In our ever changing world of globalized economies and massive corporations, the biodiversity we are able to experience is getting greatly diminished compared to how it was 100 years ago, which is tragic for our ecosystem as a whole. In my eyes, biodiversity is the total variety that occurs in natural life, the minuscule differences between species that differentiate them from their closest relatives. I think the fascinating part of biodiversity is that it can be applied in the macro, where one can look at all the different species of dog, or as micro as the species of algae in a tiny pond, which allows us to look at the complete landscape of life and compare them. With this massively wide breadth of living creatures out there, it is easy to see how threats to cultural diversity can affect biodiversity, and I can see a clear connection between the two. Any kind of globalization can change the culture within a certain area, which can mean changing the ecosystem of an area for development or a changing climate or landscape, which can facilitate a huge change in the biodiversity of an area. On the other end of this question, I do believe that governments should be involved through protective legislature to safeguard cultural landmarks within communities, so in 100 years we do not become a bulldozed society of total commercialism, stripped of our character.
With the fragility of our remaining natural ecosystems, the mass scale developing being done across the United States will have a huge effect on biodiversity. We already have undertaken most of the major development in highly populated areas, but the difference between 300 years ago and now where we have transitioned into a nation of concrete parking lots and massive malls. This has made us sacrifice biodiversity, but I believe it has allowed us to keep our cultural diversity as a whole of the country, but that is due to the unique size and culture background that we have in the United States. We are lucky to be a country built on starkly different cultures, all arriving through different means, which all have meshed together through a long period of time to give us a rich and diverse cultural base that we draw from as a big society. This is very different than what I can see Bhutan going through to keep their precious culture, while trying to allow the tentacles of globalization get a hold of them, but not by too much so they do not lose all of their culture. Bhutan is a country that takes great pride in the culture they have developed, mostly by staying very closed off from the outside world, which has kept them steeping in their own culture for a long time. Bhutan’s biodiversity is rich due to the massive mountain ranges that occupy the midlands of Bhutan, which give great housing to all of the forest creatures looking to thrive in an area that is mostly untouched by development. Due to the minimal development done to grow output of exports, the biodiversity has been able to be kept rather static over time, which has allowed for greater development of their ecosystem outside of the small towns that have undertaken some globalization. In Bhutan only some of the bigger cities have experienced any kind of widespread globalization, with televisions and cellphones only beginning to surface within the last 10 years. This means that they have been able to keep their culture almost in a glass case, unfazed by the ever advancing global world outside of the sovereign state. Bhutan’s government have also undertaken the task of trying to secure Bhutan’s rich and homegrown culture via programs that keep production in Bhutan as to make sure they are not having to import a massive amount of goods from different countries. The way Bhutan has been able to stay entrenched in their culture, while all the way being on the other side of the looking glass, seeing the rest of the world rapidly advancing through rampant globalization, is noble and frankly amazing. Globalization in some manifestation is inevitable within our ever advancing world, and it is up to us to find the balance between too much development and too little biodiversity in our ecosystem, which is a hard line to walk when there are so many hands in the pot of today’s economy. In countries like America, we expect there to be a healthy balance between keeping our rich biodiversity alive through national forests and parks, which all allow our ecosystem to stay untouched and stay working to serve our animals. In countries like Bhutan, it is easy to keep globalization from taking a foothold on their ecosystem, since the level of output from their country is minimal, which means the need for globalized development in in turn minimal. This lack of a need for development allows a country with an already rich ecosystem to keep letting it thrive without having to interfere with nature’s ways. Of course on the other hand of this coin with more globalization coming to Bhutan in the form of industry would be good in terms of advancing them economically truly into the 21st century, allowing them to experience some great growth and development within their economy and stature at the global table. The issue with this is that in a country so entrenched in it’s well developed culture, that any type of wide spread globalization would be met at every route with challenges from the locals who are adamant in keeping Bhutan’s rich culture the same as it always has been within their walls. I think overall Bhutan has seen minimal change when it comes to their biodiversity in relation to globalization, because they have minimal overall globalization when compared to most other far Eastern countries. A country like Bhutan easily can resist the sweeping changes seen in ecosystems when globalization is in full swing within countries because they do not have a need for true sweeping globalization within their culture, which allows them to keep their culture untouched, just like they want it.
