The Rise of the Digital Ecosystem

The rise of the digital ecosystem is a phenomenon that has been taking place in recent years, and it is set to continue growing at an exponential rate. The digital ecosystem is essentially a network of interconnected digital technologies and services that work together to enhance the overall user experience. This ecosystem encompasses everything from social media and mobile apps to virtual reality and the Internet of Things.

One of the main drivers behind the rise of the digital ecosystem is the proliferation of smartphones and mobile devices. With over 5 billion people worldwide now owning a smartphone, these devices have become an essential part of our daily lives. They provide us with a constant connection to the internet, allowing us to access a wide range of digital services and technologies.

Another key factor in the rise of the digital ecosystem is the increasing availability of high-speed internet and the growing number of connected devices. The Internet of Things (IoT) is a prime example of this, with more and more devices being connected to the internet every day. This includes everything from home appliances and cars to industrial equipment and medical devices.

The digital ecosystem also encompasses a wide range of services and technologies such as virtual reality, artificial intelligence and big data. These technologies are enabling new and innovative ways of interacting with the digital world, and they are set to revolutionize the way we live and work.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been a major contributor to the rise of the digital ecosystem. It has the ability to process and analyse large amounts of data, making it a valuable tool for improving the performance of various digital technologies. For example, AI is being used to enhance the capabilities of virtual assistants, making them more intuitive and better able to understand natural language. In addition, AI is being used to improve the performance of self-driving cars, making them safer and more efficient. Another important area where AI is contributing to the rise of the digital ecosystem is in the field of predictive analytics. By analysing large amounts of data, AI algorithms can make predictions about future events, which can be used to improve decision-making and optimize business operations. This technology is already being used in various industries such as healthcare, finance, and retail, and its application is expected to grow in the future. AI is also being used to improve the performance of various digital services such as search engines, recommendation systems, and social media platforms. By analysing patterns in user behaviour, AI can personalize these services, making them more relevant and useful to users. In summary, AI is a vital component of the digital ecosystem, and it has the potential to drive significant improvements in the performance of various digital technologies and services. As the capabilities of AI continue to improve, it is expected to play an even greater role in the rise of the digital ecosystem in the future.

One of the most notable effects of the rise of the digital ecosystem is the way it has changed the way businesses operate. Companies are now using digital technologies to improve their operations, increase efficiency and drive revenue growth. The digital ecosystem is also playing a key role in the rise of the gig economy, sharing economy, crowd-sourcing, crowd-funding etc.

In conclusion, the rise of the digital ecosystem is a trend that is set to continue growing in the coming years. It encompasses a wide range of digital technologies and services that are interconnected and work together to enhance the overall user experience. With the proliferation of smartphones and the growing number of connected devices, the digital ecosystem is revolutionizing the way we live and work. Businesses and individuals alike must adapt to this new digital world in order to remain competitive.

Vedat YOZKAT

This article was originally published on the book "Geleceği Kodlayan Çocuk" by Vedat Yozkat

Sustainability in IT Operations: The Importance of Virtualization and Other Techniques

The environmental impact of IT infrastructure is often overlooked when setting it up. Traditional considerations such as initial cost, performance, compatibility, and maintenance are prioritized, but the increasing number of server equipment leads to higher energy consumption, cooling expenses, and maintenance costs. To address this issue, organizations such as Dell, Sun Microsystems and others have formed non-profit organizations like "The Green Grid" to promote efficient energy consumption in IT equipment. 

Another organization, SPEC, which is formed by Oracle, IBM, and HP, conducts research to help compare energy-saving practices in IT organizations like data centres and server rooms. Both of these organizations, along with other market leaders, recommend virtualization as an energy-efficient practice.

Virtualization is a technology that enables multiple server software to run on a single server hardware. This results in a reduction of the number of server hardware needed, which in turn leads to lower cooling expenses, lower energy consumption, and less floor space. Virtualization projects promote server consolidations that lead the way for better management of the servers and lower maintenance costs. It is important to note that while virtualization is not a sufficient effort on its own to make IT operations more environmentally friendly, it is a step in the right direction.

There are several ways to reduce the environmental impact of IT infrastructure other than server virtualization. One way is to use energy-efficient hardware such as servers, storage devices and cooling systems. Another way is to use renewable energy sources to power the IT infrastructure, such as solar or wind power. Additionally, implementing power management systems, such as power capping and automatic power-down of idle systems, can help reduce energy consumption. Another approach is to use cloud computing and remote hosting, which can reduce the need for physical servers, and can also reduce the energy consumption and environmental impact of data centres. Additionally, proper disposal of electronic waste, and recycling of old equipment, can also help reduce the environmental impact of IT operations. Overall, a comprehensive approach that considers energy efficiency, renewable energy, power management, and waste reduction, is needed to fully address the environmental impact of IT operations.

In conclusion, all these techniques should be used in combination. Overall, it is crucial for organizations to adopt a holistic approach towards sustainability in their IT operations and continuously strive to improve their environmental footprint.

Vedat YOZKAT

Schedule a Walk

Many of us, as office workers, spend great deal of time sitting at our desks for long hours. Sitting for prolonged hours do not do any good to any of us. Not only, it increases our stress level and risk of having health problems but also decreases our metabolism speed and our productivity as a result. Years ago when smart phones were not very popular and wearable technologies were not on the market yet, I bought a simple mechanical pedometer to measure my daily activity. Aside from my gym routine, I wanted to see how many steps I was taking on a regular day. My car is parked right in front of my home and after a short drive I park in front of my work place. I sit all day long in front of my computer and do my short commute in the evening to go back home. I was doing my regular gym activities but take that aside, I found out that on a regular day, I was not active at all. My step count was less that 5000 steps a day which may be considered as a "sedentary lifestyle." I needed to do something to change my daily routine.

My workplace is in an industrial zone, there are no green parks, not even a decent walking route, and however, I decided to take walking breaks in the middle of the day right before my lunch. I started taking 20 minutes fast pacing walks around the neighborhood which added almost 3000 steps to my daily step count. I have been doing this for years now, if I am not preoccupied with something extremely important or if it is not raining heavily, I am taking a 20 minute walk almost every day.

I do not see this as a calorie burning activity or a replacement of my daily exercise routine; I continue doing my regular exercises. This is just a short time off for getting away from what I do, clearing my mind, boosting my energy level to return back to work more focused and for a chance to get exposed to the sun and fresh air. I found out that other than increasing my energy level and concentration, these short walks improve my problem solving capability and increase my creativity.

Many people take smoking breaks, coffee or tea breaks and get away from their desks frequently. I highly recommend taking a walking break once a day which would facilitate harmonizing your mind and body, replenish your concentration and focus and finally enhance your productivity. Once you start moving, you will be more open to the idea of moving more and being more active.


Vedat YOZKAT

Think Global, Act Social

Technology is usually to blame for environmental problems and for promoting social detachment, being in the heart of the technology, is it possible for IT operations to be more social, is it possible for IT departments to contribute to social and environmental projects?

Although, IT departments have always been the leader for productivity, we think, we still could find room to improve our services and help contributing to social initiatives without compromising the service quality. Other than participating to the global projects and programs, we think by acting smart and making minor adjustments we can consume less, help reducing our carbon footprint locally and contribute to the society more.

IT departments contributes substantially in many green initiatives within corporations, such as paper reduction campaigns, energy conversation projects, promoting communication projects to reduce business travels and involving heavily in recycle & reuse projects.

Not only we “think green” for such activities, but also as IT teams, we take parts on socially responsible activities. We have been getting in touch with vocational schools in the vicinity to make a difference for the students in these schools. We provide a workplace experience for the students in such vocational schools. For students who are studying in computer science, programming and electronics, it is at upmost importance to find a workplace to put their learning at use. Not only, we provide a workplace experience for these students but also we involve them in IT projects to increase their take from this experience.

