The Future of Paper: Should society go paperless?
Paper has revolutionized the way people transferred ideas
and thought for thousands of years. Historically,
the function of paper has driven the development of civilization throughout the
world since it allows humans to record and transfer their knowledge from one
generation to the next. After the invention of paper by Cai Lun, 105 C.E, the Chinese
grew strong in almost all fields. They were able to document history,
architecture, art and Confucius’ teaching. Further, paper spread to the Middle
East and was used to document the Qur’an. In the Qur’an Muslims are obliged to
seek and share knowledge and this has enabled them to reach their peak of civilization.
Later, Muslims scientists and writers used paper to spread mathematics,
medicines, engineering, agriculture and literature to the west and the east
(Mintenbuler, 2016). Now paper remains controversial since the idea of becoming
paperless society is getting more popular due to worldwide digitalization. Therefore,
this paper would like to discuss environmental and educational perspectives of
papers as a medium of exchanging ideas and why paper is valuable medium for
human life.
The improvement of digital security makes people
feel safer to store their data digitally. In fact, viruses can be tackled with
anti-viruses. After a data attacked by viruses, programmers can get the data
back. In addition, digital storage preserves valuable documents from heat and
humidity. However, digital world is still cannot be saved from corporates’
interest. Personal data can be misused and sold to the third party because
there is no law on digital right. Furthermore, the digital right movement is
ignored by governments around the world and not many people are aware on this
matter. The absence of law makes corporates such as Google, Face book and etc
can freely sell trends and personal data of their users to various
stakeholders. It is widely known that Google is the first company who sells
trends, meanwhile face book pioneers the trading of personal data. The digital
activist, former Security National Agency (SNA) analyst, Edward Snowden, in his
interview with The Guardian clearly pointed out how unsafe digital world due to
digital surveillance. He made a shocking claim that data transfer i.e.
documents, private nude videos or photos, is a culture that routinely passed
around for fun within the SNA. Another point to consider, is that sophisticated
editing makes digital data easily manipulated. Paper, however cannot be accessed
or deleted remotely. Further, important information is kept in paper which are
called important documents. They are printed, signed and stamped to prove
validity and legality, i.e. contract, land certificate, business permit, MoU
and etc.
The common thought that ‘digital is more ecofriendly than papers’ has spread worldwide. People strongly believe that the more digital they are, the greener their lives are. Digital seems sustainable because people can use the devices for many years and the negative side is often invisible. In fact, however, manufacturing the digital devices produces carbon footprints. Global Action Plan reports that there are more than 1 billion computers on Earth that responsible for 2.3% of manmade CO2 each year, which is the same amount produced by global air industry and is predicted to steadily rise. (Hueb and Mir, 2014). Another point to consider, is that digital activities increase the number of carbon footprint in the atmosphere since going digital does not only mean creating the devices, but also to power them, for example, emailing and online searching. Sending an email without attachment can produce up to 3.0g carbon (Berners-Lee, 2010). Further, Berners-Lee states that 136 kg carbon footprint is equal with driving 200 miles in average car. If one person sends 3 emails a day, it means that 0.9g carbon produced by email user per day and in 2018, Google tweeted that the number of Gmail users has reached 1.5 billion in the world. This implicitly tells that 13.5 million grams or 135 kg is produced a day, which is equivalent with carbon footprint of 100 cars. Moreover, there is 1 billion searches are occurring every day (Hueb and Mir, 2014) which means there are 1 billion grams of CO2 releases to the atmosphere every day. These evidences showed that fully going digital is not always greener than using paper.
