The Issues For Building Resilient Communities Environmental Sciences Essay

The Issues For Building Resilient Communities Environmental Sciences Essay Hazards are found everywhere and so the onus is always upon the communities involved to find ways to deal with such hazards (Benini et al 2008), some of which may have serious consequences while others may be less serious. Harzards which are posed by disasters may however, have far reaching effects on the local communities and in most cases there may not be adequate ways of tackling these and the communities must learn to live with such hazards. This essay will make an attempt to evaluate the nature of harzards their effects that call upon certain measures of resilience to be affected to deal with the same. It is the view of this essay that in areas where disasters are prone, there may be more hazards and hence also, more resilience responses by the members of the communities than in areas where such disasters and hence harzards are less (Garg et al 2007). But this view is only limited to the extent where natural disasters are common and not necessarily in areas where other disasters might occur, because, while natural hazards may be common place in certain areas for instance flooding and cyclone in Bangladesh due to its geographical position, fire hazards may occur in any country irrespective of its geographical location and hence the scope of this discussion will be limited to the kind of hazard that will be used (Berkes, Colding, Folke 2003, Zhou H., et al 2008). Disasters which often lead to hazards may be defined as those occurrences that are unplanned and are sudden or even anticipated and whose effects are often widespread (Benini et al 2008). Disasters have over the years struck different parts of the world and as much as they are not anticipated, there is never a guarantee that they have stopped. The essay will also present ways in which resilience communities might be build to deal with several hazards, which might arise in such a way that when such hazards arise the effects may not be too great to bear. According to Hollings (2004) and Hewitt (2004) resilience is important when dealing with hazards fro a number of ways; First, it creates a holistic approach to dealing with hazards on the basis of common notion or scientific suggestions, second, it provides the community with a multi-hazard response approach where the society will always know how to approach a hazardous situation from different perspective and lastly, being a forward looking approach, it can help a society to build response policy for dealing with hazards as and when they occur. Vulnerability of communities When a community is faced by disasters, there may either be resilience or vulnerability. In the view of this paper, resilience is the ability of the society to deal with such disasters and to overcome with little or not casually whatsoever, while vulnerability is the situation where the society is resigned to the harm caused by the disasters and the occurrence of the same will often come with devastating effects (Berkes, Colding, Folke 2003). Hazards, which are often a result of disasters, must hence be deal with using systematic or had-oc mechanisms (Islam , Deegan 2008). According to Backoff (2001), the people who live in stressed conditions are often more predisposed to cope that those in other conditions, and in the view of this report and according to (Jordan 2009), the levels of coping with such conditions may often change due to changes in the intensity of the conditions (Garg et al 2007). Different communities hence have different ways for dealing with hazards as they arise and while some may have a holistic approach to dealing with hazards for instance, tackling all hazards in the same way, others might have specific approach to dealing with the same (Zuberi 1988). There may hence be a debate as to which approach is the best. The nature of intervention build by a community may hence be viewed as a matter of tradition and culture than as a matter of snap policy. The Coast of Bangladesh This area of Bangladesh is considered the most hazardous due to the problems that are posed by environmental hazards to the residents each year (Islam , Deegan 2008). When the cyclone roars, it causes with it death and unimaginable injuries to the people living in these areas . What often happens here is that when the anti-clockwise cyclone starts offshore as a result of low atmospheric pressure, it increases the height of the water to a few meters and with a wind of about 190km/ hour, when such water is pushed to the land, it causes massive destruction (Garg et al 2007). Official figures showing the history of such disasters in Bangladesh indicates that this cyclone killed 0.5 million in 1970, and it was known as the great cyclone. Also, this coastal area is not strange to tornadoes and between 1877 and 1987, Bangladesh suffered a total of 19 serious cyclones with such tornadoes often carrying properties and depositing them tens of kilometres away and in the course of doing so, leaves masses of people, dead, injured or homeless (Salman 2009). The government records indicate that in 1987, 1988, 1998, 2004 and 2007, several floods have raved Bangladesh leading to serous deaths. In 2004, 40% of the capital city was affected, the experts have warned that the effects of global warming will become the cause of hazard in the recent times, and that Bangladesh must be ready to face it or deal with it (Salman 2009, Islam, Deegan 2008). Hazards and Vulnerabilities Bangladesh faces many problems occasioned by disasters which are both natural and man-made (Zuberi 1988), including flooding, silent but rampant spread of HIV-AIDS, Child Malnutrition and of course poverty. With relations to