In this chapter, Sherly Burt Ruzeck et al. examine the dynamics of differences in women's health. They discuss how factors like race, class, sexuality and ability influence women's health outcomes and experiences of healthcare. The authors argue that a comprehensive understanding of women's health issues requires an analysis of how social categories intersect and shape health inequalities. Failing to consider the complex interplay of these differences results in an incomplete picture of women's diverse health experiences.

1. Light, Andrew. “Taking Environmental Ethics Public.” Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters, What
Really Works, Edited by Oxford University Press, 2012, 654-663.
In “Taking Environmental Ethics Public,” Andrew Light offers his view on environmental ethics and environmental activism, which is
known as methodological environmental pragmatism (MEP), and the role of environmental ethics in society. MEP brings
environmental issues from the background to the front so that the publicly can be more engaged and better educated on
environmental issues. Generally, views on environmental issues are either biocentric or anthropocentric. Light asserts that
environmental ethics has a tendency to be associated with normative ethics, asking the question of whether nature has intrinsic
value or not. He sees two flaws in this: it excludes anthropocentric arguments for environmental protection and ignores
conversations about what moral values lead people to support more environmentally friendly views and policies. Environmental
philosophers have a responsibility to persuade the public to be more concerned with environmental issues, but in order to do so,
they must take a more pragmatic approach that requires them to be open to and take seriously anthropocentric arguments in order
to make environmental ethics more accessible to the public.
Embracing a view that isn’t one’s own personal view, such as the case of an environmental philosopher with biocentric views
embracing an anthropocentric view, doesn’t necessarily mean that a person is giving up their own convictions and morality to cave
in to another. If you can take someone else’s view seriously, you can understand their argument and perspective, and in doing so,
you will learn their moral values. In doing so, you can speak to issues that directly impact people and in turn, will be able to frame
your own arguments and convictions according to their morals and persuade them to be more concerned and engaged when it
comes to a multitude of issues; whether it’s environmental issues, public health issues, human rights issues, or anything else of
concern to humans and nature.
1

2. Guha, Ramachandra. “Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation.” Environmental
Ethics: What Really Matters, What Really Works, Edited by Michael Bukoski, Oxford University Press, 2012,
145-151.
Deep ecology is more of a movement rather than a view and at its core is the belief that all nature has intrinsic value. According to
this view, humans should strive to live in harmony with nature, should reject systems of dominance to embrace methods and
practices that promote bio-spherical egalitarianism. Being from India, Guha provides a “third-world” perspective of deep ecology. He
identifies some major claims of Deep Ecology, such as that Deep Ecology pushes for a biocentric view entirely over an
anthropocentric view and that Deep Ecology over-emphasizes its focus on wilderness preservation and restoration. He argues
against these claims these claims, beginning with the assertion that over-emphasizing biocentrism over anthropocentrism ignores
the needs of humans. In regards to Deep Ecology’s focus on wilderness preservation, this type of practice is harmful to developing
countries because of the transference of wealth from poor to rich, the ways that preservation can cause great disturbances to the
lives of poor people, and that people and nature can coexist.
Ramachandra Guha argues that Western approaches to conservation and sustainability can actually be calamitous rather than
helpful when used in developing countries. This book offers a different perspective on Western theories of environmental ethics and
models of sustainability and conservation. By reading a view that challenges Western models of sustainability, the way we think
about environmental ethics and issues is diversified. Guha encourages us to reject dualisms of biocentrism vs. anthropocentrism and
firmly argues that humans are integrated with nature in different countries outside of the West and how sustainability and
conservation needs to look at the way that humans interact and live with nature, rather than how humans are separated from it,
and devise solutions that are considerate of both wilderness and human needs. The differences of each place create unique
circumstances to consider and it is vital to sustainability to not cause further hardships on already marginalized and impoverished
people because that also just ends up perpetuating unsustainable practices. It is important to recognize the differences and
challenges of each country to avoid adhering to a standardized cookie-cutter approach to use as a model for sustainability
everywhere, when solutions need to be catered to each unique place.
2