People often think paper is only made from the pulp of trees because most paper in the world is actually still made from trees. However, there are some alternative materials available such as elephant’s dung, cotton or residue of agricultural plants. In South Asian countries such as Srilangka, Bangladesh and India, now much paper is made from elephants’ dung since a naturalist, Gehan de Silva found ‘magic’ techniques that can turn the dung into high quality paper in 2006. These eco-books are available now in the Amazon. Meanwhile in the USA, cotton has been used as paper materials for hundreds of years. Americans argue that books made from cotton have better quality than the ones from the pulp of trees. Other countries like China and Thailand are currently developing their eco-papers industry made from agriculture residues such as from wheat and rice. Furthermore, Canopy, an organization in North America has started a new market for paper from wheat waste which has potential to save at least 200 million trees a year (Hueb and Mir, 2014).
Bisides, paper recycling is getting more popular because it is cheaper. The production cost can be cut up to 40% of the whole usual production due to the availability of scrapped paper. In the USA, about 65% of paper was recycled in 2012 which has led to the increasing of 28% forest in Minnesota and Maine (Hueb and Mir, 2014). In addition, a famous Japanese publisher, The Mainichi Shimbunsa startled Japan with its new invention called green newspaper which is recycled from vegetable paper in 2016. After reading the green newspaper, readers can scramble the paper and plant it. Within a few days, plants will grow from it. This paper is made from the recycled paper that is made from residues of vegetables. Several articles mentioned that the circulation over 1 million copies a day has revenue up to USD 700,000.
McLaughin and Kamei-Hannan (2018) argue that students with visual impairments, particularly for those with more severe vision loss are benefitted from the use of electronic tablets because readers can adjust the size, font, style, colors and contrast. In this study, they both focus on silent and oral reading speed, reading comprehension that involved 3 participants who are diagnosed clinically with visual impairment. Over all, reading speed, silent and oral reading results were moderately higher compared to reading on the paper. In fact, however, many research findings prove that paper is a better medium for learning than electronic paper. Physical paper is a superior medium for learning and understanding advanced reading materials while electronic paper is acknowledged for its fast information gathering and communication (Stoop, Kreutzer and Kircz, 2013). Their suggest that teachers have to design reflective questions and exercise differently during e-reading or when computer is used in class. In addition, students are likely to have significantly eye fatigue after reading on the screen compared to paper text (Jeong, 2013). Moreover, in Jeong’s study, there were 56 six years old public student participants. It was conducted in South Korea which is country with high level exposure on technology, however, it is found that paper book has significant impact on quiz scores. Chen and Catrambone (2015) found that reading on paper affect readers’ behavior toward learning. Participants who read text on the screen has tendency to do note taking and to spend more time studying than those screen readers. This tendency has made them having better understanding on reading. Yiren (2018) also found the same findings, in which reading on paper is better than on the screen, meanwhile there was no significant different in reading speed on both mediums. The latest research on similar field also shared the same findings. Clinton (2019) found that reading text on paper help readers learning better than reading on the screen. Her research involved 33 laboratory studies from 2008-2018, which 29 of them indicates readers learned more from reading on the text than from the screen due to the influence of the reading medium itself and the external factors. Spatial memory for the location of a passage or a chart on physical page assists readers to remember the information. Since physical form of paper is comforting, more than 80% of paper readers tend to read through. Meanwhile, screen readers tend to skim the text than read it through because the glare and flickers of screen strain their brain. Moreover, digital distraction is difficult to avoid. Instant texts and notification of email or various social media cut the reading process. In addition, screen readers have tendency to use less reading strategies such as highlighting and note taking.
In conclusion, this discussion has evaluated safety, environmental and educational perspectives of paper. However, the intent of this discussion is not to choose between printed and digital materials rather than to identify the challenges of the digital media itself. It is not surprising that paper has played significant role in the world of knowledge and has benefitted human civilization for centuries as the medium for exchanging ideas. Going paperless will not help people to have a better planet since the paper industry is started to use sustainable materials and to innovate paper related products. Needles to say that forest is a renewable energy. In the educational field, paper is a superior medium in transferring information even in a country with high level exposure of technology. Its physical feature affects readers behavior and how readers’ brain absorb the information. Therefore, it is not necessary for society to go paperless.
