In October, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (I.P.C.C.) released a sobering report, stating that the threshold temperature (2 degrees Celsius) at which we must keep the planet’s climate below by 2040 might still be too high. Researchers originally believed that we had to keep temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius by 2040 to be somewhat safe. Now, they’re saying we must keep temperatures below 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2040, a conclusion that is harrowing in its implications if it wasn’t already.

What our species needs to do next is clear: we must move faster to a zero emissions society or face food shortages, more intense wildfires, and an exacerbated refugee crisis, just to name a few.

We’ve read the myriad of articles spelling out our impending doom, but what about the solutions? As journalists, editors, and media makers, what are we to make of all this? What can our role be, besides participating in the occasional march?

We can start by changing the ways we’ve defined progress, via the metric of GDP growth. As over 200 scientists stated in an open letter to the EU back in September, economic growth as we currently measure it is environmental unsustainable. We need to reduce our rates of production and consumption, which means we must have different measures for progress and wealth.

This might trigger anxiety for many, including myself, who’ve been raised under the belief that more growth means greater wellbeing. But it shouldn’t. A 2016 study by the Social Progress Initiative concluded that traditional measures such as GDP fail to capture the overall progress of societies.

For instance, countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates have extremely high GDP per capita rates but lag heavily in social progress indicators like personal freedom and choice, access to advanced education, and tolerance and inclusion.

Contrarily, countries like Uruguay, Chile, and Estonia have much lower GDP per capita rates but rank much higher in social progress indicators like access to healthcare and opportunity.

As Jason Hickel from the Guardian put it so eloquently, an alternative growth model would entail “easing the intensity of our economy, cutting the excesses of the very richest, sharing what we have instead of plundering the Earth more” and, of course, liberating ourselves from ramped consumerism (which makes us more miserable anyway). This does not entail a Ludditian regression into pre-industrial society. It means reevaluating the language we use to define growth.

Hence, there’s another way of looking at it. First off it, GDP growth doesn’t matter as much as we think it does. Media outlets and politicians alike love to use GDP as a buzzword for calculated progress and often employ absurdly hyperbolic language to suggest that something monumental is happening. Prime example: pundits praising the Trump economy’s “uuge” growth rates, how it’s just on fire (“on fire” for whom and for what is never addressed). Yet, economic pundits fail to mention how, for instance, this will directly address wealth inequality or the political disenfranchisement of communities of color and the poor.

Take another case: Nigeria. Traditionally, the rapid growth of Nigeria (now the largest economy in Africa) would elicit ecstatic responses. And indeed, some level of growth in Nigeria is positive. But what’s not in the equation is the fact that millions of Nigerians face hunger and hundreds millions more live below the poverty line. Meanwhile, the top five billionaires in Nigeria have a shared net-worth of about $30 Billion, about $5 Billion more than how much it would take to eradicate extreme poverty at the national level.

The point here is not to say we should stop talking about GDP growth. That’s impossible and undesirable. But we should place less emphasis on it politically. The actual mechanics of what this would mean on the ground via political policy is of course another matter.

As media disseminators, our primary job should be to allow for more open discussions on the alternative ways we can measure and subsequently construct a more environmentally sustainable vision for society. When have you seen a CNN panel discussion on the merits (or de-merits) of “de-growth” policies or the “steady-state economy”; or discussions on the differences between absolute and relative “decoupling”(the rate which economic output uses less energy and raw materials due to increased efficiency.)?

There’s no clear-cut rubric right now and the debate is mostly held in obscure environmental and social science circles. Instead, we should encourage these admittedly uncomfortable and controversial questions to be debated openly in mainstream outlets everywhere and the socio-economic urgency of mitigating climate change to be taken a tad bit more seriously.

China announced a 6.5 percent economic growth rate in the September quarter of 2018, the lowest rate since 2016. However, the decreased economic growth rate didn’t cool down the consumption enthusiasm on e-commerce platforms. Instead, the Chinese e-commerce companies made e-commerce history in November.

China GDP Growth Rate

The most representative e-commerce company would be the giant—Alibaba. This year, Alibaba reported that customers spent $30.8 billion online in 24 hours, a significant increase from $25.3 billion in gross merchandise volume in 2017. The number is almost five times than the total online sales on 2017 Cyber Monday reached $6.59 billion, the largest online sales day in the U.S. history, according to Adobe’s analysis.

Singles Day (Nov.11) was originally created by Chinese university students to celebrate their single status. In 2019, Alibaba created its first shopping day on Singles Day with about $7.1 million in gross merchandise volume and turned it into a nationwide shopping festival. And now it’s the world’s largest online-shopping festival, according to Bloomberg.

