Jamie Redknapp today broke his silence about the forthcoming apocalypse and slammed Rafael Benitez for leading humanity down a path to certain destruction. An obviously upset Redknapp went on to explain as best he could under the circumstances. “Me and me dad have been saying this for a long time yet no one has been heeding our warnings. Its blatantly obvious that by persisting with zonal marking Rafael Benitez is going to directly incur the wrath of the Mayan creator god and bring about the end of civilization and the world as we know it!” Pertinently pausing for breath, Jamie strokes his furrowed brow, clearly troubled by his findings. “And if anyone should know what they’re talking about its me and me dad, we’ve been in this game a long time, but I feel I’ve stayed as silent as I could for as long as possible. Someone needs to stop this mad man putting defenders in ‘zones’ before he kills us all!, I mean who ever heard of a zone scoring a goal? Certainly not Jeff Stelling nor Chris Kamara. What more proof do people need?” Sage words indeed from the Sly Sports News pundit.
According to Redknapps research the principal creator god Itzamna was apparently perturbed that Balam the main Jaguar God protector of communities decided to introduce a ‘zone per Jaguar’ system some time in AD 267 to ensure a greater number of communities came under an umbrella of Jaguar protection. Itzamna explained to Balam that zones don’t eat people, but rather other predators or men would. However the repercussions of this were not taken particularly seriously at first as although Balam kowtowed to Itzamnas wishes, the cyclical nature of humanity as viewed by the Mayan civilisation meant that this was unlikely to be the last time that the issue of zonal marking raised its ugly head.
Upon realising this Itzamna flew into a rage and ordered Yaluk the chief lightning god to Destroy the earth and scorch its crust so that no man or beast may ever defy him in such a way again. Jamie at this point becomes much more animated, “And so now we know why the 13th and final Long Cycle calendar as created by the Mayans ends on December 21st 2012, its because Itzamna will have simply grown tired of Rafas policy of zonal marking and Yaluk will destroy the entire Earth in response to Benitez’s constant affronts and shear arrogance, Its so obvious yet no one apart from Alex Ferguson has the strength of character to put a stop to his warmongering! Its about time we stood up to Benitez and ended this sabre rattling once and for all, before we’re all dead!”
Monday, 31 August 2009
Breaking News!
Andy Townsend just pissed in a bottle and threw it at Lee Dixons car!
(S. J. Tomlinson, Alty)
(S. J. Tomlinson, Alty)
Arsene Wenger in scat outrage!
Disgruntled Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger defied critics earlier today by defending his decision to take a ‘number two’ on the home dugout during his sides 2-1 defeat at the hands of their London rivals Manchester United.
"I have absolutely no idea who you are or what you're talking about, how did you get into my kitchen?" Slammed the unapologetic Wenger
Arsene was sent to the stands after an altercation with a plastic bottle and it was at that point that things started to get out of hand. Apoplectic Man Utd fan Keith Barlow from Gatley struggled to hold back his emotions as he recalled the moment that Arsene “undid his belt, dropped his trousers and actually shat onto a plexiglass roof, inches from Alex Fergusons head!” “It lacks respect” he added solemly, as an angry mob started to gather outside Old Trafford, demanding an enquiry into what has been dubbed ‘Scatgate’.
Marcus bent was unavailable for comment following the incident.
"I have absolutely no idea who you are or what you're talking about, how did you get into my kitchen?" Slammed the unapologetic Wenger
Arsene was sent to the stands after an altercation with a plastic bottle and it was at that point that things started to get out of hand. Apoplectic Man Utd fan Keith Barlow from Gatley struggled to hold back his emotions as he recalled the moment that Arsene “undid his belt, dropped his trousers and actually shat onto a plexiglass roof, inches from Alex Fergusons head!” “It lacks respect” he added solemly, as an angry mob started to gather outside Old Trafford, demanding an enquiry into what has been dubbed ‘Scatgate’.
Marcus bent was unavailable for comment following the incident.
Sunday, 30 August 2009
Planning for the worst
It is all well and good to explain and argue about what planning is setting out to achieve, and what it ought to be doing in terms of an all encompassing strategy to achieve best practice in the built environment. But for 99 percent of people planning has nothing at all to do with theory but with the very sights they see everyday. The length of time stuck in a traffic jam, whether or not they feel safe in their environs. Do the buildings make them happy, sad or indifferent? Looking back at some of the architecture from the 1960s, Brutalism is one of the most easily recognizable styles and arguably the most controversial. Many buildings of this style have managed to litter the urban form of many British cities following the clearances of bomb damaged city centres. The idea was formed by Le Corbusier ironically as an answer to a utopian society which comfortably supports its inhabitants in a pleasant surrounding, The whole idea itself that one person can in effect dictate what exactly a social utopia is, is surely inherently hypocritical. As much as I admire the works and thinking of Le Corbusier, the thought of living in a huge skyscraper town fills me with dread and I am thankful for the most part that the only people with the expertise to create such environments are the science fiction writers of comics and films such as Judge Dredd whereby the planet is covered by a series of mega cities. Alas chapter 16 of his bookthe city of tomorrow is where he attempts to justify funding for his grand schemes, this is where planning loses. Finance is a necessity, and institutions financing projects clearly want a say in what is to be built, planners cannot dictate to people what is to be built when they don’t hold the real keys to what gets built.