The common thought that ‘digital is more ecofriendly than papers’ has spread worldwide. People strongly believe that the more digital they are, the greener their lives are. Digital seems sustainable because people can use the devices for many years and the negative side is often invisible. In fact, however, manufacturing the digital devices produces carbon footprints. Global Action Plan reports that there are more than 1 billion computers on Earth that responsible for 2.3% of manmade CO2 each year, which is the same amount produced by global air industry and is predicted to steadily rise. (Hueb and Mir, 2014). Another point to consider, is that digital activities increase the number of carbon footprint in the atmosphere since going digital does not only mean creating the devices, but also to power them, for example, emailing and online searching. Sending an email without attachment can produce up to 3.0g carbon (Berners-Lee, 2010). Further, Berners-Lee states that 136 kg carbon footprint is equal with driving 200 miles in average car. If one person sends 3 emails a day, it means that 0.9g carbon produced by email user per day and in 2018, Google tweeted that the number of Gmail users has reached 1.5 billion in the world. This implicitly tells that 13.5 million grams or 135 kg is produced a day, which is equivalent with carbon footprint of 100 cars. Moreover, there is 1 billion searches are occurring every day (Hueb and Mir, 2014) which means there are 1 billion grams of CO2 releases to the atmosphere every day. These evidences showed that fully going digital is not always greener than using paper.
People often think paper is only made from the pulp of trees because most paper in the world is actually still made from trees. However, there are some alternative materials available such as elephant’s dung, cotton or residue of agricultural plants. In South Asian countries such as Srilangka, Bangladesh and India, now much paper is made from elephants’ dung since a naturalist, Gehan de Silva found ‘magic’ techniques that can turn the dung into high quality paper in 2006. These eco-books are available now in the Amazon. Meanwhile in the USA, cotton has been used as paper materials for hundreds of years. Americans argue that books made from cotton have better quality than the ones from the pulp of trees. Other countries like China and Thailand are currently developing their eco-papers industry made from agriculture residues such as from wheat and rice. Furthermore, Canopy, an organization in North America has started a new market for paper from wheat waste which has potential to save at least 200 million trees a year (Hueb and Mir, 2014).
Bisides, paper recycling is getting more popular because it is cheaper. The production cost can be cut up to 40% of the whole usual production due to the availability of scrapped paper. In the USA, about 65% of paper was recycled in 2012 which has led to the increasing of 28% forest in Minnesota and Maine (Hueb and Mir, 2014). In addition, a famous Japanese publisher, The Mainichi Shimbunsa startled Japan with its new invention called green newspaper which is recycled from vegetable paper in 2016. After reading the green newspaper, readers can scramble the paper and plant it. Within a few days, plants will grow from it. This paper is made from the recycled paper that is made from residues of vegetables. Several articles mentioned that the circulation over 1 million copies a day has revenue up to USD 700,000.
McLaughin and Kamei-Hannan (2018) argue that students with visual impairments, particularly for those with more severe vision loss are benefitted from the use of electronic tablets because readers can adjust the size, font, style, colors and contrast. In this study, they both focus on silent and oral reading speed, reading comprehension that involved 3 participants who are diagnosed clinically with visual impairment. Over all, reading speed, silent and oral reading results were moderately higher compared to reading on the paper. In fact, however, many research findings prove that paper is a better medium for learning than electronic paper. Physical paper is a superior medium for learning and understanding advanced reading materials while electronic paper is acknowledged for its fast information gathering and communication (Stoop, Kreutzer and Kircz, 2013). Their suggest that teachers have to design reflective questions and exercise differently during e-reading or when computer is used in class. In addition, students are likely to have significantly eye fatigue after reading on the screen compared to paper text (Jeong, 2013). Moreover, in Jeong’s study, there were 56 six years old public student participants. It was conducted in South Korea which is country with high level exposure on technology, however, it is found that paper book has significant impact on quiz scores. Chen and Catrambone (2015) found that reading on paper affect readers’ behavior toward learning. Participants who read text on the screen has tendency to do note taking and to spend more time studying than those screen readers. This tendency has made them having better understanding on reading. Yiren (2018) also found the same findings, in which reading on paper is better than on the screen, meanwhile there was no significant different in reading speed on both mediums. The latest research on similar field also shared the same findings. Clinton (2019) found that reading text on paper help readers learning better than reading on the screen. Her research involved 33 laboratory studies from 2008-2018, which 29 of them indicates readers learned more from reading on the text than from the screen due to the influence of the reading medium itself and the external factors. Spatial memory for the location of a passage or a chart on physical page assists readers to remember the information. Since physical form of paper is comforting, more than 80% of paper readers tend to read through. Meanwhile, screen readers tend to skim the text than read it through because the glare and flickers of screen strain their brain. Moreover, digital distraction is difficult to avoid. Instant texts and notification of email or various social media cut the reading process. In addition, screen readers have tendency to use less reading strategies such as highlighting and note taking.
