Environment assignment

Environment assignment

• 1.
  Environmental Health orEcological Sustainability? Reconciling the Brown and Green Agendas in Urban Development Farhana.K Sai Kirani Sarthak Mohapatra Navin Kumar Mohammed Maaz Ali
• 2.
  INTRODUCTION: Urban environmentproblems Brown agenda (effects environmental health impacts) Green agenda (effects on future generations ) The chapter talks about three main things: Approaches to improve urban environmental health Approaches on ecological sustainability Approaches and frameworks which improve environmental health
• 3.
  Brown and GreenAgenda  McGranahan & Satterthwaite have differentiated the two agendas in terms of scope, scale, timeframes and attitudes, which not only help to understand the nature of the two agendas but also give access to integrate the two by having a multi-scalar perspective of issues relating to the current and future sustainability. Characteristics Green Agenda Brown Agenda First order impact Ecosystem health Human health Timing Delayed Immediate Scale Regional and global Local Worst affected Future generation Lower income group Attitude to nature Protect and work with Manipulate to serve human needs Attitude to people Educate Work with Attitude to environmental services Useless Provide more Aspect emphasized in relation Overuse-need to protect with water water resource Inadequate access and poor quality Aspect emphasized in relation with Solid waste Excessive generation Inadequate provision for collection and removal
• 4.
  Characteristics Green AgendaBrown Agenda Aspect emphasized in relation with Air Acid precipitation and green house gas emissions High human exposure to hazardous pollutants Aspect emphasized in relation with Human Waste Loss of nutrients in sewage and damage to water bodies from the release of sewage into waterways Inadequate provision for safety removing faecal material and waste water from living environment Aspect emphasized in relation with land Loss of natural habitats and agricultural land to urban development Inadequate access for low income groups to housing Typical proponent Environmentalist Urbanists
• 5.
  EQUITY Graham Haughtonhas identified five interconnect equity principles that can apply to environmental problems in urban areas (Haughton, 1999) and these help to clarify the different perspectives from which proponents of the brown and the green agendas work. For the proponents of the brown agenda, the main priorities are:  Intergenerational equity  Procedural equity For the proponents of the green agenda, the priorities are:  Intergeneration equity  Transfrontier equity  Interspecies equity Working with the different aspects of equity progress on both agendas can be proceed and how conflicts can be minimized. It provides a common language for addressing both set of concerns and potentially a common goal.
• 6.
  Contrasting brown andgreen agenda Both of this agendas are in direct opposition to each other Brown agenda Green agenda More water use Water conservation More sewerage connections Less water-borne sewerage More waste collection Less waste generation More urban residential land Less urban residential land
• 7.
  Water  Insome of the wealthier cities like subsidized water supply systems have brought major benefits.  Whereas the green agenda can rightly point to the emphasis on increasing supply and keeping the price of water “affordable” has resulted in major cities throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America overexploiting local water resources.  Overexploitation of underground water has also caused serious problems of subsidence for many buildings, sewage and drainage pipes in many cities.  At least 300 million urban dwellers in Africa,Asia,latin America remain without piped water supplies (WHO/UNICEF 1993) and other 10 million who are having access to piped water supplies but still face inadequate,irregular,unsafe supplies.  The international standard of 150 litres per capita per day is only a small fraction of typical usage in affluent cities in north and the reason behind this is not overtaxing their water supplies indeed encouraging water conservation ensuring the better management and repair of piped water system with no overall increase in water use  It is not necessary that intragenerational water inequities can be solved by creating intergenerational water inequities. It is politics and policy instruments, not physical imperatives that create a stark trade off between environmental health and ecological sustainability.
• 8.
