World Hunger Essay Example for Free

World Hunger Essay Hunger can arguably be called the greatest and most intimate of all tragedies, for the reason that the necessity to eat it is the most basic, intrinsic, and immediate human need. Clearly, no one deserves to remain hungry. In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, every human being’s right to adequate food has been stated clearly. It is speculated that there is enough food in the world to feed the global population twice over (International Food Policy Research Institute [IFPRI], 2007), yet a child continues to die from hunger or other malnutrition-related diseases every few seconds. It is ironic how in view of the present day technological advancements, issues like hunger, malnutrition, and chronic poverty still persist. Why is the world plagued by hunger and mal nutrition on such a massive scale, anyone with a conscience or common sense may wonder. In the ancient times, natural calamites like drought and famine were responsible for shortage of food. However in modern times, factors like war, environmental degeneration, displacement, unfair trade agreements, trade embargoes, and smuggling are some of the complex reasons behind world hunger, all of which are manmade. The interdependent nature of these elements needs a closer analysis: First and foremost, the main reason behind world hunger is the problem of poverty, access, and affordability. Under privileged, discriminated, and marginalized segments of the population lack the power to purchase even the minimum amount of food needed for survival. Those having moderate income can afford to adjust , shift, and improvise their spending habits, but those having low-income have lesser flexibility and thus have to cutback the expenditures on their basic needs. Thus, as long as inflation rate keeps spiraling upwards, people’s purchasing power would continue to diminish, and they would go hungry. According to Koc, MacRae, Mougeot, and Welsh (1999), â€Å"access to food has been perceived by many as a privilege, rather than a basic human right, and it is estimated that about 35,000 people around the world die each day from hunger† (p. 1). Over a three year span, prices of basic food commodities have doubled and continue to steep. The main reason behind inflation is the increase in oil prices, which is pushing the production, transportation, and distribution costs of food upward. The growing demand and diminishing supply rule is also applicable here, where the highest bidder has an unfair advantage over others having moderate means yet an immediate need. In the developing countries, since people spend a bulk of their income on buying basic commodities, making ends meet is becoming increasingly difficult for them. This desperation has a domino effect and has lead to a wave of social unrest and even in rioting in countries around the globe. There has been a shift in the world’s economic trends, which is another reason for world’s food crisis. Agricultural countries are rapidly moving away from agriculture to industrialization. The agricultural ones are investing more in growing cash crops like cotton, tobacco, corn-ethanol, etc. There is no sense of self-sufficiency anymore. The governments of industrialized countries are willing to buy food from other agricultural countries on high prices, thus providing food to their own populace at higher prices and creating shortage and deprivation in the agricultural economies. Definitely, when precious agricultural land use is diverted to non-productive, or even destructive use, it has a disastrous affect on the country’s economic and social conditions. Another prominent reason of food shortage lies in its wastage. The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) states: It is estimated that 130 pounds of food per person in the United States ends up in landfills. The annual value of this lost food is estimated around $31 billion. But the real story is that roughly 49 million people could have been fed by those lost resources. (p. 21) Alarmingly, over half the food produced today is wasted or discarded, which is an important factor contributing to the golbal food shortage. Also, excessive consumption of food or gluttony is also taking away food from the mouths of the hunger and destitute into the belly of the well-fed. Not to mention that this wasted food also leads to environmental pollution due to emission of methane gases. Changing weather patterns, environmental degradation, and soil conditions too are responsible for the decrease, destruction, and depletion of food production. The recent wave of droughts and hurricanes in several parts of the world has reduced the crop production. The worlds agricultural land has become degraded due to the excessive use of fertilizers, pesticides, soil contamination, over drafting of groundwater, etc. Ironically, the measures to counter hunger such as food dumping and foreign aids also form a part of the world hunger problem rather than the solution. These measures are deceptive and harmful, as they create a sense of dependency in the poor nations rather than encourage them towards self-reliance. Many a times, these donations are conditional, dictatorial, discriminatory, and restrictive in nature. The donor countries may have their own vested interests in an impoverished region, which may lead to military and political insurgency and consequently to social unrest and chaos. Conclusively, issues like hunger, poverty and mal nutrition are a direct consequence of human decisions, greed, insecurity, and cruelty. It is thus vital for global policy makers to take into account the myriad causes behind hunger, as well as the problems that result in hunger. There is a need to understand that the problem of hunger and the human right to adequate food includes not only the issue of availability of adequate food, but it is also a matter of fair income distribution, reconsideration of agricultural trade and aid policies, curtailment of inflation and poverty, improvement of the agricultural conditions, reduction of environmental pollution, and a reduction of wastefulness. References International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). (2007). A future with no one living in poverty and hunger: Highlights from an international youth writing contest. Washington: Intl Food Policy Res Inst. Koc, M. , MacRae, R. , Mougeot, L. J. A. , Welsh, J. (Eds. ). (1999). For hunger-proof cities: sustainable urban food systems. Canada: International Development Research Centre.

