これから毎週、環境問題やその何かしらの革新に関する記事を選び、以下のような3つのパラグラフにまとめる課題をします。
概要、分析、そして、結論の3つのパラグラフ(各150語くらいずつ)に分かれています。
リーディングやテストをこなしながらこの課題をやるのはなかなかハードそうです・・・汗

Title of Article: Md. Board OKs $14.4 million Worcester Co. land deal
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/easternshore/bal-land0107,0,2416989.story

A Maryland board approved of the plan to purchase 4,700 acres of privately owned forest land in Worcester County for $14.4 on January 7, 2009. This forest land is located in Maryland’s Eastern Shore, which is considered as a high ecological important area. This purchase will be paid mainly from Maryland’s Program Open Space, a fund program which is appointed to use for conservation as a green agenda. Therefore, it seems no problem to be spent for the purpose from the fund. However, a number of questions have been raised because the state is now facing a budget crisis that should be addressed immediately. Critiques toward the Gov. Martin O’Malley also have been raised because he might have personally attempted to step forward a policy for conservation he decided for his political benefits. These critiques also come from the opinion that now is not the time to purchase the land because the forest land is not developed now nor planned to be developed.

It is not easy to make the best political decision of which of three Es should be prioritized from one day to another within a limited budget. As for the case of this article, it might be reasonable decision to spend money for “environment” of the three elements in the long term, but considering it in the short term, “economy” or “equity” of the three might should be taken care more because many people may be actually suffering more than ever before from lack of access to jobs, transportation, housing, and so on because of the current world economic crisis. In this case, the governor might have to take a flexible approach to address what the state is currently facing. However, it is also important to take a brave decision for the future not to reach the point of no return. This political dilemma can be endless.

What is the best decision to be made in Politics while no one has a perfect view for the future? Decisions cannot always be a perfect decision because they are made by imperfect individuals. So what can be the best? It is the decision that is collectively made with consents by all individuals in the community. To reach the degree of the decision, all perspectives by as many people as possible have to be included and be deliberated carefully. In this case of the article, the decision might be too early to be made for the governor. It is not said that he could earn enough consents from his forks as long as a number of questions and critiques have been raised toward this purchase in this timing. Therefore, decision makers require to overcome their own interests and to throw them into the role to encourage people to provide their own collective decision with consents from all people in their communities.

アメリカ・メリーランド州は、この経済危機でしかも予算難の時に、個人所有で環境的に貴重な森林の土地を大金をはたいて買うそうです。
これに対して、別に開発されている訳でも開発が予定されている訳でもない土地だという理由で、その購入が「今」必要なのかについて疑問や批判があがっています。
この記事では背景が完全に分からないのですが、少なくともいえることは、この決断は州民の合意に完全に達しているとは言えないということです。

限られた予算の中、政治的に、環境問題へのプランニングに不可欠な「3つのE」のバランスを保つのは至難の業。(「3つのE」とは、Economy(経済), Environment(環境), and Equity(公正)の3つの要素のことです。)

そんな中で、その時その時でベストな選択をしていくには、出来るだけ多くの人を巻き込み、出来るだけ多くの視点を集めて、注意深く、また徹底的に議論して、みんなが合意出来るポイントまで持っていくことが大事だと思います。
それが僕の結論であって、それこそが民主主義なんだと思います。
民主主義国家にいるからには、例外なく、みんなが参加者であるべきであり、それぞれの視点をみんなと共有するべきであり、徹底的にそれらを議論するべきなんだと僕は思います。