The people who multitask the most are the ones who are worst at it.
That is the surprising conclusion of researchers at Stanford University, who found multitaskers are more easily distracted and less able to ignore irrelevant information than people who do less multitasking.
The researchers studied 262 college undergraduates, dividing them into high and low multitasking groups and comparing such things as memory, ability to switch from one task to another and being able to focus on a task. Their findings are reported in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
When it came to such essential abilities, people who did a lot of multitasking didn't score as well as others.
Still to be answered is why the folks who are worst at multitasking are the ones doing it the most.
In the study, the researchers first had to figure out who are the heavy and light multitaskers. They gave the students a form listing a variety of media such as print, television, computer-based video, music, computer games, telephone voice or text, and so forth.
The students were asked, for each form of media, which other forms they used at the same time always, often, sometimes or never. The result ranged from an average of about 1.5 media items at the low end to more than four among heavy multitaskers.
Then they tested the abilities of students in the various groups.
For example, ability to ignore irrelevant information was tested by showing them a group of red and blue rectangles, blanking them out, and then showing them again and asking if any of the red ones had moved.
The test required ignoring the blue rectangles. The researchers thought people who do a lot of multitasking would be better at it.
But they're not. They're worse. They're much worse. The high media multitaskers couldn't ignore the blue rectangles. They couldn't ignore stuff that doesn't matter.
Perhaps the multitaskers can take in the information and organize it better? Nope.
They are worse at that, too.
OK, maybe they have bigger memories. But that is not the case either.
Finally, researchers tested ability to switch from one task to another by classifying a letter as a vowel or consonant, or a number as even or odd. The high multitaskers took longer to make the switch from one task to the other.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
ADD As a Social Invention
In 1851, a Louisiana physician and American Medical Association member, Samuel A. Cartwright, published a paper in the New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal wherein he described a new medical disorder he had recently identified. He called it drapetomania (from drapeto, meaning "to flee," and mania, an obsession), and used it to describe a condition he felt was prevalent in runaway slaves. Dr. Cartwright felt that with "proper medical advice, strictly followed, this troublesome practice that many negroes have of running away can be almost entirely prevented."
In the last 20 years, we have witnessed the birth of a new medical disorder--attention-deficit disorder--which has grown from a relatively rare neurological condition (under other names) during the 1930s, 40s, and 50s to a condition today said to afflict millions of children and adults (a recent Time magazine cover story even suggested that President Clinton may have ADD and could be "only a pill away from greatness"). Attention-deficit disorder (or, more recently, "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder"--the syndrome has changed names at least 25 times in the past 120 years) has the support of thousands of scientific studies, the American Psychiatric Association, the U.S. Department of Education, and many other solid institutions in this country and worldwide. Yet, like Dr. Cartwright's "drapetomania," ADD may in fact come clothed in scientific respectability yet have disturbing social overtones which are scarcely acknowledged by the wider educational community.
Social critic Ivan Illich once wrote that "each civilization defines its own diseases. What is sickness in one might be chromosomal abnormality, crime, holiness, or sin in another. For the same symptom of compulsive stealing one might be executed, tortured to death, exiled, hospitalized, or given alms or tax money." So far, few attempts have been made to analyze the social meaning of "attention-deficit disorder" in our time. However, one does not have to probe too far beneath the surface to discover some interesting-and troubling-features of ADD
Why, for example, does identification Of ADD vary so widely from one social context to another? Studies reveal that up to 80 percent of the time, ADD cannot be identified in the physician's office, presumably because the one-to-one social context with a (frequently) male authority figure mediates against the occurrence of symptoms. In another study, trained clinicians from different countries were shown tapes of children and asked to diagnose them. In a country with stricter behavioral norms--for example, China--there was a greater likelihood of an ADD diagnosis than in a country such as the United States. On the other hand, in some countries, such as England, a diagnosis of hyperactivity is much less likely (one study on the Isle of Wight identified only two children out of 2,199 as hyperactive).