flooding, which will form our main subject matter, there are many contributory factors that have made this country and especially the coastal region to be most vulnerable to disasters (Kumar, Reddy 2007), first, as stated earlier, the country sits on the path of hot air and cold air meeting points making it vulnerable to cyclones and torrential rains which often cause havoc to the people in the region, Bangladesh is geographically placed on an estuary where the sea curves into the masses of land on either side at the bay of Bengal (appendix 1) and when the moist air from the sea meets with dry air on the land then the results is heavy rainfall, that may be up to several millimetres higher in a day that most places get in a several days (Salman , 2009), secondly, Bangladesh has probably the highest concentration of river estuaries within a small mass of land, than any other country, making it vulnerable to flooding when the rivers break their banks, thirdly, Banglade sh also has one of the highest population densities in the world with a density of 1045 per square kilometre (AsiaInfo 2010). With such a high population density, (Salman 2009, Malone 2009), noted that any occurrence in hazard will definitely have devastating effect on the masses. This explains why whenever there is flooding in this county, the number of deaths will always running to several hundreds if not thousands. Fourth, this country has one of the highest poverty levels in the world and certainly one of the poorest in South East Asia region (Medical News 2008, Jordan 2009), with dowry payment that often runs to more that hundreds of times of average daily wages, being blamed for such levels since families try to save a lot of money in a lifetime and luxury or even mere subsistence is non existence (Mahmud , Amin 2006, Garg et al 2007). With such levels of poverty, it is the view of this report that the government does not also have any resources to provide for its population, indeed if there are no provisions to support the population in normal times, then, such may not be available when hazards strike. Fifth, the levels of ignorance in this area and especially at the coastal regions is extremely high that the population has not ideal whatsoever about issues of climate change, or weather conditions (Martin et al 2006, Berkes 2007), and this has led to late reaction when floods are developing since people go about their businesses as if nothing is happening and by the time they begin to react, it is often very late. According to (Hudson 2008), when a society does not appreciate the issues surrounding their safety, especially when such issues are caused by natural catastrophes, then the results are often catastrophic as such societies are often well placed on the time-bomb of prolonged danger and destruction. But, lack of awareness is often related to the levels of poverty in the society and this can hence be attributed as a secondary issue of vulnerabilit y in this region of Bangladesh, since it is a result of general levels of poverty, but not necessarily of ignorance, as the people in the cities are often more informed than those in the rural areas (Martin et al 2006). But (Zuberi 1988), argued that disasters have not subjective effects, and levels of ignorance have never spared or saved a society when disasters are about to strike, however, these views are subjective, since, the nature of destruction and hazards posed by disasters largely depend on the kind of hazards in question (Malone 2009). Building resilience In an area where flooding hazard is an issue that has continued to affect the society for decades, resilience is crucial. According to (Berkes 2007) , it is important to build good resilience to ensure that the hazards are reduced and their effected minimised. Resilience, provides a society with ways of avoiding suffering not only for the present but also for the future (Kumar, Reddy 2007). However, this has to be carried out systematically, lest it fails. There is a need to ensure that there is greater acceptability of the resilience mechanism by the society in such a way that programs being given immediately take off with general consensus of the masses (Hudson 2008). It should however be noted that for issues affecting cultural practices, it is important to tread carefully, and ensure that local community heads are put on the forefront of the program. Such activities may include; the local government representatives and religious reasons. From the information presented above, it can be seen that the coastal region of Bangladesh is extremely vulnerable to flood hazard dating back to past decades. One of the noticeable but simple and less effective ways that the people in the coastal regions of Bangladesh have been doing is to build elevated wooden structures (Zhou H., et al 2008). Of course the choice of material has nothing to do with building defences but everything to do with subjection to poverty, since, in the view of this essay, stronger housing, are necessary for creating some level of defences against flooding, but, wooden structures do not provide such resilience (Bennett et al 2010). In this region, people have also adapted to creating sandbags from soil and placing them around the vulnerable areas near the river as a way of having a sustained defence against flooding caused by overflow rivers (Malone 2009) , but these methods are carried out at micro level and there is no way they can be judged as effective. According to (Zhou H., et al 2008), the government must priorities its response mechanism and involve the local community in the process. This essay holds the view that, in order to create resilience, the following must be considered; first, the government need to start long term empowerment