IB Geography 6.2.3 Environmental Issues and the Global Shift of Industry Notes

The Global Shift of Industry Redistributes Benefits and Environmental Costs

1. Transnational corporations can separate design, finance, extraction, manufacturing and retail between countries with different wages, regulations, energy systems and market access.
2. A host region may gain employment, exports, infrastructure and tax revenue while also receiving air pollution, contaminated water, hazardous waste and pressure on land.
3. Consumers and shareholders can capture benefits far from the communities that experience the environmental damage.
4. The shift is therefore geographical: production moves, but responsibility is divided among firms, suppliers, regulators, investors and consumers.

Polluting Manufacturing May Move Where Compliance Is Cheaper

1. Energy-intensive and chemical-intensive industries face costs for cleaner technology, waste treatment, monitoring and worker protection.
2. A location with weak regulation or weak enforcement may appear cheaper because some environmental costs are transferred to communities and ecosystems.
3. Export-processing zones and industrial clusters can intensify pollution when many factories discharge into the same airshed or river basin.
4. Garment dyeing, metal processing, tanning, electronics manufacture and chemical production can create severe local impacts if effluent and hazardous waste are poorly controlled.
5. Low wages alone do not explain location: market access, infrastructure, skills, political stability, energy prices and supplier networks also influence investment.

The Pollution Haven Hypothesis Is Useful but Not a Complete Explanation

1. The hypothesis predicts that pollution-intensive activity will favour places with lower compliance costs.
2. Evidence may support the mechanism in a particular sector without proving that all foreign investment seeks weak regulation.
3. Modern export factories may use cleaner technology than older domestic plants when buyers impose standards or energy efficiency reduces costs.
4. Stricter rules in one country can also cause leakage if production relocates and global emissions remain unchanged.
5. Evaluation should compare the environmental intensity of the activity before and after relocation, not assume that movement automatically increases pollution.

Environmental Injustice Appears When Exposure and Decision-Making Power Are Separated

1. Factories are often located near low-income districts where land is cheaper and political influence is weaker.
2. Polluted water and air can damage health, fisheries and farming, so households lose both wellbeing and income.
3. Informal workers may handle waste without contracts, protective equipment or access to compensation.
4. Local governments may hesitate to enforce standards when employment and tax revenue depend on the polluting industry.
5. The distribution of costs matters as much as the national total because economic growth can coincide with worsening conditions for particular communities.

Global Agribusiness Transforms Land, Water and Nutrient Cycles

1. Large supply chains connect agricultural inputs, farms, commodity traders, processors, transport networks and retailers.
2. International demand for cattle, soy, palm oil, timber and other commodities can increase the value of clearing forests or draining peatlands.
3. The Food and Agriculture Organization reports that agricultural expansion accounts for nearly 90 percent of tropical deforestation.
4. FAO also cites estimates that international commodity trade to high-income markets is associated with up to 39 percent of tropical deforestation.
5. Monoculture can simplify habitats and increase vulnerability to pests, while fertilizer and pesticide runoff can pollute rivers and coastal waters.
6. Irrigation and livestock production can intensify water stress when production for distant markets competes with local household and ecosystem needs.
7. Cold chains, processing, packaging and long-distance transport add energy use beyond the farm itself.

The Same Commodity Can Create Impacts at Several Scales

1. At the farm scale, soil compaction, pesticide exposure and water depletion affect workers and nearby communities.
2. At the landscape scale, habitat fragmentation, altered river flow and fire risk affect ecosystems beyond an individual farm.
3. At the national scale, export dependence can increase pressure to expand production during a commodity boom.
4. At the global scale, land-use change and methane and nitrous-oxide emissions contribute to climate change.
5. A complete explanation follows the chain from global demand through a land-use decision to physical environmental change.

Governance Can Reconnect Consumption with Responsibility

1. Mandatory environmental standards set a minimum floor, but inspection capacity and penalties determine whether the standard changes practice.
2. Supply-chain traceability links a product to farms, factories or mines, allowing buyers to identify where damage occurs.
3. Due diligence requires a firm to identify, prevent, reduce and report environmental risks rather than relying only on a supplier's promise.
4. Certification can reward better practice, but narrow criteria, weak auditing and exclusion of small producers can limit its value.
5. Cleaner production reduces waste and emissions within factories, while circular design reduces demand for virgin materials by supporting repair, reuse and recovery.
6. Trade rules, finance conditions and public procurement can influence overseas production, but they must avoid shifting costs onto workers and small farmers without support.

Evaluation Should Test Whether a Response Changes the Underlying Incentive

1. A technical filter can reduce one pollutant while leaving production volume, water use or hazardous waste unchanged.
2. Relocation may clean one place while creating a new hotspot elsewhere, so assessment must compare effects across scales.
3. Corporate commitments are stronger when targets are measurable, independently verified and tied to purchasing decisions.
4. Consumer choice can support change, but governments and firms control infrastructure, product design and supply-chain information.
5. The most effective approach combines enforceable local standards with traceability and responsibility across the global supply chain.