Hearing about perspectives from all the parties involved is definitely something I find to be valuable as well! In the context of environmental protection, I think it is important for the governing bodies to incorporate Indigenous People's opinions into the decision-making process, and exercise more respect to their traditions when conducting experiments/assessments on their lands.

Group work is a huge part of the experience for sure! This is also reflected in many scientific researches too, where teamwork is needed in order for the experiment to succeed.

Being in an environment where passionate and knowledgeable discussions are held is definitely daunting for me as well, but ultimately it also pushes me to learn more about the environmental issues!

I'm also hoping to take what I learned from my experience with hard conversations and communicate with others more effectively in the future!

The pre-readings definitely helped a ton in my case as well! Becoming familiar with the content first and then engage in the lectures worked well for me this term.

I agree that we should talk more freely about death itself! After all, it's not like if we choose to ignore and forget about death, death would also ignore and forget about us. So if the society can be more open towards discussing this topic, then perhaps better burial practices can be more widely adopted.

For sure, if life is a journey, then death is surely the destination. And if all deaths are certain, then maybe we as a society should be open towards talking about what should happen to us when we arrive at the destination. Promoting discussions around the topic of death would be a great start for adopting alternative options.

I agree with you points on the current perception of death within the society. If we want a shift towards greener burial options, then the societal values surrounding death must be changed first. To this end, I agree that the best option is to simply have discussions about death itself, both within the personal social circles, and also within the society as well. Like the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus said: "Death is nothing to us; for that which is dissolved, is without sensation, and that which lacks sensation is nothing to us."

I like the image you put up at the top of your post! And yes I agree that the BC government website about death that receive an update to reflect the need for shifts towards more eco-friendly options for burials.

I like your ideas about requiring funeral homes to discuss about burial options! I think opening these discussions before death itself arrives would definitely encourage people to actively choose the greener options themselves instead of leaving the decision to their offspring.

I agree with your ideas! I think specifically your point on raising awareness on LCA issues is really important. As we make these assessments available and transparent to the public, we would shift the public opinions towards more eco-friendly options, and with the public pressure, more legislations and fundings would be able to go towards refining LCA systems and improving the assessments for the future.

Quantifying the products for their eco-friendliness is definitely an interesting idea! I think you could possibly extend this criteria to the consumers as well: the more transparent/clear the consumers are able to determine if a product is environmental friendly or not, the more pressure could be placed on corporations to care about reducing the environmental pollution that come with production.

I agree that cooperations between all levels are needed to deal with the plastic issue. I think for the conflict of interests in EIA legislations, there should be ways to hold the government/legislators accountable so that there is enough will to make the legislation function properly. Without this, the conflict of interest will continue as corporations would seek to avoid assessments and increase profits.

I think your idea is really interest! Being able to quantify products and allow people to see which one is better would definitely allow people to select towards better products, therefore pressuring industries to adapt towards more eco-friendly approaches. A possible solution to the difficulties you see may exist in the form of AI: a system with clearly defined rules (that are regularly updated to close loopholes) would ensure a neutral assessment on products, thus allowing consumers to determine which one they should choose to buy.

Thanks for the reply! To answer your question, yes I think NGOs would fulfill the duty of third-party monitors. Ideally, this would be in the form of three separate NGOs assessing the same site, so as to minimalize both corruption and inaccuracies. The NGOs would be chosen from a) established groups that have operated regionally/nationally for years, or b) local groups newly created for the exact purpose of monitoring specific sites. Having multiple assessments would hopefully ensure the effectiveness of EIA. In reality though, I fear that competition/collusion between NGOs may create newer problems that take attention away from the actual environmental assessments.

I think your train-of-thought is really interesting! I agree that currently, most (if not all) businesses' main goal is to obtain as much profit as possible, therefore causing the corporations to ignore sustainable practices as they do not bring enough benefits. Even in the face of government regulations, we see cases like VW resort to cheating in order to avoid investing more money into sustainable technologies. So yes, perhaps a change in education could shift the perception towards business in general and help reduce unsustainable practices in the future.

I think a combination of stronger laws and widespread awareness is definitely the right approach towards this issue. It is important to let more people know about the environmental problems current existing in many businesses, and potentially influence the companies so that they would be pressured to change when faced with public backlashes.

Business definitely would naturally gravitate towards the most profitable option, so I agree that laws and enforcements are necessary if we want businesses to focus more on a sustainable future. I think your point on how the government can do more frequent checks on the corporations is great!

Your point on the tax loopholes is great! I agree that the current tax laws often give many options for the rich to reduce their taxes, yet the poorer people are obliged to pay their dues because they simply cannot exercise the options available to the rich. As a starting point, closing these loopholes and implement more regulations to direct these donations/taxes towards sustainable investments would be one way to help combat the situation.

I think you make a really good point on the lack of motivations towards sustainable investments due to the absence of short-term profits. Increasing the transparency and essentially letting the public to monitor what the industries are doing regarding their pollutions is definitely a good idea, as the corporations would be pressured in this case to actually take sustainable options now that their actions can be seen by everybody.