One has to ask, then, what are some of the underlying social influences that may have served to shape the invention Of ADD as a category of disorder in our culture? The answer to that question, I believe, is complex and many-faceted. On one level, it's possible to revive some of the concerns that Nicholas Hobbs, a former president of the American Psychological Association, had in the mid-1970s concerning the labeling of children. Mr. Hobbs pointed out that "a good case can be made for the position that protection of the community is a primary function of classifying and labeling children who are different or deviant." He noted that the Protestant work ethic (as elaborated upon by social theorists such as Max Weber) may be one set of American values which may permeate our nation's penchant for classifying unruly children. Mr. Hobbs writes: "According to this doctrine ... God's chosen ones are inspired to attain to positions of wealth and power through the rational and efficient use of their time and energy, through their willingness to control distracting impulses, and to delay gratification in the service of productivity, and through their thriftiness and ambition." Such a society might well be expected to define deviance in terms of distractibility, impulsiveness, and lack of motivation--the same traits frequently used to describe children suffering from ADD.
Alternatively, ADD may have arisen in our society precisely because of the loss of those same values. As Harvard University professor Lester Grinspoon and his collaborator Susan B. Singer pointed out over 20 years ago, "our society has been undergoing a critical upheaval in values. Children growing up in the past decade have seen claims to authority and existing institutions questioned as an everyday occurrence. ... Teachers no longer have the unquestioned authority they once had in the classroom. ... The child, on the other side, is no longer so intimidated by whatever authority the teacher has." Grinspoon and Ms. Singer felt that "hyperkinesis" [the term used in the 60s and early 70s to designate ADD-type behaviors], whatever organic condition they may legitimately refer to, has become a convenient label with which to dismiss this phenomenon as a physical 'disease' rather than treating it as the social problem it is."
Another cultural view might look at the rise of electronic media as a contributing factor in the emergence of "attention deficit disorder." The fact is, we live in an attention-deficit society. During the 1992 political campaign, CBS News attempted to introduce an innovation in its newscasts: 30-second sound bites from the politicians to give the viewer more 'depth" into their views. The project had to be abandoned because the average adult viewer could not sustain his or her attention that long (the industry average for sound bites is around seven seconds). If this is true of adults--who grew up during the days of radio and early TV--then how much truer it is of today's children, who are inundated with Nintendo, the Internet, MTV, multimedia, and more.
These kids live life in the fast lane, and have evolved new ways of paying attention to cope with the increased pace. Media expert Tony Schwartz pointed out that "today's child is a scanner. His experience with electronic media has taught him to scan life the way his eye scans a television set or his ears scan auditory signals from a radio or stereo speaker." What kinds of cultural values, then, might be present in a situation where an adult brought up in Marshall McLuhan's linear, one-step-at-a-time, print-oriented culture is responsible for assessing ADD in a child who has been fed on fast-paced electronic information from birth?
Such children may have particular difficulties in traditional classroom environments where they must sit for long periods of time, listen to monotone lectures, and pore over textbook and worksheet material that bears little resemblance to real life. Interestingly, research suggests that children labeled ADD do most poorly in environments that are boring and repetitive, externally controlled, lack immediate feedback, or are presided over by a familiar, maternal-like authority: in other words, the typical conservative "back to basics" classroom (a classroom that currently seems to be undergoing a resurgence in popularity).
Unfortunately, this kind of classroom is deadly not only for the so-called ADD kid but for all kids. John Goodlad's monumental study of 1,000 U.S. classrooms in the 1980s was particularly instructive on this issue. The study, A Place Called School, was especially critical of the lack of exciting learning activities: "Students reported that they liked to do activities that involved them actively or in which they worked with others. These included going on field trips, making films, building or drawing things, making collections, interviewing people, acting things out, and carrying out projects. These are the things which students reported doing least and which we observed infrequently." All children suffer from this deprivation, but it may be that children labeled ADD react most intensely to this lack of stimulation. Several studies, especially those by Sydney Zentall at Purdue University, suggest, in fact, that just as the amphetamine-like substance Ritalin may help stimulate manv of these kids to an optimal level of arousal, so too can stimulating learning environments also help to focus and calm. I'm reminded here of the canaries that were kept by coal miners deep in the mines. If the level of oxygen fell below a certain level, the canaries would fall over on their perches and die, warning the miners to get out fast. It's possible that children who have been labeled ADD are the canaries of modern-day education; they may be signaling us to transform our nation's classrooms into more dynamic, novel, and exciting learning environments. ADD may, then, be more accurately termed ADDD, or attention-to-ditto-deficit disorder.
