text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in the anti-vaccine movement

Zoom meeting on November 20th:
Issue chosen: Power

Disciplines in health and environment and societies

possibilities: things related to gender, growing importance of teenagers in society (climate change, BLM, gender issues), assisted reproduction, surrogacy, BLM, contraception, 'artificial' meat, anti-vaccines/vaccination

Zoom meeting on November 24th:
Topic chosen: the anti-vaccine movements

Disciplines we could talk about: Power of education (lack of education), sociology (social groups impacte by this movement), power of religion, ethics, politics/power of government --> certain vaccinations mandatory, media studies? (the role of the internet - the communication on secondary effects of vaccines, polemics on cases where these secondary effects caused someone's death, etc.), conspiracy theories (discipline?) Power of media in the sociology discipline. Impacts sociology, social groups involved/impacted by anti-vccine movements. Disparities between countries. Those who have/don't have access to vaccines. Power of biology (power acquired by humans - now able to fight against viruses), epidemiology. The impact of lobbies - power of lobbies and their role in politics.

Conflict between biology (pro-vaccine) and social sciences/ethics (anti-vaccine movement and effects on society :education, media representation, politics, religion). Solution/middleground: Communication (by Education and medias). Power of education, how you can shift the anti-vaccine to pro-vaccine perspective

Conflict: can you make vaccination mandatory? Biology - yes

Social sciences/Ethics/Philosophy - can you force people, despite greater good, can you sacrifice individuals? + is are vaccines actually good for your body?

Education - see actual risks of vaccines, very contrasted with representation in the media

Maybe pick Truth instead of power?

links found by Rose:

https://ucl-new-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1637568208&context=PC&vid=UCL_VU2&lang=en_US&search_scope=CSCOP_UCL&adaptor=primo_central_multiple_fe&tab=local&query=any,contains,anti-vaccine%20movement&offset=0

https://www-tandfonline-com.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/doi/abs/10.4161/hv.18371

WHO identifies the anti-vaccine movement as one of the top ten risks for global health: power of this movement

Conclusion of the zoom : We have to read a bit more past works to examine structures and then choose between Power of Truth for the focus of our study

After further discussion we've decided to change the Issue we had chosen: we are now doing Evidence in the anti-accine movement

Found this article which looks interesting: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1586/14760584.2015.964212 Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 20:24, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Article on the link between the anti-vaccine movement and ethics: https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=dujs Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 18:34, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Article on current issues related to anti vaccine movement & covid 19 : https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(20)30227-2/fulltext. --Api20 (discuss • contribs) 16:52, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Zoom meeting on November 30th:

How to structure our Wikibooks chapter:

1) Biology - biological evidence of vaccines' efficiency

2) Ethics - talk about religion but not only (just ethics in general, philosophy etc.)

3) Education - solution? allows people to have a critical view, to understand what a vaccine is and not speculation about it in the media, learn to have reliable sources (like scientific ones rather than things found in social media)

Saucesoja will mainly focus on the biology paragraph, Api20  on the ethics one and Chopsticks21 on the education one.

Introduction: defining the movement + what is the evidence behind people reluctant to Covid-19 vaccinations?

So, I started working on the introduction and am finding sources that may interest you so I'll put them here:

For ethics: Durbach, N. They might as well brand us: Working class resistance to compulsory vaccination in Victorian England. The Society for the Social History of Medicine. 2000;13:45-62. ( vaccine = “unchristian” as it has animal origins + seen as violation of civil liberty)

and https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1586/14760584.2015.964212

For biology (evidence that vaccines are safe): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) Project Priority Studies. Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 10:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Also I created sections to organise the page a bit but feel free to change the titles of your sections if you want to be more specific as my titles are quite broad Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 10:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

SauceSoja and myself have decided to switch our roles paragraph-wise Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 11:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay so I am almost done with my paragraph on evidence in biology, tell me what you think! I will try and find some sources to have facts on vaccines in general and adverse effects as a sort of conclusion to my section to show that the discipline promotes vaccination (quantitative evidence --> data suggests small adverse effects and important decrease in the diseases in general). Feel free to edit! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 11:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

 * Hello Chopsticks21, thank you for all your links, I will have a look at them!

Overall your work is clear and seems well-referenced, you make some good points. The introduction (although it might be a bit too long) gives a concise summary of the context. We could try to open up on what is happening today in the conclusion, regarding the Covid-19 vaccine. I just have a few suggestions to make on the biology part:

- you could explain some scientific terms such as "case fatality rate", to ensure that the reader understands everything, and also reexplain some scientific concepts such as "herd immunity", the condition on which a vaccine relies to work

- you have a lot of numbers and percentages, which is great because it supports well your idea, but the reader might sometimes feel a bit lost. You could add some sentences to explain them a bit more and summarise the main idea of your paragraph

- Finally, it could be a good idea to add a small conclusion, to show that scientific evidence is mostly quantitative.

I can see in your last message above that your work isn't totally finalised anyways, I am just giving you some first feedback on your work, feel free to take it into account or not! Apart from those points I found your work very interesting. Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 18:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I just read your work & comments and I found it great. I agree with Saucesoja comments, maybe highlight a bit more the nature of the evidence in the biology part. I also re-phrased some sentences. Tell me what you think of it. As for me, I am currently reading articles on evidence from an ethical/ social view. I will follow on the questions that these statistics ask. I will put some links when I'm done. Api20 (discuss • contribs) 19:30, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay thanks for oth your feedbacks, I will try and explan that a bit further, I was just worried about the word count! Will take a look at your rephrasing too Api20! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 12:58, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, so I've added a sort of concluding sentence/paragraph introducing Api20's, tell me what you think! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 13:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Saucesoja, I was thinking that on your paragraph on education, which is kind if the intermediate discipline to resolve these tensions, you could start off with the tensions saying that for biology and ethics, both internal and external tensions are at play, as evidence in biology suports vaccination (overall positive effect) but also has evidence that go against vaccination (infant deaths, secondary diseases). Likewise, I think that Api20 (correct me if I'm wrong) will conclude that there is a tendency to promote vaccination: utilitarism = for the greater good, as well as a dilemma: can you force people to get vaccinated/to vaccinate your children - dimension of selfishness, vaccine is effective if a majority of the population is vaccinated, protecting the unvaccinated, etc. Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 12:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Chopsticks21, you make a very good point!

After further research and discussion with the other members of the group, the third part will be more globally on public health policies and the government’s strategy to fight anti-vaccine movements. The role of public policies concerning vaccines is important, because as Chopsticks21 has mentioned, they have to resolve tensions between the approach to evidence in biology and ethics. The aim of this part is hence to show how the anti-vaccine movement can be approached from an interdisciplinary point of view. As their goal is mostly to promote the health of the population, public health policies base themselves mostly on scientific evidence and quantitative data. Therefore, public health aims to fight anti-vaccination movements.

There are two main parts:

1)	Mandatory vaccines to ensure herd immunity. Public health justifies this thanks to utilitarianism and harm principle: what is better for society overall and individually. However, vaccine exemptions can exist (eg religious reasons) --> interdisciplinary approach to evidence

2)	Education has an important role because: - the new generation isn’t necessarily aware of the importance of vaccination as they can’t see their negative effects (as vaccination has already eradicated some diseases) - overall not enough knowledge - to fight all the conspiracy theories and fake news on the internet Here again, bases itself mostly on quantitative data. Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 20:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Some articles I'm going to use for my part on Ethics in the anti vaccine movement : - https://publichealthreviews.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1007/BF03391666.pdf -https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/ethical-issues-and-vaccines Api20 (discuss • contribs) 13:09, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Rose I encourage you to read the end of this article which I found very relevant for your part! https://publichealthreviews.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1007/BF03391666.pdf Api20 (discuss • contribs) 16:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I have posted my first draft under the Public Health part. I still have to change few things, like rephrasing some sentences and adding a conclusion. I am also aware it is too long. I'm waiting to see what you will write Api20 as you may repeat a few things I have said about ethics to see how I'll shorten it! And thank you for the link, I have reused it in my part. Chopsticks21, I had started my introduction with your idea at first (internal/external tensions) but as I repeated it later on it was too repetitive and long, tell me if you think I should change it. And give me back all your feedback! Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 21:25, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I've started readng your part Saucesoja and so far it is very good. I think that the introductory part was good and I think you were right to mention the tensions later on in your paragraphs. I took the liberty of editing certain phrases I hope you don't mind (you can always change them back if you think they don't imply the idea you were looking to convey)! Also I think we should rephrase "take more into account ethics" at the end of your section onn Compulsory vaccines but can't come up with anything good to replace it... please edit it if you find a better wording! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 12:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

 * Thank you for the edits, Chopsticks21, some sentences are clearer now! They haven't changed at all the ideas i wanted to convey. For the last sentence, I'll think about it and see if I find a new wording, even though yours is already good. Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 14:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Api20 for your submission. The ideas are great! I m doing a little of rephrasing at the moment that I will continue later on. Do you tink you could perhaps include a phrase or two un utilitarism? because you explain the principle of it (greater good > individual) but don't mention the term. Thanks! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 14:23, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

I was reading the part on "New issues" in ethics and thought it might fit better in the paragraph on education(/public health) or in the conclusion as it doesn't really involve any ethicl issues. Tell me what you think about it Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 18:39, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


text:
Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in the anti-vaccine movement

Introduction
Many believe that the anti-vaccination movement emerged recently through the Internet. However, vaccine opposition arose as soon as vaccination started being popularised. Widespread vaccination started in the 1800s in England to prevent smallpox. It faced immediate opposition by the population: seen as ‘unchristian’ by some and as a violation of people’s personal liberty by others. The Vaccination Acts of 1853 and 1867 faced riots and saw the founding of the Anti-Vaccination League in London (1853) and the Anti-Compulsory Vaccination League (1867). Although the ways of expressing and spreading this opposition have changed since the 19th century, the motives behind it are still mainly the same, opposing public health and medicine to civil liberty and choice.

