November, 04 2014, 12:30pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Gaelle Gourmelon, ggourmelon@worldwatch.org , (+1) 202-745-8092, ext. 510
Digital Dilemma: Is the Internet Killing (or Saving) the Planet?
Worldwatch Institute's State of the World 2014 explores the benefits and challenges that digital technologies offer for sustainability
WASHINGTON
With resource-saving notions like "the paperless office" and "telecommuting," the digital age holds great environmental promise. But have digital technologies really helped to improve global sustainability? In the Worldwatch Institute's State of the World 2014: Governing for Sustainability, Richard Worthington, professor of politics at Pomona College, posits that a dose of healthy skepticism regarding emerging digital systems may safeguard our environment and our democracy (bit.ly/SoW2014).
When the first Earth Day was celebrated on April 22, 1970, the collection of ideas and artifacts that is now known as the Internet was only a research and development program at the U.S. Department of Defense. Meanwhile, environmental advocates of the era were fighting large, complex technological systems, such as nuclear power and industrialized agriculture, as threats to both the ecosphere and democratic self-governance. Yet when big digital systems began to take hold in the 1980s, these expanding pervasive and powerful technologies were rarely criticized. Today, a true understanding of their environmental and social impacts is urgently needed in order to navigate-or resist-technology's growing influence.
Sustainable production. Studies that directly link the impacts of digital technologies to environmental benefits have yielded ambiguous results because of the difficulties in measuring these impacts. For example, it is difficult to isolate and track the Internet's contribution to energy efficiency during a time where other changes (such as energy-efficient appliances and insulation for buildings) are also unfolding.
A "'rebound effect' in which the gains of, say, telecommuting are offset by increased consumption afforded by the savings, such as taking an overseas vacation," further complicates the measurement of digital technology benefits, writes Worthington.
Although some studies address the digitization-environment link by offering projections of future savings to be had through the use of digital technologies, much of this research is sponsored by global corporations in the technology industry, leaving one to question its credibility.
Digital democracy. Among digital enthusiasts,technology is depicted as the key to creating new democratic practices. Indeed, the lower communications costs afforded by digitization have made it possible for groups to become engaged that previously had lacked the resources to participate in campaigns or policy development.
Yet many other digitally influenced developments have either resulted in very limited democratic gains or exacerbated undemocratic tendencies. In U.S. politics, for example, the use of digital systems has not increased the number of engaged citizens. Rather, it has widened the information and engagement gap by providing more opportunities for those already engaged, biasing them further toward their views. In some cases, digital technologies also have eroded the quality of political communications by generating floods of impersonal, easily ignored appeals or by shifting engagement toward event-driven, short-term responses.
Funding sustainability. Since the late 1990s, digital technology has accounted for about a third of private investment in the U.S. economy. Meanwhile, investment in sustainability, such as the support needed to set the United States on track for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, is grossly underfunded.
"At its core, investment capital is a measure of a society's freedom, representing the resources to address urgent issues and to enhance prosperity," writes Worthington. "The large claim that digital industries have on these resources in a global society that faces severe ecological disruption warrants closer attention than it has received to date."
Looking ahead. Profound changes in environmental governance have already occurred since the advent of digitization. There are no unambiguous answers about whether or how much digital systems have added to ecological destruction and sociopolitical polarization. One fact is certain, however: digital technologies cannot be ignored.
"There is little choice about engaging digital systems in environmental governance, but naive attachment to them will perpetuate distorted patterns of investment and other features of the socioeconomic model that has generated the environmental crisis," writes Worthington. "Critical engagement, careful strategizing, and most of all a commitment to profound change are preconditions for using these systems for different ends."
Worldwatch's State of the World 2014 investigates the broad concept of governance for sustainability, including action by national governments, international organizations, and local communities. The book highlights the need for economic and political institutions to serve people and preserve and protect our common resources.
State of the World 2014 's findings are being disseminated to a wide range of stakeholders, including government ministries, community networks, business leaders, and the nongovernmental environmental and development communities. For more information on the project, visit https://www.worldwatch.org/state-world-2014-governing-sustainability .
The Worldwatch Institute was a globally focused environmental research organization based in Washington, D.C., founded by Lester R. Brown. Worldwatch was named as one of the top ten sustainable development research organizations by Globescan Survey of Sustainability Experts. Brown left to found the Earth Policy Institute in 2000. The Institute was wound up in 2017, after publication of its last State of the World Report. Worldwatch.org was unreachable from mid-2019.