programs where people will be empowered economically, in Bangladesh, the United Nations bodies have continued to engage the local population in empowerment programs (Swalheim, Dodman 2008), but this has been short term and aimed at putting food on the table, rather than creating long term propensity to purchase. There is a need to ensure that self-sustaining economic activities are encouraged and this can be done through the provision of facilities for cottage industry, subsidies, tax holidays and fetching for markets for the products (Garg et al 2007). Cottage industries are preferred than agriculture which the people have for so long relied on, but without tangible success, secondly, there is a need to create a nationwide awareness for cultural change where people will be encouraged to change their attitude towards marriage and d owry (Mahmud , Amin 2006, Garg et al 2007). This will obviously be very hard to achieve, but it can be made to be part of the long-term strategy to making people to spend their money, this will result in increment in the general levels of riches in the region. Third, there is a need to ensure that the population in the coastal region avoids practices that put the environment in jeopardy and instead, engage in such practices as will lead to environmental sustenance, including, responsible disposal of non-biodegradable materials, some of which are used to make the makeshift houses, and afforestation. The premise here is that, due to higher levels of rainfall every year, it is possible to plant trees in millions in the whole region and especially by the river areas. The trees to be planted should initially be such that have a faster growth pattern, which will grow fast and act as barriers to erosion and windbreakers (Garg et al 2007). This is a sure long-term defence that will transform the region forever, and guarantee life for posterity. When the forest cover is developed, it is possible to embark on agriculture and this will develop the area further as famine will be a thing of the past, and the society, which will have also developed cottage industry will be in a good position not only to provide for their food but also housing. The view held by this essay is that afforestation and development of cottage industry are crucial in building resilience. On particular importance is afforestation, which will control climate change as Bangladesh still sits on the path of the wrath of climate change. Rampant flooding, which causes with it deaths, sicknesses, destruction of property and other problems will continue to affect this area if nothing is done to develop a long term solution (Bennett et al 2010, Garg et al 2007). Bangladesh will remain on the Bay of Bengal and if irrigation continues in India and silt is deposited in Bangladesh along river Ganges, then nothing can be done from the side of India, then activities for conservation must be undertaken in Bangladesh, and everyone should participate. Discussion and Conclusion This essay has managed to highlight the historical issues that have put Bangladesh on the path of flood and hazards. Hazards have had devastating effects on a people and their property and when it is perennial, the effects may lead to a cycle of poverty that may not come to an end. The need for resilience in the societies is therefore vital and as seen in the case of coastal areas of Bangladesh, geographical disposition of the country makes it very vulnerable and especially the coastal regions which (Garg et al 2007). The people of this country are also very poor and that translates to governments inability to provide for emergency, leaving the people exposed to floods and cyclones. In this area most people, have erected elevated houses to stay above the flood lines but when such houses are built on cardboards and polythene and even wooded materials, the defence created are very much minimised and instead, lack of sanitation and these materials, cause further problems to the environment (Garg et al 2007). As much as there are issues that can be viewed as being taboos, it is important to ensure that such taboos are gradually but surely dealt with. Most notable was the issue of dowry and issues of HIV AIDS which are also contributory to disasters in this country . What needs to be done, is to create a level of higher purchasing power and this can be done through engaging the community in cottage industries than agriculture, which can be encouraged by the government who should get the market for the people and technology too (Swalheim, Dodman 2008), along with this, there may be more acceptance to embark on tree planting activities and if the government sets targets for a certain number of trees to be planted, then this will provide impetus to the people to do the same, but they must be taught about the importance of environmental conservation (Garg et al 2007, Martin et al 2006). Later on, as economic conditions improve, and when the trees have developed, people can then be taken through responsible agricultural training. The government should work with and encourage community-based organisations to mobilise and encourage the local communities to undertake such projects. By creating an enabling economic environment in the region, most people will be willing to undertake any other conservation programs that will crate long term resilience to the hazards that have continued to affect this region (Swalheim, Dodman 2008, Berkes 2007). Bangladesh, by virtue of its location, needs long-term resilience mechanism as a country to deal with hazards that are evolving. The need to understand that the problems facing this country will increase as climate change is also becomes more serious. The local population will not, on their own develop resilience unless the