Biology
In biology, evidence seems to promote vaccination: the larger the vaccinated population, the better.

Yellow Fever
Yellow Fever is a disease prevalent in South America and Africa (90% of the cases) that can go from a mild illness to a fatal disease, including a rapid deterioration of kidneys, jaundice and bleeding diathesis. Additionally, yellow fever does not have any specific treatment; it is responsible for 200,000 cases and 30,000 deaths every year, with a Case Fatality Rate Case fatality rate for severe yellow fever of 50% or higher. As the disease is spread by mosquitoes, it cannot be eradicated, hence the importance of vaccination to reduce the victims of yellow fever. Research has shown that the yellow fever vaccine 17D (YF-17D) is efficient after 10 days in 95% of the patients and its protective effect may last for up to 30-35 years. Although the WHO World Health Organization recommends a single vaccination, study has shown that its efficiency is limited (with only 50.4% of Malian children and 27.8% of Ghanaian children still seropositive after 3-5 years), suggesting that another administration of the vaccine is required to reach an 80% immunity of the population, preventing yellow fever outbreaks.

Some evidence in the biological domain however also shows nefast effects of the vaccine. Several pathologies have been linked to this vaccination, such as transverse myelitis, encephalitis , meningoencephalitis and peripheral facial paralysis. Nevertheless, the vaccine remains the most efficient way to prevent yellow fever and its adverse effects are very low.

Vaccine efficacy
Vaccine efficacy is calculated according to the ratio of vaccinated versus unvaccinated people who catch a disease. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2 doses of IPV (polio) are 90% effective against polio and 3 doses are 99-100% effective (making the US polio-free since 1979), 2 doses of the vaccine against chickenpox are 90% effective (and reduce symptoms in case of the disease), and 1 dose of MMR vaccine is about 93% effective while 2 doses are 97% effective at preventing measles (leading to a 99% reduction in measles cases in the US).

Biological quantitative evidence therefore largely promotes (compulsory) vaccination, as the vaccines administered often have very high efficacy rates and help stop the spread or even eradicate specific diseases in certain countries. The few biological evidence used by the anti-vaccine movements often aims to show the causality between certain vaccines and diseases or infant deaths. However this evidence is often flawed or irrelevant statistically, compared to the number of lives saved by vaccination – preventing 2 to 3 million deaths every year according to the WHO - raising ethical questions on the 'collateral damage' of vaccination.

Ethics
When it comes to vaccination, Ethics take a step back from scientific evidence and look at human rights and the philosophy of actions. The ethical concerns at the origin of the movement are related to the nature and regulation of the vaccine. A tension emerges from this discipline: the worth of the individualas opposed to the community's.

Philosophy
Anti-vaccine movements question the importance of one’s freedom being overcome and how the latter is justified. This matter is discussed in terms of an individual's freedom to own their body, in addition to their freedom of belief and freedom of choice. Although vaccination is supported by Public Health for the individual's and, mostly, the greater good, can someone ethically be obliged to be vaccinated despite their refusal? As vaccines impact people's health, they should be allowed to make their own choice. The uncertainty of the object has engendered fear of harm among populations over time leading, in the most extreme cases, to trials like the American Henning Jacobson’s in 1905. His protest concerned compulsory smallpox vaccine based on an "ethical basis of autonomy and harm". Therefore, the movement bases its ideas on the worth of individual freedom compared to the common good. Is someone willing to accidentally die of a failed vaccination for the "greater good"?

Ethics in religion
Studies of anti-vaccination movements have revealed religious beliefs as the biggest argument of vaccine opposition. As a created element having animal origins, the vaccine has long been seen as « unnatural ». Thus vaccination was long considered « unchristian » or « evil » (therefore unethical), amplifying people’s unwillingness to be vaccinated.

New issues
Nowadays, additional ethical issues are raised. Technology and the Internet allowing the spread of people's concerns and opinions, especially through social media, are the perfect tool for the anti-vaccine movement to grow. Indeed, as people seek information on the subject, it has been observed that most of the sources encountered online have an anti-vaccine approach. However, most of these movements are founded on false assumptions or beliefs that feed the mistrust of governments and conspiracy theories.

Therefore, the ethical approach of vaccination is quite complex as it is quite subjective. On one hand, the utilitarianism approach promotes the enforcement of vaccines for the greater good of the population. On the other hand, the suppression of individual freedom, especially when it comes to products injected in one's body can be seen as very unethical. The anti-vaccine movements thus raise very interesting and essential ethical questions on freedom despite their often use of fake news as evidence for their cause.

Public Health
Public health as a discipline is the science of promoting the population’s health as a whole. It plays a crucial role in solving tensions in the evidence proposed in various disciplines, but also within them. Overall, public health professionals try to fight the anti-vaccine movement.

Compulsory vaccines
Governments can enforce mandatory vaccines, to promote herd immunity and avoid the resurgence of a disease. They base their evidence on principles commonly used in public health. The “harm principle”, developed by John Stuart Mill, is the idea that unvaccinated people could be a danger to society as spredears of the disease. Additionally, the “precautionary principle” states that when a country is threatened by a virus, the government must take preventive measures. These principles apply utilitarianism, prioritising the well-being of the majority rather than the individual's. Hence, evidence in biostatistics, showing that punctual negative effects are negligeable in front of the overall success of vaccines, mirrors public health’s goal of assuring the population’s safety (sometimes at the expense of the individual's).

However vaccine exemptions exist, based on the right of the individual's choice. The reasons can be medical, but also religious or philosophical. Nevertheless, these reasons's validity varies widely. In the United States, 43 states allow religious exemptions, while only 15 allow philosophic exemptions. Overall, public health does not leave much space for personal choice – which is one of the arguments used by anti-vaccination movements –, and some countries like the US seek to consider ethics more and reduce the number of compulsory vaccines.

Education
Education also has an important role when it comes to public health. This is essential as 43% of websites on Google associated to the keywords “vaccination” or “immunisation” are lead by anti-vaccination movements. Many of these websites report fake news and conspiracy theories (blaming for instance some vaccines to cause autism), in addition to social media platforms acting as “echo chambers”. However, 70% of parents go to the internet to educate themselves on vaccination, leading to a confused population, who does not have access to valid evidence on the subject. To educate parents and children, trained healthcare providers play a key role, going over the concept of herd immunity, remind the dangers of certain diseases, and explain the process of vaccines' commercialisation. Online education campaigns have also proved to be efficient. In Australia, 66% of parents and 88% of pregnant women started raising awareness and checking up on their children’s vaccination after having seen such campaigns. These strategies reduce the conflict between disciplines, simply by educating people instead of depriving them from their free will.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
LMIs in Control/Applications/Hinf optimal Model Reduction

Given a full order model and an initial estimate of a reduced order model it is possible to obtain a reduced order model optimal in $$

H_{\infty} $$ sense. This methods uses LMI techniques iteratively to obtain the result.

The System
Given a state-space representation of a system $$

G(s) $$ and an initial estimate of reduced order model $$

\hat{G}(s) $$.

\begin{align} \ G(s) &= C(sI-A)B + D,\\ \ \hat{G}(s) &= \hat{C}(sI-\hat{A})\hat{B} + \hat{D},\\ \end{align}$$

Where $$ A \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}, B \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times m}, C \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times n}, D \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times m}, \hat{A} \in \mathbb{R}^{k\times k}, \hat{B} \in \mathbb{R}^{k\times m}, \hat{C} \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times k}$$ and $$\hat{D} \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times m}$$. Where $$ n,k,m,p $$ are full order, reduced order, number of inputs and number of outputs respectively.

The Data
The full order state matrices $$ A,B,C,D $$ and the reduced model order $$ k $$.

The Optimization Problem
The objective of the optimization is to reduce the $$ H_{\infty} $$ norm distance of the two systems. Minimizing $$ \|G - \hat{G}\|_{\infty}$$ with respect to $$ \hat{G} $$.

The LMI: The Lyapunov Inequality
Objective: $$ \min \gamma $$.

Subject to:: $$

\begin{align} \ P &= \begin{bmatrix} \ P11 & P12 \\ \ P21 & P22 \\ \end{bmatrix} \ > 0, \end{align} $$

$$ \begin{align} \begin{bmatrix} \ A^{T}P11 + P11A & A^{T}P12 + P12\hat{A} & P11B - P12\hat{B} & C^T \\ \ \hat{A}^{T}P12^T + P12^{T}A & \hat{A}^{T}P22 + P22\hat{A} & P12^{T}B - P22\hat{B} & \hat{C}^T \\ \ B^{T}P11 - \hat{B}^{T}P12^{T} & B^{T}P12 - \hat{B}^{T}P22 & -\gamma{I} & D^{T} -\hat{D}^{T} \\ \ C & \hat{C} & D -\hat{D} & -\gamma{I} \\ \end{bmatrix} \ > 0 \end{align}$$

It can be seen from the above LMI that the second matrix inequality is not linear in $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}, \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P $$. By making $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}$$ constant it is linear in $$ \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P $$. And if $$ P12, P22 $$ are constant it is linear in $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}, \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P11 $$. Hence the following iterative algorithm can be used.

(a) Start with initial estimate $$ \hat{G} $$ obtained from techniques like Hankel-norm reduction/Balanced truncation.

(b) Fix $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}$$ and optimize with respect to $$ \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P $$.

(c) Fix $$ P12, P22 $$ and optimize with respect to $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}, \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P11 $$.

(d) Repeat steps (b) and (c) until the solution converges.

Conclusion:
The LMI techniques results in model reduction close to the theoretical limits set by the largest removed hankel singular value. The improvements are often not significant to that of Hankel-norm reduction. Due to high computational load it is recommended to only use this algorithm if optimal performance becomes a necessity.


text:
LMIs in Control/Applications/Hinf Optimal Model Reduction

Given a full order model and an initial estimate of a reduced order model it is possible to obtain a reduced order model optimal in $$

H_{\infty} $$ sense. This methods uses LMI techniques iteratively to obtain the result.

The System
Given a state-space representation of a system $$

G(s) $$ and an initial estimate of reduced order model $$

\hat{G}(s) $$.

\begin{align} \ G(s) &= C(sI-A)B + D,\\ \ \hat{G}(s) &= \hat{C}(sI-\hat{A})\hat{B} + \hat{D},\\ \end{align}$$

Where $$ A \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}, B \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times m}, C \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times n}, D \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times m}, \hat{A} \in \mathbb{R}^{k\times k}, \hat{B} \in \mathbb{R}^{k\times m}, \hat{C} \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times k}$$ and $$\hat{D} \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times m}$$. Where $$ n,k,m,p $$ are full order, reduced order, number of inputs and number of outputs respectively.

The Data
The full order state matrices $$ A,B,C,D $$ and the reduced model order $$ k $$.

The Optimization Problem
The objective of the optimization is to reduce the $$ H_{\infty} $$ norm distance of the two systems. Minimizing $$ \|G - \hat{G}\|_{\infty}$$ with respect to $$ \hat{G} $$.

The LMI: The Lyapunov Inequality
Objective: $$ \min \gamma $$.

Subject to:: $$

\begin{align} \ P &= \begin{bmatrix} \ P11 & P12 \\ \ P21 & P22 \\ \end{bmatrix} \ > 0, \end{align} $$

$$ \begin{align} \begin{bmatrix} \ A^{T}P11 + P11A & A^{T}P12 + P12\hat{A} & P11B - P12\hat{B} & C^T \\ \ \hat{A}^{T}P12^T + P12^{T}A & \hat{A}^{T}P22 + P22\hat{A} & P12^{T}B - P22\hat{B} & \hat{C}^T \\ \ B^{T}P11 - \hat{B}^{T}P12^{T} & B^{T}P12 - \hat{B}^{T}P22 & -\gamma{I} & D^{T} -\hat{D}^{T} \\ \ C & \hat{C} & D -\hat{D} & -\gamma{I} \\ \end{bmatrix} \ > 0 \end{align}$$

It can be seen from the above LMI that the second matrix inequality is not linear in $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}, \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P $$. But making $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}$$ constant it is linear in $$ \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P $$. And if $$ P12, P22 $$ are constant it is linear in $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}, \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P11 $$. Hence the following iterative algorithm can be used.

(a) Start with initial estimate $$ \hat{G} $$ obtained from techniques like Hankel-norm reduction/Balanced truncation.

(b) Fix $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}$$ and optimize with respect to $$ \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P $$.

(c) Fix $$ P12, P22 $$ and optimize with respect to $$ \hat{A}, \hat{B}, \hat{C}, \hat{D}, P11 $$.

(d) Repeat steps (b) and (c) until the solution converges.

Conclusion:
The LMI techniques results in model reduction close to the theoretical limits set by the largest removed hankel singular value. The improvements are often not significant to that of Hankel-norm reduction. Due to high computational load it is recommended to only use this algorithm if optimal performance becomes a necessity.


text:
User talk:24.139.9.114

𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:25, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:24.139.9.114


text:
Canadian Refugee Procedure/108 - Cessation of Refugee Protection

IRPA Section 108
Section 108 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act reads: Cessation of Refugee Protection

Rejection 108 (1) A claim for refugee protection shall be rejected, and a person is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection, in any of the following circumstances: (a) the person has voluntarily reavailed themself of the protection of their country of nationality; (b) the person has voluntarily reacquired their nationality; (c) the person has acquired a new nationality and enjoys the protection of the country of that new nationality; (d) the person has voluntarily become re-established in the country that the person left or remained outside of and in respect of which the person claimed refugee protection in Canada; or (e) the reasons for which the person sought refugee protection have ceased to exist.

Cessation of refugee protection (2) On application by the Minister, the Refugee Protection Division may determine that refugee protection referred to in subsection 95(1) has ceased for any of the reasons described in subsection (1).

Effect of decision (3) If the application is allowed, the claim of the person is deemed to be rejected.

Exception (4) Paragraph (1)(e) does not apply to a person who establishes that there are compelling reasons arising out of previous persecution, torture, treatment or punishment for refusing to avail themselves of the protection of the country which they left, or outside of which they remained, due to such previous persecution, torture, treatment or punishment.

Commentary
For commentary, see RPD Rule 64: Canadian Refugee Procedure/RPD Rule 64 - Applications to Vacate or to Cease Refugee Protection.


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Tragedy of the Commons: Power and conflicts in Overfishing

November 26th
We just had a quick group discussion to go over how we'll present our research concept to our seminar group. We plan to go into more depth into discussing our areas of research tomorrow during our scheduled zoom meeting. So far we have decided to look at the Tragedy of the Commons through the superconcept of Power, and at first discussions we know we want to approach the topic from environmental, economical and sociological perspectives. We discussed potentially using a case study of Somali Pirates and overfishing in the Indian Ocean / Somali waters to explore these perspectives. --Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 16:03, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

November 28th
In today's meeting, we discussed focusing our topic on a particular case study and look at sociological, economics and ecology disciplines conflicting with each other and using policymaking as a place where they interact. In policymaking, we could also look at the manifestation of power in terms of stakeholder and who do the policies favour more. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 10:35, 28 November 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

December 2nd
I’ve watched this ted talk in which an economist discusses how can we learn from the history (she started off by talking about how Japan coastal villages with local commons escaped the tragedy of the commons) to manage shared resources today in order to escape the tragedy of the commons.

I think the main question for us and for the world should be: How do we manage shared resources?

I think that ethics, ecology, and economy have different answers to this question and I can sense a potential interdisciplinary tension between them. My idea is to use this question as a base of this wikibook chapter. The notion of power in managing shared resources comes to mind instantly. How can we use it? Power of high-wage economies to deplete the resources of low-wage economies? Power of policy makers to constrain depleting resources and somehow prevent environmental crisis? Power of the history (overfishing in Japan) to shape modern governments? Economics point of view: common resources are not excludable but rival. Using the example of fishing. As no fisherman owns fish if he cannot decide when to fish nor how many fish he wants to catch. He must include other’s decision in deciding how much and when to fish.