3. Walker, Brian, Walker, B. H., and Salt, David Reid, Walter. Resilience Thinking: SustainingEcosystems and
People in a Changing World. Washington, DC, USA: Island, 2006.
In Resilience Thinking, Brian Walker and David Salt present alternative to usual approaches and mindsets regarding sustainability.
Walker is a scientist and Salt is a science writer and together they introduce the concept of resilience as fundamental in achieving
sustainability and in this book, they provide an overview, along with case studies of resilience thinking, of how resilience-thinking not
only differs from current practices of sustainability, but also enhances sustainability. Resilience, as defined by Salt and Walker, is, “the
ability of a system to absorb disturbance and still retain its basic function and structure.” In current practices of sustainability, the
emphasis is frequently on increasing and optimizing efficiency. Instead of looking to optimize the function of something, we should
move towards a resilience-focused mindset.
The value of this book is that it adds another dimension to what we see as sustainability. Instead of merely just seeing sustainability
as it is typically defined as being able to function at a specified level indefinitely, sustainability is also redefined by the term
resilience. To be sustainable, a system must be able to bounce back from a problem. In order to bounce back from a problem, we
have to look at the interconnections and overlaps between different socioecological systems and how the interconnections between
communities, ecosystems, and landscapes all impact each other. In doing so, we can recognize the ways in which humans and nature
are interconnected, which can ultimately serve to increase the value we place on nature.
3

4. Mitchell, Katharyne. “Visions of Vancouver: Ideology, Democracy, and the Future of Urban Development.”
Urban Geography, vol. 17, no. 6, 1996, pp. 478–501.
Katharyne Mitchell’s “Visions of Vancouver: Ideology, Democracy, and the Future of Urban development” takes a comprehensive
look at the development of Vancouver, British Columbia to fit a neoliberal agenda and the links between ideological visions of
development and also material changes that are necessary for development to take place. Additionally, she examines how both the
ideological visions and material changes fit into the advancement of development. This particular essay explains the movement and
mechanisms of capital into and out of cities and who the major players are in urban redevelopment projects. The obvious primary
players were those who made decisions regarding land use and development and powerful and wealthy developers. Governments,
in an attempt to draw capital back into cities, would try to lure in new investment by creating a “good business climate.” Some ways
which this was done was through tax breaks, deregulation of the financial market, and other concessions to persuade businesses to
either stay or come. Additionally, the joint ventures between governments and businesses also resulted in an increased blur
between the lines of public and private.
The media also served as another key player. The redevelopment plans for Vancouver were met with resistance by residents. Upset
by the pushback from citizen organizations, the media acted as a key player in promoting the plans. The local press in Vancouver was
used to legitimize and sell Vancouver’s redevelopment by predominantly foreign investors in the mid-1980s to the early 1990s.
These local newspapers took the stance that the redevelopment plans would secure the city’s economic future, which would benefit
everyone, and they were able to sell this view by constructing their arguments around a communitarian framework; if you didn’t
support the development plans, you were selfish if you were against the plans because you would be denying the “common good.” I
found this piece interesting for a few reasons. First, it showed a David versus Goliath fight between communities and developers
that were aided by the government, which demonstrates how community activism can be powerful and makes me ruminate about
how different urban spaces would look if citizens had a bigger role in redevelopment and whether or not gentrification would be as
widespread as it is. The inclusion of the role of the role of the media in Mitchell’s writing, including a newspaper article series and an
interview about the mayor of Vancouver, highlight how the neutrality of the media can be abused by the state and wealthy
developers and businesses. This has a directly influence on public opinion, which can swing public policies in their favor. Overall,
Mitchell’s work helped me better understand why and how a city or neighborhood can be thrust into such rapid change.
4

