Blog 10

This is the Tenth and last Blogprompt of the year.

It's not a difficult one.

Think about where you live at home (that is where you live now or where you lived before you moved into a Hall of Residence.)

Think about the area in which you live. Perhaps find out the area covered by your electoral ward or better still your Super Output Area (SOA). Find out from here.

Think about how closely your home area fits in with the definition of a 'sustainable community' that we introduced last week (you might want to refresh yourself of this definition by having a look at the powerpoint or one of the white papers. Here.

Blog to what extent your ward/SOA resembles a 'sustainable community' and what extent you don't think it does. Give some evidence from your observations (or your memories) of this judgment.

Use some of the collected data from your ward or SOA to make your point. Find this from here.




I have chosen to look at my super output area Milton Keynes 027D, located within my hometown of Bletchley. I do not think that my area fully fits in with the definition of a sustainable community very well; there is clearly much work to be done by the local council and community. House prices in the area are ridiculously high compared to similar properties in other parts of the country; this does make it difficult for lower-income families to afford housing even in an area that is not particularly highly desirable. There seems to be a very low sense of community spirit. There are several schools nearby but there have always been problems with capacity and catchments that have caused problems for children in the community, those who have to attend different schools from that of their friends can find it socially corrupting.
















There are unemployed adults in the area but the majority of people do work; government statistics state that 2.79% of economically active people in my area were unemployed in April 2001. This means that just over 1 in 50 people were unemployed in my super output area. Government statistics show that this super output area does have an eclectic age range of residents, however, almost a quarter of all residents were aged between 45 and 59 years of age. There is not a massively high diversity of ethnic groups in my area with 87.77% of residents being White British. The majority of people in my area have to travel less than 2km to work, this is a positive fact which shows that there is work available locally. In 2006, my area experienced only 3 fires. Statistics show that 8% of residents in this area are claiming benefits at working age.
















Although many of the statistics do not appear to be alarming, many of the residents would say that they do not live in a sustainable community; these views may be linked to the recession and past experiences such as crime and problems with the council. There is still a lot of work to be done in the area of Milton Keynes 027D but I strongly believe that with some progressive steps forward and an increase in community spirit will push the area into the realms of a sustainable community.

Blog 8

Education for Citizenship

Education for Sustainable Development also includes making learners aware of their role as 'Active Citizens'. Studies of 'citizenship' are intended to equip students with the knowledge and skills needed for effective and democratic participation. It helps learners become informed, active citizens who have the confidence and conviction to work together to take action in their communities.

It is important to know about rights, responsibilities, duties and freedoms and about laws, justice and democracy. Citizenship encourages respect for different national, religious and ethnic identities.

For the Blogprompt this week first we want you to do a bit of research.

Find out

The constituency in which you live
Your local MP (name, party)
The name of your local council
Which political party dominates your local council

Secondly

2010 is election year.
What is your attitude concerning people who are not planning to vote in the general election?
What main concerns do you have that may influence your vote?




I hail from Bletchley in the borough of Milton Keynes, my current constituency is Milton Keynes South West, interestingly, this constituency is due to be abolished and will be replaced by the new Milton Keynes South constituency at the time of the 2010 elections. The current local MP is Phyllis Starkey of the Labour party. My local councils are West Bletchley Council and Milton Keynes Council. The Milton Keynes South West constituency is dominated by the Labour Party and the Milton Keynes North East constituency is predominately a Conservative area. My area of Bletchley is a Labour area.










I am always very concerned with the number of people that do not bother to vote in elections, particularly in the general election. Not enough people realise the importance of voting and how politics can affect them. Secondly, not enough people appreciate how fortunate we are to have the opportunity to vote. Not enough people look at elections seriously and certainly do not take the time to read the manifestos and policies of political parties. There are many “thoughtless” votes submitted at elections by people who just choose somebody at random or choose the current political party simply because they hear the most about them. I believe that more people should take the time to understand the importance of voting and find a political party that shares their beliefs and ideas.


