The huge problem of course is that planers and planning under modernist thought was that their utopias, whether it be garden cities or futuristic cities were planned on a clean slate, a slate whereby planning has overcome the greed and opportunism of the opposition, the irrational developers vying for land acquisition and use. By standing up to these planning has achieved the creation of an altruistic universe where personal wealth and consumerism may still exist but in much more watered down form and where humanity has come together, casting aside its differences and where anything can be achieved. Just look at star trek, humanity can only really evolve onto a higher plane and hope of interacting with and saving other species once it has learned to save itself. And herein lies the biggest criticism of modernist thought. It’s unrealistic.
In Liverpool itself the University hospital is a fine example of what has been left behind as a result of these ideals. Looking at this building in the dead of night from Prescott Street you may well be forgiven for thinking that you have just wandered into some form of post-apocalyptic landscape where visions of a dystopian future as set out in such films as Metropolis; where a cruel and unforgiving environment has been built to suppress the masses has evolved. As impressive as the building is, it is hardly becoming of a place where people go to recuperate. This is Brutalism; this is what capitalism has led to in a cheap way of constructing large buildings, but was it necessarily for the benefit of the social good? Nova Huta is one of only two specially built soviet show towns although there is a fascist equivalent in Eur, Roma. This estate is a Southern district of Krakow. There is no doubting that this town is ugly, built cheap the concrete high rises are far from welcoming. But the designs allow much open space and tellingly schools are placed so that most children in the district don’t have to cross one road to get there. This was a town that was planned and built for the well being of its inhabitants, capitalism couldn’t stop this one.
The Oregon experiment took place in 1973 on the back of huge unrest within Oregon University, Students regularly protested. It was felt that the actual buildings of the campus (inspired by Le Corbusier) didn’t help the feel of the community. The experiment aimed to set out a new planning thought whereby six principles are set down to create an organic order whereby the very people who live, work and are affected by an area are directly responsible for its design. This idea is a step further from the public participation that is so highly coveted at the moment. It can argued that the ugliness and uncaring of the architecture of the modernist approach is what led to the backlash of postmodernism. People wanted a say because they weren’t happy with what was being served up. You can’t create your own utopia and ask others to join you expecting them to be as thrilled as you are. Management theorist Locke showed us that to achieve the best results you need to treat people as individuals.
The RTPI states on its website that "It maintains the best of the past, whilst encouraging innovation in the design and development of future buildings and neighbourhoods to meet our future needs" By our, I assume the RTPI mean society as a whole. So why is then that the top ten percent of the population in Britain own half of all wealth while a third of families own no savings whatsoever, on a world wide scale it is far worse with two percent of the population owning half the wealth. Why are they also the 'royal' town plnning institute, hardly an advert for equality and community cohesion. When we look at this then we realise that no matter how planning has set out to achieve its goals of equilibrium, it has failed miserably, and continues to do so on an increasingly sliding scale. Sandercock opens the second chapter of her book Towards Cosmopolis, stating that professions as nations shape their members attitudes by rewriting history, exactly like the ministry of truth in Orwells book 1984 and much like school syllabuses tell us of the struggle against evil in world war 2 yet omit possibly the most successful ethnic cleansing operation to have ever taken place, by the British in Tasmania. Sandercock gives a good account of how planning has done the same thing, minorities cast aside and their voices not listened to. Unfortunately I will come back to the built environment and say that planning is guilty of these atrocities. I don’t believe it’s ever been there for the people as a whole but for those with the influence, the privileged few, who even with the best intentions cannot possibly build something for everyone.
Much has been lost and ground is conceded everyday. With every crap development that is allowed through a developer becomes richer, and another sub standard building dirties the skyline. The communitive action theorists are correct up to a point, no matter what the concept, thought or ideal was or is, it is not the perception of reality that is important but the actual reality. While applying for job recently, every planning job specifies that "you will be expected to work with developers to help them find appropriate sites" I understand that working with developers will be necessary at some point by why help them when their first priority is monetary profit? Why don’t the jobs specify liasing with communities or environmental groups? Maori society forbids the private ownership of land, asking the question; who has the right to take such a vital finite resource from others? Who claimed it in the first place as theirs? How? And how can they justify that? A quick look at the Times rich list shows many people who state property, development or land acquisition as their source of wealth. It’s no surprise.
‘The paradigm shift is here and the new wave seeks to escape from the strait jacket of a narrow instrumental reality’
The same idea of a society for people is jumping out at me through all planning mind sets and yet it is not being achieved. Communicative theorists see the basis of communicative operation revolving around discussion, deliberation and interaction. This isn’t a new idea, far from it. But why does it still fail?
