Blog# 14- I think that the case is well explained and written.
– Your three explanations are really fruitful. However, are there any numbers that underline your theses? I understand that cultural and normative values nudge people to do certain things, but to what extend does this work? I realise that this blog is not a scientific paper, however, I would be interested in quantitative data.
– What is the scope of your analysis? (a,b)
a. Are the constraints universally applicable?
b. Is the specific mindset that you are elaborating on applicable to all cultures in the world? Or is this only a western mindset?
– I think your first argument is interesting. I would like to know what you mean by ‘the lack extensive knowledge base of women’ . What kind of ‘knowledge’ is this? Is this only the knowledge that is gained by education, or is it a combination between knowledge that is gained by education and knowledge that can be described as ‘experiences’? I think that this is in interesting topic to talk about. If it not only about knowledge that is gained true education, then the differences between men and women may also become gradual instead of radical.
Blog# 14
I think that you are reflecting well on the statement and that you are shining different lights on the problem. Using these references makes your argument very strong.
One remark will be about the scope of your argument and the scope of this statement. Do you think that the relations that you mention are worldwide applicable?
Blog#15
I think that you made a good distinction between the two position; well done!
– I think that you did good by using examples. This makes your arguments more vivid and testable/ quantitative.
– I also liked that you developed your own position at the end of your blog.
– Do you think that the materials that you have found on the internet are specific enough for this topic? The questions wasn’t to find as much as you can, I know, but I am asking you this because it may be interesting to develop more positions.
Blog#15Well explained again. I think that you make good distinctions.
– I liked your example on the F16’s. It makes your blog easier to understand.
– However, I think the blog should get more into detail about the two positions, regarding the example. It now looks like a summary about the bounded rationality and rational decision making and shedding a light on the F16’s. Getting more into detail about the claims that the government makes about joining the war against ISIS might make your blog more fruitful.
Blog#15- I like your puzzle and the way you start your reasoning.
– I think that your arguments are correct and that you are explaining them well. However, are there any numbers that underline your thoughts and are in line with the diagram?
– You might explain the greenhouse effect a little bit before giving arguments. I think that readers who are not familiar with the dynamics of CO2 may not understand your arguments wholly.
– You might consider quantative data to make your arguments stronger. It can be interpreted as unconvincing arguments.
Blog#15 I think that you have thought in a good way.
– However, you are prescribing what a business should be like. Do you think that this is the question?
– Can you explain more things that should be the business of business? By taking the prescriptive path, you can state more then just saying that the business of business is to maintain a healthy society. Don’t you think?
Blog#16None available
Blog#17None available
Blog#18Hi Bob,
the example that you use is very clear. I like your topic.
– You give a clear conclusion, which is good to see. You do not only conclude your research, but also show what the intension is of Ostrom’s framework. I liked that.
– You may however go deeper into the boundaries that you assume. Resource systems regarding the use of water may be different in different parts of the world. What do you think about this?
– Another question that I have is about the statements that you make, for example regarding the motivation of the government, et cetera. For the sake of your argument, it would be better if there are link to articles or quotations.
Blog#19Dear Hans Peter,
I liked your writing and the way you order and arrange your blog. I think it is well done! Because of this I don’t have a lot of things to mention. You already covered your arguments.
There are however a few things that I would like to ask you.
– You take a cultural relativism approach in your argumentation about the differences between the west and the east; this connotes in your writing. Do you think it is interesting if you go deeper into the discussion, for example by looking more at the pros and cons for Nokia to invest in a globalised production chain?
– Secondly, what do you think that ‘enforcement’ of the supplier should look like? Do you mean by specific protocols or just by excluding them for example?
– I liked your distinction between ‘window dressing’ and the ‘actual problem’. You could think about extending it a bit with examples.
I look forward to read more blogs of you!
Kinds,
Ozkan Larcin
Blog#20Dear Marie-Louise,
I very much liked the way you describe the various concepts. I think this is very fruitful and needed in order to understand the topic. You use good examples and it was very clear to me.
However, there are a two things that I want to mention.
– First of all, I don’t think that you are answering the questions for this week’s assignment. But I may be wrong. I mention this because I only see that you are writing about legitimacy but are not getting into detail about the relation between Nokia and the Chinese supplier.
– Secondly, I would like to see an extension of the ‘rules’ that you regard to in your conclusion and that you like to enforce and also what this enforcement looks like. Do you mean certain ISO regulations? I am sure this is only a matter of re-writing, but I think it is for the sake of your argument.
I enjoyed reading your blog!
Kinds,
Ozkan Larcin
Blog#21Dear Kim,
I liked your argumentation and you give a clear and sound view of the situation in the documentary. You are also well describing the dependencies between the companies, and thereby the relation that those companies have. However, there are two things that I want to share with you, and that you may take into account.
1. You describe that both the companies are equally dependent on each other. Do you think this is correct? In my view there are more suppliers in the world than that there are multinational companies such as Nokia(,Samsung, Apple, et cetera). Which in my opinion makes Nokia less dependent and thereby forces the supplier to change it’s business ethos.