LATEST NEWS
Sanders: 'The Netanyahu Gov't Should Not Receive Another Penny from US'
The bill passed the Senate in a 74-24 vote at 2:03AM
Mar 23, 2024
Following the passing of the U.S. government appropriations bill early Saturday morning, Senator Bernie Sanders said:
I voted NO on the appropriations bill that the Senate passed last night. While hundreds of thousands of Palestinian children face starvation in Gaza, this bill actually prohibits funding to UNWRA, the key United Nations aid agency delivering life-saving humanitarian support. This will only intensify the already horrific situation in Gaza. This bill also provides another $3.3 billion in U.S. military aid for Netanyahu’s right-wing government to continue this barbaric war. The Netanyahu government should not receive another penny from U.S. taxpayers.
The bill passed the Senate in a 74-24 vote at 2:03AM Saturday morning following hours of intense negotiations.
Later on Saturday, President Biden signed the $1.2 trillion government funding bill to stave off a government shutdown.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Modi Government Crackdown on Dissent Hits 'Crisis Point' Before Indian Elections
"The growing crackdown clearly shows the authorities' blatant disregard for human rights and rule of law," said one Amnesty International campaigner.
Mar 22, 2024
As India's right-wing government cracks down on opposition ahead of next month's general elections, Amnesty International on Friday urged authorities to "stop weaponizing the criminal justice system to intimidate and harass" political candidates, activists, and others.
Protests broke out in the capital New Delhi and other Indian cities after police on Thursday arrested Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, an opposition leader from the Aam Aadmi Party, over corruption allegations AAP members say are politically motivated. Two other AAP leaders were previously arrested in connection with the same case, which involves the alleged favoring of certain alcohol vendors and illegal campaign financing.
Authorities also froze the bank accounts of another leading opposition party, the Indian National Congress, over a tax dispute that dates back to 2018. Party leader Sonia Gandhi accused Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) party of perpetrating "a systematic effort to cripple the party financially."
“They want to know we are corrupt like them, which is not the case.” – AAP chief spokesperson Priyanka Kakkar on the BJP’s crackdown on opposition politicians.
AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal was arrested just today on charges of corruption.
The India Report: https://t.co/rxPr6zKnWx pic.twitter.com/P3eSbxVTVm
— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) March 21, 2024
Gandhi, Kejriwal and others have repeatedly accused of Modi's government of misusing federal agencies and resources to repress opposition figures as elections loom. The BJP denies the allegations.
"The Bharatiya Janata Party-led Indian government's crackdown on peaceful dissent and opposition has now reached a crisis point," Amnesty International India board chair Aakar Patel said in a statement.
"The authorities have repeatedly exploited and weaponized various financial and terrorism laws to systematically crack down on human rights defenders, activists, critics, nonprofit organizations, journalists, students, academics, and political opposition," Patel added. "The arrest of Arvind Kejriwal and the freezing of Indian National Congress' bank accounts a few weeks before India holds its general elections show the authorities' blatant failure to uphold the country's international human rights obligations."
Patel continued:
What we are witnessing is a brutal crackdown on human rights including through the misuse of central investigative and financial agencies, attacks on peaceful protests, arbitrary arrests, use and export of invasive spyware for unlawful surveillance, [and] systematic discrimination against religious minorities to feed into their majoritarian Hindutva politics and targeted suspension of opposition leaders from the Parliament who dare to hold the authorities to account.
"The growing crackdown clearly shows the authorities' blatant disregard for human rights and rule of law," Patel added. "Authorities must respect, protect, promote, and fulfill the human rights of everyone in the country including human rights defenders, activists, and opposition candidates before, during, and after the general elections which are due to begin in April 2024. Authorities must also ensure access to justice and effective remedies for victims of human rights violations."
On Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives' bipartisan Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission held a hearing on the situation in India.
The commission noted that in recent years, as Modi and the BJP have consolidated power, "concerns about human rights abuses in India have grown" over "a wide range of significant rights issues, including restrictions on religious and press freedoms, violence or threats of violence targeting members of national/racial/ethnic and religious minorities, harassment of and restrictions on civil society and human rights organizations, corruption, and lack of accountability."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House GOP 'Imploding' as Gallagher Resigns and Greene Moves to Oust Speaker
"House Republicans had a bad day," said one reporter, listing challenges and changes to leadership as a government shutdown looms.
Mar 22, 2024
The U.S. House of Representatives started a two-week recess on Friday, but not before a series of events that provoked fresh declarations of what has become a familiar phrase over the past few years: "Republicans in disarray."