Finally, just as it is essential to see Dr. Cartwright's drapetomania as a product of the racial bigotry of his times, so too it's critical that we not sidestep the way in which racial prejudices enter into the ADD controversy in today's admittedly less bigoted but nevertheless still racially troubled times. ADD was in fact stopped from being declared an officially handicapping condition by Congress in 1990, largely because of the efforts of a coalition of 17 educational, social, and political organizations including the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Among the concerns raised by the coalition was the strong feeling that ADD could be used to stigmatize minority groups. Debra DeLee, then a spokesperson for the National Education Association, wrote: "Establishing a new category [ADD] based on behavioral characteristics alone, such as overactivity, impulsiveness, and inattentiveness, increases the likelihood of inappropriate labeling for racial-, ethnic-, and linguistic-minority students." The work of award winning journalists such as Todd Silberman and his colleagues at the The Raleigh News and Observer in Raleigh, N.C., have shown how special-education classes are often disproportionately filled with minority students.
The issues that I've raised above are almost never discussed in the ADD community. The general consensus seems to be that ADD is a discrete medical entity that exists in any and all social contexts, but is harder to identify in some social settings (requiring more acute diagnostic skills) or simply wasn't identified in earlier times or in other cultures because of the lack of proper scientific knowledge. It holds stubbornly to its medical paradigm and resists the influence of other worldviews (including the sociological one presented here), hoping that the world will eventually unite in accepting ADD as a legitimate medical disorder. One wonders, however, as societal values and structures change over time, whether "attention-deficit disorder" will go the way of all historical labels (remember that "moron" was once a diagnostic term in the 1930s) and give rise to new terms, and new groups of "disordered children."
In the last 20 years, we have witnessed the birth of a new medical disorder--attention-deficit disorder--which has grown from a relatively rare neurological condition (under other names) during the 1930s, 40s, and 50s to a condition today said to afflict millions of children and adults (a recent Time magazine cover story even suggested that President Clinton may have ADD and could be "only a pill away from greatness"). Attention-deficit disorder (or, more recently, "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder"--the syndrome has changed names at least 25 times in the past 120 years) has the support of thousands of scientific studies, the American Psychiatric Association, the U.S. Department of Education, and many other solid institutions in this country and worldwide. Yet, like Dr. Cartwright's "drapetomania," ADD may in fact come clothed in scientific respectability yet have disturbing social overtones which are scarcely acknowledged by the wider educational community.
Social critic Ivan Illich once wrote that "each civilization defines its own diseases. What is sickness in one might be chromosomal abnormality, crime, holiness, or sin in another. For the same symptom of compulsive stealing one might be executed, tortured to death, exiled, hospitalized, or given alms or tax money." So far, few attempts have been made to analyze the social meaning of "attention-deficit disorder" in our time. However, one does not have to probe too far beneath the surface to discover some interesting-and troubling-features of ADD
Why, for example, does identification Of ADD vary so widely from one social context to another? Studies reveal that up to 80 percent of the time, ADD cannot be identified in the physician's office, presumably because the one-to-one social context with a (frequently) male authority figure mediates against the occurrence of symptoms. In another study, trained clinicians from different countries were shown tapes of children and asked to diagnose them. In a country with stricter behavioral norms--for example, China--there was a greater likelihood of an ADD diagnosis than in a country such as the United States. On the other hand, in some countries, such as England, a diagnosis of hyperactivity is much less likely (one study on the Isle of Wight identified only two children out of 2,199 as hyperactive).
One has to ask, then, what are some of the underlying social influences that may have served to shape the invention Of ADD as a category of disorder in our culture? The answer to that question, I believe, is complex and many-faceted. On one level, it's possible to revive some of the concerns that Nicholas Hobbs, a former president of the American Psychological Association, had in the mid-1970s concerning the labeling of children. Mr. Hobbs pointed out that "a good case can be made for the position that protection of the community is a primary function of classifying and labeling children who are different or deviant." He noted that the Protestant work ethic (as elaborated upon by social theorists such as Max Weber) may be one set of American values which may permeate our nation's penchant for classifying unruly children. Mr. Hobbs writes: "According to this doctrine ... God's chosen ones are inspired to attain to positions of wealth and power through the rational and efficient use of their time and energy, through their willingness to control distracting impulses, and to delay gratification in the service of productivity, and through their thriftiness and ambition." Such a society might well be expected to define deviance in terms of distractibility, impulsiveness, and lack of motivation--the same traits frequently used to describe children suffering from ADD.