Psychology: I really like the Aristotle’s quote:” What is common to the greatest number gets the least amount of care” I think that that could be the main issue from the psychological point of view. How many times do we hear someone saying: If I stop eating meat, start recycling etc. It's not going to change anything in the bigger picture. This is our mindset; such concept is set in our minds and has been for a long time. A paradox occurs because we should use the power of community and the power of the group to prevent climate change, yet we only use the power of pursuing self-interest behaviors and create a conflict leading to an environmental crisis. With the advent of globalization, local commons, who cared about the resources they’re using, transformed into the global commons who lack social preferences and compete in depleting Earth’s resources. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 17:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter
 * I like how you've underlined how fishing is a public good and how from an economic point of view as well, we need to talk about managing resources. In terms of power, do you think it would be interesting to talk about developed/developing country relations and multinationals in terms of exploitation of fishing resources? Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs)Kyoshiwarrior
 * I think that it could be very useful in terms of Power. I've read an article about the EU and other powerful countries playing a decisive role in such a destructive change of local communities in West Africa which force many youths of leaving their communities and migrate to EU countries. Destruction of fishing communities’ traditional sustainable living conditions and lifestyles is far from being a local problem it happens because of overfishing and using power by well-developed country in managing shared resources. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 11:57, 5 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter
 * This ties in really well with the research I've been doing so I think its good course of action, I've found that in my research management of resources relates both to direct and indirect coercion as strategies of power. MNCs and IUU overfishing and depleting local resources directly influences the livelihood of local communities dependent on those resources. Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs)--

December 5th
Quick sum up of our meeting yesterday: I really liked Nuggethunter's idea about incorporating "how we manage shared resources" as an issue of power. Similarly, now that we've decided on the structure on how to go about the chapter we also plan to get started on the project. We will be collaborating at all points even if some of us are focusing on a specific discipline we are more comfortable with. We plan to add our submissions soon and have another discussion about them tomorrow and on Monday. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 00:10, 5 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

December 7th
We had a meeting to go over how are contributions are coming along and sharing any research/writing blocks we've encountered and giving feedback on our work so far. Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 21:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I just got done watching the Power lectures of W9. Do you all think we should actively try to incorporate and identify the theories of power at play here? There are many examples of all four so maybe we should identify how the disciplinary issues we are talking about along with the type of powers? I think, on the whole, we can see power as resource dependency is at the crux of this issue. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 23:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * Yes this was a good point and I think we've adequately done this so far! Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 13:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

December 9th
Quick overview of the meeting: we discussed issues and blocks we faced in the writing process and how it is a little tricky to not go towards and explanative/essay based tone. The focus of this assignment is identification and we just chatted to see how the progress is going. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 23:12, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

Also, an idea: maybe we could add a picture of a common pool resource and further develop what it is in the caption. It will help us define it better and our total word count won't be affected either Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 23:36, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * I was also thinking about adding an image. It could add something valuable to our chapter beyond the word limit. I like that idea. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 19:31, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter
 * Agreed and I like the image chosen. Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 14:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

December 13th
In today's meeting, we've summarized our to-do list and gave each other some final suggestions/comments. I've also edited some hedings to minimize the word count. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 14:42, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter Also we need references for the introduction. Kyoshiwarrior do you have it? Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 16:01, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

Topic?
As we are no longer discussing the Tragedy of the Commons we should somehow change our topic. I was thinking about Power in Overfishing: Looking through the Prism of Tragedy of the Commons. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 11:42, 5 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter
 * I like this although I think it could be quite long, but perhaps thats what we can call the chapter for now and as it comes together change the name accordingly Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 11:54, 5 December 2020 (UTC)--
 * How about "Tragedy of the Commons: Power and conflicts in Overfishing" Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 23:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * I like that a lot and it shows what are we working on. I've changed it for now and then maybe we're going to change it to something else but for now I think it works the best.Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 11:06, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

Introduction
The Tragedy of the Commons is a theory that within any common pool resource that is non excludable, to be overexploited and under-maintained. Fish are an example of a shared resource hence many local fishing communities and ecosystems have experienced the tragedy of the commons in the past, yet in many cases managed to escape it through incorporating social contracts by collaborative means. With the advent of globalisation there no longer exist self-dependent local communities. Locally shared resources have become globally distributed and in many cases developed economies exploit the resources of developing countries and continue to threaten the environment and local communities.

 * This is my idea of the introduction. Let me know if it's not specific enough or too vague. It's exactly 93 words so I hope it's not too long. Also if you spot any linguistic mistakes feel free to correct them. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 11:56, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter
 * I have just edited a bit. I changed the first sentence quite a bit, and added the suggestion of "developed economies" over "higher wage economies", and I changed the last sentence deleting "fish population" as "environment" encompasses natural populations. Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 21:35, 7 December 2020 (UTC)--
 * Should the introduction introduce everything we are covering in our chapter? I think we should highlight our topic, our perspectives and how power manifests in this topic so that we can clearly narrow out and define our Wikibook chapter and approach? Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 23:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * I think we should do that. I've just written a part of it and left this part for you guys maybe? If you want me to write it I can do it. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 10:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

 * Also I've added it to the main book page already Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 10:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

 * The Tragedy of the Commons is a situation which occurs within a non-excludable common pool resource, where individuals act in their self interest and overexploit shared resources which lead to the inevitable collapse of the resource system. A keen example of this is overfishing because a development in technology has led to higher catches and thus stressed many local fishing communities and ecosystems.Overfishing in a commons presents itself as an interdisciplinary issue through the dimensions of power. Through the disciplines of human ecology and economics, we can see a conflict between prioritising profit over the ecological balance. This is further exacerbated through the discipline of politics where ambiguity in laws as well as strategic power manifestations of developed countries and world organisations attempt to exploit foreign, at-risk common pool systems.

 * The Tragedy of the Commons, first termed by Garret Hardin, describes when a non-excludable common pool resource finds its users acting in their self interest, overexploiting the shared resources which leads to the inevitable collapse of the resource itself. A keen example of this is overfishing, development in technology has led to unsustainably larger harvests and thus stressed local fishing communities and their ecosystems. Overfishing in a commons presents itself as an interdisciplinary issue through the dimensions of power. Through the disciplines of human ecology, politics, and economics, unsustainable exploitation arises when interest groups prioritise profit and strategic power over an ecological balance.
 * I have edit the intro to the above and took out the last sentence "This is further exacerbated through the discipline of politics where ambiguity in laws as well as strategic power manifestations of developed countries and world organisations attempt to exploit foreign, at-risk common pool systems." by trying to conglomerate all issues into the final sentence of the intro, my thinking is: Through the disciplines of human ecology, politics, and economics, unsustainable exploitation (this can mean to ecosystems, people, resources, and cultures) arises when interest groups (these can mean national governments, MNCs) prioritise profit (economics) and strategic power (politics) over an ecological balance (human ecology). Let me know what your thoughts are, I was thinking the shorter the better so we can have more words on the discipline contributions. Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 16:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)--
 * I agree with you! I'll add this to the main page. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 20:27, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

What do you guys think? The citations for that would be- https://earth.org/what-is-tragedy-of-the-commons/ https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10705422.2019.1660290?src=recsys Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 18:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * I actually love this and it introduces the topic way better than mine. I have nothing to add. Do you want to post this on the main book page? Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 19:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

Collaboration in Natural Resource Management
The concept of ecosystem justice is that ecosystems are a whole made of interlinking and equally important parts. To weaken or harm one part of the ecosystem is equivalent to weakening the whole and therefore, each part of an ecosystems deserves equal consideration and care. Through this lens, overfishing is an example of an ecosystem injustice whether looking at the ecosystem of our global planet or specific case studies of smaller ecosystems.

The Canadian halibut fishery in British Colombia (BC) is a case study of the pivotal influence of power in balancing ecosystem health and fish harvesting needs. Between 1980 and 1990, due to lose legislation, new technology, and competitive fishing practices the total harvest rose above 120% causing the near collapse of halibut stocks in following years. In 1990, collaboration between Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans with individual and commercial fishermen creating the Halibut Advisory Board (HAB) and introducing an Individual Vessel Quota (IVQ), whereby the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IHPC) review stock levels each year and recommend a total allowable catch (TAC) to each IVQ. Power is decentralized in the formation of HAB and calling on biologists of IPHC to establish an annual TAC, creating a sustainable collaborative power that manages the BC Halibut fishing industry; ensuring that the ecosystem remains sustainably managed and allowing collaborative, non-competitive fishing practice
 * I would have liked to go into more depth on how the overfishing practices in the late 1980's damaged the BC ecosystem as well as halibut stock but thought it might lengthen the contribution too much. Up to this point I have 225 words by the way. Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 21:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)--
 * It is interesting to see how you've taken an example of a "successful" solution/ case study so I think we should adjust the introduction in such a way. You should mention how power is used in somewhat of a powerful/strategic and sustainable way here and we could reiterate this example in our conclusion. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 14:40, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * Thanks for the feedback, I've changed a sentence now so that it reads "Power is decentralized in the formation of HAB and calling on biologists of IPHC to establish an annual TAC, creating a sustainable collaborative power" What do you think? Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 16:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)--
 * I agree with Kyoshiwarrior that we should somehow incorporate this into our introduction. It's important that you wrote about how we can actually solve this issue based on this case study. Maybe we should include it in our conclusion as well? I also think that you could add a sentence in which you would explain more the reason of "lose legislation, new technology, and competitive fishing practices" influencing the ecosystem so it would correspond with Economics and Ambiguities in Law so it would hence become more informative on the interdisciplinary discourse? Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 12:40, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

Overfishing and Ecosystem Health
Due to developments in recent technology as well as a growing multinational food and agricultural industries ensuing an increasing population (ref) and hence: demand for food, mass fishing practices have become unsustainable. The fishing industry and its fishery harvests have negative effects on the local surrounding marine ecosystems(ref). These effects are causing population, diversification, and migratory pattern changes that create greater influencing harm to the dynamics of the local surrounding and interconnected ecosystems. Effective biological indicator-based methods such as trophodynamic indicators, that measure structural changes and interactions in ecosystems, allow for ecological analyses of the damage caused to local marine ecosystems detailing when vulnerability arises (ref).

