Talk:Environmental degradation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Environment (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 16:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal[edit]

I don't agree with the merger. Resource depletion is a a type of environmental degradation. I feel they can both justify their own articles. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Disagree Resource depletion is a process. Environmental depletion is another kind of process that includes things like land degradation which has little to do with resource depletion. - Shiftchange (talk) 12:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

  • I think they could each be argued to be a subset of the other (for example, the current EnDeg lead reads "Environmental degradation is the deterioration of the environment through depletion of resources such as..."). There is tremendous overlap. Personally I think it's important for us to actually perceive them as the same concept given that even the most untouched piece of wilderness is providing economic benefits to the world (but that's just my opinion).
  • The land degradation you mention above is described in it's lead as a form of [economic] resource depletion ("the value of the biophysical environment is affected by one or more combination of human-induced processes"), besides which it deals mostly with agricultural land as a resource.
  • What do readers gain from having these two very short articles split apart? Wouldn't it be better to have a combined article (regardless of whether they may "deserve" their own article at some point in the future when they are more fully fleshed out)? NJGW (talk) 17:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
You are correct, the terms are similar. My view is that they have distinct connotations which makes them worthy of being separated. I'm thinking of the different causation factors and how resource depletion is an economic term, while environmental degradation is used in environmental fields. I wouldn't refer to the Environmental degradation page because it doesn't have any citations and both need expanding before I would re-assess my pov. - Shiftchange (talk) 22:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I think those are two very separate issues and should remain separate articles. how is pollution of the land (environmental degradation) equivalent to resource depletion? (talk) 08:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Laki, it would help if you read the article in question: "Environmental degradation is the deterioration of the environment through depletion of resources such as air, water and soil; the destruction of ecosystems and the extinction of wildlife." NJGW (talk) 18:40, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Nicholas? My knowledge tells me those are two different topics. Lets see what Google thinks: environmental degradation with depletion? or without depletion? as you can see, about 5% of books mentioning environmental degradation also mention word depletion -- hardly related concepts. (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
or to give a simple example: i trow a plastic bag in the ocean -- no depletion, but environmental degradation [1]! (talk) 19:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Environmental degradation can be classified into two broad categories: (1) that which is caused by the removal of components from the natural environment and (2) that which is caused by adding components to the natural environment. See Green Home Environmental Products ("Take Only Pictures, Leave Only Footprints" by Diana Kroll). -- Wavelength (talk) 19:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Oppose merge - distinct, if related, ideas. Resource depletion usually looks at the issue from an economic perspective, while environmental degradation takes a different approach. While both articles are pretty sad at this point in time, there's plenty of material to expand both of them. Guettarda (talk) 20:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Result = No merge
tag removed. Sunray (talk) 17:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal 2 (Environmental issue)[edit]

Looks like a very similar topic to me. --Tungsten (talk) 09:36, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Oppose merge. "Environmental issue" is a much broader, more general concept. While "Environmental degradation" is an environmental issue, it is also a very specific process that needs its own article. Sunray (talk) 17:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Oppose merge per Sunray. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 08:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Oppose merge Yes, environmental degradation is a subcategory of environmental issues, but merging the articles wouldn't make sense. Unless you think you should also merge in the "Polution" article, or "Overpopulation" article, or "climate change" article. Here is the page where this is all already worked out and is in good order (talk) 05:51, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Environmental Change and Human Health[edit]

"Environmental Change and Human Health, a special section of World Resources 1998-99 in this report describes how preventable illnesses and premature deaths are still occurring in very large numbers. If vast improvements are made in human health, millions of people will be living longer, healthier lives than ever before. In these poorest regions of the world an estimated one in five children will not live to see their fifth birthday, primarily because of environment-related diseases. Eleven million children die worldwide annually, equal to the combined populations of Norway and Switzerland, and mostly due to malaria, acute respiratory infections or diarrhea — illnesses that are largely preventable."

I came to this article to learn about environmental degradation and I was reading the article and I thought I understood the concept, then I come to this last paragraph, and I can't see how it belongs in the article. The first sentence of this article currently reads:

"Environmental degradation is the deterioration of the environment through depletion of resources such as air, water and soil; the destruction of ecosystems and the extinction of wildlife."

While I do believe that there is a link between reducing and repairing environmental degradation and increasing health and stopping some "preventable diseases", the general idea of the result of a lack of, and reason for the need of "vast improvements in human health" is not directly related to the concept of environmental degradation. Now, I'm not an expert by any means, my only education on the topic comes from the article, so either I am wrong in saying this, or the article is not adequately explaining why the direct link between human health in general and environmental degradation. So I suggest that if someone knows more about the topic that you either fill in the gaps or remove the last paragraph. (talk) 06:07, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

cause and  efect  — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:00, 25 September 2011 (UTC)