Should environmental protection be prioritized against resource extraction.
Debate Rounds (3)
Resolved; Developing Countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in conflict;
For today's resolution i provide these definitions
Environmental protection : a practice of protecting the natural environment on individual, organizational or governmental levels
Resource extraction: the extraction of natural Resources
The supreme value for today's debate is- Quality of Life- The conditions which contribute to making life more than a struggle for survival; elevating life beyond a needs-only existence.
The best criterion that upholds my value is teleology. Teleology is defined as a theory which holds that the means of achieving some end is not as important as the end result; the ends are more important than the means. If environmental protection is prioritized over resource extraction, then the developing country will be better off in the end because it will not suffer the damages done by excessive resource extraction. Teleology best achieves my value of quality of life because the end result will be a higher quality of life for citizens in the country.
Contention 1 DEFORESTATION IS DEVASTATING THE ENVIRONMENT
Across the world, complex social and market forces are driving the conversion of vast swaths of rain forests into pastureland, plantations, and cropland. Rain forests are disappearing in Indonesia and Madagascar and are increasingly threatened in Africa's Congo basin. But the most extreme deforestation has taken place in Brazil. Since 1988, Brazilians have cleared more than 153,000 square miles of Amazonian rain forest, an area larger than Germany.
As a result, loggers are now taking aim at other canopy giants few of us have ever heard of--copaiba, ishpingo, shihuahuaco, capirona-which are finding their way into our homes as bedroom sets, cabinets, flooring, and patio decks. These lesser known varieties have even fewer protections than the more charismatic, pricier ones, like mahogany, but they're often more crucial to forest ecosystems. As loggers move down the list from one species to the next, they're cutting more trees to make up for diminishing returns, threatening critical habitats in the process. Primates, birds, and amphibians that make their homes in the upper stories of the forest are at increasing risk.
Contention 2. CLIMATE CHANGE DEVASTATES DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
. If greenhouse-gas emissions continue to grow unchecked, the maximum temperatures, rainfall, and other aspects of climate that humans have experienced during the past 150 years will become the new minimum globally by 2047 (give or take 14 years), according to a new study. That year applies to global averages. For specific locations, this shift could come as early as 2020, the results show. The shift appears soonest in the tropics, where some 5 billion people live - many of them among the world's poorest - and where the planet hosts the highest levels of biodiversity, according to the study's projections. Based on one metric (ocean acidification), today's norms already became the new minimum in 2008.. if no progress is made in curbing emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases, said researchers at the University of Hawaii at Manoa who sought to project the timing of that event for 54,000 locations. If they are correct, the transition will occur by 2020 in Manokwari, Indonesia; by 2023 in Kingston, Jamaica; by 2029 in Lagos, Nigeria; by 2047 in Washington; by 2066 in Reykjavik, Iceland; and by 2071 in Anchorage.
Contention 3 SUSTAINABILITY REQUIRES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Pursuing a "green economy", which is one of the themes of Rio+20, entails a global transition away from prevailing ecologically destabilizing patterns of development to modes of development based on environmental protection. With a view to undertaking such a transition, a mix of policies and measures tailored to each country's needs and preferences will be required. For these vulnerable countries, many of which have not experienced carbon intensive and heavy industrialization, consumption and production, the notion of a green economy offers and opens up many prospects.All of humanity depends on ecosystem services and even wealthy populations are vulnerable to the consequences of ecosystem degradation in a globalized world. Nevertheless, it is poor communities that are highly dependent on nature's resources and services that bear a disproportionate burden from the degradation of ecosystems and other
environmental risks and scarcities.
Contention 4. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IS VITAL TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLE
Ecosystems throughout the region face the threat of development spurred by farmers, loggers, oil workers, miners, and mega development projects. And as the world gathers in Rio de Janeiro on June 20 to discuss strategies to move forward in a more sustainable future, locals like Mbywangi in Paraguay - who are not necessarily environmentalists with ideals about pristine lands but locals on the front lines of protection - have the self-interest to conserve as a source of income and sustainable way of life. Indigenous peoples in Latin America have gained new voices in the past two decades, defending their lands against large-scale development projects.
For all of these reasons I see no other vote than for the Affirmative.
I now stand open for CX
How exactly does your value structure link into this case?
bigbossdebater101 forfeited this round.
So Vote for Aff guys
bigbossdebater101 forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.