The main concerns influencing my vote mainly span from the mistakes and errors made by the Labour party in the last ten years or so. I do not believe that the Labour party have stayed true to their values in recent years. To me, they do not appear to have remained too committed to their ideology of being a democratic socialist party. And in fairness, the labour party have been in power for over a decade now and the cracks are starting to show. I think that it would be interesting to see Great Britain under the power of a social liberalist government this time around.

Blog 6/7

At the moment the theme in class is sustainable travel. Transport undoubtedly has had a major influence on economic and social development facilitating the movement of goods, people and ideas. Greater accessibility, mobility and communication has shaped the type of global society we live in today.

But is there a cost? Environmentalists will emphasize the problems associated with unlimited travel - depletion of fossil fuels, local air pollution, emissions of greenhouse gases, congestion and accidents, destruction of the countryside and the expansion of land under concrete to name but a few. Even our over-reliance on motorized transport has been linked to a general lack of fitness in the population at large.

So...what are your views? Is there really a transport problem? Do the benefits of motorized transport outweigh the costs? Are there any minor (or perhaps major) changes you personally feel could make our present transport system more sustainable?



Increasing accessibility and low cost travel is having a major impact on our environment. The amount of carbon dioxide being pumped into the atmosphere has increased dramatically in the last 100 years or so. This is mainly due to the increase in air and road traffic, so many airplanes fly in the sky every day, airlines and governments are continuously adding fees and charges to flight costs to discourage people from making unnecessary travels. The only thing that this idea seems to have done is anger customers and make people think that governments are just trying to drain more money from consumers for other expenditure rather than helping save the environment.

There is a page on the UK government’s website all about air travel and the environment. Their aim is to make people aware of the damage that air travel is doing to the environment and what people can do to reduce the impacts.

“Air travel is a growing contributor to climate change and can have an impact on local air quality and noise. You can help reduce your impact on the environment by choosing to travel by air less. You can also offset the carbon emissions created by your journeys.”

http://direct.gov.uk/en/Environmentandgreenerliving/Greenertravel/DG_064429

The government are asking travellers to consider their travel options and alternatives to help reduce damage to the environment. They also highly encourage “carbon offsetting” where by the traveller can pay someone to make an equivalent emissions saving or reduction.

There are similar things happening in the world of road travel, car sharing encouragement is everywhere now but it does seem to be a slow process and not many people appear to be that interested in taking part. The truth is that most car owners see the vehicle as their possession, often the second biggest purchase to a house, and they want it to be their own, privacy and efficiency are big factors for car users. Let’s face it, would people allow others to live in their house to reduce the number of properties being built? I believe that many people do see it like that and this may be why car sharing is not very popular at this time.


















I do not believe that there are many changes that can be made to make our transport system more sustainable. Most people react to “green travel advice” very stubbornly and are more likely to opt for the mode of transport that is most convenient for them, and typically, most forms of “convenient” transport are the most damaging to the environment. For most people, a car is much more convenient than a bus or walking and a car omits the most carbon and damage to the environment than the other two alternatives. It is the same with long distance travel, if somebody wanted to travel to the United States from the United Kingdom they are more than likely to fly in a plane as opposed to travelling across the Atlantic in a boat. The key to changing people’s opinions about “green travel” lies in making it the alternatives more accessible and equally or more convenient than their preferred choice of transport.

Blog 5

Christmas is coming!

Cultural festivals, such as Christmas, are undoubtedly enjoyable and an important time for families and friends to relax together. Many have important religious significance. On the other hand, such events are often defined by excess and waste...lights, fireworks, over-packaging, excessive spending, over-eating and embarrassing self indulgence.

What do you think? Is Christmas sustainable? How would it all work in a changed world?

Or should all the 'do-gooders' leave our festivals alone!!!!



