So we finally are at the end of this class and I can admit I learned a few things along the way.  A lot of it I had learned in previous classes but a few subjects were new to me.  I had never really thought about how the bicycle or hammer could result in inequalities.  Given the world design is focused on innovation and growth, it will probably never be completely equal.  Some inequalities are intentional, others are not.  For example, Robert Moses’ bridges in New York are a clear case of discrimination (although in class we were able to claim its defense).

We are in a time where technology runs the world.  It is now business as usual.  Inequalities are inevitable but we can try to limit them in the advancements and innovations of technology.  We can do this by putting people first, business/money etc., second.

Crystina Riffel

JUS494

JUS494 Week 13 Blog China

Crystina Riffel

            This week’s discussions included the topic of reform processes in countries such as China and Vietnam.  In the China article, they “summarize knowledge of what is happening in the reform process in general, how the role of some key institutions are changing and what added complexity springs from the current state of provincial municipal relations in the fields of science and technology”.

            In the post-Mao period, there was a major conference, the National Conference on Science and Technology of 1978.  This conference “Marked the beginning of the S&T reform process”.  It attempted to set a broad and ambitious research agenda for basic science and high technology. It attempted to reverse the low status of science.

            The old system provided for no effective mechanisms of accountability; therefore there was a switch to new orientations that required major reforms.  Different reforms began in the 1980s.  Most importantly were S&T reforms that were “a series of measures intended to change to challenge the ways research was funded”. 

            China attempted a new approach to research management.  They encouraged new multichannel approaches to funding due to increasing exposure to foreign government and corporate models for organizing and managing S &T.  In 1985 China also established their own patent system to “place a value on knowledge and to clarify and protect the ownership rights of this commodity”. By the mid 1980s China was seeing efforts to “commercialize technical knowledge through the establishment of new companies”.

            In the early 1990s, China’s S&T system changed dramatically.  The reforms changed policies not only in S&T areas but also the economy, law and social-security arrangements.  In 1993 new initiates in S&T and the economy were developing as China prepared for the “Ninth Five-Year Plan”.

            The reforms in S&T were adjustments to global forces.  China attempted and is attempting to adjust to globalization of industry and technology “while continuing the still incomplete process of reforming its old S&T system”.

This week’s reading was about urban development in Curitiba.  The main idea is about making choices with the pragmatic application of the principle of recycling.  In the case of Curitiba this relates to solid waste, buses (mobile schools), houses (refurbishment) and people (low-income people being employed in the garbage separation plant and environmental education) (Rabinovitch 72).  

            For urban development planning, the author suggests to establish close relationships between the public transportation system, the land use legislation and the hierarchy of the urban road network.  Not all cities are need metro underground systems and light rail systems.  Rather, the planning should be the people living in the development.  For example, total priority should be given to public transport rather than private cars and to pedestrians rather than to motorized vehicles.  Cities have come to be built around highway systems and cars, often neglecting the cities’ natural structure and excluding the public who cannot afford a car or motorized vehicle.  

 The author suggests that cities should turn problems into resources.  In this case, public transportation, solid waste and unemployment can become generators of new resources and employment (73).  Some of these resources could be substitutes for capital intensive technologies, saving money for the city.

Crystina Riffel

JUS494

November 9, 2008

Election Blog

            The 2008 Presidential election was an exciting adventure to say the least. 

After almost two years of campaigning, Obama won the election. Obama took the lead with 364 electoral votes and 53% (65,431,955 votes) of the popular vote, and McCain with 163 electoral votes and 46% (57,434,084 votes) of the popular vote.  The night was historical, with America electing the first African American as president.  This election was the most important election of our times.  With a troubled economy, Americans were looking for a change, and kept hope that Obama would be the one to do that for them.  Obama’s campaign went from a campaign to a movement.

This election was the largest turnout percentage since 1964.  One hundred twenty three million voted, 73 million voted for Obama.  More people voted for Obama than any other President in the United States.  This election had the second highest youth turnout since 1972 (ratification of the 26^th Amendment) **.