In conclusion, this discussion has evaluated safety, environmental and educational perspectives of paper. However, the intent of this discussion is not to choose between printed and digital materials rather than to identify the challenges of the digital media itself. It is not surprising that paper has played significant role in the world of knowledge and has benefitted human civilization for centuries as the medium for exchanging ideas. Going paperless will not help people to have a better planet since the paper industry is started to use sustainable materials and to innovate paper related products. Needles to say that forest is a renewable energy. In the educational field, paper is a superior medium in transferring information even in a country with high level exposure of technology. Its physical feature affects readers behavior and how readers’ brain absorb the information. Therefore, it is not necessary for society to go paperless.
References
Berners-Lee, Mike. How Bad Are Bananas? the Carbon
Footprint of Everything. Greystone
Books, 2011.
Chen, Dar-Wei, and Richard Catrambone. “Paper vs. Screen.”
Proceedings of the Human
Factors and
Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol.
59, no. 1, 2015, pp. 332–336. doi:10.1177/1541931215591069.
Clinton, Virginia. “Reading from Paper Compared to Screens:
A Systematic Review and
Meta‐Analysis.” Journal
of Research in Reading, vol. 42, no. 2, 2019, pp. 288–325.,
doi:10.1111/1467-9817.12269.
Jeong, Hanho. “A Comparison of the Influence of Electronic
Books and Paper Books on
Reading Comprehension, Eye Fatigue, and Perception.” The Electronic Library, vol. 30, no. 3,
2012, pp. 390–408., doi:10.1108/02640471211241663.
Kong, Yiren, et al. “Comparison of Reading Performance on
Screen and on Paper: A Meta
Analysis.” Computers & Education, vol. 123, 2018, pp. 138–149., doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.005.
Mintenbuler, Reid. “How paper Shaped Civilization.” The Altantic, Media Company. 2 june
2016, https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/05best-revenge-is-your-paper/483671.
Routley, Nick. “The
20 Internet Giants That Rule the Web.” Visual
Capitalist, 12 Mar. 2019,
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/20-internet-giants-ru
le-web/.
Shueb & Mir.
“Carbon Footprint in Knowledge Sector: An Assesment from Cradle to
Grave?”
Library of Philosophy and Practise (e-journal), Nebraska, 2010, Paper 1126.
Stoop, Judith, et
al. “Reading and Learning from Screens versus Print: a Study in Changing
Habits.” New Library World, vol. 114, no. 7/8,
Dec. 2013, pp. 284–300., doi:10.1108/nlw-01-2013-0012.
The Guardian, Edward
Snowden Interview.
Note: This discussion paper is written for EAP assignment of Australia Awards Indonesia
Note: This discussion paper is written for EAP assignment of Australia Awards Indonesia
Semuanya dalam Bahasa Inggris kelas tinggi, saya harus belajar biar biar ngerti.
ReplyDeleteKirain digital lebih eco friendly.
ReplyDeleteThe main motive of the AWS Big data consultant is to spread the knowledge so that they can give more big data engineers to the world.
ReplyDelete