government leads with its resources. References AsiaInfo (2010) Bangladesh country information [Online] available from < http://www.asianinfo.org/asianinfo/bangladesh/bangladesh.htm> accessed on 25th May, 2010. Bennett et al (2010) Exploring the meaning of health security for disaster resilience through peoples perspectives in Bangladesh. Elsevier Ltd. Newcastle upon Tyne. Benini et al (2008) Resilience and Vulnerability in Long-Term NGO Clients. Findings from an RDRS Bangladesh Panel survey. Bangladesh; Berkes F., (2007) Understanding uncertainness and reducing vulnerability: lessons from resilience thinking. Vol 41., Number 2. Netherlands. Berkes F., Colding J., Folke C., (2003) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press. Fiona R., (2010) Social Networking and adaptation in rural Bangladesh. Vol 2. Number 1. Garg et al (2007) From Vulnerability to Resilience: The Challenge of Adaptation to Climate Change. Case studies from Bangladesh, Brazil, China, India, South Africa and Korea. Hewitt K. (2004) A synthesis of the symposium and reflection on reducing risk through partnerships. Winnipeg. Hollilngs C., (2004) From Complex regions to complex Worlds. Ecology and Sociology. Hudson R., (2008) International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development. Vol 3. Number 3/4 . Durham University. Islam A., Deegan C., (2008) Motivations for an organisation within a developing country to report social responsibility information: Evidence from Bangladesh. Vol 21. Issues 6. Jordan J., (2009) Rethinking community resilience to climate change: does a social capital lens help?. Belfast. Kumar, P., Reddy S., (2007) Ecology and human well-being. Sage Publications. Mahmud S., Amin S. (2006) Girls Schooling and Marriage in rural Bangladesh. Research in the sociology of Education. Vol 15. Malone E., (2009) Resilience, Climate Change, and security: Modelling the Connections. Baltimore. Martin et al (2006) Vulnerability and Risk Reduction through a community based system for flood monitoring and forecasting. Medical News (2008) Major Cause of Poverty in Bangladesh is Marriage Dowry. [Online] available from < http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/127710.php> accessed on 26th May, 2010. Salman A., (2009) Bangladeshs economy: surrounded by deadly threats. International Journal of Social Economics. Vol 36. Issue  ½. Swalheim S., Dodman D., (2008) Building resilience: how the urban poor can drive climate adaptation. Zhou H., et al (2008) Resilience to natural hazards: a geographic Perspective. Vol 53. Number 1. Netherlands. Zuberi M., (1988) Environmental, Socio-Cultural and development linkages in a South Asia set-up. Vol 25. issue 6-8.

Effects Terrorism has on our Nation Essay example -- essays research p

Effects Terrorism has on our Nation Purpose: To inform readers of the effects the recent terrorist attacks have on society today. Audience: General Thesis: The terrorist attack on America has affected the economy, tourism and the foreign society tremendously. The Effects Terrorism has on Society From the lips of the FBI, â€Å"Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objective.† On September 11, 2001 the United States of America experienced such actions, it was the largest terror attack experienced by any country. The affect this had on America was tremendous, thousands are dead and tens of thousand of Americans in our country know someone who was killed or injured. The terrorist attack on America has affected the economy, tourism and foreign society.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The economy has caused the U.S. unemployment to increase. The unemployment rate from two thousand one, to two thousand four has increased by 2 percent. The number of people without jobs has grown from six million, eight hundred and one thousand in The year two thousand and one,to eight million six hundred forty six thousand and two hundred fifty currently. This massive downsize is due to the lack of finances to fund workers in the workforce. Also the United States paid over one point, thirty six million dollars to families who lost loved ones in th...

Prisoner Without a Name Book Review Essay

Prisoner without a Name, Cell without a number is a melancholy novel that expresses Argentina’s terrorist state. Jacob Timerman, a well respected man of Argentina, an editor of a well know Argentinian paper, La Opinion, tells the audience his story of the terrorist state of Argentina from 1967-1978. His gripping novel both describes his personal experience being kidnapped by terrorist, while he tells us about the condition of the terrorist state of Argentina. His book is important because it tells a first hand account of the fear, the distrust, and the mere insanity of conditions in the country of Argentina during its darkest time. In Timerman’s first chapter, he opens by describing how he lives (though being locked up in a cell is not living) while being locked away in an unknown location (p.g. 4). He first describes his own â€Å"cell†. He is extremely descriptive and the reader can feel as though they are in his small, narrow, cold, wet cell. He tells his audience of a little crack in the wall, his only ventilation and only source of light, in such little detail, yet the reader can understand his isolation from light, the outside world, and his family. Timerman describes the crack as a â€Å"faint glow, night and day, eliminating time† which represents his unwilling determination and hope for freedom. Timerman’s first chapter also gives the reader a sense that through all the events he has under gone, he still remains the same strong willed person (under the circumstances) he was as he is described in the rest of the book. In addition to he crack in the wall, Timerman describes an encounter with another prisoner when the eyehole of his cell accidentally left open by the guards. He describes his encounter with such passion and emotion, yet they do not say anything,, only stare at each other. Timerman describes how their movements, their eyes blinking, represented emotion and passionate communication between the two of them. For in these conditions seeing someone who is in the same situation and somehow communicating with them was extraordinary for Timerman. This encounter that he describes is an important aspect of his book, in that it represents an encounter with another person struggling through the same pain, and same tourture that he is experiencing. This can be looked at as a simile towards the conditions in the country of Argentina. After Timerman describes his torture and isolation while under imprisonment, his next chapter tells us about the chaos that has under gone in Argentina, and her government. He explains to the readers that there are two sides in this civil war between the two parties of government, and describes all of the violence that has occured as a by-product of this war. He tells us of his encounters with the hysteria before he was kidnapped, and the disarray that was upon Argentinians. Timerman uses a quote by Luis Borges that was very interesting and nsightful, claiming that â€Å"the Argentine is not a citizen but an inhabitant; that he lacks an idea of the nation where he resides , but views it as a territory†¦Ã¢â‚¬  which is an understandable view. The people of Argentina, as Timerman describes, are scared of their government and the terrorism that is upon them. Timerman describes Argentina is such a state that there is no government, and, that the government is corrupt and that there is no trust authorities. Timerman, throughout the book, tells about mothers, fathers, relatives, and friends coming to La Opinion asking to write a letter about their loved one going missing, yet he further explains in almost every instance, that he could not do anything about it because it could get him executed. Timerman, throughout the book, always described his reasoning and perspective, in that, he said he wanted to help those people that came looking for help, yet he was already pushing his luck writing articles that no other paper would dare to write. Timerman tells the read that during his position as editor at La Opinion he received many death threats and hostile remarks due to his articles in his paper being to left sided, or too right sided political view. Yet Timmerman tells the reader that his intensions where not to support either side, but to write about the truth about what was going on in Argentina. He also wanted to stop this terrorism and find a way to halt this insanity. Timermans book does an amazing job at telling two stories, his story of survival during imprisonment for multiple years, while also telling the reader about the irrationality and absurdity of Argentina’s â€Å"government†. Though the book takes place in Argentina, those who read it will understand the universal application. It could happen else where, and that is why it is an important book to read, understand and take in. Timerman, in his book, is a witness for the rest of us.

Competition and US Antitrust Law - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 11 Words: 3188 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Analytical essay Level High school Tags: Competition Essay Did you like this example? INTRODUCTION The boundaries of a business conduct that can be defined as anticompetitive and exclusionary is still one of the most debated issues in the United States Antitrust Law (hereinafter US Antitrust Law) today. The business conducts that intends to decrease the competition in the relevent market is widely considered as violation under the Sherman Antirust Act dated 1890 (hereinafter Sherman Act), which aims to prevent the trusts and monopolization. As mentioned above by way of protecting the competition, Sherman Act foresees some provisions where it prohibits the contracts, combinations or conspiracies that are to preclude competition and harm other competitiors. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Competition and US Antitrust Law" essay for you Create order Therefore these forms shall be illegal under Sherman Act to the extent they limit the commerce(KUSSE, 1984).[1] Under the US Antitrust Case Law and also by many leading scholars, it is widely accepted that a company is free to refuse to deal with a competitor if this behavior is not an attempt to monopolize the market. This paper will mainly focus on this assumption in light of the present US Law. In particular, in general, the Colgate doctrine revelaed that a competitor has the right to refuse to deal with a rival and if a monopoly power firm is not intended to create monopolization, the Sherman Act does not restrict the monopolist to freely choose the person/rival to deal. [2] When considering the Colgate doctine as starting point, this essay will argue the well known Aspen Case, in order to examine to what extent monopolists have an affirmative duty to deal with a rival. The limits of this right were drawn later by other US Supreme Court decision by considering the essetial fac ilities doctrine. Aspen is one of these cases where the Supreme Court concluded that the competitors right to refuse to deal with a rival competitior is not unquantified however the Court did not adopted the essential facilities doctrine. Therefore this doctrine will not be the subject of this paper instead it will be referred slightly when necessary. The facts of the Aspen case will be analyzed below further however just to give an overview it is noteworthy to mention beforehand that the dispute arose between two ski resort companies namely; Aspen Skiin and Aspen Highlands, which for many years contributed to a joint marketing of a ticket to the skiers which gives access to eachothers mountains.