Summary Of Planet Of Slums

In Planet of Slums, Davis discusses the roots of slums in relation to urban poverty in the post-modern era as well as its social, political, economical and ecological consequences. This essay might ring a bell to many as a duplication of the famous UN-HABITAT’s report in 2003 on the challenge of slums; however in my opinion, what Davis is attempting to do here is an exploration to the roots of urban poverty on a global scale rather than within local state governance, and also with references to the historical context instead of current conditions. Chapter four of this reading basically looks into the approaches taken in tackling with slums as an urban problem over the past decades. The essay presents itself in a rather despairing manner, identifying
The human imprint on the environment has become so active that it rivals some of the great forces of nature in its impact on the functioning of the earth system. The late nineteenth Century saw scientists becoming more aware of the extent of human influence on planet earth. Changes of the Earth’s climate, oceans, land and biosphere are now great and so rapid that the concept of a new geological epoch defined by the action of humans is widely debated. ‘Anthropocene’ here refers to the geological episode in Earth history caused by the action of humans. Higher levels of heat-trapping gases from burning fossil fuels are one feature of what many call the Anthropocene, a new geological era dominated by humans. Yet regulatory approaches to managing carbon in the Earth system are going in the wrong direction. This is because the rise of carbon dioxide levels is taking place at the scale of the Earth system itself. Humans are inside of that system, CO2 emissions are coupled to energy use, and increasing energy use is central to economic progression. It is hence simply not possible to manage energy usage from the scale of households to that of the planet itself using regulatory
It will also be shaped by their perceptions of monetary value. People’s willingness to pay may be dependent on their incomes, and this may distort the outcomes in favour of the choices of rich people. Although affluent people are willing to pay more to protect their local environment, they do not necessarily value their local environment more than poorer people value theirs. Clearly methods which depend on willingness to pay underrate the values of people with low incomes.
The market is a system which advantages those most able to pay. Using the market, whether an actual market or an engineered one, to value the environment tends to produce values that reflect the prevailing distribution of income and denies people an equitable influence over their environment. If equity is to be taken seriously then new ways of decision-making must be found that enable the multifaceted values associated with the environment to be fully considered and heeded. Clearly, merely extending market values to incorporate the environment into existing economic systems will not achieve