Islands differ in their geological and geomorphologic settings; and in their physical, biological, climatic, social, political, cultural, and ethnic characteristics. Yet they share a distinct underlying concern that marks their overall vulnerability in the context of sustainable development.
Continental Islands
Bodies of land connected by the continental shelf to a continent. Greenland is part of North American continental shelf, while Tasmania is an extension of the Australian continent. Also, Trinidad is a section of the South American continental shelf while Sumatra is a portion of the South East Asian shelf.
Oceanic Islands
Bodies formed by volcanic eruptions on the ocean floor. As volcanoes erupt, they build up layers of lava that may eventually break the water surface. When the tops of the volcanoes appear above the water, they form islands such as Hawaii made primarily of basaltic lava. Oceanic islands are also known as ‘high islands’ and are usually formed near subduction zones, hot spots, tectonic plates etc.
Tidal Islands
Bodies that are connected to the mainland at low tide at which time they can be reached on foot. At high tide however they are completely cut off from the mainland making it a true island. Tidal islands are sometimes connected to the mainland by a man-made causeway. Some such islands are Mont Saint-Michel in Normandy, France, Enoshima in Japan, Lindisfarne in the northeast coast of England, etc.
Coral Islands
Bodies of low flat land formed in warm waters by tiny sea animals called corals. As corals build up, their hard skeletons make reefs of limestone. Some coral reefs may grow up from a plateau on the seafloor until they break the water’s surface, forming islands. The islands of the Bahamas are the highest parts of underwater banks. Another kind of coral island is the atoll, which is a coral reef that begins by growing in a ring around the sides of an oceanic island. As the island slowly sinks into the sea, the reef continues to grow. Lakshadweep Islands comprise of 12 such atolls.
Artificial Islands
Bodies of land that is essentially man-made, with material brought-in from elsewhere or as an expanded part of an already-existing island by draining the water around it. Some of the example of artificial islands are Harbor Island in San Diego Bay, California; Treasure Island in Eastern Caribbean, etc. Singapore is actively involved in creating artificial islands apart from other nations such as Qatar and Japan.
Barrier Islands
Bodies of narrow land that lie parallel to coastlines largely made up of sediments, separated from the shore by a lagoon or a sound. They usually have sand dunes that act as barriers between the ocean and the mainland, which protects the coast from being directly battered by storm waves and winds. The islands off the Atlantic coast of southern Florida were formed in this way. Some barrier islands were formed by glacial deposits from the ice age. Long Island, in New York, and Nantucket, off the coast of Massachusetts, are both formed of glacial moraines. Some of the barrier islands are Galveston and Padre Island, Texas; East Frisian Islands, West Germany.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
Steve Ovett, the famous British middle-distance athlete, won the 800-metres gold medal at the Moscow Olympics of 1980. Just a few days later, he was about to win a 5,000-metres race at London’s Crystal Palace. Known for his burst of acceleration on the home stretch, he had supreme confidence in his ability to out-sprint rivals. With the final 100 metres remaining,
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]Ovett waved to the crowd and raised a hand in triumph. But he had celebrated a bit too early. At the finishing line, Ireland’s John Treacy edged past Ovett. For those few moments, Ovett had lost his sense of reality and ignored the possibility of a negative event.
This analogy works well for the India story and our policy failures , including during the ongoing covid pandemic. While we have never been as well prepared or had significant successes in terms of growth stability as Ovett did in his illustrious running career, we tend to celebrate too early. Indeed, we have done so many times before.
It is as if we’re convinced that India is destined for greater heights, come what may, and so we never run through the finish line. Do we and our policymakers suffer from a collective optimism bias, which, as the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman once wrote, “may well be the most significant of the cognitive biases”? The optimism bias arises from mistaken beliefs which form expectations that are better than the reality. It makes us underestimate chances of a negative outcome and ignore warnings repeatedly.
The Indian economy had a dream run for five years from 2003-04 to 2007-08, with an average annual growth rate of around 9%. Many believed that India was on its way to clocking consistent double-digit growth and comparisons with China were rife. It was conveniently overlooked that this output expansion had come mainly came from a few sectors: automobiles, telecom and business services.
Indians were made to believe that we could sprint without high-quality education, healthcare, infrastructure or banking sectors, which form the backbone of any stable economy. The plan was to build them as we went along, but then in the euphoria of short-term success, it got lost.
India’s exports of goods grew from $20 billion in 1990-91 to over $310 billion in 2019-20. Looking at these absolute figures it would seem as if India has arrived on the world stage. However, India’s share of global trade has moved up only marginally. Even now, the country accounts for less than 2% of the world’s goods exports.
More importantly, hidden behind this performance was the role played by one sector that should have never made it to India’s list of exports—refined petroleum. The share of refined petroleum exports in India’s goods exports increased from 1.4% in 1996-97 to over 18% in 2011-12.
An import-intensive sector with low labour intensity, exports of refined petroleum zoomed because of the then policy regime of a retail price ceiling on petroleum products in the domestic market. While we have done well in the export of services, our share is still less than 4% of world exports.
India seemed to emerge from the 2008 global financial crisis relatively unscathed. But, a temporary demand push had played a role in the revival—the incomes of many households, both rural and urban, had shot up. Fiscal stimulus to the rural economy and implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission scales had led to the salaries of around 20% of organized-sector employees jumping up. We celebrated, but once again, neither did we resolve the crisis brewing elsewhere in India’s banking sector, nor did we improve our capacity for healthcare or quality education.
Employment saw little economy-wide growth in our boom years. Manufacturing jobs, if anything, shrank. But we continued to celebrate. Youth flocked to low-productivity service-sector jobs, such as those in hotels and restaurants, security and other services. The dependence on such jobs on one hand and high-skilled services on the other was bound to make Indian society more unequal.
And then, there is agriculture, an elephant in the room. If and when farm-sector reforms get implemented, celebrations would once again be premature. The vast majority of India’s farmers have small plots of land, and though these farms are at least as productive as larger ones, net absolute incomes from small plots can only be meagre.
A further rise in farm productivity and consequent increase in supply, if not matched by a demand rise, especially with access to export markets, would result in downward pressure on market prices for farm produce and a further decline in the net incomes of small farmers.
We should learn from what John Treacy did right. He didn’t give up, and pushed for the finish line like it was his only chance at winning. Treacy had years of long-distance practice. The same goes for our economy. A long grind is required to build up its base before we can win and celebrate. And Ovett did not blame anyone for his loss. We play the blame game. Everyone else, right from China and the US to ‘greedy corporates’, seems to be responsible for our failures.
We have lowered absolute poverty levels and had technology-based successes like Aadhaar and digital access to public services. But there are no short cuts to good quality and adequate healthcare and education services. We must remain optimistic but stay firmly away from the optimism bias.
In the end, it is not about how we start, but how we finish. The disastrous second wave of covid and our inability to manage it is a ghastly reminder of this fact.