Set in a not-so-distant future, Elysium<\/em> paints a world where the rich have literally left Earth behind, living on a luxurious space station, while the rest of humanity struggles in dire poverty on a ruined planet. Through its dramatic depiction of extreme wealth and deprivation, the film mirrors many of the real-world dynamics we\u2019ll explore in this chapter, from the cycles of poverty to the paradoxes of resource wealth. Plus, let\u2019s be honest\u2014talking about inequality feels a bit less depressing when there are robots, lasers, and Matt Damon running around in an exoskeleton. But don\u2019t let the sci-fi distract you; Elysium<\/em> offers a powerful metaphor for the stark realities of global development and inequality today, making it the perfect case study for unpacking concepts like absolute poverty, the resource curse, and social mobility. So, strap in\u2014just not in a luxury spacecraft, unless you\u2019ve got the clearance.<\/p>\r\n SPOILER WARNING<\/strong>: This chapter will reference specific characters and events from the films in\u00a0 Elysium\u00a0<\/em>, some of which may spoil major plot points. If you would like to watch the films before you continue, I highly recommend it. HCC students can watch the film for free through our library's Swank account here: Elysium<\/em> (2013)<\/a>.\u00a0Not an HCC student? Check your streaming platforms or local library for access!<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n In the world of global politics, few issues are as pressing\u2014or as complex\u2014as development and inequality. Economic disparities within and between nations shape everything from governance and conflict to human rights and environmental sustainability. In a world increasingly interconnected by globalization, the gap between the rich and the poor has taken on dramatic proportions. But why does this gap persist? And what can be done to address it? To explore these questions, we\u2019ll use the science fiction film Elysium<\/em> as a lens. This movie offers a powerful metaphor for the stark inequalities that characterize our world, presenting a dystopian vision where a privileged elite live in luxury on a space station while the rest of humanity struggles to survive on a ravaged Earth. By examining these themes, we can better understand key concepts such as economic inequality, social stratification, and elite capture, and their real-world implications for development and global politics.<\/p>\r\n Elysium<\/em> (2013) is set in the year 2154, when Earth has become an overpopulated, polluted wasteland. The wealthiest individuals have escaped this grim reality by relocating to Elysium, a luxurious space station orbiting the planet. On Elysium, residents enjoy clean air, abundant resources, and miraculous medical technology, while those left on Earth endure grinding poverty, illness, and despair. The story follows Max, a former criminal turned factory worker, as he fights to access Elysium\u2019s advanced healthcare to save his own life. Along the way, the film reveals the deep divide between the privileged few and the impoverished masses, serving as a stark allegory for global inequality. Like our world, Elysium<\/em> portrays a system where the wealthiest not only hoard resources but actively maintain barriers to prevent others from sharing in their prosperity. Check out the first few minutes of the movie below to get a sense of the scale of inequality in this future, fictional Earth.<\/p>\r\nhttps:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=QK-MVUjkOKU\r\n\r\n[h5p id=\"25\"]\r\n In every corner of the world, [pb_glossary id=\"1231\"]economic inequality[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong> shapes the lives of billions, dictating who has access to opportunities and who struggles just to survive. In Elysium<\/em>, this divide is portrayed in stark, visual terms: Earth\u2019s surface is a sprawling, polluted slum, while the elite orbit the planet in a pristine space station equipped with every imaginable luxury. This cinematic dichotomy mirrors real-world disparities between wealthy nations and impoverished ones, as well as inequalities within societies. Economic inequality, at its core, is the uneven distribution of wealth and resources. Today, the richest 1% of people control nearly half of global wealth, leaving billions to compete for the remaining scraps. Globalization, while lauded for its potential to lift nations out of poverty, has often deepened these divides. Corporations in wealthier countries profit by outsourcing labor to poorer nations, where workers are paid less than a living wage and labor under exploitative conditions. Meanwhile, the profits generated flow upward, enriching executives and shareholders rather than the communities that produce the goods. In Elysium<\/em>, this exploitation is vividly illustrated by the plight of Max, who works in a dangerous factory producing drones for the elite, highlighting how systems of inequality are sustained by those who benefit from them. The film offers a powerful critique of global systems that perpetuate economic disparities, forcing viewers to consider whether Earth\u2019s present trajectory might lead to such a dystopian future.<\/p>\r\n Economic inequality often intertwines with [pb_glossary id=\"1232\"]social stratification[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong>, creating rigid systems where power and privilege are passed down through generations. In Elysium<\/em>, there is an unbridgeable chasm between the wealthy few living on the space station and the impoverished masses on Earth, a gap so stark that it denies any possibility of upward mobility. This concept parallels real-world structures of social stratification, which organize societies into hierarchies based on wealth, status, and power. Take, for example, the caste system in India or entrenched class divides in the United Kingdom\u2014both of which limit individuals' opportunities based on their birth. Education plays a pivotal role in these systems, often acting as a gatekeeper to social mobility. Elite universities, with their prohibitively high tuition costs, often remain accessible only to the wealthy, perpetuating cycles of privilege. The film underscores this divide through the medical technology on Elysium, which can cure any illness but is strictly reserved for the wealthy. This exclusionary access symbolizes how real-world stratification often denies the poor basic rights, such as healthcare, while ensuring the continued prosperity of the elite. Through this lens, Elysium<\/em> pushes audiences to question the fairness of systems that lock millions into poverty while reserving opportunity and advancement for a privileged few.<\/p>\r\n When the wealthy and powerful dominate resources and decision-making, the rest of society suffers\u2014a phenomenon sociologists and political scientists call [pb_glossary id=\"1233\"]elite capture[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong>. In Elysium<\/em>, the entire structure of the space station epitomizes this concept: the rich have hoarded advanced technologies, clean air, and safe living conditions for themselves, while deliberately excluding the majority of humanity from these benefits. This reflects a troubling pattern in real-world global politics, where elite groups monopolize power and resources. For example, multinational corporations often influence environmental policies to prioritize profit over sustainability, as seen in the lobbying efforts of fossil fuel companies to delay climate action. Similarly, in many countries, the political process is dominated by wealthy donors and corporate interests, leaving the needs of ordinary citizens unheard. In the film, the elites on Elysium are not merely passively benefiting from their privilege\u2014they actively defend it by deploying militarized drones and enforcing immigration restrictions to keep Earth's desperate population out. This mirrors real-world practices, such as border fortifications and the militarization of migration policies in wealthier nations, which often privilege the security of the affluent over the rights and safety of vulnerable migrants. By showing how elite capture can perpetuate global inequality, Elysium<\/em> invites viewers to consider how such systems of exclusion can be dismantled to create a fairer world.