1. Explain the factors which have contributed to Scandinavia being named the most advanced part of the planet? (12)
Scandinavia; Norway, Sweden and Denmark being named as the most advanced part of the world causes debate on both sides of the spectrum, with factors supporting each side of the argument.
On one hand Scandinavia can be seen as the most advanced part of the planet due to its economical stance. All countries feature in the top 13 of a World Bank GDP per Capita survey with Norway sitting in 2nd. This economical stature could come not just from the vast natural resources in the area, but the emphasis on education and R&D in the area. Within the three countries an average of 4% ...view middle of the document...
The countries ability to perform Carbon capture schemes like that in Norway, as well as through the help of Biogas technology cease Oil use in Sweden by 2020 stand alone in why they are advanced because of their technological skills and with the countries clearly not suffering from a ‘brain drain’ they’ve got the people to work in these projects.
The people of Scandinavia are also happy, something which would figure greatly if Scandinavia was to be considered the most advanced area of the world. A happy and sustainable life is what is highlighted by the countries Happy Planet Index with the countries ranking among the best in Britain, with other financial power houses like the UK and Germany ranking far below them. So Scandinavia has been able to grow their GDP greatly while maintaining a reasonably sustainable lifestyle, which through proposed schemes is only meant to increase. With this considered they would have to be named as the most advanced region?
However; the countries have minute populations, Sweden has the largest population between the three at 9 million, which in comparison to England (of which Sweden is over three times larger than) is tiny. So to consider this area to be the most advanced region in the world is sceptical. The biggest private company in Scandinavia is Volvo, which while a big company, it looks very small when compared to TNC’S like Walmart.
2. Assess the extent to which Scandinavia’s future is one of business as usual, sustainable or radical. (16)
Scandinavia can be viewed as business as usual, sustainable or radical. Information for the backing of these statements can also be produced. The question is, which is at the forefront of the future of Scandinavia?
Scandinavia’s current position is also debatable, although the ecological footprint of the countries dropped from 1997 to 2000 (presumably due to the introduction of the Kyoto protocol) it rose considerably from 2000-2005. The countries, bar Sweden, have also got a considerable ecological footprint, with Denmark’s being greater than that of the UK and Australia. Norway also has a considerable ecological footprint, but when considering the country’s GDP the greatness of the footprint is watered down. Norway’s considerable Oil and Gas reserves also prove a problem, with the amount of CO2 produced from these elements.
However, Scandinavia’s stance towards the environmental future of the area is clear. The countries were among the first to sign up for carbon taxes, with Norway in particular putting a hefty tax on emissions emitted through the production of oil and gas with the tax being $50, compared to $37 in Sweden. These were implemented in 1991 onwards, and since the countries have also signed up to the Kyoto Protocol which aimed to reduce emissions to set targets. The countries progress in this can be shown in 2010, with Sweden being allowed a 4% rise in emissions and they ended up reducing emissions by 3%. This is however an...