The McCain campaign assumed the campaign was about Obama.  The reality is that it was about the people.  They assumed only Black people would vote for Obama.  This was a huge miscalculation of the capacity of the American people.  More white people in real number voted for Obama than anybody else in the United States ever.  It’s quite compelling that Indiana, the birthplace of the Ku Klux Klan, and Virginia, the capital of the Confederate, voted for Obama **.

This election was quite moving.  When Obama gave his acceptance speech, cameras panned to faces in the crowd, showing the excitement and joy they felt.  The most moving were the tears running down the faces of African Americans.  To them, this was an even more historic.  From slavery to President of the United States, African Americans have come a long way.  People try to shy away from the race issue but the fact is that having elected the first African American into Presidency is an unprecedented event.  It seems Americans, too,  have come a long way. 

*Map from cbsnew.com

**Other sources from Professor Quan, ASU, November 6, 2008.

Crystina Riffel

JUS494

November 9, 2008

Election Blog

            The 2008 Presidential election was an exciting adventure to say the least. 

Crystina Riffel

JUS494

November 9, 2008

Election Blog

            The 2008 Presidential election was an exciting adventure to say the least. 

After almost two years of campaigning, Obama won the election. Obama took the lead with 364 electoral votes and 53% (65,431,955 votes) of the popular vote, and McCain with 163 electoral votes and 46% (57,434,084 votes) of the popular vote.  The night was historical, with America electing the first African American as president.  This election was the most important election of our times.  With a troubled economy, Americans were looking for a change, and kept hope that Obama would be the one to do that for them.  Obama’s campaign went from a campaign to a movement.

This election was the largest turnout percentage since 1964.  One hundred twenty three million voted, 73 million voted for Obama.  More people voted for Obama than any other President in the United States.  This election had the second highest youth turnout since 1972 (ratification of the 26^th Amendment) **.

The McCain campaign assumed the campaign was about Obama.  The reality is that it was about the people.  They assumed only Black people would vote for Obama.  This was a huge miscalculation of the capacity of the American people.  More white people in real number voted for Obama than anybody else in the United States ever.  It’s quite compelling that Indiana, the birthplace of the Ku Klux Klan, and Virginia, the capital of the Confederate, voted for Obama **.

This election was quite moving.  When Obama gave his acceptance speech, cameras panned to faces in the crowd, showing the excitement and joy they felt.  The most moving were the tears running down the faces of African Americans.  To them, this was an even more historic.  From slavery to President of the United States, African Americans have come a long way.  People try to shy away from the race issue but the fact is that having elected the first African American into Presidency is an unprecedented event.  It seems Americans, too,  have come a long way. 

*Map from cbsnew.com

**Other sources from Professor Quan, ASU, November 6, 2008.

After almost two years of campaigning, Obama won the election. Obama took the lead with 364 electoral votes and 53% (65,431,955 votes) of the popular vote, and McCain with 163 electoral votes and 46% (57,434,084 votes) of the popular vote.  The night was historical, with America electing the first African American as president.  This election was the most important election of our times.  With a troubled economy, Americans were looking for a change, and kept hope that Obama would be the one to do that for them.  Obama’s campaign went from a campaign to a movement.

This election was the largest turnout percentage since 1964.  One hundred twenty three million voted, 73 million voted for Obama.  More people voted for Obama than any other President in the United States.  This election had the second highest youth turnout since 1972 (ratification of the 26^th Amendment) **.

The McCain campaign assumed the campaign was about Obama.  The reality is that it was about the people.  They assumed only Black people would vote for Obama.  This was a huge miscalculation of the capacity of the American people.  More white people in real number voted for Obama than anybody else in the United States ever.  It’s quite compelling that Indiana, the birthplace of the Ku Klux Klan, and Virginia, the capital of the Confederate, voted for Obama **.

This election was quite moving.  When Obama gave his acceptance speech, cameras panned to faces in the crowd, showing the excitement and joy they felt.  The most moving were the tears running down the faces of African Americans.  To them, this was an even more historic.  From slavery to President of the United States, African Americans have come a long way.  People try to shy away from the race issue but the fact is that having elected the first African American into Presidency is an unprecedented event.  It seems Americans, too,  have come a long way. 