Furthermore, IT departments usually provide many training opportunities. Corporations consist of both well-educated, experienced staff and junior and not well equipped staff. One of IT departments' aim to bring everyone at an average level of understanding the technology and increase everyone's level of computer literacy. We provide many training opportunities to those that are not very well equipped with all the skills and qualification for their career targets. Without the required computer skills, many people cannot reach their career targets. We believe by helping them the break this barrier, IT departments play an important role in people's development and reaching their career goals.

Every year, number of personal computer systems retired or no longer needed by IT departments. While these are not the most powerful computers, they are still very useful for teaching basic computer skills. We refurbish these computers, remove all software licenses from them and reinstall free software licenses. After completing the installation and testing, we donate the equipment free of charge to eligible schools that are truly in need. This donation program has helped bring access to computer technology to many students. We are proud of these efforts that help create and foster foundations for enhanced learning. We will continue to donate such equipment to the schools and other educational nonprofit organizations in need.

We believe that environmental and social problems will not go away overnight by itself, all of us have to make collective efforts, we have to think smart to find more ways to be sustainable and increase our involvement in social initiatives.

We always have to keep in mind that the small details make the difference.

Vedat YOZKAT

Ego or Eco...

“Is the relationship between humans and the rest of the nature hierarchical and are humans, being superior to the rest of the nature, thus morally permitted to use nature in any way they see fit?”

Throughout the history, humanity had seen itself as the center of everything. It was widely believed that humans were created by the God and in the image of the God. Anything around us is created by the God to serve the humans’ needs. According to this view, humans had a special place in the environment, they were superior to the nature because the nature was explicitly created for their use. Below diagram depicts this view by showing a human male on top of the ecosystem pyramid.

Not only did they see themselves in a special place in this planet, but also they believed that the earth, being inhabited by humans, was the center of the universe thus was a special planet, too. This school of thought led the development of anthropocentric or human-centered world view.

Under the principles of the anthropocentric (human-centered) world view, humans are thought to be masters of the rest of the nature thus the nature is only a resource for the well-being of the human race. Since the nature is only a resource, humans are allowed to use the nature in any ways they want without taking any considerations for the nature itself.

I believe that today’s widely accepted environmental movements such as conservationism and the movements toward achieving a sustainable society are also products of the anthropocentric world view. Although, these movements do concern about the well-being of the nature and they support the idea that the nature is valuable, they still perceive the nature in human terms, that is, they believe that the nature should be protected to serve the humans better in terms of using it for sustaining human life, providing for future generations to come, recreation, appreciation and enjoyment.

Historically, some counter ideologies have been established against the anthropocentric world view also. Some scientific findings, such as Newton's geocentric discoveries and Darwin's theory of evolution, have been used to support these counter ideas. Even though, these ideologies establish good views in terms of defining the nature as an entity with an intrinsic value, they are still far from being practical in the current way of thinking. We have to devise new ways and change our way of thinking to find our righteous place in the ecosystem: not on top, just a part.

I believe that no matter what happens, the nature will survive and our existence will depend on the way the nature shape into when it manages its survival.

Vedat YOZKAT

How Green is My (Silicon) Valley...

Ethical Obligation toward Ourselves

Nowadays, heart disease is one of the leading causes of death in industrialized nations. One of the major causes of heart disease is the excess intake of fat and cholesterol, and meat is the main provider of fat and cholesterol. Since a balanced vegetarian diet greatly eliminates the fat and cholesterol intake, the risk of having heart disease for a vegetarian is very small. In fact, as early as 1961, the Journal of the American Medical Association reported, “90% to 97% of heart disease can be prevented by a vegetarian diet”

Cancer is another disease that can be prevented by following a vegetarian diet. Researches strongly suggest that eating a meat-based diet puts us greatly at risk in terms of cancer. For instance, the studies published by the Himalayan Academy show; the risk of contracting breast cancer is 3.8 times greater for women who eat meat daily compared to less than once a week, and for men who consume meat daily, the risk of fatal prostate cancer is 3.6 times greater.

Another great concern is the chemicals that meat contains. These chemicals could be very harmful to people who obtain them through eating meat. One class of these chemicals is the antibiotics. Large amounts of antibiotics are fed to livestock to control certain diseases among the animals. Since the bacteria causing these diseases are becoming immune to the drugs very quickly, the meat industry is increasing the amount of the antibiotics given to livestock every year. It is not healthy for humans to consume the meat that contains high levels of antibiotics because by the gradual increase of antibiotics in the human body, disease causing bacteria which affect humans build a resistance against these antibiotics, and this causes a rapid decline in effectiveness of all “wonder-drug” antibiotics.

Another group of chemicals that the meat contains includes pesticides and herbicides. These chemicals are commonly used to increase crop efficiency. Even in a vegetarian diet, people receive these chemicals. However, since livestock is feeding on this crop, as well, they are biologically magnifying the chemicals in their bodies and passing these chemicals at a much greater rate to the humans who consume their meat. For example, a research published by the Himalayan Academy clearly indicated that contamination of breast milk due to pesticides found in meat-eating mothers versus non meat-eating mothers is 35 times higher.

I also truly believe that adopting a vegetarian diet would also provide us more internal peace. As Tolstoy asked once, “while our bodies are the living graves of murdered animals, how can we expect any ideal conditions on earth?” In my opinion, violence creates more violence. When we treat other creatures violently, I do not think that we can find internal peace of our own.

Vedat YOZKAT

Ethical Obligation toward the Animals

One of the most important issue related to the meat consumption is dealing with animal rights. It is very simple that, in order to eat meat, animals should be killed. However, the necessity of killing another living being is highly controversial. Must we really kill in order to live? My answer for this question is a simple answer: no. I think that we can sustain our well-being without killing other living creatures. We can very well nourish our bodies with a plant-based diet, and in today’s way of living, we do not have to kill the animals to protect ourselves or eliminate the competition for other food resources either. I think that we have no right to kill the animals or treat them badly for only pleasure; since we can nourish ourselves very well without eating them, our only reason for doing all this to the animals is our enjoyment of the way they taste. And this will not even come close to justifying the cruelty.

Today, most of us do not live in wild habitats; we do not even see most kinds of animals anywhere other than zoos. Our encountering with animals is minimized in today’s comfort-driven society; therefore, it is much more impersonal. Today, we do not have to kill the animals for ourselves either because others in the meat industry are killing them for us. I think that this impersonalization and the disassociation of meat from the animals are the major human perceptions that are contributing the growth of the meat industry. Whenever a person goes shopping, she or he sees these little packages of meat in the cooler. There is nothing to associate the meat in the cooler with a living-breathing animal. For the shopper, this is only another food item to be bought. I truly believe that if everybody were reminded of the fact that these little, clean-looking packages are products of careless, malicious handling followed by violent, bloody and terrorful slaughtering, the meat consumption would promptly drop. This theory is also backed by the fact that of all occupations in the US, slaughterhouse workers have the highest turnover rate because most people cannot deal with the daily experience of screams of terror and the anger of the animals.

Some opposers think that if the animals were living in their natural habitat, they would be eaten by carnivore species anyway; therefore, there is nothing wrong with our eating them. However, they overlook the fact that, for example, whereas cows have a lifespan of 25 years under natural living conditions, they are only allowed to live 3 to 5 years on animal farms. They also overlook the fact that the treatment that the animals receive before they are killed is very different from how nature treats them in their original habitat.

I think that it is morally wrong to treat other living creatures badly and kill them for only pleasure. Since we are the only moral creatures on this planet, I think that we have an ethical obligation toward the animals, as well. I also tend to believe that, as Leonardo da Vinci wrote once, “the time will come when men will look upon the murder of the animals as they now look upon the murder of men”.

Vedat YOZKAT

Our Ethical Obligation toward the Environment

In the earlier stages of human history, individuals who ate meat did so at their own expenses, that is, whatever an individual could hunt or raise for himself or herself was whatever she or he could eat. However, especially after the industrial revolution, humanity found itself in a comfort-driven society. People in such a society do not like to be bound by their own performances and limitations but want more of everything. This has been a driving force behind the fact that meat production has become a huge industry in recent decades. As it is the case for most major industries, capital-driven enterprising of the meat industry has created major problems in the environment.

First, livestock growers realized the fact that in order to obtain maximum efficiency, they have to take the animals under their total control; this meant that the animals of commercial value should be removed from their natural habitats and put in well-defended places. This separationist attitude created several problems. By doing this, growers removed a valuable item from the food chain of the nature; this was a major cause of disruption for carnivore species that heavily depend on these animals. Not only did some weaker carnivore animals die because they could not find food readily available, but also they were killed by people who were defending the livestock under their supervision. This resulted in the decreasing of some carnivore species’ numbers and in some cases even led to extinction.

Another problem occurred. When under the supervision and protection of humans, these captivated animals increased their population dramatically to an extent that they could never reach in their original natural habitat. With the increasing population of the livestock, land and food problems have been raised. In order to keep the animals alive and well, the meat industry needed a lot of land for animals and for more crop land to feed the animals. To meet the increasing demand, each year a lot of forest land is cleared for crop land to feed livestock and produce more meat. Because of this mass clearing of forest lands, many species face extinction; a lot of wild animals die because they lose their homes in the woods. For most forest species, the forest is the major source of food and protection. With the forest destroyed, many species cannot resist the difficulties presented and die either because of starvation or because of weather conditions. The destruction of forests not only presents a problem for forest species but also creates problems for the earth’s ecology. It is widely known that forests are the major source of oxygen and oxygen is needed for life on earth. By destroying the forests, the meat industry is actually destroying the earth’s major source of oxygen. Destroying these forest lands is also a major contributor to floods and top soil erosion, as well. Trees help the soil hold together by absorbing the water, cutting these trees and planting crops with short roots would weaken the soil against winds and water and the top soil would be eroded by these external forces. With the rich and fertile soil eroded, we would not even be able to grow crops for ourselves, let alone for the livestock.

Another major environmental problem related to raising livestock is that the energy needed to produce meat is much greater. According to the scientists, the energy needed to produce meat is fifty times more than the energy needed to produce same amount of crop. This would mean that for every pound of meat fifty times more fossil fuels needed to be burnt, and the ecological problems associated with fossil fuel burning are so widely known that there is no need to discuss it here in detail other than mentioning its disease causing effect on mine workers such as black lung disease, its contribution to increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere, its contribution to acid rain and its alleged contribution to global warming..
Researches also show that in order to produce a pound of meat, 2500 gallons of fresh water are needed as opposed to 25 gallons of water to produce a pound of wheat. Because fresh water consumption is so much greater in raising livestock, the livestock growers are said to be one of the main contributors of fresh water pollution. Although the major portion of the earth’s surface is covered with water, most of the water is water with sea salt; that is, it is not usable for agricultural and household purposes unless it is treated. Only a small portion of the water is fresh and readily usable water. Water pollution in the industrialized nations is a big problem because fresh water is a precious and essential source for life, and we are rapidly polluting our resources. Although treatment techniques for sea water and some polluted water are scientifically available, they are neither practical nor economical solutions to the pollution problem. In some cases of polluted water, it is not even possible to clean up the pollution. Because of its cost-increasing effect, most industries are inattentive to take precautionary steps to decrease the amount of their water polluting waste unless they are forced by governmental regulations. One of the main industries that contribute to the pollution of the fresh water is the meat industry because the meat industry in the US, for example, uses more than half of all water used for all purposes in the US. As I stated before; fresh water conservation is so important for all the present and future life forms on earth, and we should minimize the pollution that we pour into this precious source of life.

I think that we should respect the wildlife in forests as well as the animals under captivity and let them live their lives in their natural habitats. I also think that we should be more concerned about the future of this planet and act accordingly to eliminate fossil fuel burning, deforestation, polluting of fresh water and our contribution to the extinction of species. I not only think that we should be concerned more about the future generations, animals, the environment and the earth’s well-being than what it is on our plates, but also I strongly believe that we are ethically obligated to do so. Keeping these facts in mind, I conclude by repeating that we must fulfill our ethical obligation toward the environment by eliminating our meat consumption so that this world would be a better place to live for us, for all the other species and for the future generations.

Vedat YOZKAT

Hunger, a Game?

World hunger is one of the most important of the problems that humanity is facing today. Each year, approximately 60 million people die either because of malnutrition or under nutrition. The major portion of these deaths is occurring among children who are much more fragile and prone to starvation than the adults. According to the studies, a child starves to death every two seconds. I think that these people who face starvation every day of their lives should not be deprived of their most basic right of continuing their lives, whereas people in the industrialized countries take this right for granted and continue to live in a consumption based society where massive and unacceptable wasting of resources has become a way of life. Today, with the help of our advanced science and technology, we are very efficient in growing crops. As a result, the world’s crop yield, today, is greater than anytime in the history. One would think that since we have a very large amount of crop production, we should not have any problems related to lack of food resources for every person in the world. However, the hunger problem is not a result of insufficient resources but a result of unequal distribution of resources among the individuals. Somehow this could be taken as a fortunate recognition because it would mean that the resources in the world are adequate for every people to nourish themselves if the distribution problem is solved. The major portion of the distribution problem comes into the scene with our preference for using the crops in a very inefficient conversion process to produce a more expensive food: meat. Instead, we can use the crops to feed people directly and prevent a massive waste in the conversion process. When people are starving in one part of the world, a massive amount of food is consumed by livestock in other parts of the world to produce meat in a ridiculously inefficient ratio; for every pound of beef, for instance, approximately 16 pounds of grains and soybeans needed. In a more focused example, the United States of America is one of the major producers of corn, wheat, oat, soybeans and potatoes. However, the statistics show that only a small portion of the US production is consumed by people (approximately 10-20%) because the US is also one of the major producers of livestock, and the major portion of the US grain and soybeans production is eaten by livestock. Some researchers argue that if only the people in the US reduced their intake of meat by 10%, with the grain saved from the reduced feeding of livestock, all the people who face starvation each year in the world would be adequately fed .

I think that it is morally wrong to let people die because of starvation when we could eliminate our waste of resources and let everyone nourish himself or herself. I also think that every member of the earth community should have an equal right to the sharing of resources, and she or he should not wave this right to the others who think their shares should be bigger because they are better than the rest. Under the light of these facts, it is clear, in my opinion, that people have an ethical obligation toward others not only to reduce but also to eliminate the meat consumption completely so that hunger would disappear from the face of the earth forever.

Vedat YOZKAT

Why Do Corporations Go Green?

Nowadays, all companies in a race with each other to adopt environmental practices in their operations. In the past, nobody has cared much about but now no one can run away from it.

Why is this shift?

• All of a sudden, did the leaders of the industry and the business understand the importance of the environment?
• All of a sudden, is the technology advanced in a way that environment wouldn't be harmed much?
• All of a sudden, did the people realize that the environment is more important than the bottomline?

I think not.

Maybe all of these have triggered the mind shift, but, in my opinion, overall their effect is minimal.

I think the major reason is the policies and regulations. Governments now more aware of the public health and adverse environmental impacts of the heavy industries. Therefore, one after another, governments worldwide are trying adopt regulations and policies to minimize the affects. Although, still deeply influenced by lobbies, industries, still most countries have laws the protect their environment.

Another major reason that the corporates go green is the cost saving aspect. Most green initiatives are returning as a cost saving in way or another. Energy and water conservation, reducing paper consumption, recycling etc are just to name a few.

Public is now more aware about environmental friendly corporates and brands, more and more customers base their choices on this criteria. Public image of a company is very important to increase its market share. Knowing this, corporates, now, investing more on environmental friendly practices as a PR investment.
When competitors adopt more and more environmental friendly practices and shine their images on public's eyes, others feel the pressure to go to the same direction. Peer pressure leads corporations to go green.

People feel good when contributing to environmental friendly practices, I think the feel good factor should not be overlooked. Not only devotion of the customers but also employee loyalty is promoted by adopting such practices. People tend to devote themselves to good causes.

No matter what the reason is, it is extremely crucial that we keep this direction and lead the way for future generations to come. Regardless of the motives, the outcome is of utmost importance.

