I support the
existence of scarcity exists and the proposition that it will cause conflict. Competition over resources caused by scarcity will lead to conflict
because of the basic need to survive. I believe geographic location affects the
development of this conflict especially how it occurs and to what extent. I
think the political, social, and economic situations present in areas affect
the extent of the conflict.
Scarcity in urban
areas such as cities and their surrounding suburbs leads to conflict because of
an inherent lack of accessibility to resources in these areas. City dwellers
require resources such as food to be imported from outside putting citizens at
disadvantage to access food crops and other necessities. If nation fails to
produce enough crops during a harvest then food supply drops and a scarcity
develops. Cities tend to exhibit large gaps in social inequality and this
inequality often leads to unequal distribution. Unequal distribution results in
individuals with better socio-economic status having easier access to food and
larger quantities of it. On the other hand, conflict can ensue because individuals
living in poverty cannot access the food and starvation forces them to take
drastic measures. The extent of these conflicts can range from individuals
using violence to obtain food, or large groups fighting against a government
who cannot feed them. This also harps on strikes upon how the existence of
political corruption exacerbates the scarcity and conflict. Corruption often
leads to bribery, skimming of money and resources, and unequal distribution of
resources. For example, think how much easier a political leader living in a
Nigerian city, with a ten room mansion and a swimming pool, can afford food compared
to an unemployed goldsmith living across the city live in a shack made of metal
bars and a plastic tarp. Less extreme versions also exist in industrialized
nations such as in urban areas of Baltimore where food deserts develop. Families
are forced to rely on easily accessible unhealthy fast food because healthier
food options are not in the immediate vicinity and are less accessible. I
believe lack of available resources whether it is food, water, or money leads
to scarcity and eventual conflict in urban environments. The social inequality,
and political corruption in some nations, exacerbates the scarcity and resulting
conflict.
In rural areas, scarcity can be caused by a
lack of resources, but it is more often caused by an abundance of them. In
rural areas, especially those containing large reserves of resources such as
precious metals, abundance of a resource can lead to scarcity of necessities
amongst the inhabitants. Good intentioned political action such as policy
prescriptions aim to limit the amount of resource captured in these areas and
prevent abundant reserves from diminished too quickly. Unfortunately, these
prescriptions limit the harvests so severely that individuals cannot survive they
adhere to the prescribed limitations. For example, Lahitti-dutt mentions how
inhabitants of rural villages located next to precious metal mines will
illegally harvest these resources in order to earn their livelihood and
survive. Resulting uncontrolled extraction of resources, such as diamonds, can
lead to conflict as individuals seek to secure themselves by obtaining as much
of the resource as possible. This tragedy of the commons leads to the conflict
amongst various groups who seek to control the resources and the accompanying
wealth. Terms such as blood diamonds develop because of the violence associated
with conflict caused by the abundance of a resource. I disagree with Theissen
and believe that an abundance of resource can increase scarcity of the resource
and of the necessities funded by profit from resource. The scarcity leads to
conflict between groups seeking to control the resource and secure their
ability to survive, especially groups living in rural areas.
The existence of
scarcity in a society will cause conflict, and I believe that how the scarcity
and conflict develop depend on the geographic region. Additionally, I believe
that the social, political, and economic situations in these regions will
affect how extreme the conflict can become.
Scarcity in itself is a problem. However, it does not always lead to conflict among people. Whether or not it leads to conflict depends on structure and procedures put in place by the government in sharing up the resources that are available and focusing on the creation of alternate resources. Scarcity does not always lead to conflict because there are too many other factors that can play a part.
ReplyDeleteI think one point you touched on was very important, that people of different socio-economic status receive disproportionate amounts of resources and access to those resources. This creates an artificial scarcity that is only seen by those of lower classes in society that are not afforded the same opportunities as higher classes. While I completely agree that scarcity leads to conflict, I also think that unequal distribution can create similar conflict in urban areas.
ReplyDelete