doesn’t coincide with human arrivals, But with development of technologies of mass hunting/destruction, thereby reconciling humans/MF 7. Describe concisely the range of Polynesian environmental conditions. Describe concisely the types of societies that resulted from these conditions. What does this prove according to Diamond?  Environmental Conditions   o Climate: Warm tropical to cold sub Antarctic o Geology: CoralAtolls to Continental o Rainfall: Highest recorded to too dry for agriculture o Physical Geography: (Alpine) mountain ranges to coral beaches o These above conditions had an effect on a human societies population size, density, and structure. This is because the environment determined if there was wild food, useful materials, fresh water, whether or not tropical agriculture was possible, and if trade with other settlements was possible.   • Polynesian Societies:   o Subsistence: Hunter-gatherers to intensive food production o Social Organization: Fairly egalitarian to extremely stratified o Political Organization: Tribes to multi-island proto-empires o Material Culture: Personal utensils to monumental stone architecture     o The Chathams are relatively small and remote islands, capable of supporting a total population of only about 2,000 hunter-gatherers. With no other accessible islands to colonize, the Moriori had to remain in the Chathams, and to learn how to get along with each other. They did so by renouncing war, and they reduced potential conflicts from overpopulation by castrating some male infants. The result was a small, unwarlike population with simple technology and weapons, and without strong leadership or organization. o In contrast, the northern (warmer) part of New Zealand, by far the largest island group
More Less

Related notes for GGR329H5

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit