2025 JC1 ASRJC P1A7 Essay Outlines

Adapted from 2023 ASRJC JC1 Promotional Examination Anderson Serangoon Junior College General Paper 2025 JC1 P1A7 Suggested Essay Outlines Question 1 ‘The key obstacle to solving environmental problems is corporate greed.’ How far do you agree? Question Analysis Issue: - Environmental problems and our efforts to solve them - The obstacles that hinder environmental efforts (and whether corporate greed is the chief of these) Context: - Global context Conceptual Understanding: • There are many obstacles hindering environmental efforts, and corporate greed is often singled out as a major obstacle. Key words: • Key obstacle: the most significant roadblock • Solving environmental problems: attempt to address environmental issues • Corporate greed: companies/corporations wanting more (money, market share, publicity, clout, etc.) Significant aspects/areas to be discussed (5W1H, Multiple Perspectives, Significant Trends, SPECTRAM): Candidates have to address all the key words stated above. The main POC to be addressed is that of all the roadblocks to environmental progress, corporate greed is the worst. Possible Stands • It is largely true that corporate greed is the key obstacle to solving environmental problems. • It is only partially/not very true that corporate greed is the key obstacle to solving environmental problems • Reasons why it is largely true that corporate greed is the key obstacle to solving environmental problems. Reasons why it is only partially/not very true that corporate greed is the key obstacle to solving environmental problems - TS1: The main cause of the misinformation campaigns that seriously hinder environmental efforts is corporations who obsessively desire profit. - e.g. The fossil fuel industry, exemplified by major corporations like Exxon and Shell, pursued higher profits while concealing internal research conducted in the 1980s that clearly linked their products to carbon emissions and global warming. Despite their awareness of potentially catastrophic consequences, these companies actively withheld this information from the public, prioritizing profit maximization over environmental concerns and hindering efforts to combat climate change. The misinformation campaigns orchestrated by these corporations wielded significant influence over the public's perception of the gravity of environmental issues, making them arguably the most - TS1: In many cases, rather than hindering environmental progress, corporate self-interest serves as a catalyst for environmentally sustainable practices. This is because corporations aim to win over the growing number of environmentally-conscious consumers, driving them to adopt greener initiatives. - e.g. As consumers increasingly prioritize eco-friendly transportation options, automotive giants such as Tesla, BYD, and BMW have made substantial investments in electric vehicle (EV) technology. Their profit-driven quest for market dominance in the growing EV sector has not only resulted in reduced greenhouse gas emissions but has also accelerated the development of renewable energy infrastructure to support EV charging networks. This environmental benefit has the potential to be substantial; for

Adapted from 2023 ASRJC JC1 Promotional Examination formidable obstacle to garnering public support for effective climate action. Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate- consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons- secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings instance, according DNV, a Norway-based certification company, Norway's nationwide shift to EVs is projected to reduce global carbon emissions by nearly 400 million tonnes from 2010 to 2050. Source: https://www.dnv.com/energy-transition/how- norway-evs-have-cut-emissions-globally.html# - TS2: While consumerism is commonly viewed as the main impediment to environmental progress, it is, in fact, corporate greed that fuels consumerism. Corporations, driven by the relentless pursuit of profit maximisation, have fostered the modern consumerist economy by shifting the negative environmental impacts of responsible production onto the environment itself, without taking full responsibility or bearing the associated costs. - e.g. For instance, fast fashion companies such Zara, driven by corporate greed and profit maximization, prioritize rapid and disposable clothing production. These companies contribute to consumerism by manufacturing garments that don't last, resulting in extensive textile waste. The environmental impact of their practices, including the use of synthetic materials and the disposal of non-synthetic clothing in landfills, is often externalized, leaving society and the environment to bear the costs without adequate responsibility or accountability from the corporations themselves. The fact that these companies collectively form a $2.4 trillion annual industry underscores that the great bane of consumerism is ultimately driven by the avarice of multi-national corporations, which should thus be regarded as the chief adversary of environmental efforts. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/03/books/review/h ow-fast-fashion-is-destroying-the-planet.html - TS2: The lack of viable alternative to fossil fuels is by far the more significant roadblock to environmental action than is corporate greed. This is evident from how ineffective carbon taxes have often proven. - e.g. For example, let's examine the case of Norway, which implemented a carbon tax aimed at fossil fuels in the early 1990s to reduce carbon emissions. Surprisingly, data from the World Bank indicates that on a per capita basis, carbon dioxide emissions in Norway actually increased slightly between 1990 and 2015. This illustrates that even when measures like carbon taxes address corporate greed by raising the cost of environmentally unsustainable production methods, companies may still rely on carbon- intensive practices because there are limited viable alternatives. In essence, the root challenge in resolving climate issues is not corporate greed per se, but rather the lack of green alternatives to fossil fuels. Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/taxnotes/2021/08/13/t he-case-against-a-carbon-tax/?sh=47698e7e18ba -TS3: Consumers may not be aware of the environmental harm that they are perpetrating and even think that they are doing good by buying from seemingly sustainable companies who are, in fact, employing greenwashing tactics without any tangible environmental benefits. Corporations may present themselves as sustainable or friends of the environment when all they are doing is to chase the green dollar to deceive the growing consumer consciousness of environmental damage. e.g. For instance, Volkswagen promoted diesel vehicles as eco-friendly, but were later found to have installed "defeat devices" in their cars to cheat on emissions tests, significantly increasing pollution. H&M's "Conscious" collection has faced accusations of greenwashing, with claims suggesting that the collection was marketed as more sustainable than it

Adapted from 2023 ASRJC JC1 Promotional Examination actually is. A notable lawsuit filed by a New York resident alleged that H&M misled consumers into thinking the Conscious Choice collection was environmentally friendly, despite the products containing a higher percentage of synthetic fibers like recycled polyester, which critics argue is not truly sustainable Corporate greenwashing is counterproductive for the environment because it misleads consumers and stakeholders into believing that products or companies are more environmentally friendly than they truly are. Consumers perceive to be saving the environment by switching to “sustainable” products in the short term, but in the long term, actually support environmentally damaging products or practices, thereby