Ash dieback is a phenomena of very fast lethal degradation of the ash trees population.
Currently it concerns Europe including UK but is also reaching US.
In Denmark it killed 90% of ash trees.
The process is caused by the activity of a fungus that ash trees cannot withstand.
After initial attack a sick tree dies within few months or years despite its size or age.
It comparison to the trees growing rate the fungus acts as with tornado speed.
Where does this fungus originate from? It came from Asia.
At its Asia home ash trees are immune and happily coexists with nasty fungus.
Ash trees there had hundreds of years to accommodate and develop defensive mechanisms.
Fungus reached Europe and oversees because of wood used for global transportation.
Most of goods that are shipped across the globe is packed in wooden boxes.
No one considered that the wood those boxes are made of carry the fungus everywhere alongside.
Without that human transport speed boost the fungus would not have a chance to travel that long distances.
Ash trees can disappear from our landscape. There are other tree species in danger because of similar threats.
Why the price for the globalisation is so high?
What is your opinion on globalisation?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01hrkpn
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20680252
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-23854862
I think that's very interesting example how humans ruin the natural order of the world. In a normal situation, transfer of such fungus would be impossible due to the large distance between places. Thanks to thoughtlessness of people innocent nature suffers again and this situation will bring more negative effects. Globalization contributes to the unification of the world but many times as a result it produces a tendency for the new lifestyle, involving the disappearance of the role of indigenous cultures and nationalities, which were determinant factors of human behaviors. Globalization destroys cultural diversity, degrades cultural and national standards, kills local identity marginalizes artistic and craft production.
ReplyDeleteI believe that nature will not suffer that much because there would another species that will cover the gap after ash trees.
DeleteIt's rather the problem that most of the global performed activities are not well thought and are driven by highest profits chase.
Why is the price of globalisation so high?
ReplyDeleteBy Wikipedia® “globalisation” - “is the process of international integration arising from
the interchange of world views, products, ideas, and other aspects of culture”. For me it is not
a precise definition , as it does not justify integrating
the nations. There are at least two kinds of reasons. The first one I perceive as decent, as much as necessary for the good of the nations, whereas the other one is not necessary at all, since it is harmful for the majority. This latter reason has been created by one individual or those few who endeavour to change the world on a whim. As it was said before, “Fungus reached Europe and oversees because of wood used for global transportation”. I suggest tracing the causes of this issue, as a string of human decision backwards:
1. A corporate manager decided to use global transport (more expensive than the local one) as he intends to maximise both the rate of profit and the total mass of profit. This is not the wish of a given nation but only of a small chosen group of shareholders or managers!
2. Why do they want to maximize profit? Perhaps because their earnings are directly proportional to the profit.
3. Next, why some individuals strive so much to earn more and more, and why materialism is so unsatisfied?
4. And again, why one individual never seize in his/her pursuit of growing reach instead of living more modest? However, such a simple lifestyle would also be in harmony with nature and natural order. .
5. What is the origin of greed - perhaps it comes from a need to dominate others? Or it is caused by common human pride! This pride that is skilfully reinforced by the media and advertising!
My answer to the question about high price of globalisation is very simple. The causes may be found in us, these are human vices that make the prudent decision making process difficult and after the act difficult to trace their results.
What is your opinion on globalisation?
In my opinion “globalisation” is something not all that good or bad. It is the same as with most other human ideas. The problem is not in the idea itself but whom it brings profit and how is it obtained. For me national and any other integration on the global scale is a positive matter if it is the source of free nation’s needs, if its implementation process is careful and we are able to follow its results. I suppose an excellent example of the integration of people is communication and exchange of views on the Internet in the early nineties. Such a “globalisation” had much more benefits than disadvantages.
I like your statement that globalisation is not good nor bad. I also think that it is inevitable. I wish people would put more effort in thinking their actions more as a whole.
DeleteHonestly, I'm rather surprised by this article. I never really heard about this problem until now - unlike many other threats of globalization - and I'm finding it rather difficult to relate. While I'm sure green activitists are greatly concerned by this, calling the death of few trees a "high price for globalisation" doesn't sit well with me. There are many other issues I consider far more important, so this particular problem won't get much empathy from me. Perhaps a better example would suffice, but for this one, I can only offer a resounding "...so?".
ReplyDeleteAs for the globalisation itself, I remain neutral. It's a concept that presents both big problems and opportunities. Both of these tend to be rather overexagerrated - and I certainly consider "ash tree dieback" to be such. I consider a lot of fears to be largely unfounded - our history and culture will not dissapear simply because of ongoing globalisation. There are no foreign powers out to get us and grind us under their boots, while simultaneously seeking to exploit us for pure profit. If anything, the latter happens on a local scale, globalisation isn't needed at all.