*Map from cbsnews.com

**Other sources from Professor Quan, ASU, November 6, 2008.

Crystina Riffel

JUS494

November 9, 2008

This past Thursday in class we discussed the inequalities of technology in regards to students and education in the classroom.  We explored the four generations and how they are different from each other.  The “Silent Generation”, from about 1925 to 1942, having characteristics described as grave, fatalistic, expecting disappointment. The “Baby Boomer Generation”, 1943-1960, was in the era of the civil rights movement, feminism and had visions of lifelong prosperity.  “Generation X”, 1961-1981, was described as being economically conservative.  Lastly, “Generation Y”, 1982-2001, is generally more liberal, hyper-structured, overscheduled and technology plays a big role in their lives (computer age). 

Today, student’s lives are deeply embedded into technology.  Computers, iPods, cell phones, internet, videos, etc. are used everyday.  It would be hard to get away from any of these technologies.  Today, technology is embedded in our education system.  We rely on computers, the internet, overhead projectors, microphones, etc. for everyday class room experiences.  And it is expected that students have or have access to these technologies.  On one hand these could be regarded as positive, but we need to look at the consequences as well. 

Reliance on technologies creates dependence.  Today we have moved away from traditional ways of teaching.  Where there were chalkboards there are now computers with Power Point.  Online resources are preferable to going to the library.  Technology has made it easier for us to obtain knowledge faster and at greater ease.  But technology has also made social contact a distant memory.  Nowadays, people are more distant, cold and less socially engaged in part due to the use of newer technologies.

Crystina Riffel

November 2, 2008

JUS494 blog

This weeks’ topic was about inequality in regards to research agendas in Latin America.  Innovative, developed countries have taken advantage of underdeveloped countries.  They set up their heavy polluting industries in poor countries without regard to the people’s and environment’s health.

  Sutz states that technology should be viewed as a tool to fight inequality, but the roots of inequality seem to be too strongly established to challenge by technology (55).   He suggests that research agendas are biased.  Some research objectives may be presented in a way that differs from what is really intended to fit the agencies’ priorities.  They present agendas in a “more favorable light in terms of social relevance” (Sutz 57).  

 Sutz states that in countries that are undeveloped lack technical solutions due to structural weaknesses in the region’s national systems of innovation (63).  They lack knowledge, research, allies, policies and funds.  These types of countries need policies to “assist the integration of research, innovation, production and diffusion” in order to create more equality (65).  “Equality-oriented knowledge is only important insofar as it creates opportunities for innovation” (Sutz 65).

     The reading and class discussions for this week looked at how war, not peace, has been the universal default mode.  The author looks at history to make the claim that we need to “rediscover peace, not war, as humanity’s central concern” (Gittings). 

            Gittings analyzed the history of the globalization of nuclear proliferation.  Most countries have used the excuse that the future is uncertain so we must be prepared with nuclear weapons.  They state that it would not be wise to predict the unpredictable in the times to come.  The current global state mentality is the assumption that the future is too uncertain to be safely predicted, or at least set an extremely high threshold for the abandonment of such an assumption (Gittings 392).

Countries have also used their nuclear programs as a source of national pride such as China and France.  Gittings states that the United States sees their nuclear program as indispensible and a part of their claim to possess (391). 

There have been proposals of disarmament throughout the years in fear of a “nuclear tipping point”.  People have called for total elimination of nuclear weapons and believed this was possible through a gradual and phased movement forward without artificially leaping ahead (Gittings 392).  US ambassador Christina Rocca said to the 2006 UN Conference of Disarmament that the objective of all states should be to create an international situation in which it is no longer necessary for anyone to rely upon nuclear weapons for security (393).  In reality, an international environment of disarmament is only possible only if human behavior will change.  This requires a new global ethic where we prepare for peace not war.

Crystina Riffel

JUS494

October 12, 2008

Topic Proposal

Despite medical advances and increasing life expectancy, there is evidence of rising disparities in health status among people worldwide.  For my final research paper, I am proposing to research the issue of how drug technologies, specifically drug patents (intellectual property laws), create inequality between third world and industrialized countries.  The paper will attempt to understand how drug patents from pharmaceutical companies create severe inequality.