I would like to think that Christmas was a sustainable time of celebration, it brings so much joy to people and seems like the most harmless thing in the world, but unfortunately, it is more than likely to be the most unsustainable time of the year.

There is so much going on at Christmas to promote serious unsustainable development. The most major impact will result from all of the gifts being purchased, many more of the Earth’s resources are being eaten away very rapidly at this time of year, more raw materials are needed to create the gifts and much fuel is needed to transport all of these goods around the world. The other major contribution to this unsustainable movement is that there is so much more food consumption around the world, everybody stuffs themselves at Christmas and there is always loads of food left over every year. This extra consumption makes us use more gas and electric to cook it and the extra animals being bred and slaughtered is bound to have an effect on our planet, mainly through gases such as methane and carbon dioxide.

I have noticed that there is a new gift on sale this year known as “Nothing”, it’s a good-humoured scheme that encourages people to buy absolutely nothing but still get the buzz from the shopping experience, the website is set out to imitate the popular online store, Amazon. From this, it looks like some people are taking steps to create a more sustainable Christmas, the product description even states; “Shop your sustainable heart out and Buy Nothing”.











I think that in the years to come, we are going to see many more sustainable ideas at this time of year. More and more people are turning towards greener living and are realising the impact that humans have on the planet. People are being encouraged and in some cases, rewarded for utilising environmentally-friendly alternatives. I think that if people took a step back and stopped treating Christmas as a time of spending, greed and excessive consumption, we may see a more positive turn towards a sustainable Christmas, but for the time being, Christmas appears to be a highly unsustainable time of the year.

Blog 4

To what extent do the best selling UK newspapers cover stories related to serious issues? To what extent would you think that it is their role to do so? In your opinion does the tabloid media and 'low budget entertainment' (reality shows, soaps) have too much power and influence in this country?


Most newspapers are dominated by celebrities, scandals and sports. There are very few “serious” articles out there. The vast majority of people like to be entertained and kept informed about things they care about such as football, horoscopes and their favourite stars. Looking at the list of the six most popular papers, I know that I would not buy them to read about climate change, astronomy or wildlife concerns. Two newspapers that I believe are very informative when it comes down to serious issues are the Guardian and the Independent; they are the most geographical papers and seem to have the best knowledge about the environment.




















Having looked at some newspapers this week, it is easy to see that there are two different sides to the views of serious issues. The Sun has been mainly looking at celebrities in their top stories; I have seen very large write-ups about Tiger Woods’ fling and articles about Jordan being reunited with Peter for their sons’ nativity. This is very alarming for me to see that this is considered as relevant for top stories and front page news. On the other hand, looking at the Independent, I can see a vast difference in the calibre of the news. The first article I read is titled “Climate change special: 12 days to save the world”, I am very pleased to see that this paper is covering world issues that matter. That’s what we need to be informed about, things that will affect the human race, things that are threatening to us. Indy writer Johann Hari has given the opening statement “We face a threat as terrible as the rise of fascism”, it seems ludicrous that there are not many more people reading such articles. Perhaps people are afraid of the truth? Or maybe they are just naive?




















It is shocking to see that so many people in the nation live their lives around reality TV and soaps. I don’t believe that these shows have any positive role in society apart from the fact that they make people happy. People dedicate their lives to these programmes and sacrifice other, sometimes more important things just to catch 30 minutes of their favourite show. They do not give any guidance on life issues, etiquette or world issues. I’m not saying that everyone should be forced to watch documentaries on poverty, development and resource depletion but there should be more dedication to serious world issues, we cannot strive for a sustainable future if millions of people have their heads in the sand.

Blog 3

One of the central themes underpinning sustainable development is equality and fairness. This is reflected in the concept of 'empowered citizenship'- in that we can all make a contribution to making our community (our local area, our region, our country, our planet) a better place now and in the future.

Some important areas are quite difficult to understand. Science, economics, politics are often quite difficult to comprehend and yet are central to decisions that are made by others about our lives.