1 Comment
Hey y'all, I just posted my report on education in Bhutan on my Politics/Economics page, feel free to check it out and leave some comments here! Cheers!
Bhutan is a fascinating case in globalization, due to the countries vehement resistance to any true kind of globalization. Bhutan is a small shut in country that is very deeply rooted in their culture, as one of the only small countries that has never been invaded or taken over, thus being able to keep their unique culture intact for so long. Bhutan's resistance to globalization is easy to understand, they do not want things like smartphones, Twitter, mainstream 24 hour news syndications, and a reduced local output and input of goods and services. In a nutshell, globalization is the process that takes goods, ideas and cultural aspects and disseminates them throughout the rest of the world. This spreading of things across the globe initiates greater interactions between different cultures and countries which can cause the wanted or unwanted integration of things into other cultures and their cultural zeitgeist. This is a theory that Bhutan is rather steadfast against, but there are several examples of globalization within Bhutan.
The first example is the production of potatoes within Bhutan. Potatoes take up a whopping 90% of Bhutan's agriculture exports, with agriculture in turn taking up a large share of Bhutan's production at 57%. These potatoes are being almost solely exported, thus bringing a piece of needed and in demand agriculture to the global market. This globalization exports Bhutanese products into the global market, bringing in the global money that allows for growth and expansions within a country. The second phase of globalization within Bhutan is the exports of hydropower to their neighbor India. Hydropower makes up the rest of the agriculture's exports from Bhutan, and almost exclusively goes to India in one of a number of trade developments with the two countries. This brings more Indian business in and with more business comes more infused culture, and it also brings Bhutan to the tip of the tongue when one considers hydropower in the Far East. The third example of globalization is the prevalence of cellphones and television sets within Bhutan. Ten or so odd years ago only the very very rich had cellphones in Bhutan, and even then they were barely covered service-wise, and televisions cost an arm and a leg to operate and pay for, so they were almost non-existent. Nowadays, most of the middle and upper middle class kids growing up have cellphones, and televisions are rather prevalent, especially in public places like restaurants. This has brought in a large piece of global monoculture that Bhutan has tried to avoid for a long time to keep their rich culture intact. With the prevalence of cellphones in Bhutan, there comes a larger stream of modern popular culture touchstones of our 21st century, which in turn invades the youth's minds and cultures, which many old-school Bhutanese people are strongly against. I can totally understand the fervor behind not wanting globalization to change Bhutan and their culture, because they are one of the only countries that have stayed whole and untouched by anything and anyone since their inception. Their whole existences are rooted in the culture that they have cultivated for hundreds of years without being disturbed by the global monoculture that has wedged into every truly globalized country. I think it would be naïve on the other hand, to totally reject globalization and anything it entails, because that would be equivalent to cutting off your nose to spite your face. Eventually growth within Bhutan will stall out without globalization and what that facilitates, but there will be obvious drawback that will chip away at the hallowed Bhutanese culture. I think this is a very touchy situation, but I think there is no true way to fully advance Bhutan into the 21st century and beyond without truly taking the globalized hand and taking a seat at the table to make an impact in the marketplace and advance your own interests, even if it comes at a small cost of a bit of culture. Topping, A. (2014, August 26). Bhutan battles to preserve its culture as development accelerates | Alexandra Topping. Retrieved October 26, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/aug/26/bhutan-preserves-culture-development-accelerates 2004, B. A. (2004, January 26). Globalization in Bhutan. Retrieved October 26, 2016, from http://www.globalenvision.org/library/8/578 Wangdi, K. (2012, May). Bhutan. Retrieved October 26, 2016, from http://www.fao.org/ag/AGp/agpc/doc/Counprof/Bhutan/Bhutan.htm#5. THE PASTURE In starting my reading regarding societal roles of men and women within Bhutanese culture, I expected an old and antiquated tradition of men being the dominant majority in the workforce, like most eastern countries have and have sustained for hundreds of years. I was surprisingly happy to see what the real breakdown of the workforce in Bhutan, with the percentage tallying in as almost 50/50 men to women. This off the bat was rather fascinating because in my reading I keep reading about Bhutan being a country that has resisted and avoided a massive amount of societal change throughout the last few hundreds of years. Bhutan is frequently referred to as a country that is secluded and avoids any western or eastern influences on their country, due to their massive pride in their culture and upbringings. Thinking through regular logic when I hear that a country is assumed to be a less socially developed society that they have more archaic gender roles within the workforce, and I thought they would have a large disparity within their workforce. This proved me wrong clearly, and it set the tone for my research on societal roles within Bhutan.