Source: Statista

When the creative marketing strategy created by accident has become a profitable business model, Alibaba is not the only company who participates in the festival. While Alibaba calls its shopping festival as “Double 11”, JD.com, the most competitive rivalry of Alibaba, names its shopping festival as “11.11” and extends its sales time from Nov.1 – Nov.11. During the period, JD.com saw about $22.8 billion in transactions, a 25.7 percent increase compared to the gross merchandise volume of the same period in 2017. JD.com also has its own shoppers’ holiday in mid-June (6.18). This year, JD.com has sold $24.7 billion worth of goods on that day.

Plus, other popular local platforms performed well in this Singles Day, for example, Suning, VIP.com, Vmall.com and Kaola.com, all of which are popular e-commerce companies in China.

Based on the whopping numbers, China’s media show their confidence in Chinese customers’ purchasing power. According to people.cn, an authoritative media in China say that the development of shopping festivals over the ten years has shown the increase in China’s economic growth and witnessed the consumption power of domestic economic growth. In the past ten years, the items customer buy online have changed from everyday necessities to high-quality commodities, such as big-screen televisions, smartphones and imported products. Also, an increased number of rural residents are taking part in the shopping festival, for example, the number has reached 241 million in western rural areas, which can show huge potential possibilities for the e-commerce industry. China is welcoming “consumption upgrading”, China’s media say.

However, the opposite points came out that the numbers “ suggest China’s economy is cooling down”, according to Business Insider. Although the gross merchandise volume has been increasing over the past ten years, the GMV annual growth rate is not the case. This year, the GMV annual growth rate of Alibaba has dropped from 39% to 27%. Also, the upstart e-commerce company Pinduoduo, featuring to sell unknown-brand, cheap, low-quality products but low-price products, has won many shoppers in China this year. The phenomenon was heatedly discussed that Chinese people are facing “consumption degrading”.

The 2018 shopping festival in China has come to a close. What is the status quo behind the hilarious shopping carnival? Maybe the consumers can tell.  

For over a year, cities all over the United States, as well as in Canada and Mexico, have been in a battle to get Amazon’s attention. Two-hundred and thirty-eight entries from states, cities and towns were submitted since the announcement of the search for Amazon’s HQ2, all offering the online retail giant millions of dollars in tax incentives. Local officials all over North America had immense excitement about the possibility of bringing many new, high paying jobs to their city. In the end, Amazon chose to split its second headquarters between two areas that already have the greatest number of Amazon employees other than Seattle and the Bay Area – Long Island City, NY (just outside of Manhattan) and Arlington, VA (just outside of Washington D.C.) The decision is controversial, and has local taxpayers wondering whether or not the benefits outweigh the downsides of the company’s presence.

Amazon has committed to generating 25,000 new jobs in each city, with an average salary of more than $150,000 for those jobs. They have also committed to building community infrastructure and to donate space for a new public school and ““for a tech startup incubator and for use by artists and industrial businesses.” There are many potential benefits on the local economy and individuals as a result of so many new jobs and an investment in the community. Additionally, college students in the surrounding areas are enthusiastic about the number of diverse, high-paying future job opportunities.

But many concerns are also being raised, particularly surrounding the headquarters in Long Island City, in the Queens neighborhood outside of Manhattan. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the representative-elect of New York’s Fourteenth Congressional District said on Twitter, “The idea that [Amazon] will receive hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks at a time when our subway is crumbling and our communities need MORE investment, not less, is extremely concerning to residents here.” Others have also openly criticized the use of government money for a private corporate government, when that money could be used for so many other things.

There are additional concerns over housing prices rising outside of Long Island City and Arlington. According to senior economist at First American, Odeta Kush, home prices in Seattle have jumped 35 percent since Amazon opened its doors. In the last five years, that jump was 73 percent for homes and 31 percent for rent prices, according to Zillow data.

In places like New York City and Washington D.C., where home and rent prices are already some of the highest in the U.S. these statistics are extremely concerning to many residents. However, some analysts believe price trends will not mirror Seattle’s because of the already established housing markets in the two cities.

As plans for the split HQ2 are being finalized, everyone seems to have an opinion on the decision – including SNL writers.

The recent announcement is another example of how a company that started out as an online bookstore, has become such a powerful force in our society. Amazon has an economic impact that cannot be ignored, and has even manage to seep into popular culture,

Widespread fires burn through thousands of California homes year-over-year. This doesn’t only affect the homeowners and their families but also lays immense pressure on firefighters in these dry areas. Also, insurance companies struggle as they insure these households and properties that are prone to blow up in flames.