Interactions between ecosystem damage and overfishing can be examined in the case study of artisanal fisheries in Senegal (ref). Analyses of trophic level variances in comparison with measures of Catch per Unit Effort (CPUE) between 1990 and 2009 indicate that fishing practices led to decreasing populations of larger fish species and an increase in small species (ref). Overfishing practices of fisheries hold direct power over marine ecosystems by directly decreasing species’ populations from targeted catches and hold indirect coercive power through the influencing harm these population changes causes the trophic structures of ecosystems (ref). Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 22:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Here I plan to go into an example of where power is misused to cause ecosystem injustice, I was planning to this through the case study of Somalia's overfishing crises, but am now looking a study on the eco-social impacts of overfishing in Senegal. I think I may look at this from a more sociological perspective, and see that the indirect coercion of resource depletion causes locals to migrate unwillingly therefore displaying a misuse of power.
 * what do you all think of this?Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 21:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)--

Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 21:26, 7 December 2020 (UTC)--
 * The direction you are taking in this is good and will illustrate the dynamics of power in that specific case study through the eco-social lens. One thing though- human ecology and it's intersection with sociology is very tricky, so be sure to always include impact on local communities as well as the eco-systems they are in. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 14:40, 9 December 2020 (UTC) Kyoshiwarrior
 * Yes I plan to go into that, I am concerned that this may go too sociological but will try to tie in elements of ecology (this is why I started the contribution with the concept of ecosystem injustice because I'd describe the local communities as part of the ecosystem and therefore the local ecosystem).  Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 16:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)--
 * Okay I have now added my contribution under the heading above. I decided to go more into the direct environmental effects of overfishing on species population change and the affects that has on local ecosystems. I need to add in my references, I have noted where I will be referencing - I currently have links and need to transform into Vancouver style. Let me know your thoughts! Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 22:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you know what your total word count is? I would recommend being as concise as possible. Content wise- I like how you've focused on environmental injustice and eco-social impacts and would recommend pointing out clearly how economic activities are fearing the collapse of the commons? This will foreshadow and lay the groundwork for our conflict and conclusion parts better. What do you think? Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 23:43, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * I agree with you that power over local communities (sociological perspective) is extremely important in examining this issue but I also think that we should be more focused on the environmental aspect. I think that for your second contribution it would be very interesting to look at the aspect of the ecosystem recovery. While I was researching the economic impact o the environment I've actually learned that fishing practises can remain sustainable and still satisfy the increasing demand. This course of thinking would also be corresponding with the contribution on the prisoner's dilemma. I don't want to impose on your work and tell you what to do obviously but do you think it would be useful? Also maybe you've found a case-study examining the recovery of the ecosystems that you could discuss here? Just an idea! Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 12:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

=Economics= ''Ethical forces are among those of which the economist has to take account. Attempts have indeed been made to construct an abstract science with regard to the actions of an economic man who is under no ethical influences and who pursues pecuniary gain … selfishly. But they have not been successful''. (Principles of Economics, 1890)

It's not my contribution yet but I found this interesting quote and didn't want to lose it. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 19:25, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

Power and Conflicts in Economics
Globalisation and increased demand for fish has led multinational corporations (MNCs) to gain economic power over national governments, fishing-dependent communities of developing countries and the ecosystem. MNCs regularly catch more than 200 species in over 100 countries and territories and the fish harvested by MNCs are crucial resources for both marine market and biodiversity thus earning a profit on them negatively impacts the environment.

Yearly reports of the inspected (13) MNCs demonstrate that the extent to which these firms consider sustainability as a business strategy varies across them and it seems that many continue to treat the environment as separate to their business rather than integral to it. Sustainable fishing practises motion may come from governments or consumers, however, the power gained from earning profit and the possibility of maximising it triggers entrepreneurs to pursue self-interest decisions that they would not otherwise make. Furthermore, global companies, capable of influencing policy-making, became resilient to the aforementioned pressure and continue to threaten both local communities and ecosystems.

Each firm being motivated by receiving maximised revenue causes the fish stocks to be overexploited, moreover, power in the fishing practises has become decentralised. Just 13 MNCs pulled out approximately 10 million tons of fish in 2012, while 23 countries harvested roughly 1 million tons that year.

MNCs' decision-making could be explained through the concept of game theory where companies interact in a prisoner's dilemma game with each other. Every firm can decide on the number of fish caught taking into account other companies' strategies. The competitive market, the rivalry of resources and the desire of maximised profit result in the market allocation that deviates from the environmentally-friendly outcome leading to excess supply, wasteful practises and the tragedy of the commons.

Revenue maximisation and the prisoner's dilemma game are powerful aspects of economics which cause valuing private benefits more than external costs. This phenomenon leads to the conflict between economics and the environment which result in overexploitation of shared resources.

 * This is my contribution on Economics. Let me know your thoughts. I've tried to show both internal and external utilisation of power in this discipline through discussing a case-study on MNCs and the concept of game theory. It's 283 words long and I don't plan to go above this word count I think. I'm not sure about the part on game theory because I'm worried that three sentences may not explain it well enough and solely make my whole contribution more ambiguous. What do you think? It still lacks referencing which I am planning to add tomorrow (I have it all written down). I've also added an image which is quite unreadable but if you click on it it shows information about MNCs which I discussed here. Any edits and suggestions are warmly welcome :)) Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 22:34, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter
 * This is a good contribution and it covers all the key points! I would recommend you to space out the paragraphs so they look more cohesive. Also instead of "harmful decisions" say "private benefits over external costs"? Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 14:06, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * Thank you for your suggestions! I've separated the paragraphs so it looks more clear and I've changed harmful to self-interest so it's more clear. And I've also added a concluding sentence as we've spoken about it. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 14:24, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

= Politics = Local, national and international politics have conflicting motives and ambiguous laws in place which further exacerbate the issue of overfishing and prevent finding a solution for it. Since there is no unified, proper legislation i.e an ambiguity of “who really holds the power” makes it easier for IUU to exploit fishing resources. What I plan to do with my contribution is to assess different ways there are local, federal and international clashes which prevent proper legislation from taking place. Here, “developed nations exploiting developing nations” as a manifestation of direct power could be seen as recently, a deal to allow Chinese companies to fish for tuna in the Somalian border for $1mil,and a recent study which showcased how more pirates work for IUUs/MNCs shows how developing/pastoralist countries are vulnerable to multinationals or developed countries as they are controlled by monetary influence. (direct coercion) Similarly, I want to explore the strategic power in play in specific international politics and how international licensing agreements are driven by individual profit motives and exclude local fishermen and pastoralist workers who deal with the ecological and economical consequences of overfishing and the subsequent collapse of the fisheries as a common resource system. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 23:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * I really like your idea. You could focus on how power is utilised because of shared resources; no one can exclude IUU from fishing, and they fish more because they don't legally own the fish so they want to make as much profit as possible. Moreover, how power is utilised because of the lack of policies; IUU can exploit developing countries because the law does not forbid that? So maybe in this case we can observe how Politics comes into conflict with ethics and ecology? Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 11:03, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter
 * Yes! I am going to be focusing on how political ambiguity and lack of regulations can further facilitate IUUs and allow exploitation because it is not really "clear" who has the "power over resources" Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 20:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

Role of Politics in Overfishing
The central conflict in the commons of fishing is between the disciplines of economics and human ecology. However, the role of politics acts as an intersection where these disciplines can either collaborate to achieve sustainable solutions or influence to fulfil their disciplinary goal. An example of the latter is how politics can exploit the ambiguity of international, federal and local regulations regarding fishing.

Ambiguity in Laws
Since there is no set regulation in Somalia, conflicts between federal and local laws regarding fishing rights allow IUUs, developed countries and multinationals to continue trawling the waters. Similarly, Somalia designated exclusive economic zone of 200 nm has been questioned by several countries in the UN as they continue to fish up till 12 nm of the waters. Issues of power are central to the political conflict of overfishing. Lack of framework translates to an ambiguity in who truly holds power over the resources which allow parties with a vested interest to exploit the situation. Here, displays of direct and strategic power are seen by international agencies, developed countries and multinationals influence the federal and local laws through monetary and profit incentives.