Emergence of Women in the Great Gatsby :: F. Scott Fitzgerald

The Emergence of women and the decline of male dominance in the 1920’s During the 1920’s, the role women had under men was making a drastic change, and it is shown in The Great Gatsby by two of the main female characters: Daisy and Jordan. One was domesticated and immobile while the other was not. Both of them portray different and important characteristics of the normal woman growing up in the 1920’s. The image of the woman was changing along with morals. Females began to challenge the government and the society. Things like this upset people, especially the men. The men were upset because this showed that they were losing their long-term dominance over the female society. Daisy is in a relationship where she is unhappy. Not only is she unhappy, she is immobile and has no say in just about anything that goes on. Relationships in the 1920’s were just like this scenario. Women were dominated by their husbands and unhappy. They were objects that were to be domesticated and be under the command of â€Å"the man†. It was during this time that woman were starting to take a stand and be in charge. They were done with standing on the sidelines while their husband had reign over their lives. In the beginning of the twenties a change was made. On August 18, 1920 the 19th Amendment was ratified giving women the right to vote. This gave women the chance to have a voice in the government. In 1922 Nellie Tayloe Ross, the nations first female governor, was elected in Wyoming. Giving women the right to vote was the first step to helping them emerge from out of the shadows of a male dominated society. Daisy wanted to drive Gatsby’s car and was cheating on Tom. Jordan was a golf champion. It was usual for the men to be dishonest to their spouses, but not for women. A thing like driving cars was a â€Å"mans thing to do†. Also there were certain sports that women just weren’t supposed to play. Along with the emergence into society, came a new set of morals. Women were beginning to think and act for themselves. They changed the man made stereotypes that they had been brought up to think, into something brand new. â€Å"Never had a drink before, but oh how I do enjoy it†(Gatsby pg.

Assess the usefulness of different sociological approaches to suicide

Durkheim wrote in the 1890s and was one of the first sociologists right at the forefront of establishing and defining sociology as a scientific discipline. Durkheim argued that it was not only possible to apply scientific principles to social phenomena but that it was essential to do so in order to produce useful sociology. His 1897 book suicide: a study in sociology uses his scientific methods to explore suicide. Durkheim chooses suicide deliberately, because as the most individual, private and psychologically driven act it was considered by most not to be a social phenomenon.If sociology could identify social factors and causes of suicide, this would demonstrate the power and impact of society on individual behaviour. So in Durkheim’s view he believes our behaviour is caused by social facts and they are said to be external from the individual, constrain individuals and be greater than the individuals. After Durkheim’s analysis of official statistics on suicide it reve aled some social groups are more likely to commit suicide than others. For Durkheim, the social patterns of suicide he discovered is not a random individual act but as stated by Luke’s social factors play a key role.Durkheim’s work showed a correlation between suicide and social facts like suicide rates were higher in predominantly protestant countries than in catholic ones, Jews were the religious group with the lowest suicide rate, married people were less likely to commit suicide and those with higher education had a higher suicide rate. Durkheim said different forms of suicide related to how much integration and regulation there was in society and this would provide us with a fourfold typology. The term social integration means socialisation into the norms, values and lifestyles of social groups and society.Regulation meaning the control that society and social groups has over an individual’s behaviour. With these two factors Durkheim brings upon egoistic su icide not enough integration. The individual isn’t successfully integrated into groups or society, anomic not enough regulation society has insufficient control over individuals, altruistic too much integration an over integrated individual sacrifices their life for the group and fatalistic too much regulation the individual is too highly controlled by society. Durkheim’s work can also be applied into type of society.As Durkheim states modern societies and traditional society differ from one and other in their levels of integration and regulation. Durkheim discovers that modern industrial societies have lower levels of integration due to lack of freedom this weakens bonds and give rise to egoistic suicide. Whilst, traditional pre-industrial societies have higher levels of integration as the group is more important than the individual and this gives rise to altruistic suicide. Durkheim has been criticised by other positivist sociologist.Halbwachs largely supported Durkh eim’s conclusion but pointed out that the impact of rural versus urban lifestyles on suicide rates hadn’t been considered. Also, Gibbs and Martin argued that Durkheim hadn’t used vigorous enough scientific methods even though he’d stressed how important they were. The key concepts of integration and regulation weren’t defined closely enough to be measured statistically. Gibbs and Martin query how anyone can know how anyone can know what â€Å"normal† levels of integration and regulation are.Interpretivist sociologists have devised alternative theories of suicide they say social reality is not a series of social facts for sociologists to discover, but a series of different meanings and interpretations that each person brings to and takes from each situation. Durkheim’s work is fatally flawed from this perspective because he relies on the unquestioning use of official statistics. According to interpretivists, statistics are not fact the y are a social construction based on the definition of the people who compile them.Douglas takes an Interactionist approach to suicide and he is interested in the meaning that suicide has for the deceased, and the way that coroners label death as suicides. He criticises Durkheim’s study of suicide on two main grounds. One of them being the use of suicide statistics because the decision to classify death as a suicide is taken by a coroner and this may produce bias in verdicts reached. So Douglas feels these are the patterns Durkheim found and that well integrated have friends and relatives who may deny death and this explains their low level of suicide.So Durkheim indicates that suicide verdicts and statistics are based on interactions and negotiations between those involved like friends, doctors and police as they may affect death being labelled as a suicide, rather than it actually being one. That’s why people feel integration plays no dividends. Douglas second point criticises Durkheim for ignoring the meanings of the act for those who kill themselves and for assuming that suicide has a fixed or constant meaning.Douglas backs this up as he notes the cultural differences by Japanese samurai warrior who kill themselves because they have been dishonoured by western society. Douglas also states that we need to categorise suicides according to their social meanings because the triggers and response to suicide are different in different cultures. These social meanings consist of transformation of the soul, transformation of the self, achieving sympathy and achieving revenge.Douglas can be criticised, as he is inconsistent, sometimes suggesting that official statistics are merely the product of coroner’s opinions. At other times, he claims we really can discover the cause of suicide-yet how can we, if we can never know whether a death was a suicide and all we have is coroners opinions? Douglas also produces a classification of suicide based on the supposed meanings for the actors. However, there is no reason to believe that sociologists are any better than coroners at interpreting dead person’s meanings.