This is the Tenth and last Blogprompt of the year.
It's not a difficult one.
Think about where you live at home (that is where you live now or where you lived before you moved into a Hall of Residence.)
Think about the area in which you live. Perhaps find out the area covered by your electoral ward or better still your Super Output Area (SOA). Find out from here.
Think about how closely your home area fits in with the definition of a 'sustainable community' that we introduced last week (you might want to refresh yourself of this definition by having a look at the powerpoint or one of the white papers. Here.
Blog to what extent your ward/SOA resembles a 'sustainable community' and what extent you don't think it does. Give some evidence from your observations (or your memories) of this judgment.
Use some of the collected data from your ward or SOA to make your point. Find this from here.
Would I describe my local community as "a place where people want to live and work, now and in the future?" (Society Guardian) Glenfield (also known as Glenfields on Google Maps) is a village West of Leicester's city centre and boasts an ever increasing population due to the attraction of an excellent commuter route into Leicester's central business district, outstanding schools that are performing well above the national average and also the convienience of local shops such as the large Co-op superstore. Glenfield is in the ward of Fairestone with a population of 4,687 (2001 census) in the super output area of Blaby 001F.
Glenfield, under the leadership of Blaby District Council, operates a very strict policy on recycling. The five bins that have been in place for over four years has revolutionised the way people dispose of their rubbish within the area. Combined with the recycling points in the village that further the recycling practice provide excellent, if not outstanding facilties for the local community.
Glenfield's rise in the past few years has lead to various issues arising and I personally believe that the community has struggled with the rise of individuals within the area. For example the Glenfield Hospital renouned for it's specialist treatment attracts many workers from Leicestershire and beyond. The hospital doesn't occupy a large site and usually breaches its capacity, leading to the overspill of traffic into the streets of Glenfield. The problem is that the hospital itself doesn't cross many bus routes and therefore people that use the hospital regularly, mainly the elder generation, have no other option than to drive. The car parking fees implemented by the hospital to encourage the use of the use of public transport has not entirely hit the jackpot, as the amount of cars parked along the streets of Glenfield seems to be ever growing.
To determine if a community is of the 'sustainable' variety, I think the use of statistics is very justifiable. For example, an area that has high employment rates, high levels of public transport to get to the work place and also high levels of qualifications is an area you would anticipate has a certain degree of 'sustainable living' going on.
The Fairestone Ward has a very low unemployment rate of 77 people (2.18%), which could present a sustainable way of living in the Glenfield area. The sustainable way of life is generally more expensive than that of the non-sustiable lifestyle. Therefore an area with low unemployment, generally means the area has a certain degree affluency and as a result inhabitants are able to afford sustainable items such as low emission cars, insulation of houses and produce from the local grocers instead of going to the supermarket where it will be cheaper. Also linked with this is the qualification level within the area, as the better education you have achieved may result in a better depth of knowledge in regards to sustainability and therefore the lifestyle of a more knowledgable individual may be more sustainable than that of a person less qualified. The Fairestone ward has a proportion of a relatively high level of education obtained (65.29& of the population having a level of qualification of some sort) which would suggest a greater knowledge base than an area. This is probably as a result of the family-orientated set-up within in the Fairestone Ward. The high levels of academic acheievement within local schools is a major plus for local residents, with pupils coming from outside the Fairestone ward to obtain a place here.
On the whole I think Glenfield was a very sustainable village, but with the expansion in size and population the demand on local services has taken a real turn, mainly in a negative aspect. The severely cramped street as a result of facilites such as the hospital in this case, has lead to disruption within the community particular at peak times with the traffic little short of unbearable. The local council have acknowedged this issue of the strain on public services/lack of public services with the possible introduction of a park and ride system on the edge of the village, which would reduce the parking issues associated around Glenfield. However, the cost may play an important factor in this development and the ultimate success of the system, as the cost of parking on a street is free compared to whatever the council decide the right fare for the park and ride to be. To answer my question of, Would I describe my local community as "a place where people want to live and work, now and in the future?" I would answer yes, but the future actions of the council remain in the balance in that they need to address a few minor issues that could escalate into a unsustainable way of life being met.
References:
Office for National Statistics., 2001. Neighbourhood Statistics [online]. Available from:
http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadAreaSearch.do?a=3&i=1001&m=0&s=1269727164060&enc=1&areaSearchText=le3+8pl&areaSearchType=14&extendedList=false&searchAreas= [Accessed 27 March 2010)
Aldred, J., What is a "sustainable community"? [online]. Available from:
http://society.guardian.co.uk/mindtheskillsgap/story/0,,2176901,00.html [Accessed 27 March 2010]
Director of Highways, Transportation and Waste Management.,2009. Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee[online]. Leicestershire: Leicestershire County Council. Available from:
http://politics.leics.gov.uk/Published/C00000443/M00002069/AI00020094/$CMajortransportreport.doc.pdf [Accessed 27 March 2010]
Friday, 26 March 2010
Education for Citizenship
Education for Sustainable Development also includes making learners aware of their role as 'Active Citizens'. Studies of 'citizenship' are intended to equip students with the knowledge and skills needed for effective and democratic participation. It helps learners become informed, active citizens who have the confidence and conviction to work together to take action in their communities.
