Nauruu (not the 55 page fucker) (17th feb)

Question 1

The physical destruction of Nauru - who wrote it?

Answer 1

Gowdy and Mcdaniel

Question 2

Research showing…

Answer 2

The destruction of Nauru’s natural resources yet Naura having a high per capita income has led scientists to propose Nauru is an example of weak sustainability

Question 3

Gowdy and Mcdaniel evaluated..

Answer 3

The socioeconomic impacts of phosphate mining on Nauru to determine whether there is continued availability of substitutes for the natural capital that has been depleted, and if destruction caused by phosphate mining will lead to the demise of Nauru due to its lack of self-sufficiency now its natural resources are gone.
(got double tick for this)

Question 4

Their results suggest

Answer 4

That resource degradation has left Nauru with very little natural resources, and little potential for human capital increase, thus leaving them reliant on outside aid (trading etc)

Question 5

What date did they get rights to own phosphate

Answer 5

1919 - also buy mineral at cost of production not world price.

Question 6

How have they achieved weak sustainability

Answer 6

Weak sustainability can be achieved is an economy saves more than the combined depreciation of various kinds of capital, even if it depletes its stock on natural resources.

Question 7

If Gowdy and McDaniel are right … assess prevailing theory that..

Answer 7

We need to re-assess the prevailing theory that by exploiting natural resources for money we are sustainably fueling economic growth.
‘The more of the natural world we dominate, the more we are reliant on the manufactured world we are creating’

Question 8

Extra Nauru facts

Answer 8

They are now economic people
$10000 per capita (1993)
1 billion trust fund (use to invest to make money)
1993- Australia offer 2.5mill annually for 20 years.
Purely human system (no full circle)