To what extent do you think that it is your duty as a citizen to be 'informed'? Are you informed? How do you get to be informed about serious issues? To what extent do you think that you should leave the complicated decisions up to others ?

















As a citizen, I believe that I have the right to be informed about global issues and the methods and implications of modern development. I am well informed but maybe that’s because I have a particular interest in the issues and topics surrounding the sustainable development discipline, I myself search for the information, if I did not have an interest in the subject I could easily switch off and ignore it as many people in society do.


The primary source that keeps me informed about serious issues is newspapers; I often read stories encompassing sustainable development and similar topics. But I must say that I can be highly sceptical at times. There are so many different opinions floating around in the media and in politics that it is almost impossible for news sources to give you a clear-cut factual view of what is really going on, you need to make the decision yourself about what you believe. The biggest example of this is the ongoing climate change debate, there are many people out there who believe that humans and CO2 are to blame for increasing temperatures and that within a few years, global warming will have cataclysmic circumstances. In complete contrast, there are many cynics including many scientists and other respectable people that believe that global warming is not caused by humans and CO2 at all and some even believe that global warming is a natural event that happens every few hundred years. So I find it very difficult to make decisions on what I believe.














All human beings have the right to be informed about the changes that our Earth is going through on all levels; environmentally, politically and economically. This gives everybody a chance to have their opinions and ideologies if their voice can be heard, but a voice does not have to be heard on an international or even national level, as individuals, we can all do things to make a difference and in some respect it is our responsibility to make a difference, whatever a person’s view on climate change or world development we must consider future generations and what must be done to make life for them as it is for us or better, this can be undertaken in any way that the individual deems reasonable, using their car less or perhaps donating clothes to charity. However, I do believe that the science behind climate change should be left to scientists and major development decisions should be made by economic and political experts. We need to know what is going on with our planet; evidence needs to be provided from historical and scientific sources and major decisions need to be made by reliable governmental bodies.

Blog 2

Al Gore (and the IPCC) won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 (BBC 2007) largely for the production of the film 'An Inconvenient Truth'
The committee cited "their efforts to build up and disseminate knowledge about man-made climate change".

To what extent do you think this was deserved? Having watched this film in class did you feel that your opinion (or perhaps the opinion of others) to the issue of climate change could be positively influenced? What did you think of this film? Was it effective?



Through media sources, I have been well-informed about Al Gore's and the IPCC’s efforts to educate the international public with vital facts and statistics about the biggest threat that we, as a planet, face today. The film has made people across the world recognise the severe urgency that is required for the world to make even just a small change to global warming; it has also informed the world of the concerning links between mankind and climate change.

At first, hearing about how the film was laid out with the “PowerPoint presentation” theme, I was sceptical and thought that I would not find the film very interesting or as powerful as I did. The statistics were very fascinating and made me realise how potentially serious that climate change could be. It was useful to contain much historic data, this definitely helps show the audience that this pattern of climate change and of course, the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have never been seen before. In contrast to this, the diagrams, animations and clips proved to be a very welcome “breather” from viewing charts, graphs and figures. Seeing how our emissions are affecting the atmosphere and the subsequent impact of that on the ice sheets, wildlife and the oceans was very effective for the spectators, these send the audience into an imaginative trance that allows them to perceive what they think the earth would be like if these things happened in real life.

After watching the film, I had many thoughts and perceptions about what might happen and what could be done to prevent or at least slow this catastrophic outlook. Unfortunately to me, it looks like there is very little that mankind can do to stop this disaster in waiting, all we can do is learn how to cope with the changing world and see how the global community and environment can evolve sustainably without excessively polluting our planet and speeding up global warming. I believe that Al Gore and the IPCC have made an impressive effort to educate and alert the world to this new phase in our history, therefore I feel that the Nobel Peace Prize awarded was given deservingly.