On the other hand, the benefits are also varied. The concept of "tax haven" is one of consequences of globalisation and there are mixed opinions about those. Definitely good for the companies themselves, but not so much for the governments. Also, joining the EU - while a rather limited example of globalisation - introduced us to variety of laws and directives which are sometimes considered absurd. Granted, "banana curve" was an euromyth, but there are many of similar things that leave us scratching our heads in surprise.
Still, I suppose it's inevitable. The internet itself makes it almost impossible to isolate a country entirely from the outside factors, and so does international trade. How does it go in the future, it remains to be seen.
"... calling the death of few trees a "high price for globalisation" doesn't sit well with me ..."
DeleteI would not call 90% of ash trees population as "few trees".
It is a real measurement and it counts in thousands of trees.
If numbers do not make proper impression on you then what would do?
"... There are no foreign powers out to get us and grind us under their boots, while simultaneously seeking to exploit us for pure profit..."
DeletePlease take a look at all the super market nets (e.g. Biedronka).
They tend to eliminate all the local trade bringing much poorer quality and dragging profits out our (society) reach.
Globalisation - I agree it is somehow inevitable and the results are yet to be seen.
Delete"Please take a look at all the super market nets (e.g. Biedronka).
DeleteThey tend to eliminate all the local trade bringing much poorer quality and dragging profits out our (society) reach."
Wladek recently tendency are change people begin to buy products in small local shops because in many case they have better quality and big supermarkets start to have troubles for example Real will close they shops because the have have significant losses. I'm not saying that all supermarket will disappeared but for sure they don't eliminate all the local shops.
I've seen somewhere that Biedronka's plans are to have a market for every 10k people in PL. Seems scary. I hope that there is still a place for local trade.
DeleteI never even heard of "ash trees" before, so it's rather hard for me to be concerned about them. Maybe it's truly a great tragedy, but if it was, I'd expect more noise around this problem.
DeleteI think that globalisation is a very big problem but this problem cannot be stopped. We are computer scientists, not politicians, not economists so discussions with us about this problem is bad way. Globalisation involves the development of industry, this evolution began formation of computers and more things which we are use in our life - everyday. How do you really want to stop this ?? If you have any good idea for this, then of course i can more discuss this topic. At this moment discussion about this problem with computer scientists is like a discussion with economists about programming languages ;) I understand that we need to talk here because we need to get good rate from english to our index but i think that this topics need to be more directed/related to our phd study ;)
ReplyDeleteI don’t agree with you. I don’t want stop “globalisation” but I want discuss about it. I am fully prepared to discussion, have got a master's degree in computer science and also I have got master's degree in political science. When I studied political science my favorite subject was macroeconomics.
DeleteI didn't say that you not prepared to discuss about globalisation ;) You see you wrote "I got master's degree in political science" - but I guess that only you here - so very sorry but this is not my topic, this is why I not fullfill your expectations - maybe next time, I studied aviation, space sciences too, but this blog I treat more like a computer science blog ;) have a nice evening and thank you for your very fast answer!
DeleteI do not want to stop "globalisation". I do not think it is a phenomena that can be stopped anyhow.
DeleteI rather want to stay concious and sensible.
Regarding your statement that the topic is unsuitable for IT phd study - really? There is enormous amount of issues that have to be dealt with using strong science regarding globalisation. All BIG DATA topics are so much driven by the globalisation itself.
Yes, really ;) have a nice evening.
DeleteOk :) and have a niece evening as well.
DeleteWhy the price for the globalisation is so high?
ReplyDeleteWell, seeing as I didn't quite know what an ash tree was to begin with, I'm not going to miss them all that much (I hope!).
But seriously, these things are hard to quantify. We're definitely living in the geological human age and someday our fossils will be used as index fossils which define this period in time. We may well be in the midst of a mass extinction event right now. These things have happened in the past history of our planet and somehow evolution worked around them and kept going. So in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter. We have our moment now and we should use it to the fullest. Of course that doesn't mean we shouldn't learn from our mistakes and limit our disastrous impact on the environment. But the Earth is not an open-air museum, it will evolve with or without us.
What is your opinion on globalization?
I think there's no going back and you have to take the good with the bad. Much bigger questions lie ahead: like should we expend huge resources to colonize Mars ;)
I agree that the universe is a closed system and "can not be spoiled" by humans. It will evolve with or without us as you've stated.
DeleteYes, once you look at it from that perspective, all those political quibbles about globalization seem kind of petty.
DeleteIf people travel a lot it increases epidemics risk. There is no bigger different if it is human, animal or tree disease. We had to deal with epidemics imported by travelers in previous centuries. Traveling can be considered as the initial symptoms of globalization but for me globalization is more like sharing information worldwide then just traveling. Thanks to globalization and internet, a large number of people can get ideas about ash tree problem in Europe. I do not go to the forest so often so maybe without internet with is one of the symbols of globalization I would not even know that the problem exists. May be thanks to globalization some smart scientists on the end of the world will solve the problem of European ash trees without even one visit in our continent. Imagine that in previous centuries, this visit could expose our ash trees on risk of other nasty fungus. I agree that humans harm natural order and pollute the environment but in this case I do not think that we can feel guilty. This type of fungus is not created by our evil genetic industry, epidemic occurs. Optimistic is that according to what Tadeusz Kowalski said 15 do 20 percent of trees survived with no signs of disease. So may by it is just a matter of time and we will get new stronger population of ash trees.
