Development studies in Madagascar and Chernobyl

  1.     I’m going to talk about a case study about deforestation in Madagascar. This case study is a perfect example on how development could be good and/or bad. Historically, deforestation began when Madagascar was annexed as a French colony in 1896. The people were not happy with the political agendas going on and the famine that followed so they ran into the woods, where they practiced shifting cultivation for survival. This is where a certain area would be cleared out for crops and used for a short time.  Another example is when citizens were introduced to vaccines which helped significantly raise the population. An area having good health is a sign of good development; however, the resources were being depleting due to the rapid population increase. A way that they’re trying to save some forests is by creating parks and they are using fees generated from tourism to support local villages. http://personal.colby.edu/personal/t/thtieten/defor-mad.html

2.     I found a case study about the nuclear reactors in Chernobyl. In 1986 a nuclear reactor malfunctioned in Chernobyl and residents had to be evacuated. The radioactivity decreased the development due to the large effects it had. People had to be evacuated and were exposed to radiation which caused health effects. It isn’t necessarily proven that the illnesses are results from the radiation, but in children thyroid cancers have increased massively since 1986. More than 70 villages were destroyed along with a lot of farmland. This means that the land can no longer be used for any kind of productive output because it’s contaminated. The reactor was housed in a concrete tomb but the tomb has been deteriorating, causing more radiation to leak out, which would further negatively impact the environment and development. In order to fix this, the U.S., Canada and the European Community are negotiating with Ukraine and Russia to close down all Chernobyl-like reactors to prevent any future potentially accidents like the one in 1986.

http://www.mhhe.com/Enviro-Sci/CaseStudyLibrary/Topic-Based/CaseStudy_Chernobyl.pdf

3.    I live near Scranton Pennsylvania where there are not a lot of woods and I’ve never seen a nuclear reactor. I do not see crops around here so I cannot say there is a similarity between here and the shifting cultivation in Madagascar. However, there are a lot of hospitals and doctors around that have vaccines which helps us stay healthy. As we know, health is one of the tools used to measure development. Another way I see a similarity between us and Madagascar is the use of parks! We have state parks that are used to conserve the forests and we can go hiking, kayaking and exploring in them! These activities also promote good health along with keeping the forests preserved. In contrast to Chernobyl, I do not see any nuclear reactors around this area, which I find a good thing due to the possible detrimental effects. I have seen windmills close by though, which use natural resources without the threat of depletion and also keep us healthy by not using harmful resources.

One thought on “Development studies in Madagascar and Chernobyl

  1. Hey Alexandra. I really enjoyed reading your article. It’s a great example of how development can be good and bad. For my article I wrote about development in Indonesia and India. Indonesia was an example of unsustainable development, while India took actions to become sustainable. Good health can be achieved while still depleting resources. Just because you’ve achieve good health doesn’t mean you’re doing it in a sustainable manner. You can refer to my blog at: https://wp.me/p3RCAy-bBT

Leave a Reply