The syllabus says
The effects of transnational manufacturing and services
- Discuss the reasons for and consequences of the relocation of polluting industries (such as some TNCs) and waste disposal (such as ICT, chemical and nuclear waste) to countries with weaker environmental controls and safety regulations.
Where is the pollution?
Source of PDF and graphic: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/31/world-carbon-dioxide-emissions-country-data-co2#img-1
|
The graphic below can be seen in more detail in the PDF document (left).
This page uses CO2 emissions as an example of pollution. It's clear to see that in domestic production terms, Asia, and specifically China, is the world's biggest area of pollution. |
What are the main issues?
There are three main questions that can be discussed around the issues of transnational manufacturing and the pollution that results.
- Outsourcing - the basic fact of the outsourcing of the polluting industries is that HICs are transferring their companies abroad. The reasons for this are outlined below.
- Accounting for emissions - when the total amount of pollution is accounted for, it varies depending on whether 'domestic' or 'total' emissions are included. Domestic emissions are those that are produced directly within the territory of a country. Under this measure, China is by far the world's largest polluter in terms of CO2 emissions. Total emissions include the end-user emissions. This means that the emissions from a mobile phone produced in China will count towards the emissions of the country where it is eventually used - for example, the US or France. In this case, the total emissions of HICs are not declining as rapidly as they might seem.
- Absolute values versus per capita values - though China and India are among the world's largest polluters, they have large populations. Their per capita emissions remain much lower than many HICs.
Why do TNCs move their manufacturing industries?
Manufacturing industries and waste disposal industries are generally moving from high income to low and middle income industries. This is for several reasons.
Benefits of LIC/MICs:
Drawbacks of HICs:
There is a debate over whether TNCs (Trans-National Corporations) deliberately move polluting industries overseas. A 1970s report by a US environmental consultant found that many companies had moved from the US to Mexico to produce dangerous materials such as asbestos and arsenic. However, in the 1980s a contradictory report found that although environmental concerns would be one part of a relocation study, “they were never strong enough to outweigh all the traditional forces that determine investment and location decisions” including raw materials, energy supplies, labour, transport, political considerations, climate and the local market. In the 1990s a mixed picture emerged, suggesting that any economic benefits of environmental degradation were short-lived due to growing awareness in the destination countries.
The concept of a Manufacturing industries and waste disposal industries are generally moving from high income to low and middle income industries. This is for several reasons.
Benefits of LIC/MICs:
Drawbacks of HICs:
There is a debate over whether TNCs (Trans-National Corporations) deliberately move polluting industries overseas. A 1970s report by a US environmental consultant found that many companies had moved from the US to Mexico to produce dangerous materials such as asbestos and arsenic. However, in the 1980s a contradictory report found that although environmental concerns would be one part of a relocation study, “they were never strong enough to outweigh all the traditional forces that determine investment and location decisions” including raw materials, energy supplies, labour, transport, political considerations, climate and the local market. In the 1990s a mixed picture emerged, suggesting that any economic benefits of environmental degradation were short-lived due to growing awareness in the destination countries.
The concept of a pollution haven is that in a globalised environment, manufacturers are able to move to the places with the lowest environmental controls and thereby make greater profits. However, in practice there are no such specific areas. This is because companies are afraid of litigation and a negative public image, as well as being genuinely concerned about the environment. In any case, as the destination develops in terms of GDP it is likely those environmental concerns will grow and controls will be placed on manufacturers. Therefore, the level of pollution may be low, then increase with industrialisation, and then decrease again.
What is more likely is that there are pollution zones. These may not be “based on national environmental standards…but instead be areas of poorer people, where firms perform worse and where regulations are less effective” (Zarsky 1999, in Planet Geography 6th ed.).
The concept of a pollution haven is that in a globalised environment, manufacturers are able to move to the places with the lowest environmental controls and thereby make greater profits. However, in practice there are no such specific areas. This is because companies are afraid of litigation and a negative public image, as well as being genuinely concerned about the environment. In any case, as the destination develops in terms of GDP it is likely those environmental concerns will grow and controls will be placed on manufacturers. Therefore, the level of pollution may be low, then increase with industrialisation, and then decrease again.
What is more likely is that there are pollution zones. These may not be “based on national environmental standards…but instead be areas of poorer people, where firms perform worse and where regulations are less effective” (Zarsky 1999, in Planet Geography 6th ed.).
