ARTICLE: Maldives: Bring the Waterproof Pens, ASSOCIATED PRESS, October 7, 2009
Fabulous logic implied here: the world should kneecap industrialization and economic development in a host of rising countries whose development has and will continue lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty so as to make sure that people living in the lowest levels above sea level should have their existences preserved.
Or maybe we just accept the fact that sea levels will rise and adapt ourselves.
The difference between the Netherlands and the Maldives? One has the money for dikes and all manner of sea-retaining technology, and the other does not. So what's the solution? Beggar the Netherlands or develop the Maldives? And if there's no compelling economic logic for the latter, just how far do we go to slow down globalization for these slices of humanity that will no longer be able to live in environmentally unsustainable landscapes? Do we really want to define our global future on the basis of what works to keep Bangladesh Bangladesh-like going forward?
| Permalink |
Comments (1)
There's an easier way of developing the Maldives: build floating island cities for their population. In the short run, it develops their technical skills (training them to maintain the cities) and clears up land for farming and tourism. In the long run, it reduces or eliminates the effects of rising and falling sea levels.
Posted by Michael | November 10, 2009 6:45 PM