 * I like this direction a lot, am looking forward to reading it. This sentence "Similarly, I want to explore the strategic power in play in specific international politics and how international licensing agreements are driven by individual profit motives and exclude local fishermen and pastoralist workers who deal with the ecological and economical consequences of overfishing and the subsequent collapse of the fisheries as a common resource system." is a bit confusing to me, what do you mean by "individual profit motives" - do you mean MNCs? or individual countries? It might also be interesting to add a sentence at some point about how ambiguous fishing laws can be as fish are migratory species so are not fixed to a given location rather they have migration patterns that mean they commonly pass through given areas but at the same time harm to an ecosystem can cause fish to change migratory patterns? Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 16:55, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have been thinking of making a change to the content in my contribution. I feel that politics isn't as central to the interdisciplinary conflict as much as economics and human ecology however its involvement can accelerate the collapse of the commons as a whole but at the same time can also mediate resolutions and be a space for collaboration. The change I want to make is to underline it's supplementary role through the ambiguity of laws as well as strategic power in international agreements regarding fishing. The contribution will be shorter than human ecology and economics however, we could revisit it in the conclusion and conflict resolution. This will allow us to spread our content and directly identify all the issues as well as balance out the word count. What do you guys think? Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 23:32, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior
 * I like that idea a lot. Because in my economics contribution I've discussed how MNCs have power to destroy ecosystems and why are they motivated to do so I think that your contribution about policy making could be a very valuable conclusion. I've been thinking a lot about certain disciplines "helping" other disciplines gain power. Do you know what I mean? Like in this case I find it interesting that we see a lot of policies that regulate economic decision-making but in many countries climate or environment are not a part of internal governance. What do you think? we could briefly mention it in our conclusion. How Politics as a discipline has power to regulate decisions/issues in Economics and Ecology and how it contributes to this conflict. That's what I really appreciate in your idea! Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 12:26, 12 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

revised: A case study( https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00704/ )) of overfishing in Somalia suggests that due to the lack of set regulations in Somalia, conflicts between federal and local laws regarding fishing rights allow IUUs, developed countries, and multinationals to continue trawling the waters. Similarly, Somalia’s designated Exclusive Economic Zone of 200 nm has been questioned by several countries in the UN as they continue to fish up to 12 nm of the waters. Lack of continuity in federal and local laws enables locals to sell permits that allow unsustainable bulk fishing practices. Issues of direct power are central to this ambiguity in-laws: the absence of framework translates to ambiguity in who truly holds power over the resources which allows parties with a profit motive to exploit the resource system further.

 * I've corrected some minor mistakes here and edited them for you on the main page Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 19:32, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

Strategic and dependency power in International fishing agreements
The dimensions of strategic and dependency power are observed in the politics of international fishing agreements. Trade and licensing regulations often seem to favor MNCs and developed countries over their developing counterparts which favors their economic motives of keeping costs low and maximizing individual profit The recent deal which allows Chinese vessels to fish in the Somalian EEZ did create a source of revenue however, was widely criticized due to its unsustainable and exploitative fishing methods and its impact on the livelihoods of domestic farmers. Such intense overfishing could cause the resource systems of many developing countries to collapse as many countries are dependent on these resources for their livelihoods. An example of such a collapse is the case of Senegal where overfishing and policies which favored industrial fishing negatively impacted pastoralist and traditional farmers, causing an increase in poverty, unemployment and immigration to other countries.
 * added this on the main page directly but put it here for comments! Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 19:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

= Conflict =

Guys I was thinking that maybe we should skip that part of our chapter because reading our contributions I've come to the conclusion that we cover the conflict part pretty well and we would just repeat ourselves. We can mention the conflict in our conclusion. What do you think? Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 12:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

 * I agreed with this, I think if we address issues of power in each of our disciplines and how they interact with others we would be addressing the conflict and then we can tie each of our findings together in the conclusion. Brokentelevision2020 (discuss • contribs) 13:57, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

To summarise, the chief conflict in the problem of overfishing is between the disciplines of human ecology and economics. The goal of profit maximization clashes with the goal of creating and maintaining sustainable ecosystems and politics aggravates the issue by supporting policies and regulations which focuses on short term economic profit. Likewise, an imbalance of power and intensive resource exploitation in developing countries allows unsustainable economic practices to continue which aggravates the problem of overfishing. In order to manage fishing resources, there is an imminent need to decentralize forces of strategic power and replace neo-liberal and structural adjustment policies and intense fishing with local focused, sustainable alternatives.
 * This is my rough idea for the conclusion! Let me know what are your ideas/thoughts on this and what can we collaborate on. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 20:10, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

= Conclusion =

What should we cover in our conclusion:
 * Evaluate how Tragedy of the Commons/overfishing is a result of utilizing economic power of MNCs over developing often corrupted governments
 * emphasize the conflict between profit-making and the environment. Name the effects on the environment.
 * explain how lack of policies/ambiguity in policies facilitate powerful countries/companies using power over developing countries/the ecosystem
 * Potential solution?

Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 13:18, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

I agree with this direction! I'll add up my ideas in a bit. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 14:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

Overexploitation of common-pool resources is caused by the utilization of power by many economic actors whose desire for revenue maximization comes into conflict with ecology. MNCs and developed countries that interact with each other in the prisoner's dilemma game continue to fail in sustainable resource management and their behavior result in overfishing which could be referred to as the tragedy of the commons. Moreover, policy-makers are not ambivalent towards this issue and in many cases exacerbate the conflict. Nuggethunter (discuss • contribs) 20:10, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Nuggethunter

To summarise, the chief conflict in the problem of overfishing is between the disciplines of human ecology and economics. The goal of profit maximization clashes with the goal of creating and maintaining sustainable ecosystems and politics aggravates the issue by supporting policies and regulations which focuses on short term economic profit. Likewise, an imbalance of power and intensive resource exploitation in developing countries allows unsustainable economic practices to continue which aggravates the problem of overfishing. In order to manage fishing resources, there is an imminent need to decentralize forces of strategic power and replace neo-liberal and structural adjustment policies and intense fishing with local focused, sustainable alternatives. Kyoshiwarrior (discuss • contribs) 20:11, 13 December 2020 (UTC)Kyoshiwarrior

Conclusively, international and national conflicts of interest have an influencing power on fishing practices that lead to overfishing. With much of the ocean being considered international territory, a lack of ecological surveillance and policies that enforce open dialogue between MNC interest, local fishing cultures, and ecologists monitoring ecosystem health; allow for an unaccountable exploitation of fishing resources that disregards socioenvironmental health over short-term economic benefit. A potential solution to managing fishing resources would be a collaborative effort between national and international policy makers to enforce and regulate a decentralised decisive power over fishing practices, enforcing accountability and continual evaluation of fishing practice and its influences, creating neo-liberal and structural adjustment policies and intense fishing with local focused, sustainable alternative.

=References=


text:
User:TeraChecchi

My name is Tegan and I am studying Computing and Information Science and Agriculture and Life Sciences at Thiais / France.

title: User:TeraChecchi


text:
LMIs in Control/Matrix and LMI Properties and Tools/Generalized H2 Norm

Generalized $$H_{2}$$ Norm
The $$ H_2 $$ norm characterizes the average frequency response of a system. To find the H2 norm, the system must be strictly proper, meaning the state space represented $$ D $$ matrix must equal zero. The H2 norm is frequently used in optimal control to design a stabilizing controller which minimizes the average value of the transfer function, $$ G $$ as much as possible. This optimal control problem is also called the Linear Quadratic Gaussian.

The System
Consider a continuous-time, linear, time-invariant system $$ G : L_{2e} \to L_{2e} $$ with state space realization $$ (A,B,C,0) $$ where $$ A\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n} $$, $$B\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times m}$$, $$C\in\mathbb{R}^{p\times n}$$, amd $$ A $$ is Hurwitz. The generalized $$ H_{2} $$ norm of $$ G $$ is:

$$ \left\| G \right\|_{2,{\infty}} = \sup_{u\in L_{2}, {u}\neq\text{zero}} $$ $$ \frac{\left\| Gu \right\|_{\infty}}{\ \left\| u \right\|_{2}}$$

The Data
The transfer function $$G$$, and system matrices $$A$$, $$B$$, $$C$$ are known and $$ A $$ is Hurwitz.

The LMI: Generalized $$H_{2}$$ Norm LMIs
The inequality $$ \left\| G \right\|_{2,{\infty}} < \mu $$ holds under the following conditions:

1. There exists $$ P\in\mathbb{S}^{n}$$ and $$ \mu\in\mathbb{R}_{>0}$$ where $$ P > 0 $$ such that:

 * $$\begin{bmatrix} A^{T}P + PA & PB \\ * & -\mu 1 \end{bmatrix}<0 $$.
 * $$\begin{bmatrix} P & C^{T} \\ * & \mu 1\end{bmatrix}>0 $$.

2. There exists $$ Q\in\mathbb{S}^{n}$$ and $$ \mu\in\mathbb{R}_{>0}$$ where $$ Q > 0 $$ such that:
 * $$\begin{bmatrix} QA^{T} +AQ & B \\ * & -\mu 1 \end{bmatrix}<0 $$.
 * $$\begin{bmatrix} Q & QC^{T} \\ * & \mu 1 \end{bmatrix}>0 $$.

3. There exists $$ P\in\mathbb{S}^{n}, V\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$$ and $$ \mu\in\mathbb{R}_{>0}$$ where $$ P > 0 $$ such that:
 * $$\begin{bmatrix} -(V+V^{T}) & V^{T}A+P & V^{T}B & V^{T} \\ * & -P & 0 & 0 \\ * & * * -\mu 1 & 0 \\ * & * & * & -P \end{bmatrix}<0 $$.
 * $$\begin{bmatrix} P & C^{T} \\ * & \mu 1 \end{bmatrix}>0 $$.

Conclusion:
The generalized $$ H_{2} $$ norm of $$ G $$ is the minimum value of $$ \mu\in\mathbb{R}_{>0} $$ that satisfies the LMIs presented in this page.