‘Ultimately, planning theory oriented to conflict and to democratic compromise is likely to support more democratic planning practices and outcomes than an orientation to consensus’
It is this idea of consensus which comes in for some pretty heavy criticism, as it is felt that those with power make the decisions and not, as idealised, the majority decision. Look at major decisions in the UK for examples. Heathrow and Manchester runways were hugely opposed by hundreds of thousands of residents and environmental protesters. There is no doubt that the economic benefits are huge and will help the economy grow, but there it is. Power makes the decisions and money does equal power. When it comes down to it the Deputy Prime Minister has the final say, and this government as with any other, is all bought and paid for (by property developers in the most recent scandal). Public participation is supposedly key to planning, with local authorities expected to deal with all objections within 6 to 8 weeks. However the Government Office for the North West and the regional development agency are being downsized to make them ‘smaller yet stronger’.
These agencies are there to communicate with the public and facilitate participation yet are being cut back. This shows how high on the agenda communicative action really is. Healey attempts to answer such critique by saying that CAT is more focused on understanding complexity and diversity and that although power is a huge relation it needs to be fully understood before it can be applied to the theory. Power is also not a natural occurrence but has become natural through social acceptance and embedding. To change such a thing would be a real challenge. The best way forward according to Mouffe is to find ‘forms of power more compatible with democratic values’. It’s probably the best we can hope for until Captain Picard takes us all for a ride on the Enterprise and really opens people’s eyes.
The huge problem of course is that planers and planning under modernist thought was that their utopias, whether it be garden cities or futuristic cities were planned on a clean slate, a slate whereby planning has overcome the greed and opportunism of the opposition, the irrational developers vying for land acquisition and use. By standing up to these planning has achieved the creation of an altruistic universe where personal wealth and consumerism may still exist but in much more watered down form and where humanity has come together, casting aside its differences and where anything can be achieved. Just look at star trek, humanity can only really evolve onto a higher plane and hope of interacting with and saving other species once it has learned to save itself. And herein lies the biggest criticism of modernist thought. It’s unrealistic.
In Liverpool itself the University hospital is a fine example of what has been left behind as a result of these ideals. Looking at this building in the dead of night from Prescott Street you may well be forgiven for thinking that you have just wandered into some form of post-apocalyptic landscape where visions of a dystopian future as set out in such films as Metropolis; where a cruel and unforgiving environment has been built to suppress the masses has evolved. As impressive as the building is, it is hardly becoming of a place where people go to recuperate. This is Brutalism; this is what capitalism has led to in a cheap way of constructing large buildings, but was it necessarily for the benefit of the social good? Nova Huta is one of only two specially built soviet show towns although there is a fascist equivalent in Eur, Roma. This estate is a Southern district of Krakow. There is no doubting that this town is ugly, built cheap the concrete high rises are far from welcoming. But the designs allow much open space and tellingly schools are placed so that most children in the district don’t have to cross one road to get there. This was a town that was planned and built for the well being of its inhabitants, capitalism couldn’t stop this one.
The Oregon experiment took place in 1973 on the back of huge unrest within Oregon University, Students regularly protested. It was felt that the actual buildings of the campus (inspired by Le Corbusier) didn’t help the feel of the community. The experiment aimed to set out a new planning thought whereby six principles are set down to create an organic order whereby the very people who live, work and are affected by an area are directly responsible for its design. This idea is a step further from the public participation that is so highly coveted at the moment. It can argued that the ugliness and uncaring of the architecture of the modernist approach is what led to the backlash of postmodernism. People wanted a say because they weren’t happy with what was being served up. You can’t create your own utopia and ask others to join you expecting them to be as thrilled as you are. Management theorist Locke showed us that to achieve the best results you need to treat people as individuals.
The RTPI states on its website that "It maintains the best of the past, whilst encouraging innovation in the design and development of future buildings and neighbourhoods to meet our future needs" By our, I assume the RTPI mean society as a whole. So why is then that the top ten percent of the population in Britain own half of all wealth while a third of families own no savings whatsoever, on a world wide scale it is far worse with two percent of the population owning half the wealth. Why are they also the 'royal' town plnning institute, hardly an advert for equality and community cohesion. When we look at this then we realise that no matter how planning has set out to achieve its goals of equilibrium, it has failed miserably, and continues to do so on an increasingly sliding scale. Sandercock opens the second chapter of her book Towards Cosmopolis, stating that professions as nations shape their members attitudes by rewriting history, exactly like the ministry of truth in Orwells book 1984 and much like school syllabuses tell us of the struggle against evil in world war 2 yet omit possibly the most successful ethnic cleansing operation to have ever taken place, by the British in Tasmania. Sandercock gives a good account of how planning has done the same thing, minorities cast aside and their voices not listened to. Unfortunately I will come back to the built environment and say that planning is guilty of these atrocities. I don’t believe it’s ever been there for the people as a whole but for those with the influence, the privileged few, who even with the best intentions cannot possibly build something for everyone.
Much has been lost and ground is conceded everyday. With every crap development that is allowed through a developer becomes richer, and another sub standard building dirties the skyline. The communitive action theorists are correct up to a point, no matter what the concept, thought or ideal was or is, it is not the perception of reality that is important but the actual reality. While applying for job recently, every planning job specifies that "you will be expected to work with developers to help them find appropriate sites" I understand that working with developers will be necessary at some point by why help them when their first priority is monetary profit? Why don’t the jobs specify liasing with communities or environmental groups? Maori society forbids the private ownership of land, asking the question; who has the right to take such a vital finite resource from others? Who claimed it in the first place as theirs? How? And how can they justify that? A quick look at the Times rich list shows many people who state property, development or land acquisition as their source of wealth. It’s no surprise.
‘The paradigm shift is here and the new wave seeks to escape from the strait jacket of a narrow instrumental reality’
The same idea of a society for people is jumping out at me through all planning mind sets and yet it is not being achieved. Communicative theorists see the basis of communicative operation revolving around discussion, deliberation and interaction. This isn’t a new idea, far from it. But why does it still fail?
‘Ultimately, planning theory oriented to conflict and to democratic compromise is likely to support more democratic planning practices and outcomes than an orientation to consensus’
It is this idea of consensus which comes in for some pretty heavy criticism, as it is felt that those with power make the decisions and not, as idealised, the majority decision. Look at major decisions in the UK for examples. Heathrow and Manchester runways were hugely opposed by hundreds of thousands of residents and environmental protesters. There is no doubt that the economic benefits are huge and will help the economy grow, but there it is. Power makes the decisions and money does equal power. When it comes down to it the Deputy Prime Minister has the final say, and this government as with any other, is all bought and paid for (by property developers in the most recent scandal). Public participation is supposedly key to planning, with local authorities expected to deal with all objections within 6 to 8 weeks. However the Government Office for the North West and the regional development agency are being downsized to make them ‘smaller yet stronger’.
These agencies are there to communicate with the public and facilitate participation yet are being cut back. This shows how high on the agenda communicative action really is. Healey attempts to answer such critique by saying that CAT is more focused on understanding complexity and diversity and that although power is a huge relation it needs to be fully understood before it can be applied to the theory. Power is also not a natural occurrence but has become natural through social acceptance and embedding. To change such a thing would be a real challenge. The best way forward according to Mouffe is to find ‘forms of power more compatible with democratic values’. It’s probably the best we can hope for until Captain Picard takes us all for a ride on the Enterprise and really opens people’s eyes.
Greenwashing the world down the drain
The term eco tourism was first established by a Mexican conservationist by the name of Hector Ceballos-Lascurain who revised his first quote made in 1983 which was slightly ambiguous, to the latter in 1996. Which is now given as a definition of eco tourism by the International Union for the conservation of nature (IUCN):
"Ecotourism is environmentally responsible travel and visitation to relatively undisturbed natural areas, in order to enjoy and appreciate nature (and any accompanying cultural features - both past and present) that promotes conservation, has low negative visitor impact, and provides for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local populations".
The ICUN is the largest global environmental network, lending weight to the above definition.
Finding out about ecotourism for many people will ultimately come down to an Internet search engine. The term eco tourism itself is a relatively new concept so what exactly does it entail? What is ecotourism, how does it work and is it actually going to create a revolution in terms of holidaying and travelling whereby the fad of carbon offsetting becomes the norm, people pay for the pollution they cause and the impacts of holidaying are reduced to the point of being totally negated by either technological advances or simple lifestyle choices that shun the grandiose and luxurious.
The simple answer is no. Ecotourism is a cynical marketing tool being used increasingly upon a population of guardian readers looking to justify their whimsical and luxurious retreats to 5 star hotels on tiny Polynesian islands. This truly is a capitalist’s dream, no longer do companies and consumers need to bury their heads in the sand and turn a blind eye to the obvious and irreversible damage wreaked upon delicate and unique ecosystems. Now people can proudly argue over their mochas and extra skinny lattes about whose five thousand pound Caribbean odyssey was better for the environment, Tarquin who went and counted rare jellyfish for a day or Pipa who helped a turtle lay eggs by watching it for an hour. This might sound overly cynical but the idea of ‘ego’ tourists is not something new. Duffy (2002) believed that the new ecotourism was simply being used as a means of social positioning where people think that they are above the average imbecilic tourist. The ego tourists interviewed by Duffy were scuba diving off Belize on an ‘eco holiday’, yet none considered the effects of motorboats upon the environment or the effect of tourists upon the marine life (recent studies in the black forest show that the presence of tourists noticeably and detrimentally effects local wildlife.), not too mention the effects of flying half way around the globe in the first place.
Just how endemic this ‘green washing’ of the unjustifiable has become first becomes apparent when on an Internet search engine: type in ecotourism. The first 20 results are marketing companies who specialise in ecotourism marketing. To be fair they do come up with some interesting ecotourism marketing ideas, such as sending guests home with a gift; for example a bar of soap in the shape of something memorable about their trip.
Ecotourism as an idea and in the purest sense is not a marketing tool, nor should it be considered one. It is a mindset and a conscious personal effort to have an enjoyable holiday without causing irreversible damage to the planet, and funding the destruction of areas by staying in large hotel or holiday complexes. But this simply does not conform in a society built upon the principal of wealth accumulation and ownership. As such we must look at ecotourism as a marketing tool and see whether or not the Ecotourism organisations are actually any more environmentally friendly than those that do not use this tag. In fact the misrepresentation of eco tourism has led to organisations avoiding using the tag due to cynicism created by hypocritical use of the term.
2002 was designated year of the eco tourist by the united nations, however this provoked a hostile reaction from many eminent ecologists and environmentalists who claimed this would play into the hands of the big corporations using eco tourism as a marketing tool and worse still using the eco title to gain access to sensitive areas such companies would never be allowed to set foot in under the auspice of normal tourism.
People such as Deborah McLaren, the coordinator of Rethinking Tourism, a conservation group in America; Chee Yoke Ling, a representative of the Third World Network and Nina Rao co-chair of Tourism Caucus an African far trade NGO with links to the UN commission for sustainable development.
Its not hard to see why these complaints were lodged, post 2002 many tourism organisations such as Skal began to operate eco tourism awards, the winner of one such award was Marari Beach Resort in India. This resort boast traditional Indian fishing huts, air conditioning and swimming pools set over 9 Islands. The most popular of which is the Casino Island. This eco tourism award winner is far out of the price range of local people and being all-inclusive means they will see little benefit from its existence. And Skals main business partner? Best Western. One of the largest multi national hotel networks in the world.
Unfortunately this is a common and reoccurring theme within the minefield of eco tourism. Awards and more importantly accreditation are not necessarily a guarantee that the company is acting responsibly. The World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) operate a Green Globe 21 scheme, which destinations need to pay to become part of, this is however backed up by assessors who visit the resorts to asses their eco credentials. Just how strict these assessors are, or whether they exist at all would be an interesting question. Green Globe 21 accredited resorts include Sandals Dunn's River resort in Jamaica, a huge complex built around an artificial 18 hole golf course. The average golf course consumes at least 35 Million Gallons of water per year, which works out at around 2,500 Gallons per round played. Hardly what I consider to be environmentally conscious practice. And this is without taking into account what 234 en suite air conditioned rooms built on a beach does to the marine environment, nor does it take into account the costs of getting to Jamaica by air.
Certainly there is much good to come of a more socially aware public who believe in helping the planet, and eco tourism itself should surely be welcomed. The unfortunate problem we have at the moment is that the term has simply been hijacked by businesses using it to make more money. The other issue relates to the holidaymakers themselves. For all people say, when studied they really aren’t thinking about the consequences of their actions at all. Sharpley suggests that tourism is escapist and people pay money to be entertained, so they are more likely to give priority to serve their self-interests above those of the environment. This is what Duffy experienced in practice. The potential is huge, but the issue still remains, when are people going to take responsibility for their actions.
"Ecotourism is environmentally responsible travel and visitation to relatively undisturbed natural areas, in order to enjoy and appreciate nature (and any accompanying cultural features - both past and present) that promotes conservation, has low negative visitor impact, and provides for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local populations".
The ICUN is the largest global environmental network, lending weight to the above definition.
Finding out about ecotourism for many people will ultimately come down to an Internet search engine. The term eco tourism itself is a relatively new concept so what exactly does it entail? What is ecotourism, how does it work and is it actually going to create a revolution in terms of holidaying and travelling whereby the fad of carbon offsetting becomes the norm, people pay for the pollution they cause and the impacts of holidaying are reduced to the point of being totally negated by either technological advances or simple lifestyle choices that shun the grandiose and luxurious.
The simple answer is no. Ecotourism is a cynical marketing tool being used increasingly upon a population of guardian readers looking to justify their whimsical and luxurious retreats to 5 star hotels on tiny Polynesian islands. This truly is a capitalist’s dream, no longer do companies and consumers need to bury their heads in the sand and turn a blind eye to the obvious and irreversible damage wreaked upon delicate and unique ecosystems. Now people can proudly argue over their mochas and extra skinny lattes about whose five thousand pound Caribbean odyssey was better for the environment, Tarquin who went and counted rare jellyfish for a day or Pipa who helped a turtle lay eggs by watching it for an hour. This might sound overly cynical but the idea of ‘ego’ tourists is not something new. Duffy (2002) believed that the new ecotourism was simply being used as a means of social positioning where people think that they are above the average imbecilic tourist. The ego tourists interviewed by Duffy were scuba diving off Belize on an ‘eco holiday’, yet none considered the effects of motorboats upon the environment or the effect of tourists upon the marine life (recent studies in the black forest show that the presence of tourists noticeably and detrimentally effects local wildlife.), not too mention the effects of flying half way around the globe in the first place.
Just how endemic this ‘green washing’ of the unjustifiable has become first becomes apparent when on an Internet search engine: type in ecotourism. The first 20 results are marketing companies who specialise in ecotourism marketing. To be fair they do come up with some interesting ecotourism marketing ideas, such as sending guests home with a gift; for example a bar of soap in the shape of something memorable about their trip.
Ecotourism as an idea and in the purest sense is not a marketing tool, nor should it be considered one. It is a mindset and a conscious personal effort to have an enjoyable holiday without causing irreversible damage to the planet, and funding the destruction of areas by staying in large hotel or holiday complexes. But this simply does not conform in a society built upon the principal of wealth accumulation and ownership. As such we must look at ecotourism as a marketing tool and see whether or not the Ecotourism organisations are actually any more environmentally friendly than those that do not use this tag. In fact the misrepresentation of eco tourism has led to organisations avoiding using the tag due to cynicism created by hypocritical use of the term.
2002 was designated year of the eco tourist by the united nations, however this provoked a hostile reaction from many eminent ecologists and environmentalists who claimed this would play into the hands of the big corporations using eco tourism as a marketing tool and worse still using the eco title to gain access to sensitive areas such companies would never be allowed to set foot in under the auspice of normal tourism.
People such as Deborah McLaren, the coordinator of Rethinking Tourism, a conservation group in America; Chee Yoke Ling, a representative of the Third World Network and Nina Rao co-chair of Tourism Caucus an African far trade NGO with links to the UN commission for sustainable development.
Its not hard to see why these complaints were lodged, post 2002 many tourism organisations such as Skal began to operate eco tourism awards, the winner of one such award was Marari Beach Resort in India. This resort boast traditional Indian fishing huts, air conditioning and swimming pools set over 9 Islands. The most popular of which is the Casino Island. This eco tourism award winner is far out of the price range of local people and being all-inclusive means they will see little benefit from its existence. And Skals main business partner? Best Western. One of the largest multi national hotel networks in the world.
Unfortunately this is a common and reoccurring theme within the minefield of eco tourism. Awards and more importantly accreditation are not necessarily a guarantee that the company is acting responsibly. The World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) operate a Green Globe 21 scheme, which destinations need to pay to become part of, this is however backed up by assessors who visit the resorts to asses their eco credentials. Just how strict these assessors are, or whether they exist at all would be an interesting question. Green Globe 21 accredited resorts include Sandals Dunn's River resort in Jamaica, a huge complex built around an artificial 18 hole golf course. The average golf course consumes at least 35 Million Gallons of water per year, which works out at around 2,500 Gallons per round played. Hardly what I consider to be environmentally conscious practice. And this is without taking into account what 234 en suite air conditioned rooms built on a beach does to the marine environment, nor does it take into account the costs of getting to Jamaica by air.
Certainly there is much good to come of a more socially aware public who believe in helping the planet, and eco tourism itself should surely be welcomed. The unfortunate problem we have at the moment is that the term has simply been hijacked by businesses using it to make more money. The other issue relates to the holidaymakers themselves. For all people say, when studied they really aren’t thinking about the consequences of their actions at all. Sharpley suggests that tourism is escapist and people pay money to be entertained, so they are more likely to give priority to serve their self-interests above those of the environment. This is what Duffy experienced in practice. The potential is huge, but the issue still remains, when are people going to take responsibility for their actions.
Thursday, 27 August 2009
Chinese pollution concerns force crack down on gas guzzlers
A 14-year-old Chinese fan of the Transformer movies has been drinking gasoline for five years in an attempt to "become a valiant fighter" like his hero Optimus Prime, Chinese media said on Monday.
"He started drinking gasoline about five years ago, when we first discovered he enjoyed smelling lighter fuel," Xinhua said citing a local newspaper report.
At the age of nine the boy from the southwestern Chinese city of Yibin began stealing lighters from his mother's grocery stall. After discovering that their son had drunk half a bottle of gasoline from the fuel tank of the family motorcycle "to obtain energy," the worried parents locked the vehicle away.
The boy, however, started emptying the fuel tanks of cars in the neighborhood, gradually increasing the amount of consumed fuel to two or three bottles each day. His concerned family has sought medical advice and a doctor diagnosed the child with a serious mental disorder and "petrol addiction."
"Since my son began drinking fuel, his IQ has dropped sharply and now he can't figure out addition and subtraction within 100," the father told West China Metropolis Daily. "Before that, he was a very smart boy, and he could even repair the television. But now he does not know the answer of 7 plus 17."
"He started drinking gasoline about five years ago, when we first discovered he enjoyed smelling lighter fuel," Xinhua said citing a local newspaper report.
At the age of nine the boy from the southwestern Chinese city of Yibin began stealing lighters from his mother's grocery stall. After discovering that their son had drunk half a bottle of gasoline from the fuel tank of the family motorcycle "to obtain energy," the worried parents locked the vehicle away.
The boy, however, started emptying the fuel tanks of cars in the neighborhood, gradually increasing the amount of consumed fuel to two or three bottles each day. His concerned family has sought medical advice and a doctor diagnosed the child with a serious mental disorder and "petrol addiction."
"Since my son began drinking fuel, his IQ has dropped sharply and now he can't figure out addition and subtraction within 100," the father told West China Metropolis Daily. "Before that, he was a very smart boy, and he could even repair the television. But now he does not know the answer of 7 plus 17."
New budget punishes smokers
A U.S. man has discovered that he was charged more than $23 quadrillion for a pack of cigarettes that he bought at a filling station using his Visa card, WMUR-TV (US) reported on Wednesday 15/07/09.
When his checked his online bank account, Josh Muszynski discovered that he was $23,148,855,308,184,500 ($23,148 trillion) in the red.
"I thought my card had been compromised. I thought somebody had bought Europe with my credit card," he said.
Muszynski turned to the sales assistant at the store, but "she said she couldn't help me at all. She didn't know anything about it," he explained.
He then phoned the Bank of America to find out where the mysterious string of numbers on his account had come from. After two hours on the phone to the bank, a representative still had no explanation, but assured Muszynski that his statement would be corrected.
Some 24 hours later the huge negative balance on his account was reversed back to normal.
When his checked his online bank account, Josh Muszynski discovered that he was $23,148,855,308,184,500 ($23,148 trillion) in the red.
"I thought my card had been compromised. I thought somebody had bought Europe with my credit card," he said.
Muszynski turned to the sales assistant at the store, but "she said she couldn't help me at all. She didn't know anything about it," he explained.
He then phoned the Bank of America to find out where the mysterious string of numbers on his account had come from. After two hours on the phone to the bank, a representative still had no explanation, but assured Muszynski that his statement would be corrected.
Some 24 hours later the huge negative balance on his account was reversed back to normal.
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Sky sports exclusive from Football Manager 2007
This week on sky sports news +1 we take a look behind the scenes at clubs close to all our hearts, because we really know how you feel. This week, take a look at the fortunes of our lower league virtual manager with some profound results.
Here with the exclusive is our roving reporter S. J. Tomlinson.
Dr Kiddy has completed 1 calendar year at the helm of good ship Altrincham and we've been lucky enough to get access into the bowels of Moss Lame .Altrincham blew away all expectations this year to finish 22nd, 2 places above bottom, with 40 points. Many feel that whilst relegation is an annoyance, all it really represents its Dr Kiddys love of taking Alty on the road, to pastures new, spreading his seed and disease.
Alty had a rough sort of season, scoring the least (38) and conceding 98 goals (the most), 2 short of the golden ton, "maybe next year, eh!?", Kiddy postulated. But they gave as good as they got, for certain. Alty blew the record books to bits as they collected no fewer than 79 yellows and 19 red cards. Eddie Hussin, proud owner of 3 red cards in 14 starts,argued "if the league is full of pricks what need crocking, fuck em". Mr Hussin was allowed to leave Moss Lane in the summer.
Dr Kiddy certainly has made a name for himself as the 'Pol-Pot of non-league'. His no nonsense appoach to man management has turned Moss Lane into the footballing equivalent of the Killing Fields, dropping the axe on 24 players in the summer. "they were fucking useless at the end of the day". Sage words form the man in charge. "signed some sexy bastards tho". Dr Kiddy wouldbe referring to 18 year old prodigy Ben Kumi, a Ghanaian spring signing who achieved a brain melting average of 6.4 in 11 games at the end of the season, easily Altys best player, "fucking ace,i am ace, feel my weight, me mam's got me tea on and me dog thinks this is my best life choice". Remarkable young man.
We caught up with Player of the Year, top scorer and General good guy Rod Thornley who smashed 8 league goals for The Robins, in 1 season!! we asked how it felt to be so prolific,"got any spare change?" Funny old Roddy.
Many players did indeed take a (forced) pay cut as a result of relegation as the wage bill plunges to a limit of 5k a week, but the board are not tight! no sir, Dr Kiddyhas been given a war chest of 0 pounds this year to turn it around, "what the fuck is going on?", our thoughts mirrored by Dr Kiddy there, who knows where Alty got that kind of cash from.
So, a season of ups (3-3 away at Southport!) and downs (a 0-8 close home loss to Grays, alty ending with 8 men), lefts and rights and lots of spinning around. Colin Little has resigned for 120quid a week, less than a third than what he was on when allowed to leave to Rushden, his apparent love for the club shining through, "i thought i was getting a job as a bin man". Maybe you are son, maybe you are.
Well, Alty go to Lancaster away first game up, lets see if they can tear it up. Dr Kiddy obviously thinks so " i hope im dead by Christmas". Keep reading folks.
Here with the exclusive is our roving reporter S. J. Tomlinson.
Dr Kiddy has completed 1 calendar year at the helm of good ship Altrincham and we've been lucky enough to get access into the bowels of Moss Lame .Altrincham blew away all expectations this year to finish 22nd, 2 places above bottom, with 40 points. Many feel that whilst relegation is an annoyance, all it really represents its Dr Kiddys love of taking Alty on the road, to pastures new, spreading his seed and disease.
Alty had a rough sort of season, scoring the least (38) and conceding 98 goals (the most), 2 short of the golden ton, "maybe next year, eh!?", Kiddy postulated. But they gave as good as they got, for certain. Alty blew the record books to bits as they collected no fewer than 79 yellows and 19 red cards. Eddie Hussin, proud owner of 3 red cards in 14 starts,argued "if the league is full of pricks what need crocking, fuck em". Mr Hussin was allowed to leave Moss Lane in the summer.
Dr Kiddy certainly has made a name for himself as the 'Pol-Pot of non-league'. His no nonsense appoach to man management has turned Moss Lane into the footballing equivalent of the Killing Fields, dropping the axe on 24 players in the summer. "they were fucking useless at the end of the day". Sage words form the man in charge. "signed some sexy bastards tho". Dr Kiddy wouldbe referring to 18 year old prodigy Ben Kumi, a Ghanaian spring signing who achieved a brain melting average of 6.4 in 11 games at the end of the season, easily Altys best player, "fucking ace,i am ace, feel my weight, me mam's got me tea on and me dog thinks this is my best life choice". Remarkable young man.
We caught up with Player of the Year, top scorer and General good guy Rod Thornley who smashed 8 league goals for The Robins, in 1 season!! we asked how it felt to be so prolific,"got any spare change?" Funny old Roddy.
Many players did indeed take a (forced) pay cut as a result of relegation as the wage bill plunges to a limit of 5k a week, but the board are not tight! no sir, Dr Kiddyhas been given a war chest of 0 pounds this year to turn it around, "what the fuck is going on?", our thoughts mirrored by Dr Kiddy there, who knows where Alty got that kind of cash from.
So, a season of ups (3-3 away at Southport!) and downs (a 0-8 close home loss to Grays, alty ending with 8 men), lefts and rights and lots of spinning around. Colin Little has resigned for 120quid a week, less than a third than what he was on when allowed to leave to Rushden, his apparent love for the club shining through, "i thought i was getting a job as a bin man". Maybe you are son, maybe you are.
Well, Alty go to Lancaster away first game up, lets see if they can tear it up. Dr Kiddy obviously thinks so " i hope im dead by Christmas". Keep reading folks.
Comeback for 90's TV hero?
Gazza pissed on national radio a few months back and claims he doesn’t have a problem.
I think that’s a lesson for us all.
Anyway let’s do away with all these fucking none entity smug bastards who seem to be on every single fucking TV station right now.
My undercard would be as follows,
Chris Moyles
Ferne cotton
building up to Jonathan Ross
Then the final big fight live, Noel fucking Edmonds.
The BBC is to blame for this shower of talentless brain-dead morons soiling my eyes and ears despite my best efforts to flick through the plague of channels that the digital revolution has blessed us with. From time to time freezing, leaving a big portrait of some null and void complete with shit eating grin as if to hammer home the point that these barely literate half wits are the voice of a nation. The crème de la crème of communication through this sexy medium of digital. People we should be idolising, those who’ve made it in the big time, and who quite rightly have a soap box from which to preach.
Said celebrity enters a circular room, large enough to run but nowhere to hide. Strange multicoloured poker dots on the walls....
Drum roll. enter MR BLOBBY tooled up with a large cutthroat razor, he starts doing his blobby blobby blobby carry on and chases them around slicing a bit off at a time, dragging it out as only he could, back in his prime when TV heros were made of sterner stuff than the converyor belt of mental illness paraded by reality television nowadays. All this is much to the absolute hilarity to the PPV subscribers. Just imagine, just imagine. Edmonds deserves no less. The irony, the people of Morecambe would finally have their moneys worth.
I was reading a book the other day, going on about infinity theories, whereby if the universe is infinite then by definition there are infinite worlds with infinite actions occurring, which means that somewhere this is already happening anyway.
I think that’s a lesson for us all.
Anyway let’s do away with all these fucking none entity smug bastards who seem to be on every single fucking TV station right now.
My undercard would be as follows,
Chris Moyles
Ferne cotton
building up to Jonathan Ross
Then the final big fight live, Noel fucking Edmonds.
The BBC is to blame for this shower of talentless brain-dead morons soiling my eyes and ears despite my best efforts to flick through the plague of channels that the digital revolution has blessed us with. From time to time freezing, leaving a big portrait of some null and void complete with shit eating grin as if to hammer home the point that these barely literate half wits are the voice of a nation. The crème de la crème of communication through this sexy medium of digital. People we should be idolising, those who’ve made it in the big time, and who quite rightly have a soap box from which to preach.
Said celebrity enters a circular room, large enough to run but nowhere to hide. Strange multicoloured poker dots on the walls....
Drum roll. enter MR BLOBBY tooled up with a large cutthroat razor, he starts doing his blobby blobby blobby carry on and chases them around slicing a bit off at a time, dragging it out as only he could, back in his prime when TV heros were made of sterner stuff than the converyor belt of mental illness paraded by reality television nowadays. All this is much to the absolute hilarity to the PPV subscribers. Just imagine, just imagine. Edmonds deserves no less. The irony, the people of Morecambe would finally have their moneys worth.
I was reading a book the other day, going on about infinity theories, whereby if the universe is infinite then by definition there are infinite worlds with infinite actions occurring, which means that somewhere this is already happening anyway.
The news is the news. Welcome to the newsage.
"Sky sports news have just introduced new music to their program, somehow its even more dramatic than the last tune they had. To commemorate the changing of the guard so to speak, they were alternating between them all afternoon, I thought the world was ending! " (S, J, Tomlinson. Alty)
Subscribers
Please feel free to subscribe to this here new blog, and find out how long blogspot take to delete it for inactivity.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