[3] However Aspen Skiing discontinued its participation in this joint ticket program with Aspen Highlands. In Aspen Case, the Supreme Court concluded that since the defendant monopolist could not prove the justification to its refusal to cooperate to market a joint ski lift ticket that it formerly supplied to the Claimant was to obtain or at least was to cause monopoly violates Section 2 of the Sherman Act.[4] RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE Aspen Case between two ski resort companies in Aspen, Colorado in the USA i.e. Aspen Highlands (hereinafter Aspen Higlands) and Aspen Skiing Co. (hereinafter Aspen Skiing) is a United States Supreme Court case dated 1985 which has significance effect with regard to the abuse of dominant position. By the time of the dispute was first brought to the US Federal District Court, tehere were four ski resorts in Aspen Mountain; only one of them was owned by Aspen Higland and the rest of the resorts were owned by a single resort namely Aspen Skiing. The Parties had, for several years, to be more specific-until 1978- contributed into a joint marketing plan to sell a ski ticket called a 4-area All Aspen ticket which allowed the skiers to visit all of the Mountains without considering at which resort they stay and the revenues from these sales were shared between the parties in accordance with the coupons collected everyday. However, in 1978, Aspen Skiing abused its dominant position by it will not continue to sell its visitors the all-Aspen ticket if Aspen Highlands would not accept a fixed share of revenue which will in long term will hamper rival competition and therefore not considered as normal competition.[5] After long negotiations, Highlands accepted a fixed percentage which is a bit higher than what was offered by Aspen Skiing, which was leter further decreased by Aspen Skiing. [6] Because this offer was unaccapteble for Aspen Highland and therefore had not been accepted by Aspen Highlands, Aspen Skiing discountinued to sell the all-Aspen tickets. Notwithstanding Aspen Skiing started to act in a way where it stoped to offer any lift tickets to Aspen Highlands visitors to enable them to ski at the the Aspen Skiing Mountains as well. This attitude economicly harmed Aspen Highlands since it prevent Aspen Highlands from offering skiers visiting its resort any ticket for giving acces to all mountains (multi- area ticket). In spite of this Aspen Skiing was a ble to offer a 3-area, 6-day ticket which made it the only resort in the market that can give oppourtunity to visit more than one mountain during their visit and therefore the visitor who wants to ski on different mountains had to visit the Aspen Skiings resort. In addition to that, to promote this ticket, Aspen Skiing started an advertising campaign that influenced people who were unfamiliar with Aspen where it changed its picture of the four mountains in the Airport-Aspen Airways waiting room. The new sign referred to its three mountains only.[7] These actions of Aspen Skiing harmed Aspen Highlands so deeply that it became very hard to survive in the market as a result of which Aspen Highlands became a day ski area. Consequently, Aspen Highlands market share faced a steady downfall after it discountinued to sell the multiarea tickets.[8] Aspen Highlands revenues from associated skiing facilities and services declined sharply as well. Eventually in 1979, Aspen Highlands filed a case before the United States District Court alleging that Aspen Skiings unilateral refusal to continue selling a joint ticket launced by the competitors was to attempt to monopolize the market under Sherman Act- Section 2. In 1985, the case was taken to the Supreme Court, wherein the Supreme Court concluded that Aspen Skiings refusal to deal with a rival competitor was exclusionary since it made a change in the longlasting joint marketing program between the parties on some basis other than efficiency which can be defined as predatory.[9] The Supreme Court more specifically reasoned its decision based on the fact that refusal to deal violates antirust law only when it is to maintain a monopoly power and Aspen Skiing without any justified reason cut a longlasting cooperation with its rival.[10] Prior to Aspen Case, almost al of the US Supreme Court case have evaluated the refusal to deal concept within the framework of essential facilities doctrine under which a monopolist is to deal with a competitior if a monopolist has the control of a facility essential for its rival to compete and it has denied the use of this facility to a rival without a valid business reason. Aspen Case is therefore important that it did not adopt the essential facilities doctrine, which was being critizied by many leading scholars.