Benefits of LIC/MICs:
- Manufacturing gives the opportunity for a low/middle income country to develop its economy
- FDI is welcomed by LICs and MICs with low taxes, cheap land, and government-paid improvements to infrastructure
- There may be low levels of environmental regulations in lower income countries
Drawbacks of HICs:
- It is harder to find workers willing to engage in dangerous occupations in higher income countries
- The higher income of workers in HICs may cancel out any benefits of tax incentives and good infrastructure
- Increasingly high awareness of environmental issues has led to massively increased environmental regulation in HICs
There is a debate over whether TNCs (Trans-National Corporations) deliberately move polluting industries overseas. A 1970s report by a US environmental consultant found that many companies had moved from the US to Mexico to produce dangerous materials such as asbestos and arsenic. However, in the 1980s a contradictory report found that although environmental concerns would be one part of a relocation study, “they were never strong enough to outweigh all the traditional forces that determine investment and location decisions” including raw materials, energy supplies, labour, transport, political considerations, climate and the local market. In the 1990s a mixed picture emerged, suggesting that any economic benefits of environmental degradation were short-lived due to growing awareness in the destination countries.
The concept of a Manufacturing industries and waste disposal industries are generally moving from high income to low and middle income industries. This is for several reasons.
Benefits of LIC/MICs:
- Manufacturing gives the opportunity for a low/middle income country to develop its economy
- FDI is welcomed by LICs and MICs with low taxes, cheap land, and government-paid improvements to infrastructure
- There may be low levels of environmental regulations in lower income countries
Drawbacks of HICs:
- It is harder to find workers willing to engage in dangerous occupations in higher income countries
- The higher income of workers in HICs may cancel out any benefits of tax incentives and good infrastructure
- Increasingly high awareness of environmental issues has led to massively increased environmental regulation in HICs
There is a debate over whether TNCs (Trans-National Corporations) deliberately move polluting industries overseas. A 1970s report by a US environmental consultant found that many companies had moved from the US to Mexico to produce dangerous materials such as asbestos and arsenic. However, in the 1980s a contradictory report found that although environmental concerns would be one part of a relocation study, “they were never strong enough to outweigh all the traditional forces that determine investment and location decisions” including raw materials, energy supplies, labour, transport, political considerations, climate and the local market. In the 1990s a mixed picture emerged, suggesting that any economic benefits of environmental degradation were short-lived due to growing awareness in the destination countries.
The concept of a pollution haven is that in a globalised environment, manufacturers are able to move to the places with the lowest environmental controls and thereby make greater profits. However, in practice there are no such specific areas. This is because companies are afraid of litigation and a negative public image, as well as being genuinely concerned about the environment. In any case, as the destination develops in terms of GDP it is likely those environmental concerns will grow and controls will be placed on manufacturers. Therefore, the level of pollution may be low, then increase with industrialisation, and then decrease again.
What is more likely is that there are pollution zones. These may not be “based on national environmental standards…but instead be areas of poorer people, where firms perform worse and where regulations are less effective” (Zarsky 1999, in Planet Geography 6th ed.).
The concept of a pollution haven is that in a globalised environment, manufacturers are able to move to the places with the lowest environmental controls and thereby make greater profits. However, in practice there are no such specific areas. This is because companies are afraid of litigation and a negative public image, as well as being genuinely concerned about the environment. In any case, as the destination develops in terms of GDP it is likely those environmental concerns will grow and controls will be placed on manufacturers. Therefore, the level of pollution may be low, then increase with industrialisation, and then decrease again.
What is more likely is that there are pollution zones. These may not be “based on national environmental standards…but instead be areas of poorer people, where firms perform worse and where regulations are less effective” (Zarsky 1999, in Planet Geography 6th ed.).
The impact of pollution: China
The two videos below describe the impacts of polluting industries. They include distressing film of bereaved families talking about the pollution that caused the cancers that killed their loved ones. Because of the high cost of medical bills, families sink into poverty and struggle through the remainder of their lives.
Looking to the future: China exports its polluting industries
One of the consequences of the rapid industrialisation in China has been the huge pollution seen in the videos above. The Chinese government is now considering how to reduce these impacts. One way is to export the pollution even further afield. IN November 2014, the State Council announced that they would cap coal consumption at 4.2billion tons per year by 2021, but to do this they would send factories to other Asian countries, Africa and South and Central America.