2. I very much liked your move to the conglomeration of companies from which a more centralised and universal way of business occurs. I was also thinking about the ISO 14000 norms. Don’t you think that this is also something that can be seen as an universal tool for control?
Kinds,
Ozkan Larcin
Blog#22Dear Zejun,
I liked your blog entry and I think that you are thinking holistically about this problem.
However, there is something that I want to ask you about your solutions in general:
The thing that I want to mention raise when I was reading your first argument. You are stating that
“Natural selection favors the force of psychological denial [1]. Education is needed to counteract the natural tendency to do the wrong things which lead to collapse of our resource system.”
What do you exactly mean by this? How can education change the ‘natural’ thing called psychological denial. Isn’t it paradoxical to think that education will change the ‘natural’ interest of people to do wrong, into doing right? In other words: How can something ‘natural’ be neglected and turned into something artificial?
If it is correct that people are doing wrong by themselves, then the only thing that can be used as a mechanism to counter this will be something like you mention in the second argument, so something such as ‘external control’, or motivating people to do right.
This is something that I would suggest to think about.
Kinds,
Ozkan Larcin
Blog #24
Dear Michael,I liked your use of Hardins Tragedy of the Commons. There are however a few things that I would like to remark:Preliminarily:What do you exactly mean by the sentence: 'the problem was not the student, but the rules of the game'? Do you mean that the problems only occurred by the rules of the game? In my opinion, the problem is not totally because of the rules of the game. There were teams that did manage to be sustainable. How come? I think because of their willingness to be sustainable and not competitive. What do you think about this argument?About your arguments:- I like your solution of giving permits. My question will be: Is there a feedback mechanism that makes the overall situation controllable and transparant?- What will be the positive outcome of the possibility of negotiation for keeping the fish in the sea balanced? In other words: what does this additional (communicative) rule mean for the task of keeping the fish in the sea balanced in the time-span that is defined? I can't make the link between communication and the behaviour of the players in the game.Kinds,
Ozkan Larcin
Blog #25
Dear Sayra,
I enjoyed reading your blog entry. It gives a nice overview and analysis of the Kalundborg eco-industrial park. I have no remarks, only something that you can take into considerations if you want to take another perspective.
I was thinking about the concept of ‘Institutional capacity’ in which trust, communication, knowledge sharing and transparency between the firms (actors) are the dominant factors for managing the industrial symbiosis. It is said that the factors in this concept were the necessary things in current eco-industrial parks such as Kalundborg. So you might take a look at this concept. In short it means that the firms in Kalundborg and other eco-industrial parks are transparant, share their knowledge and trust each other. If they are not, then the symbiosis will not occur.
You can take a look at this article, it explains the concept very well: “Boons, F. and Spekkink, W. (2012), Levels of Institutional Capacity and Actor Expectations about Industrial Symbiosis. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16: 61–69″
Kinds,
Ozkan Larcin
Blog #26
Dear Nicole,
well done by looking broadly at the discussion about the tragedy of the commons. I think you did well!
However I would like to know what your real, practical solutions and measurements are for the harvest game in class. I see that you are mentioning the pros and cons of several options, but not the stating the best solution for implementing.
Secondly, for the sake of the argument: how can trust between companies emerge? Should this be provided by external parties?
Blog # 27
Dear Francesca,your solution looks nice and creative. It may work actually!However, my critical thoughts are: - is there any control at the port that eliminates the possibility of illegal fishing or fishing by my other group members, just at the other part of the sea? I am stating this because the delegation may go out for fishing, which is a sustainable solution, but this does not mean that it is impossible for me as a (illegal) fisher to go out and fish? - what kind of game do you think of for competing for the remaining fish?Nice work!
Blog #28
Dear Diana,
I liked your way of thinking and it is good that you clearly explained the concept of ecoindustrial development.
However I have one questions regarding your plan:
- What do you know about the internal scope of this plan? Economic crisis is not something that takes place universally. So how can your plan be valued by, for example, quick economically developing countries as Turkey.
Blog #29
Dear Daniel,
you thought up some good rules for making the use of LCAs more common. However I think that there is room for thought. I wrote the same blog and bumped into a few question. You might have thought of them. I couldn't find it in your blog entry.
My thoughts are:
- What is the difference between external control and setting boundary conditions if it comes to monitoring the actual use of LCAs. Are there any feedback mechanisms in setting boundary conditions that are not externally controlled?
- Sabatier uses his PIF framework for implementing a policy. Don't you think it is hard for the external control method to come up with a feasible plan that covers all of the different behaviour in society.
It is something to think about
Nice Silvester!
Blog #30
Dear Branco,
very nice and detailed description of your ideas about the implementation of LCAs. I loved to read it. However I have one major remark that regards the idea of altering market conditions.
You already mention it that companies may all together may refuse the use of LCA. How can you, as a government, tackle this possible problem?