<\/p>\r\n Ultimately, Elysium<\/em> is a cautionary tale, one that challenges us to confront the structures of inequality that shape our world. Through its dramatic depictions of economic disparity, entrenched social hierarchies, and elite domination, the film forces us to consider how these systems manifest in real life. While the futuristic setting of Elysium<\/em> might seem far removed from our present reality, its core themes resonate deeply with the challenges facing global politics today. It reminds us that inequality is not inevitable but rather the result of deliberate human choices\u2014choices that can, and must, be changed to ensure a more equitable future.<\/p>\r\n\r\n How do we make sense of inequality, conflict, and power in the world? Political science offers us a range of theoretical lenses to understand the forces shaping global politics, from the motivations of nations to the dynamics of wealth and power. The film Elysium<\/em> provides a rich case study for applying these theories, depicting a future where Earth\u2019s downtrodden masses struggle to survive while the wealthy elite thrive on a luxurious space station. The film\u2019s stark portrayal of inequality and systemic exclusion makes it an ideal way to explore some of the most influential theories in international relations: realism, liberalism, constructivism, Marxism, and feminism. Each theory offers a unique perspective, helping us uncover different facets of the world Elysium<\/em> envisions. By examining the events of the film through these frameworks, we can better understand how power operates and how it might be challenged or sustained in global politics.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Realists would view the world of Elysium<\/em> as a story about power, competition, and the survival of the fittest. In realism, the international system is defined by anarchy\u2014no central authority governs the interactions between states or actors, forcing them to prioritize their own security and interests. In the film, the space station Elysium operates as a self-contained \u201cstate,\u201d securing its survival by maintaining strict borders and protecting its resources. Earth\u2019s population, desperate and impoverished, poses a constant threat to Elysium\u2019s security. The elites respond with militarized drones and anti-immigration policies, illustrating the realist principle of self-help: actors must rely on their own strength to survive. Realists might argue that this behavior is inevitable, as limited resources create a zero-sum game where one actor\u2019s gain is another\u2019s loss. Historically, we see similar dynamics in border security policies, such as the U.S.\u2013Mexico border wall or Australia\u2019s strict immigration controls, both designed to protect affluent nations from perceived threats. By focusing on power and security, realism provides a stark but pragmatic explanation for Elysium\u2019s policies of exclusion and resource hoarding. However, this narrow focus on survival leads to a bleak view of global politics, setting the stage for theories like liberalism that emphasize cooperation over conflict.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Liberalism offers a more optimistic lens, emphasizing the potential for cooperation and mutual benefit, even in a divided world. A liberal analysis of Elysium<\/em> would highlight how the elites\u2019 refusal to share resources ultimately harms everyone, creating instability and conflict. For liberals, institutions and norms are key to fostering cooperation. If Earth and Elysium established agreements or governing bodies to distribute resources more equitably, both societies could prosper. In the real world, organizations like the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO) exemplify liberal ideals, working to address global challenges through collective action. The WHO\u2019s efforts to distribute COVID-19 vaccines to poorer nations, for instance, demonstrate the liberal belief in interconnectedness: neglecting the needs of the global poor can lead to greater crises that affect everyone. In Elysium<\/em>, however, the absence of cooperation leads to systemic inequality, reinforcing liberalism\u2019s warning about the dangers of isolationism and unilateralism. The film challenges viewers to imagine what the world might look like if elites recognized the long-term benefits of collaboration and solidarity, offering a stark contrast to the constructivist emphasis on ideas and identity as driving forces in politics.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Constructivists would approach Elysium<\/em> by focusing on the social and cultural constructs that shape behavior and power dynamics. Unlike realists and liberals, constructivists argue that the international system is not driven solely by material forces but by the ideas, norms, and identities actors create. In the film, the stark divide between Earth and Elysium is not just a physical boundary\u2014it is also a construct rooted in ideology. The elites on Elysium view themselves as inherently superior, creating a narrative that justifies their exclusionary practices. Similarly, Earth\u2019s population is dehumanized, seen as a chaotic \u201cother\u201d unworthy of sharing in Elysium\u2019s abundance. This mirrors real-world examples like colonialism, where European powers justified exploitation by constructing racial hierarchies that devalued colonized peoples. Constructivists would argue that changing these dynamics requires shifting the narratives and identities that sustain inequality. In the film, Max\u2019s struggle challenges the elites\u2019 worldview, symbolizing how transformative change often begins by questioning dominant ideas. By focusing on how norms and perceptions shape power, constructivism connects seamlessly to Marxism, which examines how economic structures drive inequality.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Marxists would see Elysium<\/em> as a classic tale of class struggle, where the wealthy bourgeoisie exploit the working-class proletariat. The film\u2019s futuristic setting dramatizes the economic inequalities that Marxists argue are inherent to capitalism: the elites on Elysium hoard wealth and resources, while the masses on Earth labor under oppressive conditions with little hope of improvement. Max, a factory worker exposed to deadly radiation while producing goods for Elysium, embodies the plight of the proletariat. For Marxists, this exploitation is not accidental\u2014it is a feature of a system designed to prioritize profit over human needs. Historically, this analysis aligns with movements like the Russian Revolution of 1917, where workers rose up against an elite class that monopolized wealth and power. Elysium<\/em> also highlights how the ruling class uses state violence\u2014via militarized drones and police forces\u2014to maintain their dominance, reinforcing Marxist critiques of how power operates under capitalism. By exposing the deep economic inequalities that underpin global systems, Marxism offers a lens that demands systemic change, paving the way for feminist theories that interrogate intersecting forms of oppression.