Vedat YOZKAT

Computers and the Environment

Throughout the history, humanity has altered its environment so that the environment would be more comfortable and more suitable to its needs. For millions and millions years, people have continued to change the environment in many ways, however, these changes have been considered as minor changes, because of the fact that people did not have the necessary power to make major alterations in the environment until the recent centuries. Industrialization was the name of the game that gave the necessary power to the people’s hands, so that they could make major alterations in the environment to obtain a “better life.” Industrialization has been exclusively serving people on the expense of all other elements of the environment. All of the major environmental problems have been created and have been being created during the industrialization process, namely; global warming, ozone depletion, water pollution, air pollution, accelerated extinction of species, etc.

After having completed their development by using the power of industrialization, some nations went into another stage that some people call postindustrialism. According to Daniel Bell in his 1973 work on sociological movements, postindustrialism refers to a shift toward service and advanced knowledge technology (Bartos). I think that computers came into the scene at this stage of industrialization. Because computers, themselves, cannot be used in the production processes as it is required in the industries, but they can be used to improve, control or monitor the production processes. Computers, especially in the recent years, helped the improvements of service economies and led to advancements in the knowledge-based technologies. Analogously, in the postindustrial societies, computers are extensively used to find solutions to the environmental problems created by industrialization.

Because of the complicated nature of the environment, proposed solutions to the environmental problems would lead to some unexpected consequences, and because we cannot use the nature as a laboratory to conduct experiments on it, we would never know what consequences to expect as a result of the actions we are intending to take. In order to get at least some sense of what to expect, environmental scientists, nowadays, heavily rely on computer models and simulations. For example, computer models are extensively used to predict possible outcomes of global warming. Other computer models, such as World3 and Balance of the Planet, are used for educational purposes to give the students some sense of the complex structure of the earth (Skinner). Although, these computer models are widely accepted as good tools for environmental researches, they would be never fully accurate because of the infinite number of parameters involved in a single environmental phenomenon. However, I think that computer models will continue to be used in the process of ethical decision making toward the environment.

Computers are also useful as accurate measurement and complicated calculation devices. Industries in the developed countries, today, monitor their production processes by computers to increase their efficiencies as well as decrease their pollution. Computers are really helpful to make necessary adjustments quickly and accurately in real-time systems to increase productivity of the production line, and consequently eliminate the waste of resources and conserve energy. Environmental scientists also make a heavy use of the computers in analyzing ecological data by measuring the levels of pollution in the air, soil, and water.

I think that use of computers in the postindustrial societies is an attempt to find solutions to the environmental problems that are created by industrialization process. In a sense, computers are our modern devices to help us to find out what is ethically right thing to do. In terms of computer modeling, forecasting, energy conservation systems, environmental safety monitoring systems or computerization of treatment systems, I believe that the use of computers will continue to increase in the near future, and I also believe that computers will be proven to be useful in the ethical decision making process by providing the necessary information and possible precautionary steps to take.

Vedat YOZKAT



References


Bartos, Otomar J. “Postmodernism, Postindustrialism, and the Future.” Sociological Quarterly. Volume 37. Issue 2. p307.

Sewell, Joe. “Expert Systems in the Air Pollution Industry.” Christian Brothers University.


Skinner, B.K. “Decisions, Systems, and Models.” Gumption Trust.

Biodiversity

Biological diversity or biodiversity can be simply described as number of different species within the ecosystem. It includes not only all the animals, plants and micro-organisms that exist on the planet but also it includes all the genetic variety within these species and the variety of ecosystems that they inhabit (“Biodiversity...”). Since the creation of the earth, the earth’s biodiversity has been constantly changing in various rates of speed. Whereas evolution introduces some new species, some natural phenomenon such as changes in climate, volcano eruptions, and meteor impacts may cause extinction of some species. In today’s world, other than these natural phenomena, by over-exploiting and destroying the rainforests, humans have become a huge threat to the biological diversity of the world.