5. Brulle, Robert J, and David N Pellow. “Environmental Justice: Human Health and Environmental
Inequalities.”Annual Review of Public Health, vol. 27, 2006, pp. 103–24.
Robert J. Brulle and David N. Pellow provide an overview of environmental justice and environmental inequality in “Environmental
Justice: Human Health and Environmental Inequalities.” The main concept of this review is that exposure to toxic hazards isn’t even
distributed between poor and rich nations and also within each nation between different socioeconomic classes. The disparate
exposures to toxins are influenced by race and income, which has resulted in not only increased exposure to toxins in poor
communities and people of color, but has also become a major contributor of health inequities.
The importance of this review is that it peers into how differences in income and race influence our exposure to toxins and how that
impacts our health. This information is important in recognizing that it’s not just individual action that accounts for overall health,
but is rather more complex and interconnected with our environments that are being increasingly polluted through the industrial
transformation of agriculture. This environmental pollution is changing our bodies by entering our bodies through the food we eat,
the water we drink, and the air we breathe. The toxins that enter our body also come from the products we use and the presence of
toxins in the products we purchase and the use of antibiotics, vitamins, and hormones used in livestock to produce meat.
Since race and income-level impact our exposure to these toxins, the reality is that unless to have the financial means to distance
yourself from these toxins to be healthier, your chances of limiting to exposure are decreased. It is important to raise awareness on
this matter because of the individual accountability that is often used as to explain health disparities and understand that the health
of communities is also the result of a larger system that allows these disparities to create differences in health.
5

6. Ruzeck, Sherly Burt et al. “What are the Dynamics of Differences?” Women’s Health: Complexities and
Differences, Ohio State University Press, 1997, 47-83.
In “Taking Environmental Ethics Public,” Andrew Light offers his view on environmental ethics and environmental activism, which is
known as methodological environmental pragmatism (MEP), and the role of environmental ethics in society. MEP brings
environmental issues from the background to the front so that the publicly can be more engaged and better educated on
environmental issues. Generally, views on environmental issues are either biocentric or anthropocentric. Light asserts that
environmental ethics has a tendency to be associated with normative ethics, asking the question of whether nature has intrinsic
value or not. He sees two flaws in this: it excludes anthropocentric arguments for environmental protection and ignores
conversations about what moral values lead people to support more environmentally friendly views and policies. Environmental
philosophers have a responsibility to persuade the public to be more concerned with environmental issues, but in order to do so,
they must take a more pragmatic approach that requires them to be open to and take seriously anthropocentric arguments in order
to make environmental ethics more accessible to the public.
Embracing a view that isn’t one’s own personal view, such as the case of an environmental philosopher with biocentric views
embracing an anthropocentric view, doesn’t necessarily mean that a person is giving up their own convictions and morality to cave
in to another. If you can take someone else’s view seriously, you can understand their argument and perspective, and in doing so,
you will learn their moral values. In doing so, you can speak to issues that directly impact people and in turn, will be able to frame
your own arguments and convictions according to their morals and persuade them to be more concerned and engaged when it
comes to a multitude of issues; whether it’s environmental issues, public health issues, human rights issues, or anything else of
concern to humans and nature.
6

7. Sachs, Jeffrey. The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time. New York: Penguin Books, 2006.
Jeffrey Sachs believes that with the help of foreign aid from the Global North, extreme poverty can be eradicated by 2025. The
Global North should provide foreign aid to the Global South because it is the Global North’s responsibility to help developing
countries step onto the ladder of development. Foreign aid is necessary because it paves the way to economic development and
improving levels of inequality by helping to meet preconditions of basic infrastructure and human capital. Foreign aid can increase
life expectancy, advance opportunities for women, and can help provide essentials that can improve the health of a population, such
as, health care, clean water, food, etc. For Sachs, once access to these basics are improved, then microfinance can be successfully
introduced to help boost the country onto the ladder of development. In order to get onto that ladder, he describes the steps
necessary to reach it, in what he calls “clinical economics.”
I know that when it comes to foreign aid, there are many situations in which states misuse the funds because of corruption, but
foreign aid shouldn’t be halted to countries even when there is evidence of corruption. Sachs readily acknowledges that flawed
international aid practices of the structural adjustment era, and asserts that the steps of clinical economics help identify the causes
and complexities that are unique to each recipient nation. This itself will allow us to create tailored solutions to help each nation
step onto the ladder of development, but also to look at where the corruption is and how to set up frameworks to improve the
systems that allow corruption to happen. To me, this needs to occur from the top down, starting at the international and then down.
To me, this Is the most logical approach because there is no single-sided approach to different problems that plague different
nations regarding states, foreign states, and multinational corporations. In order for development to happen sustainably, for the
environment and for people, it has to occur within a guide that can be individualized to fit different problems.
7