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Feminist theories would offer a sharp critique of Elysium\u2019s portrayal of leadership, noting that even though the President is a man (Faran Tahir) and the Defense Secretary is a woman (Jessica Delacourt, played by Jodie Foster), the film still upholds deeply patriarchal power structures. From a feminist perspective, representation alone isn\u2019t enough\u2014what matters is how power is used and what norms are being reinforced. Scholars like Cynthia Enloe and Laura Sjoberg argue that women in elite political or military positions often must adopt traditionally \u201cmasculine\u201d behaviors\u2014assertiveness, aggression, emotional distance\u2014to be seen as competent and legitimate. Delacourt is a textbook case of this dynamic: she is ruthless, militarized, and unapologetically authoritarian, reinforcing systems of control rather than challenging them. In this light, her gender doesn\u2019t make her role feminist; rather, it shows how women can be absorbed into patriarchal institutions and expected to perform power the same way men traditionally have. Feminism would thus critique Elysium not for the lack of female presence alone, but for presenting a world where power remains masculinized\u2014even when it wears heels.<\/p>\r\n Each of these theories\u2014realism, liberalism, constructivism, Marxism, and feminism\u2014offers a unique lens for interpreting the world of Elysium<\/em> and, by extension, the real-world dynamics it reflects. By examining the film through these frameworks, we not only gain insight into the forces shaping global inequality but also begin to see the possibilities for resistance and change. As these theories remind us, the systems that sustain inequality are not immutable; they are constructed by human actions and choices, and they can be reimagined for a more just and equitable world.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Economic development is a driving force in global politics, shaping the well-being of individuals, the stability of nations, and the dynamics of international relations. It is not merely about growing economies; it is about creating opportunities, reducing poverty, and ensuring equitable access to resources and services. But development does not follow a single blueprint. Across history, nations have pursued diverse strategies, often guided by competing theories about how societies grow and what forces hinder progress. These theories help us analyze both historical successes and enduring inequalities in the world today. The film Elysium<\/em> vividly dramatizes these challenges, depicting a future where development has taken a sharply unequal turn: the wealthy enjoy the fruits of advanced technologies and a pristine environment aboard a high-tech space station, while the impoverished masses on Earth are left to toil in pollution and deprivation. By applying key theories of development\u2014such as modernization, dependency, and sustainable development\u2014we can better understand the factors shaping progress and inequality, both in the film and in the real world.<\/p>\r\n The belief that societies progress along a linear path from tradition to modernity has long guided development policy. In this view, traditional economies marked by subsistence agriculture and limited technology evolve into industrialized, urban economies with modern infrastructure, governance, and values. Elysium<\/em> starkly illustrates this divide: the space station epitomizes modernity with its sleek architecture, clean air, and cutting-edge healthcare technologies, while Earth\u2019s inhabitants are trapped in conditions resembling a pre-modern dystopia. [pb_glossary id=\"1237\"]Modernization theory[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong> suggests that the solution for Earth\u2019s people would be to follow the same developmental path as Elysium, adopting its technology, education systems, and political institutions. South Korea offers a real-world example of such a transformation. In the 1950s, South Korea was one of the poorest nations in the world, reliant on subsistence farming. Through industrialization, investment in education, and integration into global markets, it became a global economic powerhouse. However, modernization theory has its flaws. It assumes that all nations have equal access to the resources and opportunities needed to modernize, ignoring the systemic inequalities that hinder some countries while benefiting others. In Elysium<\/em>, Earth\u2019s people lack access to the advanced resources that fuel Elysium\u2019s prosperity, reflecting the critique that development is often blocked by deeper structural inequalities. This brings us to a contrasting theory that focuses not on internal progress but on external exploitation.<\/p>\r\n While modernization theory emphasizes progress, another perspective argues that the global economy itself is designed to perpetuate inequality. The people of Earth in Elysium<\/em> are not merely underdeveloped; they are exploited to sustain the wealth and power of the space station\u2019s elite. This mirrors the real-world dynamics described by [pb_glossary id=\"73\"]dependency theory[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong>, which posits that wealthy nations maintain their dominance by exploiting poorer nations for labor and resources. Historically, colonial powers extracted raw materials from colonies, sold them finished goods, and prevented local industries from developing. This cycle created dependency, locking colonized regions into a state of underdevelopment. Today, similar patterns persist in the relationship between the Global North and South. For instance, multinational corporations extract valuable minerals from African countries for use in electronics, while local populations see little of the profit and suffer from environmental degradation. In Elysium<\/em>, the people on Earth work dangerous, low-paying jobs in factories that produce goods for the elite, exemplifying this unequal relationship. Dependency theory argues that breaking this cycle requires systemic change, but this is easier said than done. One historical attempt to address these inequalities involved a strategy of fostering domestic industries to reduce reliance on foreign imports.<\/p>\r\n In the face of exploitation, some nations have sought to build economic independence by fostering their own industries and reducing reliance on imports. This strategy, often referred to as [pb_glossary id=\"1238\"]import substitution[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong>, emphasizes producing goods domestically rather than importing them from abroad. In Elysium<\/em>, this might look like Earth\u2019s population developing their own technologies and industries rather than relying on scraps from the space station. Countries like Brazil and India experimented with this approach during the mid-20th century, using tariffs, subsidies, and state support to nurture their industries. Brazil, for example, developed its own automobile industry by protecting it from foreign competition. However, these policies often struggled in the long term, as industries became inefficient without external competition and lacked the innovation needed to thrive in global markets. In the world of Elysium<\/em>, Earth\u2019s residents face even steeper barriers, as they lack access to the capital, infrastructure, and education needed to foster self-reliance. This highlights a critical tension: while reducing dependency is essential, engaging with global markets through export-led strategies has often proven more effective for driving sustained growth.