Implementation
This implementation requires Yalmip and Sedumi.

Generalized $ H_{2} $ Norm - MATLAB code for Generalized $$ H_{2} $$ Norm.

Related LMIs
LMI for System H_{2} Norm

Return to Main Page:
LMIs in Control: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LMIs_in_Control


text: User:Erokhin

title: User:Erokhin


text:
Talk:OpenSCAD User Manual/Libraries

> This library provides tools to create proper 2D technical drawings of your 3D objects: [6]

Dead link?

title: Talk:OpenSCAD User Manual/Libraries


text: Adventist Adventurer Awards and Answers/Cupcakes and More


text:
User:Mwadieh/sandbox

LMI in Multi-Robot Systems

title: User:Mwadieh/sandbox


text:
LMIs in Control/Applications/An LMI for Multi-Robot Systems

An LMI for Multi-Robot Systems
 * /Consensus for Multi-Agent Systems/


text:
Adventist Adventurer Awards and Answers/Talent

What is a talent?
Talent is natural skill or ability given by God. It is also applied to person who has a natural skill or ability in something.

According to 1 Corinthians 10:31, who should receive all the praise for your talent? Why?
God should always receive all praise for everything, including our skills and abilities. Because God created the world, God is supreme owner and we worship Him in all we do out of our love for Him.

Make a list of your talents.
A child’s talent might be praying, singing, friendship, crafting, instruments, helpfulness, caring, telling a story, etc. Make a consolidated list of talents for the kids to see. Use the handprint attached for the adventurers to create their 5 top talents

Select one of the talents identified and share that talent as a group or individually.
Ideas at club meeting, church, Sabbath School, nursing home, school, etc.

Play a talent game.
Ideas from Google - 55 Talent Show Ideas for Kids https://ladyandtheblog.com/talent-show-ideas-for-kids/


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21

Image Help
Does anyone know how to add an image please? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uclqjh0 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps try w:Help:Visual file markup. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 02:35, 13 December 2020 (UTC)


text:
User:Empereurthepug

= Issues in Interdisciplinaraity 2020-21/ Evidence in racial bias in 20th century USA =

title: User:Empereurthepug


text:
User talk:Empereurthepug

Zoom meeting 20/11/20 - I introduced the idea of looking at false accusations of rape/sexual harassment and exploring the conflict between disciplines of biology and psychology. Originally, the group was going in the direction of literature but after discussion we found more possibility in looking at a specific case of false rape accusation. Olivia suggested we look into the case of a Polish man who served 25 years for rape and murder of a 15 year old and I suggested the Central Park 5 case. We decided to follow the Central Park 5 case as it had more mainstream coverage and we would be able to find better facts and evidence to support our arguments. Someone also suggested we look at Racial Studies and Media Studies as potential disciplines which could have impacted the case since all the boys were young, black men and the media uses techniques to sway the public opinion. We decided that we would all carry out research into the different disciplines and the case so that we each have an understanding of the linkages and conflicts between disciplines rather than focusing and specialising so early into the assignment. We have created a Google Docs to collaborate on our research and will consolidate and discuss our findings at our meeting next Thursday Driedmangoes (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Zoom meeting 27/11/20- We decided that the Central Park case was not a very good idea, so we brainstormed and changed the subject to "Evidence on racial bias in the 20th century USA". We want to discuss how despite concrete biological evidence institutional racism was still implemented. We'd like to look for evidence in different disciplines such as psychology, biology, law, sociology (institutional structure). We had some trouble with history though, as we are having a historical approach but cannot really include history as a discipline in which evidence is found. We are going to brainstorm individually and each make a plan that we'll share with each other on Monday. Empereurthepug (discuss • contribs) 12:06, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Empereurthepug


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in Tariffs

Deciding Upon a Topic
Upon discussing our interests we decided to base our Wikibooks chapter on tariffs. Tariffs match our interests in the social sciences. Tensions arise between different disciplines when considering whether or not tariffs should be implemented. From our research, how each discipline uses evidence seems to be the cause of the tension. Frenchfries124 (discuss • contribs) 12:17, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

We will now narrow our focus to look at a specific example of tariffs after looking at some sources. We decided that the tariffs in response to China in response to the trade war between the two countries provides many opportunities for interdisciplinary discussion because it is talked about extensively in academia.Frenchfries124 (discuss • contribs) 17:56, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Outlining the Task in Hand
After meeting, we agreed that these steps need to be completed.
 * 1) Identify a research question- How do different disciplines use evidence to decide on whether the US should implement tariffs in response to China's economic growth
 * 2) Identify the disciplines used to answer the question- Politics, Economics and Statistics
 * 3) Identify a tension that can arise when answering the question- Generally speaking, political Scientists are against tariffs whereas economists and statisticians are in favor of their implementation
 * 4) Attribute the tension to an interdisciplinary issue- Disciplines use different types of evidence to justify their claims.Frenchfries124 (discuss • contribs) 18:00, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

I am planning on focusing on the economic analysis side of tariffs unless anyone else wanted to do it. Kyloren1 (discuss • contribs) 14:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, that's great. I think you are valuable in approaching the research problem from the field of economics and Paul would be the most suitable of the group to approach the issue using statistics and mathematical analysis. Frenchfries124 (discuss • contribs) 12:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

As a team we decided together that the statistics section does not help us in answering our research question. After much deliberation, we decided that it should be removed.

Finalizing our Essay
After meeting, we decided upon the final things we must do to improve our Wikibooks chapter. Here's a quick summary.
 * 1) Shorten introduction section and incorporate some of the points made into the political science section if possible
 * 2) Be more specific in how each discipline uses evidence (for example, talk about the types of evidence used in each discipline, why different types of evidence are used and how this results in different conclusions with regards to the research question
 * 3) Ensure that the section on statistics is congruent with the rest of the chapter
 * 4) Add to the conclusion, summing up arguments made throughout the chapter
 * 5) Ensure the chapter is within the word count limit
 * 6) Proof read entire chapter- ensuring sentences present the arguments lucidly and make sure specialist terms are explained
 * 7)  Frenchfries124 (discuss • contribs) 14:40, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I will finalise my section the conclusion. Is there anything you want specifically from political science in conclusion? Kyloren1 (discuss • contribs) 15:24, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Great, thank you. I think we should wait until the main body of the text is completed before we finalize the conclusion. Frenchfries124 (discuss • contribs) 15:54, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Miscellaneous Comments
Hi team, what do we think about adding another image to our Wikibooks chapter. If so, where would you say it is best placed? Frenchfries124 (discuss • contribs) 16:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I think an image would be good. Maybe in the introduction of Trump making an economic deal or something? Kyloren1 (discuss • contribs) 16:51, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Possibly, though I do think an image should be used specifically to advance our argument. For example, as you so brilliantly did with your tariff diagram to diagrammatically demonstrate the use of evidence in economics. Frenchfries124 (discuss • contribs) 17:35, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The statistics section mentions a linear regression model so we could maybe find an image to do with that? Kyloren1 (discuss • contribs) 17:45, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Possibly, good idea.


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in racial bias in 20th century USA

Added section on sociology
Hi! I hope you are well, I've added my section on evidence in sociology, I have yet to add some of my references but thought this way you could already have a look at it for our call later today. I'm a little unsure whether the focus on evidence is strong enough here, I would be delighted to have your feedback, also, do let me know if certain things seem unclear to you! Unadorablemensonge (discuss • contribs) 10:42, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Page setup
Do we need to keep the link at the top of the page? The one that guides you back to the general page of issues in interdisciplinarity?Unadorablemensonge (discuss • contribs) 10:56, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Activity log
Zoom meeting 20/11/20 - I introduced the idea of looking at false accusations of rape/sexual harassment and exploring the conflict between disciplines of biology and psychology. Originally, the group was going in the direction of literature but after discussion we found more possibility in looking at a specific case of false rape accusation. Olivia suggested we look into the case of a Polish man who served 25 years for rape and murder of a 15 year old and I suggested the Central Park 5 case. We decided to follow the Central Park 5 case as it had more mainstream coverage and we would be able to find better facts and evidence to support our arguments. Someone also suggested we look at Racial Studies and Media Studies as potential disciplines which could have impacted the case since all the boys were young, black men and the media uses techniques to sway the public opinion. We decided that we would all carry out research into the different disciplines and the case so that we each have an understanding of the linkages and conflicts between disciplines rather than focusing and specialising so early into the assignment. We have created a Google Docs to collaborate on our research and will consolidate and discuss our findings at our meeting next Thursday Driedmangoes (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Zoom meeting 27/11/20- We decided that the Central Park case was not a very good idea, so we brainstormed and changed the subject to "Evidence on racial bias in the 20th century USA". We want to discuss how despite concrete biological evidence institutional racism was still implemented. We'd like to look for evidence in different disciplines such as psychology, biology, law, sociology (institutional structure). We had some trouble with history though, as we are having a historical approach but cannot really include history as a discipline in which evidence is found. We are going to brainstorm individually and each make a plan that we'll share with each other on Monday. Empereurthepug (discuss • contribs) 12:06, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Zoom meeting 1/12/20 - Each of us brought up different ideas of how to structure the page and what exactly we thought should be the focus of the page. After discussing it for a while we agreed we shouldn't look only at racial bias (which is quite specific to psychology) but rather at inequality in general. We also agreed to look at a specific area of racial inequality: education. This would narrow down the field of research and enable us to have a more comprehensive and thoughtful wikibooks chapter. Moving away from the vastness of racial inequality in general would indeed enable us to uncover some specific and insightful information. Still, we had doubts about where there would be points of tension, and were not entirely convinced we were going in the right direction. We wrote to our seminar leader, Hélène who was ever so kind to arrange a meeting with us the very next day! Unadorablemensonge (discuss • contribs) 10:56, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Zoom meeting 2/12/20 - Hélène was super helpful in aswering the questions we had and guiding us. We felt encouraged and agreed each of us would do research and attempt to define which disciplines seemed most relevant to our issue. Unadorablemensonge (discuss • contribs) 10:56, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Zoom meeting 4/12/20 - Today, each of us chose which discipline we would focus on. Oliwia and Olivia are working on evidence in psychology, Iman is looking more at Urban Geography or Economics while I will be researching evidence in Sociology. We agreed to publish draft articles by Monday which we would then discuss together. Unadorablemensonge (discuss • contribs)