Looking at the article from everyculture.com that I cited, 93% of Bhutanese laborers work within the agriculture sector, which makes sense due to the dense mountains and foliage that takes up a large amount of Bhutan. This is surprising though since the workforce is split 50/50, in America we see a very miniscule amount of laborers who are female, with the overwhelming majority being males, but Bhutan is clearly a more progressive country when it comes to workforce equality than America. This may have to do with the massive emphasis on the familial matriarchy within the Bhutanese culture. Bhutan’s overwhelming familial hierarchy starts with the mother right at the top, she is the owner of the home, and purveyor of all that happens within it and what comes in to support it. With the high rate of female’s working within the regular workforce, this can only underline the emphasis on the importance of females in the familial system, with a large amount of the workforce supporting and taking care of their families through general labor in Bhutan. This is a great cross section between Bhutan and us as a country here in the U.S. where we still even in the 21st century put a decent emphasis on old gender roles within the general labor workforce, even with the disparity of the major labor here in the U.S. and the small comparative amount in Bhutan. Something else that really stuck out like a sore thumb when I was researching gender roles within Bhutan was the major emphasis upon land ownership in Bhutanese families. A good 60% of women in Bhutan are land owners, which is a huge disparity from the U.S. With the emphasis on matriarchy within Bhutan, this split makes sense, because the women are the major bread winners within the family, so the land most probably would be acquired by them due to the majority of the capital coming in. Bhutan is a culturally secluded country, which puts a footnote on keeping a bloodline going through families, so the disparity through land ownership is understandable, with the house being the stable place for a mother to raise children to keep the lineage going. The assumption that the woman will be the main bread winner is directly converse to what we have had in America throughout our history, which luckily is changing progressively, to bring more equality to our workforce and our communities, but I would definitely say we could take a page out of the Bhutanese playbook in this. The only drawback to this being the societal norm in Bhutan is their lack of secondary education for women in their culture, with the emphasis going on having a family and subsequently being able to truly provide for them it takes away that opportunity for advanced education and continued literacy within the Bhutanese culture. Within my research about Bhutanese societal roles, I was very surprised with what I found overall. The sheer fact that the workforce is evenly distributed between genders is fascinating, especially growing up and living in what we would think as a “progressive” western culture. I was brought up having the thoughts of the men having to be the bread winners and the heads of the family ingrained into me, which I swiftly found was incredibly untrue, especially in 21st century America. The fact that they have a culture where that gender role is totally flipped upside down is amazing, because the overarching thoughts of Bhutan is they are an enclosed society away from influences of the 21st century, when they truly are one of the most forward thinking and progressive cultures out there. While there still is a need for the males to be parts of the work force, the clear emphasis on a total matriarchy within the familial culture takes them into another category compared to the other eastern countries. Looking comparatively between the U.S. and Bhutan, we are clearly the tortoise and Bhutan is the hare within gender equality within the workforce and the economy, with American women still majorly discriminated within the workplace, and with the gender pay gap in our country. Bhutan is a country that is incredibly proud of their culture, and they are historically more concerned with their GNH rating, gross national happiness, than their economical GDP, or their foreign relations. This shines through with their culture, and their progression into the 21st century when it comes to gender disparities, where the majority of eastern cultures are still a good heap of years behind, and we as the U.S. are clearly slacking on addressing. The culture of Bhutan is truly a fascinating one, and the societal roles of males and females is the true pillar of that protected culture. References: People of Bhutan. (n.d.). Retrieved September 26, 2016, from http://www.earth-cultures.com/cultures/people-of-bhutan Aguilar, G. (2013, December 4). Education and Economic Empowerment of Women in Bhutan Could Address the Gender Gap in Happiness. Retrieved September 26, 2016, from http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2013/12/04/education-economic-empowerment-women-bhutan-gender-gap-happiness Bhutan. (n.d.). Retrieved September 26, 2016, from http://www.everyculture.com/A-Bo/Bhutan.html Hey all, this is where my blog will be, please feel free to share your comments and suggestions, I'd really appreciate it! Cheers!
-Andy |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2016
Categories |