<\/p>\r\n Exporting goods to global markets has helped many countries achieve rapid economic development. In contrast to focusing on domestic industries, [pb_glossary id=\"1239\"]export-led growth[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong> prioritizes producing goods for international consumers, leveraging global demand to drive national prosperity. In Elysium<\/em>, the factories on Earth mass-produce goods for the space station, but the benefits are siphoned off by the elite. Real-world examples, however, show how this strategy can benefit entire nations when implemented effectively. For instance, China embraced export-led growth in the late 20th century, transforming itself into the \u201cworld\u2019s factory\u201d by producing everything from electronics to textiles for global consumers. This approach created millions of jobs, lifted millions out of poverty, and spurred industrial modernization. However, export-led growth has its limitations. Overdependence on global markets can leave countries vulnerable to economic shocks, such as the 2008 financial crisis, which saw a sharp decline in global trade. Moreover, wealth generated by exports is often unequally distributed, benefiting corporations and elites while leaving workers with low wages and poor conditions. This imbalance reflects broader concerns about the policies promoted by international institutions like the IMF and World Bank, which have often prioritized economic liberalization over equitable development.<\/p>\r\n In the 1980s and 1990s, many developing nations found themselves grappling with spiraling debt, stagnant growth, and mounting economic crises. In response, powerful international financial institutions\u2014most notably the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank\u2014began promoting a standardized set of economic reforms that came to be known as the [pb_glossary id=\"1241\"]Washington Consensus<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary]. Coined by economist John Williamson in 1989, the term referred to a group of policy prescriptions centered in Washington, D.C., where these institutions, along with the U.S. Treasury Department, were headquartered. These policies emphasized free trade, deregulation, fiscal austerity, tax reform, privatization of state-owned enterprises, and the liberalization of markets. They were presented as universal solutions for economic recovery and modernization, particularly in the wake of Latin America\u2019s debt crisis and the global shift toward neoliberal economic models. Countries in Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia were often required to implement these reforms as conditions for receiving loans or debt restructuring\u2014this process became known as structural adjustment.<\/p>\r\n On paper, the Washington Consensus aimed to restore macroeconomic stability and attract foreign direct investment by creating predictable, open, and investor-friendly environments. However, in practice, the reforms frequently produced harsh social consequences. Structural adjustment programs (SAPs) in countries like Ghana, Bolivia, and Zambia led to deep cuts in public spending, including reductions in healthcare, education, food subsidies, and employment protections. As public services deteriorated and poverty rose, vulnerable populations bore the brunt of reforms designed with macroeconomic goals in mind, not social equity. Critics argued that these policies reflected the priorities of Western economic thinking\u2014efficiency, liberalization, and growth\u2014without sufficient attention to local needs, historical contexts, or social safety nets. While some countries did experience temporary economic stabilization or increased investment, the long-term effects often included widening inequality, weakened state capacity, and growing public discontent. The Washington Consensus, once touted as a development blueprint, eventually became a symbol of top-down economic engineering that too often prioritized market outcomes over human well-being and democratic accountability. Its legacy continues to shape debates over global development, sparking calls for more inclusive, people-centered approaches that prioritize not just growth, but equity, resilience, and dignity.<\/p>\r\n True development must go beyond economic metrics like GDP to focus on what people can actually achieve in their lives. The [pb_glossary id=\"1242\"]Capability Approach[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong>, developed by economist Amartya Sen, emphasizes this by focusing on individuals' real freedoms and opportunities to live the kinds of lives they value. Sen argued that development should prioritize expanding capabilities\u2014such as access to education, healthcare, and meaningful participation in society\u2014over arbitrary indicators like GDP. In Elysium<\/em>, Earth\u2019s residents suffer not only from poverty but from a lack of basic opportunities that restrict their freedoms, such as access to life-saving healthcare or quality education. This idea aligns with the [pb_glossary id=\"1243\"]Human Development Index (HDI)[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong>, which measures life expectancy, education, and income to assess overall quality of life. Norway consistently ranks high on the HDI because it invests heavily in social welfare programs that expand individual capabilities and improve societal well-being. In contrast, nations grappling with corruption or conflict, such as Afghanistan or Haiti, struggle to provide even the most basic services, leaving their citizens trapped in cycles of deprivation. In Elysium<\/em>, these disparities are starkly evident, as the elite hoard advanced medical technologies, leaving Earth\u2019s population to die from preventable diseases. Addressing such inequalities requires a holistic approach that not only balances economic growth with social equity and environmental sustainability but also expands the real freedoms and capabilities of all individuals, as envisioned by Sen\u2019s Capability Approach. Check out the video below to learn more about the Capability Approach.<\/p>\r\nhttps:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=BunGwSCuksE\r\n\r\n[h5p id=\"26\"]\r\n The choices we make today will shape the opportunities available tomorrow\u2014a truth that lies at the heart of modern development debates. Real-world examples, such as the destruction of the Amazon rainforest, the overfishing of global oceans, or the depletion of clean water sources, illustrate how pursuing short-term economic gains without regard for environmental limits can create long-term ecological and social crises. These challenges have spurred a growing recognition that development cannot be measured by GDP growth alone. In response, the concept of [pb_glossary id=\"1244\"]sustainable development<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary] emerged as a guiding framework that aims to balance economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity\u2014often referred to as the \u201cthree pillars\u201d of sustainability. The term gained global prominence in 1987 with the publication of the Brundtland Report, formally titled Our Common Future, produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. This report defined sustainable development as \u201cdevelopment that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.\u201d<\/p>\r\n Since then, sustainable development has evolved into one of the major theories in international development, influencing policymaking, global cooperation, and institutional reform. It plays a central role in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a blueprint adopted in 2015 that outlines 17 goals to address global poverty, inequality, climate change, and more by the year 2030. Unlike earlier development paradigms that focused narrowly on industrialization or economic liberalization, sustainable development advocates for a holistic approach that takes into account the long-term health of both people and the planet. In practice, this includes investments in renewable energy, green infrastructure, sustainable agriculture, and education, all designed to build economies that are resilient, inclusive, and ecologically viable. Moreover, it challenges traditional development models by emphasizing intergenerational justice, urging governments, corporations, and citizens to think beyond immediate profit and consider the legacy left for future generations. As climate change, biodiversity loss, and resource scarcity intensify, sustainable development has become not just an ethical imperative but a strategic necessity for building a stable and equitable global future.