Hello!
Here is my reader’s response to “The Double Edge of Globalization” by Chanda:
Chanda(2007) argues that consumption is a key player in environmental degradation. Increased consumption has been brought about by forces such as consumerism. The effects of consumerism has led to increasing consumption of raw materials attained from the environment.
I agree with Chanda that consumption degrades the environment. To further substantiate on his point, consumers’ and producers’ attitude towards environmental protection affects the feasibility and effectiveness of environmental protection policies. According to Morgan (2013), environmental laws against burning of forest has been implemented in Indonesia but it persists annually. This is attributed to the illegal burning of forests which reflects producers’ prioritising cost-effective production over efforts to save the environment. Reason being, burning is more cost-effective as compared to other environmentally friendly but more expensive ways of clearing land. This is a cheaper way of meeting the increasing demand of consumers today, as producers are able to provide more at a lower cost.
Producers’ profit maximization mentality and consumers’ utilitarian objective will result in utilising cost-effective methods of production. To minimize the use of these methods, a change in attitude is required. Such a change may potentially resolve or slowdown environmental degradation.
To conclude, the onerous of environmental protection lies in producers and consumers commitment and attitudes to resolve environmental degradation.
ES1102 
Hi Gio!
Your post is rather insightful and I do agree with you that consumers and producers are two important factors influencing the effectiveness of environment protection.
From your reader response, I understand that there must be a change in both the consumers’ and producers’ attitude towards extraction of raw materials. However, I think your thesis will be clearer if you could specify what should be done to drive the change in attitude.
Thank you for your post!
Sumin
Hi, Gio. Thank you for your effort for writing this interesting reader response. =) Here are some comments from me:
The effects of consumerism has>> The effects of consumerism have
environmental laws against burning of forest has been implemented>> environmental laws against burning of forest have been implemented
And I have one question, did you change your thesis statement? I find that your reader response is not very related to your thesis statement. There are all my comments. Thank you. =)
Hi Gio! Thank you for your effort!
Here are our comments on your response 🙂
-CONTENT-
On text connections:
You have
– Provided a summary of the article
– Provided linkages of the point raised.
– Provided details that support opinions and ideas
On Critical thinking :
– Provided suggestion/solution to the issue raised
(eg the need for change of attitude for both producers and consumers). But maybe can include how change of attitude can resolve the issue.
Thesis/main idea:
-Provided clear opinion and thesis.
Main and supporting ideas:
-Included relevant supporting ideas
Citation:
– Cited correctly
others:
– paragraph 2: This is a cheaper way of meeting the increasing demand (what demand?) of consumers today, as producers are able to provide more (what?) at a lower cost.
– paragraph 2: compared to other environmentally friendly but more expensive ways of clearing land.
→ such as? /eg?
-ORGANISATION-
Introduction:
-Repetition in the first paragraph (consumption→ consumerism→consumption)
*Suggestion* [Increased consumption of raw materials attained from the environment has been brought about by consumerism]
-Paragraphs were coherent throughout. ☺
-Provided clear conclusion.
-LANGUAGE-
Spelling
– paragraph 2 :environmental laws against burning of forest(s) (have) been..
-This is a cheaper way of meeting the increasing demand of consumers today (without comma ,) as producers are able to provide more at a lower cost.
Hope this helps! Thanks!! 🙂