8. Sparke, Matthew. Introducing Globalization: Ties, Tensions and Uneven Integration. Oxford: Wiley-
Blackwell, 2013.
An essential reading in the ISS program has been “Globalization and You” by Matthew Sparke. This book is an introduction to
globalization. Some of the key information within the book includes the concepts of Big G Globalization and little g globalization.
Another important concept in the book is neoliberalism and how it is the driving force behind globalization.
Sparke’s book offers a comprehensive and balanced view of globalization and its impacts. Understanding the growing impact of
global market integration, the issues surrounding globalization, and being able to analyze the “ties and tension of uneven global
development” all help us analyze the impacts of globalization on global and local scales. Equally important, is that it pushes us to
synthesize and analyze how global market forces shapes our own experiences, from what we wear, the things we use, our education,
and other opportunities. Having the critical skills needed to analyze and understand the intricacies and impacts of globalization can
empower us to be more engaged in shaping the world around us.
8

9. “Scott E. Page – Biography.” Leigh Bureau, W. Colston Leigh, Inc,
http://www.leighbureau.com/speakers/spage/
This ISS reading isn’t a book or an article, but it is a page on a website for a communications course I took. Instead, it is a biography
of a speaker at the Leigh Bureau that highlights the speaker’s most prominent research. The speaker in focus is Scott E. Page, a 2013
Guggenheim Fellow whose professional positions have included being a professor at the University of Michigan, external faculty at
the Santa Fe Institute, and he is also the author of The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools,
and Societies, The Diversity Bonus, Complex Adaptive Systems, and Diversity Complexity and Difference.
Page researches the many ways that diversity improves performance and decision making and how social, political, and economic
systems work. Through his research, Page has found that diversity is more beneficial than homogenous groups of people with similar
ways of thinking when it comes to complex tasks. He uses the term “diversity bonuses” to describe this. Diversity is also an asset in
that it “underpins system level robustness, allowing for multiple responses to external shocks and internal adaptations.” Being able
to recognize the value of diversity can fortify a person’s ability to think creatively and abstractly. By examining the benefits of
diversity in problem-solving, we can recognize differences and how they can be used to our advantage in improving performance
and decision making skills. If we can embrace diversity and differences, we can also recognize the importance in looking at issues
from different angles and as a result, we will be more open to different ideas and creating our own solutions when it comes to
address a myriad of issues in a complex world.
9

10. Klein, Naomi. “Don’t Look Away Now, the Climate Crisis Needs you.” Guardian. 6 March 2015.
In this Guardian article, Klein argues that we need to stop ignoring climate change and recognize that it needs to be addressed with
urgency in the shape of societal, political, and global market reforms. In the beginning of the article, Klein immediately addresses
nonchalant attitudes about climate change, despite being faced with ample information about it and its threats. This attitude
enables not just the same activities that threaten our planet, but also encourages even more destructive activities, such as, fracking,
deep water drilling, coal from detonated mountains, and personal consumption and lifestyle choices that contribute to climate
change. What ties all of these activities together is In order to fight the threat of climate change, merely changing our consumption
isn’t enough. People will have to put pressure on their governments and in doing so Klein states that, “the political class will have to
respond, both by making resources available and by bending the free market rules that have proven so pliable when elite interests
are in peril.” Not only will reshaping market policies and changing consumption habits aid us in mitigating the harmful effects of
climate change, but also help alleviate inequality and strengthen democracy.
Looking at climate change through this lens shows exactly how each issue is interlinked and what part we can do in mitigating the
impacts of climate change. Klein’s approach to fighting climate change is interesting because she looks at how it’s not just an
environmental or economic issue, but also a social issue. I believe anthropocentric climate change is very real and is at the forefront
of our generation’s issues to fix. One of the underlying issues of climate change is how it impacts people differently depending upon
a number of factors. Those in poverty are most adversely impacted by climate change and will continue to be in the future. Those
living in developing countries and countries with conflicts are more likely to increase the negative impacts of climate change. Being a
woman can also increase the negative impacts of climate change. In order to get people to remove their blinders when it comes to
climate change, we have to be vigilant, but the media (whether through news networks or through social media) can play a
monumental role in shaping the way we view climate change and its urgency.
10