<\/p>\r\n By exploring these theories of economic development\u2014modernization, dependency, self-reliance, export-led growth, and sustainable development\u2014we gain a deeper understanding of the forces that shape our world. Elysium<\/em> provides a powerful case study, illustrating how development can both empower and exclude, creating futures that are as divided as they are advanced. These theories challenge us to think critically about what progress truly means and how we can achieve a more equitable and sustainable global system.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Global economic challenges demand coordinated action, and international organizations have emerged as key players in managing development and addressing inequality. These institutions wield immense power, shaping the futures of nations through trade rules, financial aid, and economic reforms. While they often claim to promote stability and growth, their policies and practices frequently spark debate about fairness, accountability, and the balance of power between wealthy and poorer nations. The film Elysium<\/em> offers a vivid metaphor for these dynamics, depicting a world in which a wealthy elite enforces policies that sustain their dominance while leaving the impoverished majority to bear the brunt of economic hardship. Similarly, institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank exert significant influence over the global economy, with far-reaching consequences. By examining the roles of these organizations and their policies\u2014such as structural adjustment and conditionality\u2014we can better understand the complexities of international development and its real-world impact.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"522\"] The promise of free trade often masks an unequal playing field. In Elysium<\/em>, Earth\u2019s workers produce goods for the elites on the space station, but they see none of the benefits\u2014a dynamic that mirrors the global trade system regulated by the [pb_glossary id=\"1246\"]World Trade Organization<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary] (WTO). The WTO was established to promote free trade by reducing tariffs, eliminating barriers to commerce, and resolving trade disputes. It evolved from the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), created in 1947 to foster economic recovery and cooperation after World War II. Over time, as trade became more complex and globalized, GATT was replaced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 to provide a stronger institutional framework with broader enforcement powers. While this has facilitated the expansion of global markets, the benefits of free trade are often skewed in favor of wealthier nations. For example, subsidies provided by the U.S. and the EU to their farmers make agricultural products from those regions cheaper on the global market, undercutting farmers in developing countries. Countries like Ghana, whose local rice industry struggled against cheap imports, illustrate the challenges faced by weaker economies when competing in an uneven global market. In Elysium, this imbalance is dramatized as Earth\u2019s residents are economically excluded despite their labor powering the elite\u2019s prosperity. Critics of the WTO argue that its policies often prioritize the profits of multinational corporations over the needs of local producers in poorer nations, perpetuating inequality. When such imbalances lead to economic collapse or instability, institutions like the IMF step in with promises of financial aid\u2014but often at a significant cost.<\/p>\r\n Financial lifelines offered in times of crisis often come with harsh trade-offs. In Elysium<\/em>, Earth\u2019s economy is in free fall, and governments are powerless to address poverty without external intervention. This echoes the real-world role of the [pb_glossary id=\"1247\"]International Monetary Fund[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong> (IMF), which provides loans to countries facing economic crises. While the IMF can prevent financial collapses, the conditions attached to its assistance often exacerbate social inequality. For instance, during the 1980s Latin American debt crisis, the IMF required nations like Mexico and Brazil to implement austerity measures, including cutting public spending and privatizing industries, as conditions for receiving loans. These measures stabilized national budgets but led to significant hardship for ordinary citizens, as healthcare, education, and other essential services were slashed. In Elysium<\/em>, this dynamic is represented by the exploitation of Earth\u2019s population, whose well-being is sacrificed to preserve the economic and political dominance of the elites. Critics argue that the IMF\u2019s policies often prioritize the repayment of foreign creditors over the long-term development of recipient nations. This tension highlights the importance of institutions like the World Bank, which aim to foster development more directly through large-scale projects.<\/p>\r\n Development projects are often presented as straightforward solutions to poverty, but their outcomes are frequently complex and can even produce unintended harm. Institutions like the [pb_glossary id=\"1248\"]World Bank[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong> have long funded large-scale infrastructure projects\u2014such as dams, highways, and power plants\u2014in developing countries, with the stated goal of fostering economic growth and improving quality of life. While some of these projects have succeeded in expanding access to electricity, transportation, or clean water, others have had damaging social and environmental effects. A notable example is the Lesotho Highlands Water Project, which displaced thousands of people, disrupted fragile ecosystems, and disproportionately benefited South African industries over the local communities in Lesotho. Critics argue that projects like these often prioritize macroeconomic indicators and external investor interests over the lived experiences of those on the ground. Additionally, the loans used to fund such initiatives frequently saddle recipient countries with large amounts of debt, creating long-term financial dependency and limiting governments\u2019 ability to invest in essential services like healthcare and education.<\/p>\r\n These challenges are often compounded by the economic reforms required as a condition of receiving financial assistance. Known as [pb_glossary id=\"1249\"]structural adjustment programs[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong> (SAPs), these policies were widely implemented in the 1980s and 1990s by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, especially in countries facing debt crises. SAPs typically mandated a package of market-oriented reforms, including the privatization of public enterprises, trade liberalization, deregulation, and cuts to public spending. While proponents claimed these measures would stabilize economies and attract foreign investment, the social costs were severe. In many countries across sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, SAPs led to mass layoffs of public employees, reduced access to healthcare and education, and a rise in poverty, especially among the most vulnerable populations. These programs also reinforced a broader practice known as conditionality, in which access to international loans or aid is tied to the adoption of specific economic policies\u2014often with limited input from the affected populations. As a result, critics argue that SAPs and similar reforms reflected a top-down model of development, prioritizing economic metrics over human welfare and undermining the sovereignty of nations already grappling with structural challenges.