Before leaving Capitol Hill, House members passed a spending package intended to prevent a partial government shutdown that could still occur unless the Senate acts. Fewer than two dozen Democrats and over 100 Republicans opposed the bill. Democratic opposition was largely related to Israel's war on the Gaza Strip.
Meanwhile, far-right Republicans like Texas Congressman Chip Roy have made comments like, "Everyone that I know and trust about the border, about overall spending, see it as a complete and total failure and a capitulation by Republicans. And leadership worked the deal, so it's on leadership."
Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) not only opposed the package but also filed a motion to vacate, hoping to remove House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.)—which would only require a simple majority if it came up for a vote.
The \u201cRepublican-controlled\u201d House just passed a $1.2 trillion spending bill that doesn\u2019t secure our border, but funds full term abortion and trans ideology on our youth.\n\nI filed a Motion to Vacate because the House needs a Speaker who\u2019s able to win for Republicans and our\u2026— (@)
House Republicans elected Johnson to the leadership role in late October, after ousting former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.)—who then opted to leave office at the end of last year—and rejecting three other candidates for the post: Reps. Tom Emmer (D-Minn.), Steve Scalise (R-La.), and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).
Noting that Greene filed a regular motion rather than a privileged one, meaning it could be referred to a committee, "where it would likely languish," NBC Newsreported Friday:
Greene told reporters that her motion to vacate was "more of a warning than a pink slip," saying she does not want to "throw the House into chaos," like the three and a half weeks that the chamber was without a speaker when McCarthy, her close ally, was ousted.
"I'm not saying that it won't happen in two weeks or it won't happen in a month or who knows when. But I am saying the clock has started. It's time for our conference to choose a new speaker," she said.
Johnson's October election led Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.)—who filed the motion to vacate targeting McCarthy—to declare that "MAGA is ascendant," a reference to the "Make America Great Again" campaign slogan of former President Donald Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee for the November election.
While Gaetz voted against the spending package on Friday, he also said that "if we vacated this speaker we'd end up with a Democrat. You know, when I vacated the last one, I made a promise to the country that we would not end up with a Democrat speaker and I was right. I couldn't make that promise again today."
Asked if he thinks Johnson's job is safe, Gaetz responded, "It is."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) also responded dismissively when questioned about Greene's motion on Friday, tellingPunchbowl News, "She's a joke."
A spokesperson for Johnson, Raj Shah, toldPolitico that the speaker "always listens to the concerns of members, but is focused on governing. He will continue to push conservative legislation that secures our border, strengthens our national defense, and demonstrates how we'll grow our majority."
However, Johnson's limited control over the House is dwindling. Congressman Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), who backed the spending bill, revealed that he is resigning from his seat effective April 19 after previously saying that he would not seek reelection. Friday was also the last day of Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), who announced earlier this month that he would step down from his seat.
The Washington Post noted Friday that "Buck and Gallagher are the sixth and seventh members of the House who are quitting midterm simply to leave for the private sector, a trend we dubbed 'the Great Resignation' last weekend. It's also the highest number of lawmakers quitting public service altogether in at least 40 years."
Responding to Gallager's announcement on social media, HuffPost's Jennifer Bendery said that "House Republicans are imploding in plain sight."
In yet another disruption to the chamber's GOP leadership, Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas)—who announced last year that she wouldn't seek reelection—wrote in a Friday letter to Johnson that she plans to step down as chair of the House Appropriations Committee.
Granger told the speaker she would stay in the post until the Republican Steering Committee chooses her replacement and then remain on the panel through the end of her term to offer "advice and counsel for my colleagues when it is needed."
The Texas Tribunepointed out that "the Appropriations Committee will need to pass another set of federal funding bills before the end of September to keep the government funded. Congress has failed to meet that deadline for nearly 30 years, and Granger acknowledged in her letter that election years in particular often distract Congress from passing spending bills on time."
GOP members of the upper chamber were also accused of sowing chaos on Friday, as the midnight shutdown deadline loomed.
Senate Budget Committee Chair Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said on social media, "Well, it looks like we're headed for a shutdown at the hands of Senate Republican gremlins who (1) know that amendments can't pass because there's no House to send an amended bill back to (they adjourned) and (2) want amendments anyway."
"And (3) can't decide amongst themselves what won't-pass amendments they want," Whitehouse added. "I sure hope I'm wrong. But the Republican Senate caucus is a rudderless ship right now, so the gremlins are running the show."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular