The Tragedy of the Global Commons - Essay Example

Frankel (2003) examines the relationship between the environment and globalization. On its part, globalization has been an ongoing process for many years now. On the same note, it encompasses diverse and dynamic practices that affect the society in one way or another. This means that globalization has its positive and negative sides. According to Frankel, the point of interaction between globalization and the environment is critical (13). Enormous emphasis on either could adversely affect the other, thus the need to strike a balance between the two.

Frankel’s reading is dominated by an argument about environmental sustainability. Globalization continues to take a very significant position all over the world. It has essentially aided global business and contributed in enhancing the quality of life all over the world. However, this process has threatened the environment in diverse and dynamic ways. Frankel examines and assesses the existence of a balance between the two to determine which of the two should be accorded more attention. Notably, Frankel’s arguments factor in the current and future generations.

The continued social and economic growth and development has had its effects on the overall welfare of the global community. Production and consumption of goods and services have been critical to this process. Although production and consumption has essentially driven the world forward, a major issue has come up; garbage management. The society’s garbage today can tell so much about it. This constitutes the line of interest that Humes (2012) explores in his reading. Humes looks into people’s daily lives and how they manage their trash over time.

He notes that today’s society has fallen in love with its trash (Humes, Chapter 1). Primarily, Humes analyses contemporary trash and positions this analysis in today’s society. As earlier noted, climate change has been a pertinent issue since the onset of global warming. Pooley (2010) notes that climate change has resulted in climate wars and persistent bids to have the planet saved (37). Global mobilization has been observed around the world, but little or no resolutions have been put on the table.

This follows a scenario that can be best described as: vibrant economic activity threatens environmental sustainability in one way or another and enormous emphasis on environmental sustainability jeopardizes social and economic progress. The question is: which between the two is the most important course to pursue. Of course, both the environment and social and economic progress are fundamental. For this reason, Pooley argues that environmental stakeholders are in climate wars to prove their point in the quest to enhance environmental welfare in planet earth (Pooley 49).

The climate, environment, and globalization have been explored, examined, assessed, and evaluated for many years. Information, arguments, and debates on the three are massive and drawn from many scholars. This exploration, examination, assessment, and evaluation are so massive, intensive and extensive compared to garbology. In other words, garbology is so much less explored. In this respect, I personally find Humes’ reading exceptional, compelling, and interesting. Humes’ reading is commendable and should take the underlying research even further.

The society needs to be enlightened about understanding itself through its trash. The insights that garbage sheds about the