by Stu Lucy
Immigration is a complex concept., Sophisticated issues such as this are often reduced to simplistic and narrow trails of thought that exclude some of the intricacies vital in understanding the true scope of the issue. In my previous article, I attempted a brief, but lengthy, outline of aspects of economic history that I believe laid a foundation for the increase in migrants choosing to leave their home behind in search of a life they perceive could potentially produce prosperity. Intrinsically entwined into this history is a mechanism of production that, since the ‘great acceleration’, significantly contributes to environmental changes within our global habitat.
It is through this lens that I wish to proceed with this second piece on immigration, as I touch on a demographic within migrant populations forced from their homes by climate change.Continue Reading
by Yali Banton Heath
On December 4th Trump signed proclamations to shrink two U.S. national monuments in Utah. Bears Ears National Monument is to be squeezed from 1.5m to 228,784 acres, and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument from 2m to 1,006,341 acres. Unremarkably, this decision has sparked a backlash from various groups. It is a textbook debate on who possesses the rights to the land, and is one of many such disputes in which the environment itself is all too often overlooked.
National monuments in the U.S. are granted their status by the President under the 1906 Antiquities Act, drafted to protect sites of natural, cultural or scientific interest. In his statement, Trump argued that previous administrations have used this law to “lock up hundreds of millions of acres of land and water under strict government control” and that “public lands will once again be for public use”. Continue Reading
by Dorothee Häussermann
Last August, more than 1000 people rushed into one of Germany’s biggest open-cast lignite mines and stopped mining operations for a day. This action of civil disobedience went under the slogan ‘Ende Gelände — stop the diggers — protect the climate’; ‘Ende Gelände’ translates as ‘here and no further’. The campaign called for an immediate coal phase-out, emphasizing the urgency for DIY solutions to the climate crisis in the face of governmental inaction.
What is the problem? Isn’t Germany the paragon of energy transition? Aren’t ecologists and economists alike inspired by progressive policies such as the feed-in tariff that supported the rapid expansion of renewable energy sources? Even Naomi Klein’s film This Changes Everything depicts the German ‘Energiewende’ as a way to go forward. So what are these activists complaining about?Continue Reading
by John Heathcliff
As each day passes, it becomes clearer and clearer that UEA’s relationship with sustainability is one of convenience rather than conviction. Revelations about over £10 million of losses from the failed biomass project on the campus and the recently mothballed ‘Generation Park’ in Norwich have demonstrated the fundamental ineptitude at the heart of decision making at the University. Grand, white elephant projects intended to bring significant reputational benefit to the institution as well as new revenues have become undeniable disasters. National media have run the story, highlighting the amount of public and student money spent on failed projects that could have instead been spent on education and effective research.
Looking at these errors in isolation is bad enough. If you join together the dots, it only becomes worse.Continue Reading
By Josiah Mortimer
It’s now three months since Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader of the Labour Party. For Greens, it’s posed some interesting questions.
For a start, Greens didn’t really know how to respond to the new political context. The party positioned itself as the left party for so long (and rightly), but few had thought about what might happen if the Labour Party actually turned left. Suddenly, the political space for the Greens appeared to shrink dramatically. And for a while, there was silence.Continue Reading
by Chris Jarvis
For over a year and a half, students at UEA have been campaigning for the University to end its financial ties to the fossil fuel industry. This is part of an international movement for divestment that has been growing since it was first launched in 2012 in the United States by environmental activist Bill McKibben. Since its inception, five universities in the UK have taken active steps to divest from the industry, recognising the unequivocal link between fossil fuels and runaway climate change. In the last month alone, three universities – SOAS, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford have all committed to remove their investments from all or part of the fossil fuel industry, in addition to countless other institutions, including more than 20 US Universities and Oxford City Council ending their links to the industry in the last few years.
Here at UEA, the campaign has built increasing momentum over the last two academic years. More than 1,000 students have signed a petition calling for divestment, activists have held repeated stunts, actions and demonstrations and last Christmas, campaigners gave a giant oil rig to University managers to symbolise their complicity in the industry’s practices. Now, almost 100 academics have joined the campaign, all signing an open letter to the Executive Team of UEA which claims that UEA’s investment in fossil fuel companies including Rio Tinto and BHP Billington is ‘logically and morally incompatible with the view UEA has on sustainability and the positive actions taken to ensure sound environmental practice.’
by Liam McCafferty
Over the last five years, students have felt the impact of austerity. With the recent election shock of a Conservative majority, we can expect further hardship: more cuts, more pain. But how exactly have students been affected by austerity, and why should we care?