I.                   history/creation of patent laws

a.        patents and monopolies

II.                implementation of international patent laws

a.        who it affects

b.        human rights treaties

III.             Costs and benefits of drug technologies

a.        third world vs. industrialized countries

b.        how it affects lives

IV.       Conclusion—how drug technologies/drug patents have contributed to societal inequalities between third world and industrialized countries.

Possible sources:

 Amy Kapczynski “Strict International Patent Laws Hurt Developing Countries”.. YaleGlobal, 16 December 2002. Yale Global Online.

Trouiller et. al, “Drug Development for Neglected Diseases: a Deficient Market and a Public Health Policy Failure,” The Lancet, vol. 359, pp. 2188-94.

Philippe Cullet. “Patents Bill, TRIPs and Right to Health”. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 36, No. 43 (Oct. 27 – Nov. 2, 2001), pp. 4049-4051 Published by: Economic and Political Weekly. JSTOR

 

Helene Cooper, Rachel Zimmerman and Laurie McGinley. “AIDS Epidemic Puts Drug Firms In a Vise: Treatment vs. Profits”. Wall Street Journal, Mar. 2, 2001

Kumariah Balasubramaniam. “Pharmaceutical Patents in Developing Countries: Policy Options”. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 22, No. 19/21, Annual Number (May, 1987), pp. AN103-AN107+AN109-AN120 .Published by: Economic and Political Weekly. JSTOR

“Drug Patents and Public Health”. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 36, No. 10 (Mar. 10-16, 2001), pp. 795-796 Published by: Economic and Political Weekly. JSTOR

Crystina Riffel

Jus494

Week 6 reflection

This week’s discussion involved distributive justice in science and technology policy.  In one of the readings, it examines viewpoints of four traditions in political philosophy: libertarian, utilitarian, contractarian and communitarian.

Libertarian thought/principles place primary value on the equal protection of property rights (Cozzens 86).  Three principles make up the libertarian system: acquisition, transfer and rectification.  Cozzens states that government functions should be limited to those that protect rights in holdings and that collecting taxes to pay for any other function is an unjust violation of rights and liberties (86-87).  Principles of acquisition and transfer are related to a debate on intellectual property in connection to justice between rich and poor countries.  For example, drug companies from outside a country claim ownership rights to medical principles derive from plants they obtained in that country (Cozzens 87).  Cozzens states that Nozick concludes that the claim of ownership does not violate Locke’s proviso because nobody would have derived benefit from the plant without the discovery (87).  “A purely libertarian science and technology policy would eliminate government funding and avoid policies that create better business conditions for some technologies over others, but embrace policies that protect ownership of innovations so that market exchange can determine what technologies are developed and used, including the current extension of intellectual property rules on a global basis under the World Trade Organization” (Cozzens 87).

In the utilitarian view, a set of social arrangements is fair as long as it increases total well-being and it provides a rationale for government support of research and development (Cozzens 87).   Utilitarian principles of justice are not inherently distributive: well-being could increase for everyone, or large gains in well-being for some could outweigh losses by others (Cozzens 88).  There is no explicit mechanism or criterion built into most S&T programs to make sure that both advantaged and disadvantaged share in the benefits.  Cozzens states that drug companies are most likely to develop products that will earn big profits through sales in affluent countries with good health coverage.  Basically, in the absence of deliberate distributional action, science-based advances that in principle could produce broad benefits will in practice only have the impacts the market allows (Cozzens 89).  Cozzens also adds that analysts say that the idea of S&T policies create wealth and other policies distribute them.

Contractarian distribution thought lies on the principles of John Rawls.  Under contract theory, a fair system of distribution is one that rational individuals would freely agree to after deliberation (Cozzens 89).  Other principles of Rawls are also included such as “veil of ignorance” and “justice as fairness”.

Finally, communitarians believe that action is moral when it strengthens community life.  To maintain this community, it is essential to respect human rights and to accept social responsibilities (Cozzens 91).  Cozzens adds that each society must find its own path and strike its own balance between liberty and order, developing its own moral code based on the concepts of a healthy society that its members evolve and enact (91).  Communitarians also caution against the growing polarization of wealth.