text:
Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in racial bias in 20th century USA

Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21

Introduction
Almost seven decades after Brown v. Board of Education, racial inequality still permeates educational structures in the United States, as made apparent by the persistence of an achievement gap between African American students and their caucasian peers. This chapter aims to understand why, despite the fact education is often perceived as the ground for breaking down social inequalities, it appears instead to perpetuate them. By looking at the evidence used in Sociology, Psychology and Economics to explain racial inequalities this chapter strives to present a holistic understanding of this issue.

Explaining inequality: Sociology
In their endeavour to elucidate the question of racial inequality in the US education system, sociologists have looked primarily at the role of identity and at the structures embedded in education.

The Coleman Report of 1966, supported by a wealth of empirical and qualitative data, set a precedent for understanding the achievement gap as a product of family background, rather than as a result of school funding. More recent analysis has aimed to explain how the interplay between family background and socio-economic factors such as social and cultural capital, lies at the heart of these inequalities. Indeed, Diamond and Lewis' research reveals children of white descent tend to have more of both these forms of capital and also suggest their parents are more likely to make use of their social capital.

Other sociologists focus more on structural aspects of the US education system, such as standardised testing. Indeed, it would seem that the inherent form of these tests places African American students at a disadvantage. In turn, black and brown students are disproportionately assigned to lower ability classes, which again has a negative impact on their learning, as a combination of factors renders these lower ability classes less enriching. Sociologists have also analysed the relationship between deviance and punishment, which is stronger for black students than for their white peers. As such, not only is their learning process more often stymied but this also reinforces the State to Prison Pipeline, widening the achievement gap.

By juxtaposing the colour-blind theory with the qualitative data they have obtained in schools, sociologists also argue de jure equality of educational institutions, serves as a justification for the inaction of both parents and policymakers, who turn a blind eye to the persistence of de facto inequality, perpetuating the cycle of racial inequality.

Conclusion
= References =


text:
Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Truth in Greenwashing

Introduction
Greenwashing is defined as “the intersection of two firm behaviours: poor environmental performance and positive communication about environmental performance," and has become a popular tactic in response to recent consumer demand for more sustainable goods and services, especially in wealthier nations with a “disposable culture” . This demand stems from the growth of science-backed environmental consciousness within the past few decades, but has been capitalised upon as a quick way to turn a profit from a customer’s good intentions . Fast fashion companies are notorious for this practice, due to their global markets and cheap goods, which allow for profitability to continue while allowing consumers to look past how their products came to be. The ‘truth’ is that these two disciplines haven't quite found an effective way to work together, which creates tension in today's over-consumptive Western world.

Greenwashing and the Environment
Environmental studies is a discipline that uses analytical tools to evaluate human impact on the environment. In fast fashion’s case, this represents critically demonstrating the impact of their accessible, inexpensive and produced quickly products that keep up with current trends. The truth implied here is science-based and objective.

Annually, around 80 billion pieces of clothing are purchased (the majority going to the United States), bringing in 1.2 trillion dollars for the fashion business. The availability of fast fashion pushes consumers to purchase more, increasing demand for raw materials, and creating waste at both production and disposal stages. The majority of the discarded clothing goes to landfills, so from a purely quantitative standpoint, the eco-friendliest course of action would be to lower manufacturing rates.

Manufacturing is primarily located within nations with cheap labor, especially in China and Bangladesh. Their sustainability goals and resources may differ from their buyer nations, making environmental (and ethical) issues more likely to slip through the cracks. For example, 90% of clothing purchased in the US includes either cotton or polyester, both of which can have serious effects on worker health. Additionally, cotton growth is water-intensive, and polyester is derived from oil making it difficult to dispose of or recycle.

The Case of H&M's "Conscious" Line
In 2010, the Financial Time Deutschland reported that the cotton within H&M's clothing that was certified as ‘organic’ from India was actually inorganic. The scandal impacted brand reputation as H&M was one of the first to introduce organic cotton into their clothes in 2004, and since 2007, has been producing garments that are 100% organic cotton. The move originally allowed H&M to be seen as a green firm that cares about the environment.

More recently, H&M was also criticised for greenwashing their “Conscious” collection, by making it unclear to consumers what the percentage of the garments had actually been recycled, according to the Norwegian Consumer Authority. Ultimately, H&M cannot back up all of their claims. Their statements are formed from normative truth, a phenomenon where humans declare something good or bad based on qualitative judgement. H&M wants their products to appear eco-friendly, while the objective truth shows that their manufacturing changes are not necessarily effective in heralding a sustainable change.

Greenwashing in marketing
Greenwashing is a prevalent practice primarily because of the financial gains that it brings, as well as an improved brand image that increases consumer purchase intention. Given marketing’s goal to increase profitability, the objective truth about the advertised products becomes irrelevant. Truth becomes constructivist; advertisers create their truth about products, which is later sold to the consumers.

Much of broader environmental messaging is formulated to shift the blame onto the individual, while these companies pump emissions and pollution into the environment, and even withhold information relating to future climate change, as Exxon and Shell did in the 1980s . They can create a form of guilty normative truth in consumers’ minds, making them believe that they are the ones at fault. Then they appease them by greenwashing destructive practices, making consumers feel better about buying from them in a world where everything carries an environmental impact.

However, research proves that the greenwashing brings desirable financial effects only when unacknowledged. Consumers, after learning about products being greenwashed, significantly lose trust in that specific brand, and tend to avoid their products. Therefore, an effective greenwashing campaign has to successfully deceive customers, at least to an extent. This approach is in direct opposition to the environmental point of view, where scientific, positivist truth is paramount.

Acknowledgment of greenwashing, however, does not influence only the company that took part in the greenwashing. It can influence the perception of all other products previously deemed to be eco-friendly, even the ones that truly are. It negatively affects person’s trust in the ‘green’ label, effectively lowering purchase intention and making them more suspicious towards seemingly unrelated products. This can have significant effects on the green movement as a whole, legitimate or not.

Opposition to Greenwashing
The most obvious example of the tensions between the disciplinary views are the movements focusing on counteracting greenwashing. Its harmful effects have been acknowledged by some of the world’s governments, who have established laws and authorities to fight these practices. Instances include the guidelines provided by the Federal Trade Commission in the United States, some of which are are aimed against the potential greenwashers and carry legal consequences. Several companies have already been prosecuted as a result. Additionally, the European Commission recently passed new regulations to sort companies by sustainability status in order to deter future investment into their practices. This has had pushback from industry experts wondering if it will do more harm than good, but the move is certainly encouraging transparency within business practices into the spotlight.

Examples of the tensions are also visible in the actions of other, non-governmental entities, such as a not-for-profit organization Two Sides. Its anti-greenwashing campaign has resulted in a few hundred companies removing misleading marketing claims.

In certain cases, it can even be the companies themselves pushing for more stringent measures to disclose environmental impact. In a significant example of both the market and environmentalism working together, DuPont, a large manufacturer of harmful CFCs, skewed the market towards themselves by switching to greener practices, then both advertising that fact and suddenly supporting environmental regulation, hurting competitor sales. This is a constructive interdisciplinary approach that ensures profitability, forces companies to go green in order to compete, and does not drastically mislead consumers.

Conclusion
The public is gradually becoming more aware of misleading practices such as greenwashing. Though brands try to suppress truth and maximize profit through marketing, customers are increasingly willing to do their own research, using positivist scientific resources to do so. Ultimately, it is difficult for these two disciplines to work together, as their goals are radically different and often exclusive. However, an interdisciplinary perspective is vital in order to find an optimal middle ground, where the benefits are maximised with respect to both ethics and environment. It is important in fields such as politics, where interests of both parties clash in attempt to impose their own truth, but a broader view could lead to favorable compromise.