I embarrassingly have to admit that my understanding of GMO’s is limited at best, as it’s not something I’ve spent much time thinking about. If I were to choose though, I would find myself in a mix of systems 2, 7, and 8. I certainly have concerns about engineering more food, largely centering on what the effects will be on the environment, and how healthy these foods will be for humans/animals. Will the costs to the environment be significant? Will the benefits for humans be significant? Will benefits outweigh costs? I am skeptical. I also acknowledge that I don’t know much about this issue, and that I don’t feel great about passing judgement on this issue. This feeling pushes me towards the second system, hoping more than believing that someone more educated on this than myself is overseeing such projects. This is probably a naive thought.
-
Using your own topic for research, can you Identify 3 stakeholders (groups or phenomenon) with different perspectives, and then describe the system (the stakes) from which they are operating? For instance, if the subject is “Safari Parks”, 3 stakeholders could be (1) Animal Rights activists, (2) the region’s Board of Tourism, and (3) the local land itself. The first operates in a system of ethics around the treatment of animals; the second in a networked system of economic benefits for the community (hotels, food, and attractions), and the third, in an ecosystem that the safari park may put at risk, by introducing pollutants from animal waste and fertilizer, and ecological competitors such as escaped non-indigenous plant products used in the landscaping of the Safari Park.
There are lots of different kinds of gardens, each with vastly different stakeholders. There are public gardens in parks, suburban home gardens, rural food/kitchen gardens, private gardens, and more. For this question, I will write about suburban home gardens.
Three stakeholders could include
– Homeowners
– Environmentalists
– Lawn care companies
Homeowners operate in a system in which investing in the garden improves the quality of their home and environment either financially, emotionally, or in comparison to their neighbors. Some homeowners with gardens maintain them out of love for gardening, others do it out of obligation or a need to keep up appearances in front of their neighbors, and some (probably far fewer) do it to supplement their food supply. These homeowners end up investing considerable time, money, and other resources into garden maintenance. The reward they get from it varies — some spend lots of time in the garden, some see the value of their homes/neighborhoods increase because of the gardens, etc.
– Environmentalists operate in a system in which gardens are a significant use of resources (like water) for relatively little payoff. Because most gardens are full of ornamental non-plants, they can frequently disrupt the ecosystem. Combined with the amount of water it takes to maintain a garden and the frequent use of fertilizers, some environmentalists would propose different kinds of gardens than those which are frequently seen: rock gardens, native plants gardens, etc.
– Lawn care companies operate in a system of seeing gardening as an economic opportunity. Because gardens are popular and require a lot of work and we live in a capitalist society, there are many people who can’t or won’t take care of their own gardens. Therefore companies are happy to step in and provide the labor required.
Environmentalists: Have you seen/can you imagine successful projects/attempts at resolving the tensions between environmental concerns and the other two stakeholders? What sort of new stakeholders might that system include?