Alternatively, ADD may have arisen in our society precisely because of the loss of those same values. As Harvard University professor Lester Grinspoon and his collaborator Susan B. Singer pointed out over 20 years ago, "our society has been undergoing a critical upheaval in values. Children growing up in the past decade have seen claims to authority and existing institutions questioned as an everyday occurrence. ... Teachers no longer have the unquestioned authority they once had in the classroom. ... The child, on the other side, is no longer so intimidated by whatever authority the teacher has." Grinspoon and Ms. Singer felt that "hyperkinesis" [the term used in the 60s and early 70s to designate ADD-type behaviors], whatever organic condition they may legitimately refer to, has become a convenient label with which to dismiss this phenomenon as a physical 'disease' rather than treating it as the social problem it is."
Another cultural view might look at the rise of electronic media as a contributing factor in the emergence of "attention deficit disorder." The fact is, we live in an attention-deficit society. During the 1992 political campaign, CBS News attempted to introduce an innovation in its newscasts: 30-second sound bites from the politicians to give the viewer more 'depth" into their views. The project had to be abandoned because the average adult viewer could not sustain his or her attention that long (the industry average for sound bites is around seven seconds). If this is true of adults--who grew up during the days of radio and early TV--then how much truer it is of today's children, who are inundated with Nintendo, the Internet, MTV, multimedia, and more.
These kids live life in the fast lane, and have evolved new ways of paying attention to cope with the increased pace. Media expert Tony Schwartz pointed out that "today's child is a scanner. His experience with electronic media has taught him to scan life the way his eye scans a television set or his ears scan auditory signals from a radio or stereo speaker." What kinds of cultural values, then, might be present in a situation where an adult brought up in Marshall McLuhan's linear, one-step-at-a-time, print-oriented culture is responsible for assessing ADD in a child who has been fed on fast-paced electronic information from birth?
Such children may have particular difficulties in traditional classroom environments where they must sit for long periods of time, listen to monotone lectures, and pore over textbook and worksheet material that bears little resemblance to real life. Interestingly, research suggests that children labeled ADD do most poorly in environments that are boring and repetitive, externally controlled, lack immediate feedback, or are presided over by a familiar, maternal-like authority: in other words, the typical conservative "back to basics" classroom (a classroom that currently seems to be undergoing a resurgence in popularity).
Unfortunately, this kind of classroom is deadly not only for the so-called ADD kid but for all kids. John Goodlad's monumental study of 1,000 U.S. classrooms in the 1980s was particularly instructive on this issue. The study, A Place Called School, was especially critical of the lack of exciting learning activities: "Students reported that they liked to do activities that involved them actively or in which they worked with others. These included going on field trips, making films, building or drawing things, making collections, interviewing people, acting things out, and carrying out projects. These are the things which students reported doing least and which we observed infrequently." All children suffer from this deprivation, but it may be that children labeled ADD react most intensely to this lack of stimulation. Several studies, especially those by Sydney Zentall at Purdue University, suggest, in fact, that just as the amphetamine-like substance Ritalin may help stimulate manv of these kids to an optimal level of arousal, so too can stimulating learning environments also help to focus and calm. I'm reminded here of the canaries that were kept by coal miners deep in the mines. If the level of oxygen fell below a certain level, the canaries would fall over on their perches and die, warning the miners to get out fast. It's possible that children who have been labeled ADD are the canaries of modern-day education; they may be signaling us to transform our nation's classrooms into more dynamic, novel, and exciting learning environments. ADD may, then, be more accurately termed ADDD, or attention-to-ditto-deficit disorder.
Finally, just as it is essential to see Dr. Cartwright's drapetomania as a product of the racial bigotry of his times, so too it's critical that we not sidestep the way in which racial prejudices enter into the ADD controversy in today's admittedly less bigoted but nevertheless still racially troubled times. ADD was in fact stopped from being declared an officially handicapping condition by Congress in 1990, largely because of the efforts of a coalition of 17 educational, social, and political organizations including the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Among the concerns raised by the coalition was the strong feeling that ADD could be used to stigmatize minority groups. Debra DeLee, then a spokesperson for the National Education Association, wrote: "Establishing a new category [ADD] based on behavioral characteristics alone, such as overactivity, impulsiveness, and inattentiveness, increases the likelihood of inappropriate labeling for racial-, ethnic-, and linguistic-minority students." The work of award winning journalists such as Todd Silberman and his colleagues at the The Raleigh News and Observer in Raleigh, N.C., have shown how special-education classes are often disproportionately filled with minority students.