  Sanitation  Mostof the small urban centers have no sewer system at all. Estimates suggests that close to one half urban population of Africa, Asia and Latin America lack adequate provision for urban sanitation and tens of millions of urban dwellers have no access to any form of sanitation or having poor quality, overcrowded public facilities that they have to resort to defecation in the open.  Proponents of green agenda point to environmental cost that conventional sewer system can bring that larger volume of water used to flush toilets and problem of disposing of larger volumes of sewage.  In Latin America,Asia,Africa only a small amount of sewage is treated before disposal(WHO 1996).  Untreated sewage is the major contributor to the highly polluted water bodies,fisheries.which is leading to thousands of people losing their livelihood.  Proponents of brown agenda point to the hundreds of million of urban dwellers who currently rely on sanitation system that do not use water like pit latrines which bring serious health risk and often contaminate ground water.  Pit latrines are particularly hazardous in areas that regularly face floods as the pits become flooded and spread human excreta everywhere.  The unit cost of Installing the sewers was increased that the low income households were unable to pay.  Water borne sewerage can be reduced through decreasing the intragenerational inequities, but typically at the cost of intergenerational inequities.
• 9.
  OTHER ISSUES: Solidwaste:  Waste generated from every household should be collected to reduce environmental health problems, as the uncollected waste brings very serious problems as acumilation of waste on road and bad smell.. Etc.  It leads to health diseases and pets gets attracted to waste and overflow of drainage as the waste is getting collated.  But the concern is to decrease the waste reduction and to reuse and to recycle it  Even when the waste is collected also , the waste is dumped in open areas which is leading to air pollution, ground and surface water contamination and methane production.  Many policies have been created but they are not applicable to the other places as the tax system has been introduced in affluent cities the waste production is reduced , in low income countries illicit burning and dumping of waste is done , which increases air pollution
• 10.
  Air pollution: Air pollution in residential areas is mainly because of the usage of smoky materials to decrease it the use of clearer fuels is promoted but the green agenda proponents objects it as it increases the usage of fossil fuels but it brings benefit to the people who spend time more in the kitchen  Using chimney in household decreases the indoor air pollution and high chimney for industries reduces its impact in the city area but it is a burden for environment, in low income areas bio stoves should be used. Land use management:  Green agenda proponents state that In urban centers for the development they encroach the agricultural land and spoiling the ecological balance  Brown agenda proponents state that highlights that the low income people need cheap and well located land to develop their livelihood , as they are allocated in the important part of city the value of land decreases so often high and middle income groups follow green agenda to defend the maintains and improve of green belt around their homes.
• 11.
  DRAWING TOGETHER THEBROWN AND GREEN AGENDAS • Need to work on both brown and green agendas because both are interrelated. • It should be campaigns by the citizens, community, organizations and NGO’s. • As a result industrial pollution can destruct or damage the fisheries or can cause air pollution, pollutes the ground water which can cause different diseases. • Brown agenda concern for need of low income group of health, air quality and good public transport can overlap with green agenda concern to reduce fossil fuel use. • A commitment to improve SWM i.e reduction, reuse, recycle materials form waste streams which generates jobs many jobs also. • Volume of water can be treated in local treatment plant allowing nutrients in the waste water to be used for fishery and farming.  BEST WAY TO DO : HYGENE EDUCATION – Both health and water resources would be benefited if people know how to use water more efficiently to protect themselves from diseases.
• 12.
  INSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES THATHELP TO RECONCILE BROWN AND GREEN AGENDAS Reconciling the brown and green agendas in urban development requires institutions and prosses that:  Reduce the inequities that are of concern to both the brown and green agendas;  Enable collective and democratic responses to the public aspects of both brown and green environmental problems; and  Provide a better understanding of the environmental issues that different cities face. There are at least three important areas where action is need:  Open and participatory process within each city that allow environmental problems to be discussed and agreements reached over priorities for action and investment.  National policies that encourage and support urban development that tacks accounts of ecological sustainability but within an understanding of potential conflicts with brown agenda priorities and other social and economic priorities.  A stronger basis for mutual understanding between the brown and green agenda proponents and this depends on a good knowledge of the environmental issues within and around each urban centre.