It is important to know about rights, responsibilities, duties and freedoms and about laws, justice and democracy. Citizenship encourages respect for different national, religious and ethnic identities.
For the Blogprompt this week first we want you to do a bit of research.
Find out
The constituency in which you live
Your local MP (name, party)
The name of your local council
Which political party dominates your local council
Secondly
2010 is election year.
What is your attitude concerning people who are not planning to vote in the general election?
What main concerns do you have that may influence your vote?
My Constituency: Northampton North
Local MP: Ms Sally Keeble, Labour
Local Council: Northampton Borough Council
Political party that dominates Northampton Borough Council:
Liberal Democrats, 24 members (Dominant)
Conservative, 15 members
Labour, 5 members
Independent, 3 members
My attitude towards people that are deciding against voting is largely negative in the sense that a lot of people feel privileged and honoured to vote and others couldn't care less. Voting is a very important aspect of society in that the leadership that is selected determines the future of the country and inevitably policies on areas such as education, health and sustainability. People that are deciding against the vote may not be entirely acting as a citizen within society for various reasons, and therefore they are unaware of the issues around them. In this instance I think it is probably right for socially impaired people not to vote as they don't exactly know what they are voting for. It just seems a shame when people such as Emmeline Pankhurst fort so hard for the right of female voters and nowadays people decide against voting.
When I place my vote I will be looking into party's agendas on areas such as transport as being a student transport is essential for me to get back home. I would like the new government to implement new infrastructure that will revolutionise the way we travel, in a new less-environmental damaging way. An absolute definite is the healthcare system as there is continuous problems portrayed in the news that beggar belief in many cases. The current economic upheaval is something that I would like new guidance on, as the current government seem to have got us into this mess with little recovery a few years on.
Education for Sustainable Development also includes making learners aware of their role as 'Active Citizens'. Studies of 'citizenship' are intended to equip students with the knowledge and skills needed for effective and democratic participation. It helps learners become informed, active citizens who have the confidence and conviction to work together to take action in their communities.
It is important to know about rights, responsibilities, duties and freedoms and about laws, justice and democracy. Citizenship encourages respect for different national, religious and ethnic identities.
For the Blogprompt this week first we want you to do a bit of research.
Find out
The constituency in which you live
Your local MP (name, party)
The name of your local council
Which political party dominates your local council
Secondly
2010 is election year.
What is your attitude concerning people who are not planning to vote in the general election?
What main concerns do you have that may influence your vote?
My Constituency: Northampton North
Local MP: Ms Sally Keeble, Labour
Local Council: Northampton Borough Council
Political party that dominates Northampton Borough Council:
Liberal Democrats, 24 members (Dominant)
Conservative, 15 members
Labour, 5 members
Independent, 3 members
My attitude towards people that are deciding against voting is largely negative in the sense that a lot of people feel privileged and honoured to vote and others couldn't care less. Voting is a very important aspect of society in that the leadership that is selected determines the future of the country and inevitably policies on areas such as education, health and sustainability. People that are deciding against the vote may not be entirely acting as a citizen within society for various reasons, and therefore they are unaware of the issues around them. In this instance I think it is probably right for socially impaired people not to vote as they don't exactly know what they are voting for. It just seems a shame when people such as Emmeline Pankhurst fort so hard for the right of female voters and nowadays people decide against voting.
When I place my vote I will be looking into party's agendas on areas such as transport as being a student transport is essential for me to get back home. I would like the new government to implement new infrastructure that will revolutionise the way we travel, in a new less-environmental damaging way. An absolute definite is the healthcare system as there is continuous problems portrayed in the news that beggar belief in many cases. The current economic upheaval is something that I would like new guidance on, as the current government seem to have got us into this mess with little recovery a few years on.
At the moment the theme in class is sustainable travel. Transport undoubtedly has had a major influence on economic and social development facilitating the movement of goods, people and ideas. Greater accessibility, mobility and communication has shaped the type of global society we live in today.
But is there a cost? Environmentalists will emphasize the problems associated with unlimited travel - depletion of fossil fuels, local air pollution, emissions of greenhouse gases, congestion and accidents, destruction of the countryside and the expansion of land under concrete to name but a few. Even our over-reliance on motorized transport has been linked to a general lack of fitness in the population at large.
So...what are your views? Is there really a transport problem? Do the benefits of motorized transport outweigh the costs? Are there any minor (or perhaps major) changes you personally feel could make our present transport system more sustainable?