The issues that I've raised above are almost never discussed in the ADD community. The general consensus seems to be that ADD is a discrete medical entity that exists in any and all social contexts, but is harder to identify in some social settings (requiring more acute diagnostic skills) or simply wasn't identified in earlier times or in other cultures because of the lack of proper scientific knowledge. It holds stubbornly to its medical paradigm and resists the influence of other worldviews (including the sociological one presented here), hoping that the world will eventually unite in accepting ADD as a legitimate medical disorder. One wonders, however, as societal values and structures change over time, whether "attention-deficit disorder" will go the way of all historical labels (remember that "moron" was once a diagnostic term in the 1930s) and give rise to new terms, and new groups of "disordered children."
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Muslim woman barred from Paris pool for `burquini'
Sama Wareh walks along the sand dressed in swimwear designed to comply with Muslim sensibilities.
PARIS – A Muslim woman who tried to go swimming in a head-to-toe "burquini" has been banned from her local pool in the latest tussle between religious practices and secular authority in France.
Officials on Wednesday insisted they banned the woman's use of the Islam-friendly swimsuit because of France's unusually strict hygiene standards in pools — not because of official hostility to wearing overtly Muslim garb.
Under the policy, swimmers are prevented from wearing any street-compatible or baggy clothing, such as Bermuda shorts, in favor of figure-hugging suits.
The woman, a 35-year-old convert to Islam identified only as Carole, complained of religious discrimination after trying to go swimming in her burquini in the Paris suburb of Emerainville.
She was quoted as telling the daily Le Parisien newspaper that she had bought the burquini after deciding "it would allow me the pleasure of bathing without showing too much of myself, as Islam recommends." "For me this is nothing but segregation," she added.
The issue of religious attire is a hot topic in France, where head-to-toe burqas or other full-body coverings worn by Muslim fundamentalists are in official disfavor.
French lawmakers recently proposed a ban on the burqa and other voluminous Muslim attire. President Nicolas Sarkozy backs the move, saying such clothing makes women prisoners.
But Daniel Guillaume, a regional official in charge of swimming pools, said Carole's poolside rebuff had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with public health standards.
He said swimmers throughout France must wear special clothes to the pool, whereas a burquini could be worn all day long, collecting everything from food spills to sweat along the way.
"These clothes are used in public, so they can contain molecules, viruses, et cetera, which will go in the water and could be transmitted to other bathers," Guillaume said in a telephone interview.
"We reminded this woman that one should not bathe all dressed, just as we would tell someone who is a nudist not to bathe all naked," he said.
Guillaume said France's public health standards require all pool-goers to don appropriate attire — swimsuits for women and tight, swim-specific briefs for men — and caps to cover their hair. Bathers also must shower before entering the water.
Guillaume said Carole had tried to file a complaint at a local police station, but her request was turned down as groundless.
Carole told the daily Le Parisien she would protest with the help of anti-discrimination groups.
One has to acknowledge however, irrespective of what side of the divide you are on, that esthetically, the 'burquini' leaves a little to be desired, just a little.
Canadian cellphone rates among world's worst
The average Canadian cellphone user is paying among the highest bills in the developed world, according to a new international study.
Using a comparison package of 780 calls made, 600 text messages and eight multimedia messages sent per year, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development found that Canada has the third-highest wireless rates among developed countries. The United States had the highest rates for this "medium-usage" package, followed by Spain.
Canadians falling into this usage category shelled out an average of $500 US a year for their cellphone service, compared with $635 for Americans and $508 for Spaniards. Dutch users had the cheapest rates, with an annual expenditure of only $131 for the sample plan.
Canadians who were light or heavy users ranked slightly better in the OECD's annual Communications Outlook, released Tuesday. Light users, defined as those making 360 calls a year and sending 396 text messages and eight multimedia messages, spent $195 US a year on average — the 11th-most expensive among the 30 OECD member countries.
Heavy users, those making 1,680 calls a year and sending 660 text messages and 12 multimedia messages, spent $563, which ranked near the middle of the pack at 12th.
The poor showing was not surprising — the Canadian government has acknowledged that rates are too high and are contributing to lagging cellphone usage. Canada now ranks last for cellphone users per capita in the OECD, having been surpassed by Mexico since the organization's previous study.
Canadians are also getting hosed for their internet access, according to the OECD Communications Outlook study. Canada has the second-most expensive high-speed connections, or those ranging between 12 and 32 megabits per second, next to only the Slovak Republic. Such a connection costs around $90 US per month in Canada, well above the OECD's average of $53.