ReplyDeleteI fully agree that the communication we have now brings possibilities to deal with problems using simultaneously more brains then ever before. Lets' use it wisely :)
DeleteIn my opinion environment for appearing that nasty fungus in Europe has existed for a few hundreds years - since people started travelling between continents. Therefore I look at described problem with a big distance.
ReplyDeleteI think that "environmental price" for the globalisation is so high because people introduce their ideas faster than environment can prepare for them. Additionally a lot of people tend to maximise individual income without regarding on whole society income. Nature in this context is a constituent which has the least for saying.
I agree with Slawomir that globalisation isn't something completely good or bad. I suppose that one of the main problems corresponding to globalisation is a fact that it is something which exists and spans but it isn't enough researched and understood by scientists.
"... people introduce their ideas faster than environment can prepare for them ..."
DeleteLet's hope that this would not turn against us. Piotrek mentioned that fungus spread can be compared to other epidemic risk. We had some examples - like SARS. Let's all be sensible an open minded should we face any bigger problems in future.
I suppose that if we don't have a fungus from Asia we will have another problematic situation for solving. For example: foresters from my area try to defend our spruces to sawyers (woodworms). Their also eat our forests in an epidemic way.
DeleteTherefore I would like to say that instead of avoiding all problematic situations we should more focus on a fight with them. According to the Murphy's law - something always will go wrong because it may go wrong.
I've found very positive aspect of globalization - When I'm hungry abroad and have problems with communicating with the natives I'm always looking for restaurants KFC, MCDonalds or Subway. More or less I know what they serve there ;)
ReplyDeleteAre you sure you know WHAT they serve?
Delete:)))
I hope so, but you never know ;)
DeleteWhy the price for the globalisation is so high?
ReplyDeleteThere are some drawbacks from globalization but there are also impressive amount of advantage so overall I would not say that there’s “price for the globalization”. In the context of ash trees, it’s not impossible that those fungi would not “travel” to Europe anyway. Maybe it would take tens or hundreds of years, but I believe it would be possible.
What is your opinion on globalisation?
Only one thing that I consider as a negative aspect of globalization is quite often marginalization of local culture, other than that I would rather be enthusiastic about globalization. It gives us easier access to information and in many cases it removes cultural or language barriers in communication. Moreover it standardizes many aspects of life throughout the world, what have positive and negative effects but I see more positives.
"... it’s not impossible that those fungi would not “travel” to Europe anyway. Maybe it would take tens or hundreds of years, but I believe it would be possible. ..."
DeleteYou are probably right. It could reach Europe but those years you've mentioned would give more time to local species to accommodate.
I am far from being a green activist but I want to be well informed upfront and not unpleasantly surprised at the and.
sorry for a typo: "and" -> "end".
DeleteEverything has good and bad sides so it is with globalisation. Thanks to globalisation we have easy access to many good products or we have easy access to the latest discoveries and technical innovations we don't change that globalisation is a fact and we can't do anything with that. But I agree with this, that globalisation shouldn't destroy the environment or to share or use people and we should fight with behaviors where greed and lust for profit at any price leads to such things. In my opinion when we stop such behavior then globalisation can give us a lot of good.I am aware that there will be always someone who will be greedy and will be look only for profit but if we condemn such behavior, who knows maybe this will be change
ReplyDeleteWe describe the process of globalization only listening to the opinions of others. We are not experts in this field.
ReplyDeleteBut we have to talk about it. The problem of globalization is a big problem already known for a long time.
Globalization is the integration of countries, cultures, societies, economies. Globalization does not guarantee any security.
Globalization is connecting up with the countries where for example there is a lack of access to safe drinking water.
We know what this involves would. Destroying of the environment is to transport dirty technologies.
You can familiarize yourself with bad cases of globalization:
- The case of Union Carbride, 1984,
- The case of Monsanto, 1929,
- The case of Shell, 1995
We can only talk about the process of globalization, however we can not stop it.
I suppose that a lot of globalization problems are known, but simultaneously probably there is a similar number of unknown problems. Additionally sometimes we know problem but we don't now its solution.
DeleteIt is frightening what's happening now in the world and what the world is going to. Environmental and Animal Protection were always very close and dear subjects to me. Degradation and capsizing of the natural order of things can have very severe consequences for people
ReplyDeleteGlobalization has its pros and consts as all other things. I agree with Kamil Drabek on this subject. Additionally, in my opinion the so-called process of globalization has a relatively shortly history and we cannot say with full determination that something is bad or good; we must just wait. Time will tell who was right.