[11] The reason of the criticism was that most of the courts interpreted the essential facilities doctrine and concluded that it gives a general duty to deal with a rival. This was negated by the Aspen case where the court concluded that Aspen Skiings refusal to deal with Aspen Highlands was exclusionary when considering the fact that Aspen Skiing could not be able to prove an efficiency justification for its refusal and further the Court did not evaluated whether or not the product (facility) was essential. In my opinion Aspen case has a great importance where the Supreme Court did not consider the essential facilities doctrine instead the justific ation for a monopolist resfusal to deal with a rival. ASPEN CASE- REFUSAL TO DEAL WHAT IS MONOPOLY POWER? In the event that one firm has the majority of the market share and that one firm can determine the conditions of the market as being in a dominant position, it is worth to note that this firm has monopoly power, which can in practice use this power to determine the conditions that can have a negative impact on the smaller competitors. The US Antitrust Law prohibits the monopolies unless they are are not as a result of a natural success or superior product of a firm (legitametely gained monopoly). In other words, it is fair to say that the general standard under Sherman Act is that the criter of harm the rival and competition will be considered exclusionary conduct by a monopolist, for which sanctions were foreseen by the Sherman Act. DOES A MONOPOLY POWER FIRM HAVE THE DUTY TO ENGAGE IN BUSINESS WITH A COMPETITOR? Section 2 prohibits any concerted and unilateral conducts that are to acquire monopolies. As emphasized by RIEVMAN, due to a lack of a clear definition of an unilateral and anticompetitive conduct in the Act itself, the courts usually define and formalize the elements for an anticompetitive behaviour on a case by case basis (RIEVMAN, 2012).[12] As briefly mentioned above in the Colgate case the court concluded that if a monopolist did not intent to maintain monopoly, its can freely decide whether to deal or with whom to deal. Mostly after the Colgate Case, US Supreme courts adopted the same apporac. Similarly, in Lorain Journal and Aspen Case, the Courts and besides leading scholars revealed that the there is a duty to aid a rival unless a monopolist did not have a valid reason for refusal.[13] Therefore, the entrepreneur has the right to exercise independent discretion in choosing the customers or class of customers with whom he will deal unless this right to choose the customer e xcludes competition.[14] In Aspen Case it was decided that the offense of monopolization has two element as similarly explained in United States v. Grinnell Corp. that is to say if a firm has a monopoly power in the market who uses this power to create monopoly power which is not an outcome of a superior product or business of this firm. These elements set out by the vested practice of the US Supreme Courts decision determines the boundaries of the monopolization which will be considered as a violation of law. In a sense, the refusal to cooperate with a rival can be anticompetitive only under the above mentioned circumstances which is more basically the intent of the monopolist. The Court of Appeal in the Aspen Case took the same approach. The Court of Appeal emphasized that a monopolists intent should be taken into account when determining whether the challenged conduct is fairly characterized as exclusionary, anticompetitive, or predatory.[15] Unless there is a valid reas on for a monopoly power firm to refuse to deal with a rival, it will not be considered as a violation of Sherman Act Section 2, which shall be evaluated by examining the the firmss intent. Aspen Skiing was not able to support its position that it had a valid business reason when discontinuing to sell a joint marketing product launced and developed by both of the Parties. Aspen Skiing became the only ski resort that could offer a multiare ski-ticket to its visitos. Aspen Highlands had a great interest in continuing to sell the all-Aspen tickets and Aspen Skiings insistence first on a fixed percentage of the market share of the revenues from these tickets and secondy cancelling a long-lasted practice between the Parties. Without being able to sell tickets to the other mountains, Aspen Highlands market sahere and revenues declined where at the same time Aspen Skiings shares increased sharply. Aspen Skiings refusal for a 4 area-mountain ticket also had adverse affect on the skiers as well. Appeal Courts decision was later affirmed by the Supreme Court where it rendered that Aspen Skiing had monopolized the market in Aspen. The Supreme Court clerarly stated no monopolist monopolizes unconscious of what he is doing by making reference to  Borks book where he stated that improper exclusion that are not a consequence of a superior business or products is always intended therefore the intend shall be investigated (BORK, 1978). In the actual case, the Supreme Court cocluded that Aspen Skiing did not only rejected to contiune a joint marketing program long lasting between in the Parties but is actually without a valid reason stopped the availability of a tiket that was preferred by the skiers.[16] Therefore paralel to the Supreme Courts decision one can argue that Aspen Skiings decision to terminate the all-Aspen wa to determine the conditions of the market and harm the other competitor in the market. Not only to the rival competitor, also consumers were also affected by Aspen Skiings unilateral decision. The Supreme Court concluded that where a firm with monopoly power attempts to create monopoly power by restraining the competition in the market with our efficiency concerns, it will be considered a violation of Section 2. If one should examine the consequences of Aspen Highlands refusal to deal. For whatwever the reason is the strong demand of the skiers for all-Aspen ticket formed over the years, which remained unreciprocaed. Aspen Skiing cancelled a product that allowed the skiers to be flexibale about the mountain to ski each day which was preferred by the the majotiy of the skiers. Besides the consumers, due to Aspen Skiings pattern of conduct on Highlands together with the additional actions taken by Aspen Skiing Aspen Highlands was prevented from marketing its own product to compete with Aspen Skiing and therefore survive in the market. The Court indicated that underlying norm of efficieny was not met as a result of which i t is not fair to say that there is a proper exclusion of the monopolist. Aspen Skiing refusal to deal with Aspen Highland was to enforce a power to exclude the competition in the relevant market and could not be explained by a any valid business reason. I belive that the Supreme Courts decision was right in this respect when considering the reason for termination of the multi area tickets by Aspen Skiing. The reason was that Aspen Skiing was not happy with the accuracy of the ticket monitoring system. However it was later revealed by thevidences before the Supreme Court that Aspen Skiing itself monitored the use of the 3-area passes based on the same system which it claimed to be unproper during the cancellation of the joint product.[17] Therefore this is enough to have a clear indication that Aspen Skiing was enjoying to exclude competition in the market by hamparing a smaller rival. [18] As emphasized by the Supreme Court if there was any valid reason for the refusal then Aspen Sk iing would not be considered to be violating Section 2. Because having a monopoly power alone is not a base for a violation instead the conduct itself is important. One should consider whether the conduct namly the refusal of the monopoist to deal is to handicap competitior and whether it benefits the consumers by this conduct, which is definitely not the case in the instant case.[19] When considering the above, parallel to the Supreme Courts decision, I am of the understanding that the monopolist made an effort to hinder the skiers (customers) to prefer the smaller rival for skiing services and it had no valid reason when doing so. Therefore the monopolist conduct in an anticompetitive or exclusionary way for instance by harming a rival to get higher profit in the market shall be illegal. In other words there are limits of a right of a competitors refusal to deal. These limits are vested in the rivals ability to find new customers and make higher profits. This will be conside red sucessful competition.[20] Therefore as emphasized in many US Supreme Court decision a monopolist right to refuse to deal with a rival competitor is not unqauntified.[21] It may give rise to a responsibility unless there is any valid reason to do so. In Lorain Journal Case it was concluded by the Supreme Court that a refusal to deal with a competitor can harm this smaller competitors right to select his customers and therefore make benefit in the market. In Lorain Journal case the publisher was considered to be in an attempt to monopolize the market by trying to destroy its small competitor which was a radio station when refusing to sell advertising to persons that patronized the radio station. Finally, in my opinion, In Aspen Case, Aspen Skiing refusal of continuing a joint marketing product with Aspen Highlands resulted in a wane of Aspen Highlands share in the relevant market. The Court is right in concluding that although there is no general duty to deal with a competi tior, monopolists refusal to sell a joint ticket program with its rival should be considered as illegal to the extent that this refusal has no valid reason and harms the small competitor(s). CONCLUSION A monopolist duty to deal is considered by case by case approach. As emphasized by many US Supreme Court cases, monopolisy duty to deal with the competitor depends wherher monpolist has a valid reason for that refusal. In Aspen Case, Aspen Skiings conduct was to maintain a monopoly without a valid business reason. When considering the essential nature of the All-Aspen Ticket featuring access to all four maountiains Aspen Skiings refusal to deal with Aspen Highlands, had limited its facilites to offer its visitors. In my opinion within the framework of the objectives of the competition and consumer welfare, if a monopolists refusal to deal harms the smaller competitor and also the consumer, which will be negatively effected by the refusal, this should be considered as violatio n of Sherman Act if there is no valid reason to refuse and one will be able to argue that a monopoly power firm then has a duty to cooperate with its rival. REFERENCES KUSSE, Kathryn A., Refusal to Deal as a Per Se Violation of the Sherman Act: Russel Stover Attacks the Colgate Doctrine, (1984) Retrieved from https://www.americanuniversitylawreview.org/pdfs/33/33-2/kusske.pdf RIEVMAN, David M., Boston College Law Review, Volume 28, Issue 2, Number 2, Article 7, 3-1-1987, The Grinnell Test of Monopolization Sounds a False Alarm: Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. (1987) KÃÆ'„SEBERG, Thorsten Intellectual Property, Antitrust and Cumulative Innovation in the EU and the US, p.187 (2012) KAPEN Alon Y., Duty to Cooperate Under Section 2 of the Sherman Act Aspen Skiings Slippery Slope, Cornell Law Review Volume 72 Issue 5 July 1987 Article 5 ELHLAUGE Einer, GERADIN Damien, Global Competition Law and Economics, 2011, p. 425 R. BORK, The Antitrust Pa radox (1978) CASE REFERENCES Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp., 472 U.S. 585 (1985) United States v. ColgateCo., 250 U.S. 300 (1919) Lorain Journal v. United States, 342 U.S. 143, 154 (1951) United States v. Citizens Southern National Bank 422 US 86 1 [1] KUSSE, p. 463 (1984) [2] Colgate, 250 U.S. at 307 [3] Parties had a interchangable ticket program which gives acces to all of the four mountains for the skiers visiting these resorts. [4] Aspen, 472 U.S. 585, at 610-11 [5] Id. at 591; ELHAUGE/GERADIN, p. 415 [6] Id. at 593 [7] Id. at 593 [8] Id. at 590 [9] BORK, p. 344 [10] Id. at 603 [11] ELHAUGE/GERADIN, 447. 415 [12] RIEVMAN (2012), p.415 [13]Lorain Journal v. United States; Verizon vs. Trinko, ifra 524 [14] JONES/ SUFRIN, p.524 [15] Id. at 602-04 [16] Id at 603 [17] Id at 608-10. [18] Id at 608-10. [19] Id at 597 [20] United States v. Citizens Southern National Bank 422 US 86 [21] Id. at 602