<\/p>\r\n The strings attached to financial assistance often shape the political and economic futures of recipient nations. In Elysium<\/em>, Earth\u2019s leaders face pressure to accept reforms dictated by external powers, knowing these conditions may deepen inequality and public dissatisfaction. This mirrors the real-world practice of [pb_glossary id=\"1250\"]conditionality<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary], where international organizations require governments to implement specific reforms in exchange for loans or aid. These conditions often include privatizing industries, cutting subsidies for basic goods, or liberalizing markets\u2014policies that can disproportionately harm the poor. For example, in Nigeria, the removal of fuel subsidies in compliance with IMF recommendations led to a dramatic rise in transportation costs and sparked nationwide protests. While proponents argue that conditionality promotes accountability and aligns aid with development goals, critics contend that it often reflects the priorities of donor nations rather than the needs of recipients. In Elysium<\/em>, the resulting social unrest mirrors real-world tensions, highlighting the disconnect between external decision-makers and the people affected by their policies. These dynamics raise broader questions about fairness and power in global governance.<\/p>\r\n The systems and policies depicted in Elysium<\/em> resonate deeply with real-world debates about international organizations and development. Institutions like the WTO, IMF, and World Bank have shaped the global economy in profound ways, providing critical support to struggling nations but often imposing conditions that deepen inequality and dependency. By examining these institutions and their practices, we gain insight into the complexities of global governance and the challenges of promoting equitable development. The world of Elysium<\/em> serves as a cautionary tale, reminding us that development is not just about economic growth\u2014it is about creating a fairer, more inclusive future for all.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Poverty and inequality are more than just economic issues\u2014they are global challenges that shape politics, power dynamics, and human development. Poverty deprives billions of access to basic needs like food, healthcare, and education, while inequality reinforces systems of exclusion and exploitation. These issues are not only morally troubling but also destabilizing, contributing to unrest, migration crises, and environmental degradation. Addressing poverty requires understanding its various dimensions and systemic causes, while inequality demands examining how power and resources are distributed both within and between nations. The film Elysium<\/em> vividly portrays the devastating effects of unchecked inequality, depicting a future where humanity is divided into two extremes: a wealthy elite living on a technologically advanced space station and the rest of humanity struggling for survival on a ravaged Earth. Through the lens of Elysium<\/em> and key IR concepts like absolute poverty, relative poverty, the resource curse, the Gini coefficient, the cycle of poverty, and social mobility, we can better understand how poverty and inequality are sustained\u2014and how they might be addressed.<\/p>\r\n Imagine a world where millions of people wake up each day unable to meet even their most basic needs. This is the grim reality of [pb_glossary id=\"1256\"]absolute poverty<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary], which affects over 700 million people worldwide. In Elysium<\/em>, the people left on Earth endure this condition daily, depicted in scenes of crumbling infrastructure, overcrowded slums, and untreated illnesses. Absolute poverty goes beyond financial hardship\u2014it is a fight for survival, as individuals lack access to necessities like food, clean water, shelter, and healthcare. Real-world examples of absolute poverty can be found in sub-Saharan Africa, where decades of conflict, underdevelopment, and environmental crises have left millions vulnerable to famine and disease. In Yemen, for instance, a prolonged war has created one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world, with millions facing starvation due to blockades, economic collapse, and lack of international aid. The film\u2019s portrayal of Earth as a polluted, overcrowded wasteland where people die from preventable conditions mirrors these global realities. Addressing absolute poverty requires more than short-term humanitarian aid; it demands systemic investment in infrastructure, healthcare, and governance. Yet even in societies where basic needs are met, poverty can persist in less visible but equally harmful ways, as seen in the concept of relative poverty.<\/p>\r\n Even in societies where people have enough to survive, inequality can still trap individuals in cycles of exclusion and frustration. In Elysium<\/em>, the stark contrast between Earth\u2019s impoverished masses and the luxury of Elysium\u2019s space station illustrates [pb_glossary id=\"1258\"]relative poverty<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary]\u2014the sense of deprivation that arises when people compare their circumstances to the wealth and privileges of others. Relative poverty is not about lacking food or shelter but about being excluded from the opportunities and resources necessary to fully participate in society. For example, in the United States, a family might have housing and basic necessities but still struggle to afford higher education, quality healthcare, or opportunities for upward mobility. The frustration of relative poverty is often magnified in societies with growing wealth gaps, as seen in the \"Yellow Vests\" protests in France, where citizens protested rising inequality and the erosion of middle-class security. Elysium<\/em> dramatizes these tensions, showing Earth\u2019s residents yearning for access to Elysium\u2019s advanced healthcare and technological abundance but being denied by systemic barriers. Such inequality often stems from how societies manage and distribute their natural resources, leading to phenomena like the resource curse.<\/p>\r\n Counterintuitively, nations rich in natural resources often face some of the worst developmental outcomes\u2014a paradox known as the [pb_glossary id=\"1259\"]resource curse<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary]. Countries like Nigeria, Venezuela, and the Democratic Republic of Congo possess vast reserves of oil, minerals, or precious metals, yet many of their citizens remain trapped in poverty. Rather than serving as a catalyst for broad-based development, resource wealth frequently leads to economic overreliance on a single export, such as crude oil or cobalt, which leaves national economies vulnerable to price shocks and external market fluctuations. When global commodity prices fall, these states often experience sudden fiscal crises, exposing their lack of diversification and long-term planning. This economic fragility is compounded by corruption, weak governance, and elite capture, where resource revenues are siphoned off by a small ruling class rather than invested in public goods like education, infrastructure, or healthcare. In Nigeria, for example, oil exports generate billions in revenue, yet chronic underinvestment in human development and rampant pollution in the Niger Delta have left much of the population in poverty\u2014despite the country's immense natural wealth.