Medium-speed connections, or those between 2.5 and 10 megabits, are eighth-most expensive out of 30 countries at about $48, above the $43 average. Low-speed connections, under 2.5 megabits, are ninth-most expensive at around $33, slightly above the OECD average of $32.
In late 2007, the then industry minister, Jim Prentice, moved to encourage competition by reserving airwaves for new cellphone carriers. A trio of new companies — Public Mobile, Globalive and DAVE Wireless — are expected to begin offering services by the end of this year or early in 2010.
Canadian wireless carriers have in the past questioned the OECD's methods and said it is difficult to compare cellphone plans across countries because of the variables involved. For one, Canadian and U.S. carriers also charge customers for incoming calls, a practice not common in many European and Asian countries, where only the calling party pays. Incoming minutes aren't tallied.
This has skewed usage patterns in North America, with Canadians and Americans using significantly more airtime than customers in other parts of the world.
Taylor Reynolds, communication analyst and economist for the Paris-based OECD, acknowledged such differences do make it difficult to get true comparisons.
"North Americans do tend to make a lot more calls than in other countries," he said. "This is a challenge when we have to define a 'typical' consumption pattern for all OECD countries. The number of calls are too low for some countries and too high for others."
The total cost of ownership of high-end devices such as the iPhone has also been considerably higher because Canada is the only OECD country to require three-year contracts. Most countries have two-year limits on contracts. Canadian carriers have recently begun offering such devices without contracts, albeit with hefty up-front fees.
Using a comparison package of 780 calls made, 600 text messages and eight multimedia messages sent per year, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development found that Canada has the third-highest wireless rates among developed countries. The United States had the highest rates for this "medium-usage" package, followed by Spain.
Canadians falling into this usage category shelled out an average of $500 US a year for their cellphone service, compared with $635 for Americans and $508 for Spaniards. Dutch users had the cheapest rates, with an annual expenditure of only $131 for the sample plan.
Canadians who were light or heavy users ranked slightly better in the OECD's annual Communications Outlook, released Tuesday. Light users, defined as those making 360 calls a year and sending 396 text messages and eight multimedia messages, spent $195 US a year on average — the 11th-most expensive among the 30 OECD member countries.
Heavy users, those making 1,680 calls a year and sending 660 text messages and 12 multimedia messages, spent $563, which ranked near the middle of the pack at 12th.
The poor showing was not surprising — the Canadian government has acknowledged that rates are too high and are contributing to lagging cellphone usage. Canada now ranks last for cellphone users per capita in the OECD, having been surpassed by Mexico since the organization's previous study.
Canadians are also getting hosed for their internet access, according to the OECD Communications Outlook study. Canada has the second-most expensive high-speed connections, or those ranging between 12 and 32 megabits per second, next to only the Slovak Republic. Such a connection costs around $90 US per month in Canada, well above the OECD's average of $53.
Medium-speed connections, or those between 2.5 and 10 megabits, are eighth-most expensive out of 30 countries at about $48, above the $43 average. Low-speed connections, under 2.5 megabits, are ninth-most expensive at around $33, slightly above the OECD average of $32.
In late 2007, the then industry minister, Jim Prentice, moved to encourage competition by reserving airwaves for new cellphone carriers. A trio of new companies — Public Mobile, Globalive and DAVE Wireless — are expected to begin offering services by the end of this year or early in 2010.
Canadian wireless carriers have in the past questioned the OECD's methods and said it is difficult to compare cellphone plans across countries because of the variables involved. For one, Canadian and U.S. carriers also charge customers for incoming calls, a practice not common in many European and Asian countries, where only the calling party pays. Incoming minutes aren't tallied.
This has skewed usage patterns in North America, with Canadians and Americans using significantly more airtime than customers in other parts of the world.
Taylor Reynolds, communication analyst and economist for the Paris-based OECD, acknowledged such differences do make it difficult to get true comparisons.
"North Americans do tend to make a lot more calls than in other countries," he said. "This is a challenge when we have to define a 'typical' consumption pattern for all OECD countries. The number of calls are too low for some countries and too high for others."
The total cost of ownership of high-end devices such as the iPhone has also been considerably higher because Canada is the only OECD country to require three-year contracts. Most countries have two-year limits on contracts. Canadian carriers have recently begun offering such devices without contracts, albeit with hefty up-front fees.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
India's land and air getting more polluted: Govt
About 45 per cent of India's land is degraded, air pollution is increasing in all its cities, it is losing its rare plants and animals more rapidly than before and about one-third of its urban population now lives in slums, says the State of Environment Report India 2009 brought out by the government.