In light of the recent fires burning through Northern and Southern California, I am discussing the economic impact that this disaster-prone state has on insurance companies. As one of the driest states in the United States of America, it seems like insurance companies struggle as California officials don’t do much to mitigate these risks. There is not much of a boundary for homeowners to build on land that is so dry that the probability of a wildfire is high. It feels like these fires that happen on a yearly basis are not enough for someone to take a step in the direction for safer housing, which would result in insurance companies saving money, as well. While public resources are spent defending or salvaging what is left of those homes which shouldn’t have been built in the first place, insurance companies must defend themselves or they are at risk for driving themselves out of business.

As California residents sift through the ash and hope to rebuild, funds may be insufficient, as insurance companies don’t need to cover one homeowner’s lost property, but the entire community (if not more). According to a Forbes article discussing insurance and loss of use for the recent victims of the Woolsey and Camp Fire in Los Angeles and Ventura County, “What is often overlooked is loss-of-use coverage. How long will it take to repair or rebuild?” (Gorman). Loss of use, or living expenses during the duration of the recovery process, usually covers living expenses and rental value. Although, not all insurance plans have this, and when a fire causes destruction, Californians may be surprised when their insurance companies don’t fully cover these temporary living costs. Homeowners in these high-risk areas must understand that in cases of natural disasters, they may be left with a much lighter wallet than expected.

According to a Los Angeles Times article discussing fleeing insurers, insurance companies in high-risk areas for natural disasters are no longer agreeing to insure homes. For example, a couple living in Lake County in Northern California is denied insurance. In the area which the couple resides, “50% of the land has been burned by fires in the past several years” (Newberry). With an already expensive premium of $2,100, their rate had skyrocketed to $5,800 in only two years (Newberry). The increase in California wildfires leads to more fleeing insurers. What insurers have continued to do in California is to inflate the price of insurance in high-risk areas to veer builders away from this land, and make home buyers think twice before buying a property with a likelihood to catch fire.

The Los Angeles Times article also provides statistics on the California Department of Insurance: This department acknowledges that the trend of inflating insurance prices is a rational and fair response on the part of the insurance companies. In 2017 alone, they “received nearly $12 billion in claims from wildfires that destroyed more than 32,000 homes. It makes sense that companies will write fewer – if any – policies in areas where they predict losses will outweigh what they can recoup through premiums.

What’s next? Legislators must take action to protect home buyers and homeowners who have made efforts to reduce wildfire risk.

It is no secret that Uber is more popular in American cities than European cities. However, the company is making attempts to change this. Uber has recently returned to Germany. Previously, Uber had been forced out of Germany due to not following German regulations. This time, the company is trying to make amends. 

Germany requires all drivers to pass health and driving tests, and to receive a business licenses that includes a bookkeeping exam. Additionally drivers must return to a home base between trips, which result in limitations in the number of rides that can be made. Car-pooling services are not allowed. When Uber first arrived in Germany, the company didn’t inform local officials that it was coming and so as soon as the app went live, anybody was able to transform his or her car into a taxi, even if they didn’t have a license. Uber has been trying to make amends since this faulty communication. The CEO, Dara Khosrowshahi, has been to Germany twice in the past year in order to apologize for the company’s past behavior. Uber has also vowed to follow all of Germany’s regulations, as well as incorporating electric cars into Uber’s fleet out of respect for the German government’s fight against air pollution. Uber plans to re-establish its service into Germany by the end of 2018.

Uber will first return to Düsseldorf. The company has chosen this town because customers have logged into the app more than 150,000 times since January and this was a period of time when there weren’t even any cars on the road.

Re-entry will not be especially easy for Uber. The company faces more competition than it did when it started in Germany three years ago. There is now a service owned by BMW called DriveNow that lets people rent a car with an app for short trips around cities. Moia is testing a ride-sharing bus service in Hamburg. MyTaxi is a taxi-dispatch app that is widely used in Germany. Lastly, Taxify also provides rides in European cities. 

In addition to other competing apps, Uber is also facing major backlash from German taxi drivers. Last month dozens of taxi drivers protested outside of Uber’s office. They blasted their horns and stopped traffic. The Düsseldorf police said there have been reports of six incidents between taxis and Uber drivers. These reports include incidents of taxi drivers verbally abusing and harassing Uber drivers. 

If Uber were able to successfully expand into Germany, this would result in great things for the company. Germany is the world’s fourth-largest economy and the largest in Europe. It has multiple densely populated cities and has a wealthy, tech savvy population. Currently, in London, the company is involved in a lawsuit that would require a minimum wage and to provide holiday time to drivers. In Spain, taxi drivers have persuaded politicians to limit the number of Ubers on the road. In Italy, the company has been kept out due to regulations. It seems as though Germany may be Uber’s greatest hope in expanding into European markets.