According to Chandra (2007), there are both pro and con of
globalization. The con lied in the fact that it indirectly accelerated the disintegration
of our environment via driving intake of resources due to increased
transactions of goods and services. Increased usage of raw materials like oil
and minerals for production and razing of natural habitats for growing crops
caused pollution and global warming. They in turn resulted in more floods and
acid rain occurring around the world. However, the pro of globalization brought
about a small interrelated world and the increase in availability of
information to the masses thus there was more recognition about the need to resolve
the global environmental problems. This could lead to more collaboration between
nations to tackle these problems like in the case of the Montreal Protocol and
translate into political disposition of the governments to vest more authority
in the United Nations to resolve cross-borders environmental issues.
Hi Jun Kang,
ReplyDeleteI liked all the points you included in your summary and how concise it is!
However, I think that some of the tenses you used should be changed from past to present because globalisation still affects the world today. :)
For example, instead of "The con lied in the fact that it indirectly accelerated the disintegration of our environment via driving intake of resources due to increased transactions of goods and services.", I think it should be: The con lies in the fact that globalisation accelerates the disintegration of our environment via driving intake of resources due to an increase in transactions of goods and services.
Also, I think "However, the pro of globalization brought about a small interrelated world and the increase in availability of information to the masses thus there was more recognition about the need to resolve the global environmental problems." should be: However, the pro of globalisation is that it has brought about a smaller, interrelated world, and the increase in availability of information to the masses means that there is more recognition...
Hi Jun Kang,
ReplyDeleteGood summary. Managed to capture the main points and I could easily understand the main gist of it. Good use of vocab too. Keep it up.
Yes adding on to Anne, spotted a tenses error:
1) The con
1) "The con lie" >> "the con lies"
DeleteHi Jun Kang,
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Jared that your usage of vocabulary is good. Your summary is concise and pretty much error free. There is just one point that I am not too sure if it is correct.
1) According to Chandra (2007), there are both pro and con of globalization.
>>> I think it should be pros and cons instead.