<\/p>\r\n The resource curse also makes countries more susceptible to foreign exploitation and neocolonial dynamics, where more powerful states or multinational corporations extract resources while leaving behind environmental degradation and social unrest. This pattern reflects broader dependency theory, a development framework explored earlier in this chapter, which argues that wealthier \"core\" countries extract value from resource-rich but politically weaker \"peripheral\" nations, perpetuating global inequality. Meanwhile, the World Systems Theory helps us understand how resource-exporting countries often remain stuck in a subordinate position in the global economic hierarchy, supplying raw materials while importing finished goods at higher prices. Internally, the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, while the majority struggle with poverty, results in extreme inequality\u2014a condition measurable through tools like the Gini coefficient, which captures how unevenly income or wealth is distributed within a society. Thus, far from guaranteeing prosperity, resource abundance can entrench underdevelopment, reinforce dependency, and destabilize societies, unless managed with transparent institutions, economic diversification, and inclusive growth strategies.<\/p>\r\n How unequal is a society? The [pb_glossary id=\"1260\"]Gini coefficient<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary] provides a way to measure this by analyzing how wealth or income is distributed within a country. In Elysium<\/em>, the gap between the space station\u2019s elite and Earth\u2019s population represents extreme inequality\u2014what would correspond to a Gini coefficient approaching 1. In real-world terms, South Africa has one of the highest Gini coefficients globally, a legacy of apartheid that continues to divide the nation\u2019s wealthy urban centers from its impoverished informal settlements. On the other hand, nations like Denmark and Norway boast some of the lowest Gini coefficients, thanks to robust social safety nets, progressive taxation, and universal public services. High levels of inequality, as depicted in Elysium<\/em>, are not just morally troubling; they can also undermine social cohesion and stability. When wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, entire generations can be locked into cycles of deprivation and exclusion, unable to access the opportunities needed to improve their lives. This systemic entrenchment of poverty connects to the concept of the cycle of poverty, which explains how disadvantage persists over time.<\/p>\r\n For many, escaping poverty is not just difficult\u2014it\u2019s systematically obstructed by barriers that trap individuals and families in a [pb_glossary id=\"1261\"]cycle of poverty[\/pb_glossary]<\/strong> across generations. In Elysium, this cycle is vividly illustrated through the character of Max Da Costa, who, like countless others on Earth, is denied access to quality education, healthcare, and stable employment. In a desperate effort to keep his factory job, Max is forced to enter a hazardous area, ultimately being exposed to a fatal dose of radiation\u2014an act that underscores how people living in poverty often face impossible choices that those in more privileged positions never have to consider. This mirrors real-world conditions where, for instance, children in rural India leave school to help support their families, sacrificing their futures for short-term survival, or where low-income communities in the U.S. struggle with underfunded schools and limited access to essential services. These conditions not only deprive individuals of opportunity but perpetuate inequality across generations. The factory where Max works produces technology for the elite in Elysium, yet he and others on Earth are wholly excluded from its benefits\u2014a striking metaphor for the global economic system, where marginalized populations often power production without sharing in its rewards. Breaking this cycle of poverty requires more than personal determination; it calls for comprehensive, systemic investments in education, healthcare, housing, and job creation to ensure that people are not forced to choose between safety and survival, and that every individual has a genuine chance to build a better life. Check out this clip to see the unfortunate incident where Max is exposed to fatal radiation at work.<\/p>\r\nhttps:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=60V3JFUPvIE\r\n\r\n[h5p id=\"27\"]\r\n In societies marked by deep inequality, the dream of rising through hard work and determination often becomes an illusion. In Elysium, this reality is embodied by the character Max Da Costa, whose life on a decaying, overpopulated Earth is defined by systemic barriers that render upward mobility virtually impossible. Despite his efforts to play by the rules\u2014holding a factory job and trying to stay out of trouble\u2014Max is exposed to dangerous working conditions, exploited by uncaring employers, and ultimately discarded when he is injured, with no safety net or path to recovery. His desperation to reach the orbital utopia of Elysium isn\u2019t just a personal quest\u2014it\u2019s a last-ditch effort to escape a system where advancement is deliberately out of reach. This mirrors real-world struggles in highly unequal societies such as Brazil, where wealth and privilege are often inherited, and millions are confined to favelas with limited access to quality education, stable employment, or healthcare. In such environments, hard work alone is rarely enough to break the cycle of poverty, as the social and economic systems are stacked against the majority.<\/p>\r\n By contrast, countries like Canada, Finland, and Norway demonstrate how strong public institutions and universal social policies\u2014including free education, universal healthcare, and affordable childcare\u2014can foster genuine [pb_glossary id=\"1262\"]social mobility<\/strong>[\/pb_glossary]. When people are empowered to move upward based on merit and effort rather than birth or connections, inequality tends to decline, and economic development becomes more inclusive. Max\u2019s journey, while fictional and set in a dystopian future, serves as a powerful metaphor for what happens when systems are designed to hoard opportunity rather than share it. His struggle underscores the social consequences of denying mobility: growing frustration, alienation, and eventually rebellion, as those left behind demand a fairer system. Addressing inequality, then, requires more than just redistributing wealth\u2014it demands building pathways that allow everyone, regardless of background, to thrive and move forward. Watch the video below to see the lengths those in poverty will go to try and achieve the same benefits as those who are rich.<\/p>\r\nhttps:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=SUEaBZXafW0\r\n\r\n[h5p id=\"28\"]\r\n By examining absolute and relative poverty, the resource curse, the Gini coefficient, the cycle of poverty, and social mobility, we can see that poverty and inequality are deeply interconnected and systemic. Elysium<\/em> serves as a powerful allegory for these issues, showing the devastating effects of unchecked inequality and systemic exclusion. Tackling these challenges requires systemic reforms that go beyond immediate aid, addressing the structural factors that perpetuate inequality and limit opportunity. As global citizens, understanding these dynamics is the first step toward creating a fairer and more equitable world.