In today’s society, business and commerce is a weapon not to be taken lightly. If you look on the roads today, you will see that a
large proportion of the vehicles are either people involved in business & commerce or heavy goods vehicles. Both of these are directly related to our present lifestyles in that we have become so dependent on obtaining our food from supermarkets or our latest design clothing from the High street that the road capacity is being stretched beyond its capable abilities, highlighting a severe transport problem. Large Lorries have to continuously be up and down the country to ensure the shelves are replenished to reach the supply and demand of the shops and their customers. This leads to major congestion at peak times on busy roads such as the M1 where people involved in business & commerce are commuting home. Usually, if there is a problem (car crash on roads), preventing the traffic from flowing, then the road becomes so congested that the traffic tails back for miles. As well if there is a problem on one mode of transport this can sometimes correspond to problems in another i.e. the train. Obviously this can lead to an enormous amount of stress created, as well as being late for work. All of which is very unsustainable in that turning up to work stressed is not going to allow you to work at your optimum conditions, the additional time spent waiting in traffic queues where the car is still ticking over releasing exhaust fumes is damaging on the environment, and finally the prospect of this continuous lifestyle is only going to be damaging on your health if it is a regular occurrence.
I think it all comes down to what you want from your life. In my opinion, there are two sides, do you want to have enough money for you to be comfortable, leading a relatively stress free life and of course being happy, or do you want to be well off able to afford lush cars, but on a day-to-day occurrence experiencing high levels of stress and not being all that happy. Therefore if the latter statement appeals to you, then obviously you will be very much in favour of motorised transport to allow commuting to and from work, probably a high paid job in London or another major city. But on the other side of the spectrum, if you have a job that is low paid but is relatively close to your home, then you will not probably think the benefits of motorised transport is not worth the unsustainable lifestyle.
The main problem is the roads whereas the other means of transport are more often than not running relatively fine i.e
. plane and trains. Therefore to combat the issues associated with the roads would be to improve the rail system significantly. This could include additional stations opening around the country, lowering prices on the trains and even by the addition of high speed trains such as the Bullet Train in Japan. This would be much more appealing to the business & commerce executives as they would be able to get to London easily, cheaply and most importantly quickly, if the trains are running as planned. This would reduce the stress on individuals if the trains were reliable, saving money and most importantly reduce the environmental impacts.
But is there a cost? Environmentalists will emphasize the problems associated with unlimited travel - depletion of fossil fuels, local air pollution, emissions of greenhouse gases, congestion and accidents, destruction of the countryside and the expansion of land under concrete to name but a few. Even our over-reliance on motorized transport has been linked to a general lack of fitness in the population at large.
So...what are your views? Is there really a transport problem? Do the benefits of motorized transport outweigh the costs? Are there any minor (or perhaps major) changes you personally feel could make our present transport system more sustainable?
In today’s society, business and commerce is a weapon not to be taken lightly. If you look on the roads today, you will see that a
large proportion of the vehicles are either people involved in business & commerce or heavy goods vehicles. Both of these are directly related to our present lifestyles in that we have become so dependent on obtaining our food from supermarkets or our latest design clothing from the High street that the road capacity is being stretched beyond its capable abilities, highlighting a severe transport problem. Large Lorries have to continuously be up and down the country to ensure the shelves are replenished to reach the supply and demand of the shops and their customers. This leads to major congestion at peak times on busy roads such as the M1 where people involved in business & commerce are commuting home. Usually, if there is a problem (car crash on roads), preventing the traffic from flowing, then the road becomes so congested that the traffic tails back for miles. As well if there is a problem on one mode of transport this can sometimes correspond to problems in another i.e. the train. Obviously this can lead to an enormous amount of stress created, as well as being late for work. All of which is very unsustainable in that turning up to work stressed is not going to allow you to work at your optimum conditions, the additional time spent waiting in traffic queues where the car is still ticking over releasing exhaust fumes is damaging on the environment, and finally the prospect of this continuous lifestyle is only going to be damaging on your health if it is a regular occurrence.I think it all comes down to what you want from your life. In my opinion, there are two sides, do you want to have enough money for you to be comfortable, leading a relatively stress free life and of course being happy, or do you want to be well off able to afford lush cars, but on a day-to-day occurrence experiencing high levels of stress and not being all that happy. Therefore if the latter statement appeals to you, then obviously you will be very much in favour of motorised transport to allow commuting to and from work, probably a high paid job in London or another major city. But on the other side of the spectrum, if you have a job that is low paid but is relatively close to your home, then you will not probably think the benefits of motorised transport is not worth the unsustainable lifestyle.
The main problem is the roads whereas the other means of transport are more often than not running relatively fine i.e
. plane and trains. Therefore to combat the issues associated with the roads would be to improve the rail system significantly. This could include additional stations opening around the country, lowering prices on the trains and even by the addition of high speed trains such as the Bullet Train in Japan. This would be much more appealing to the business & commerce executives as they would be able to get to London easily, cheaply and most importantly quickly, if the trains are running as planned. This would reduce the stress on individuals if the trains were reliable, saving money and most importantly reduce the environmental impacts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