The report, prepared by NGO Development Alternatives under the aegis of the ministry, says 45 per cent of India's land area is degraded due to erosion, soil acidity, alkalinity and salinity, waterlogging and wind erosion.
It says the prime causes of land degradation are deforestation, unsustainable farming, mining and excessive groundwater extraction.
On the bright side, the report shows how over two-thirds of the degraded 147 million hectares can be regenerated quite easily, and points out that India's forest cover is gradually increasing.
Presenting the salient features of the report to the media, Development Alternatives President (Development Enterprises) George C Varughese said one of its most worrisome findings was that the level of respirable suspended particulate matter -- the small pieces of soot and dust that get inside the lungs -- had gone up in all the 50 cities across India studied by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences and the Central Pollution Control Board.
"In these 50 cities, with their population of 110 million, the public health damage costs due to this was estimated at Rs 15,000 crore in 2004," Varughese said.
The main causes of urban air pollution were vehicles and factories, he pointed out, appealing for a major boost to public transport.
While India still had some cushion when it came to water use, this scarce resource would have to be managed very carefully, the report says. It identifies lack of proper pricing of water for domestic usage, poor sanitation, unregulated extraction of groundwater by industry, discharge of toxic and organic wastewater by factories, inefficient irrigation and overuse of chemical fertilisers and pesticides as the main causes of water problems in the country.
While India remains one of the world's 17 "megadiverse" countries in terms of the number of species it houses, 10 per cent of its wild flora and fauna are on the threatened list, Varughese pointed out. The main causes, according to the report, were habitat destruction, poaching, invasive species, overexploitation, pollution and climate change.
The report points out that while India contributes only about five per cent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions that are leading to climate change, about 700 million Indians directly face the threat of global warming today, as it affects farming, makes droughts, floods and storms more frequent and more severe and is raising the sea level.
In the section on urbanisation, the report points out that 20 to 40 per cent of people living in cities are in slums. Varughese said there were good projects to upgrade their lives and improve the environment at the same time, but the problem was that most of the money from schemes like the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission was taken away by the big cities, "while the major problem is in about 4,000 small and medium towns".
The report, prepared by NGO Development Alternatives under the aegis of the ministry, says 45 per cent of India's land area is degraded due to erosion, soil acidity, alkalinity and salinity, waterlogging and wind erosion.
It says the prime causes of land degradation are deforestation, unsustainable farming, mining and excessive groundwater extraction.
On the bright side, the report shows how over two-thirds of the degraded 147 million hectares can be regenerated quite easily, and points out that India's forest cover is gradually increasing.
Presenting the salient features of the report to the media, Development Alternatives President (Development Enterprises) George C Varughese said one of its most worrisome findings was that the level of respirable suspended particulate matter -- the small pieces of soot and dust that get inside the lungs -- had gone up in all the 50 cities across India studied by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences and the Central Pollution Control Board.
"In these 50 cities, with their population of 110 million, the public health damage costs due to this was estimated at Rs 15,000 crore in 2004," Varughese said.
The main causes of urban air pollution were vehicles and factories, he pointed out, appealing for a major boost to public transport.
While India still had some cushion when it came to water use, this scarce resource would have to be managed very carefully, the report says. It identifies lack of proper pricing of water for domestic usage, poor sanitation, unregulated extraction of groundwater by industry, discharge of toxic and organic wastewater by factories, inefficient irrigation and overuse of chemical fertilisers and pesticides as the main causes of water problems in the country.
While India remains one of the world's 17 "megadiverse" countries in terms of the number of species it houses, 10 per cent of its wild flora and fauna are on the threatened list, Varughese pointed out. The main causes, according to the report, were habitat destruction, poaching, invasive species, overexploitation, pollution and climate change.
The report points out that while India contributes only about five per cent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions that are leading to climate change, about 700 million Indians directly face the threat of global warming today, as it affects farming, makes droughts, floods and storms more frequent and more severe and is raising the sea level.
In the section on urbanisation, the report points out that 20 to 40 per cent of people living in cities are in slums. Varughese said there were good projects to upgrade their lives and improve the environment at the same time, but the problem was that most of the money from schemes like the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission was taken away by the big cities, "while the major problem is in about 4,000 small and medium towns".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