Tropical rainforests are estimated to cover about 7% of the earth’s land surface, yet they hold more than half of the total species in the world (“Vanishing...”). Rainforests are very rich and diverse ecosystems. Everything that constitutes an ecosystem continues its existence in a delicate balance. Even a small disturbance to this balance may cause unintended consequences. Let alone a small disturbance, humans have changed and continue to change this delicate balance in many major ways such as over-exploitation and destruction of rainforests. By the over-exploitation and destruction of rainforests, many of the forest species are facing extinction at a rate that would never be possible in natural conditions.

The main reason behind this massive destruction of rainforests is strictly economical. Mainly local people either encouraged by huge international companies or driven by their instincts for survival in a capital-driven society want to get a “piece” of these precious resources to find themselves a “better” place in their societies. However, giving the finite nature of these resources, in my opinion, these people are preparing their ends in terms of both economically and ecologically.

Destruction of rainforests has one direct and several indirect effects on decreasing biodiversity. The direct effect is , as one would imagine, the fact that the species that only live in the areas that are being destroyed would go extinct. These species would include large trees, small plants, animals, insects and even different types of fungi. The indirect effects are related to habitat alteration and species’ survival skills in a fast altered environment.

First, destruction of rainforests would cause soil erosion, with the fertile top soil gone, soil left would not be suitable for many plant species that originally inhabit the area, and they go extinct. Another indirect factor would be the fact that rainforests, as the name implies, largely contributes to the rainfall in their vicinities, their destruction would lead decreasing in the amount of rainfall and this would create some discomfort for many species that depend on rainfall, and if these species would have difficulties in adjusting the new conditions, they would face extinction. Another indirect effect would be related to CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Forests help removing CO2 from the atmosphere but when they are destroyed, in contrary, they give out CO2. Scientists argue that increasing levels of CO2 levels would cause global warming and in the process, some species would not be able to go along with the changes and vanish from the face of the earth forever.

I think that every ecosystem is invaluable. Some elements of the ecosystem whose contribution to the human lives is obvious such as water, air, soil, plants, etc. are not
more important than the elements whose contribution is less obvious such as swamps,
bacteria, insects, fungi and microorganisms (“The Science...”). The author of the article called “The Science of Biodiversity” argues that the best way of protecting the endangered species is preserving the endangered ecosystem. In the case of rainforests, if we want to preserve the species, we have to preserve the forests.

Up to this point, we have not been able to identify all the species on the earth; therefore, we do not know what kind of use they might offer and whether or not they would be beneficial to humanity in any way. For instance, researches show that only 5% of the known plants have been analyzed for their medical properties (“The Science...”). Since the rest of the plants have no known medical properties so far, they are considered to have no economical value, but it does not mean that they contain no beneficial component to be discovered in the future; therefore, I think that we are morally obligated to conserve every species as if they are as valuable as a treatment for a fatal disease because they might turn out to be (“The Science...”).

Conserving the genetic diversity within individual species is especially important for domesticated crops and animals, because depending on a few number of crops and animals may cause a great economic lose in case of an outbreak which could affect only the species that we are heavily depending on for our food resources (“The Science...”). I think that we have a great obligation toward the human race to keep the species as diverse as possible, because I think it might be helpful to the survival of human race in the future by providing varieties of replacements for our current resources.

In my opinion, biodiversity is so important for the future of this planet, and obviously this accelerated rate of extinction is going to be a huge problem in the near future. Most of the damage is being done by human activities, keeping this in mind, I think that we should set new regulations to keep this types of activities limited, and we should also establish scientific foundations to conserve the existing biodiversity and its components. As I understand, biodiversity is really complicated and has many parameters, and I do not think that we have scientifically advanced enough to reach a thorough understanding of biodiversity. I think that we should conduct more researches on this issue to complete our understanding about biodiversity and its components. Meanwhile, I think, we should immediately stop this accelerated rate of extinction because it will be too late to find out that we cannot survive on this earth by ourselves when we are really by ourselves.


Vedat YOZKAT



References

“Biodiversity is a Guarantee of Evolution.” UNESCO Courier. Volume 49. Issue 9. p4.

“The Science of Biodiversity.” Global Resources.

“Vanishing Forests and Vanishing Species.” One Earth One Future. National Academy of Sciences. Washington. p. 116-130.