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Poverty and global inequality are daunting challenges that demand our attention, not just because they reflect profound injustices but because they shape the world we all live in. From absolute poverty that denies basic survival needs to the cycles of inequality that trap entire generations, these issues are both deeply personal and undeniably political. Tools like the Gini coefficient or concepts like social mobility help us understand the complexity of these challenges, while the film Elysium<\/em> provides a dramatic, if exaggerated, warning about what happens when inequality is left unchecked. But here\u2019s the good news: the future doesn\u2019t have to look like Earth in Elysium<\/em>. With systemic reforms, equitable policies, and a commitment to justice, we can begin to close these gaps and create a more inclusive world. After all, if we can envision a future with space stations and miracle medical pods, surely we can imagine one where billionaires don\u2019t need a whole planet to themselves.<\/p>\r\n\r\n Why do some people live in mansions while others can barely afford a roof over their heads? Why do some nations thrive with advanced technologies while others struggle to provide clean water and basic healthcare? Understanding global development and inequality isn\u2019t just about statistics\u2014it\u2019s about recognizing the systems that shape opportunities and outcomes for billions of people. These issues are at the heart of political science, affecting everything from international conflict to migration and environmental crises. Development is about more than building wealth; it\u2019s about ensuring everyone has the chance to live a dignified life. Inequality, however, reminds us that progress isn\u2019t always shared equally. To make sense of these issues, we\u2019ll dive into the dystopian world of Elysium<\/em>, a film that brings these challenges to life\u2014albeit with a dash of science fiction flair.<\/p>\n Set in a not-so-distant future, Elysium<\/em> paints a world where the rich have literally left Earth behind, living on a luxurious space station, while the rest of humanity struggles in dire poverty on a ruined planet. Through its dramatic depiction of extreme wealth and deprivation, the film mirrors many of the real-world dynamics we\u2019ll explore in this chapter, from the cycles of poverty to the paradoxes of resource wealth. Plus, let\u2019s be honest\u2014talking about inequality feels a bit less depressing when there are robots, lasers, and Matt Damon running around in an exoskeleton. But don\u2019t let the sci-fi distract you; Elysium<\/em> offers a powerful metaphor for the stark realities of global development and inequality today, making it the perfect case study for unpacking concepts like absolute poverty, the resource curse, and social mobility. So, strap in\u2014just not in a luxury spacecraft, unless you\u2019ve got the clearance.<\/p>\n SPOILER WARNING<\/strong>: This chapter will reference specific characters and events from the films in\u00a0 Elysium\u00a0<\/em>, some of which may spoil major plot points. If you would like to watch the films before you continue, I highly recommend it. HCC students can watch the film for free through our library’s Swank account here: Elysium<\/em> (2013)<\/a>.\u00a0Not an HCC student? Check your streaming platforms or local library for access!<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In the world of global politics, few issues are as pressing\u2014or as complex\u2014as development and inequality. Economic disparities within and between nations shape everything from governance and conflict to human rights and environmental sustainability. In a world increasingly interconnected by globalization, the gap between the rich and the poor has taken on dramatic proportions. But why does this gap persist? And what can be done to address it? To explore these questions, we\u2019ll use the science fiction film Elysium<\/em> as a lens. This movie offers a powerful metaphor for the stark inequalities that characterize our world, presenting a dystopian vision where a privileged elite live in luxury on a space station while the rest of humanity struggles to survive on a ravaged Earth. By examining these themes, we can better understand key concepts such as economic inequality, social stratification, and elite capture, and their real-world implications for development and global politics.<\/p>\n Elysium<\/em> (2013) is set in the year 2154, when Earth has become an overpopulated, polluted wasteland. The wealthiest individuals have escaped this grim reality by relocating to Elysium, a luxurious space station orbiting the planet. On Elysium, residents enjoy clean air, abundant resources, and miraculous medical technology, while those left on Earth endure grinding poverty, illness, and despair. The story follows Max, a former criminal turned factory worker, as he fights to access Elysium\u2019s advanced healthcare to save his own life. Along the way, the film reveals the deep divide between the privileged few and the impoverished masses, serving as a stark allegory for global inequality. Like our world, Elysium<\/em> portrays a system where the wealthiest not only hoard resources but actively maintain barriers to prevent others from sharing in their prosperity. Check out the first few minutes of the movie below to get a sense of the scale of inequality in this future, fictional Earth.<\/p>\nLearning Outcomes<\/h2>\r\n
\r\n \t
\r\n \t
8.1: <\/span>Case Study \u2013 Elysium<\/em> (2013)<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\r\n
International Relations Theories & Elysium<\/i><\/h2>\r\n
Realism: The Pursuit of Power and Survival<\/h3>\r\n
Liberalism: The Hope for Cooperation<\/h4>\r\n
Constructivism: The Power of Ideas and Identity<\/h4>\r\n
Marxism: The Struggle Between Classes<\/h4>\r\n
Feminism: Inequality Through a Gendered Lens<\/h4>\r\n
8.2: <\/span>Theories<\/span> of Economic Development<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\r\n
8.3: <\/span>International Organizations and Development<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\r\n
![\"International](\"https:\/\/live.staticflickr.com\/4452\/36982592244_fb8c9053f5_b.jpg\" "\\"https:\/\/www.flickr.com\/photos\/imfphoto\/36982592244\\"")
In theory, the IMF's mission is \"working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world.\" In practice, the outcomes are more complicated. Development Committee<\/a> International Monetary Fund, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0<\/a>[\/caption]\r\n8.4: <\/span>Poverty and Global Inequality<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\r\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\r\n
CC Licensed Content, Original<\/h3>\r\nThis educational material includes AI-generated content from ChatGPT by OpenAI. The original content created by Eric Fiske and Deborah Barr from Hillsborough Community College is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0<\/a>).\u00a0<\/span>\r\n
\r\n\r\nCC Licensed Content Included<\/h4>\r\nDevelopment Committee<\/strong>\r\nInternational Monetary Fund\r\nLicense: CC BY-NC-ND 2.0\r\n\r\n
\r\n\r\nOther Licensed Content Included<\/h4>\r\nAn Introduction to Amartya Sen\u2019s Development as Freedom A Macat Geography Analysis | Isaac Lyne<\/strong>\r\nVideo by Isaac Lyne.\r\nLicense: Standard YouTube License.\r\n\r\nElysium (2013) - Doomed to Die Scene (1\/10) | Movieclips<\/strong>\r\nVideo by Movieclips.\r\nLicense: Standard YouTube License.\r\n\r\nELYSIUM (2013) - First 10 Minutes | Sony Pictures Entertainment<\/strong>\r\nVideo by Sony Pictures Entertainment.\r\nLicense: Standard YouTube License.\r\n\r\nElysium | Trying To Get To Elysium | Full Scene | 2013 Sci-Fi Movie | Matt Damon | Sci-Fi Central<\/strong>\r\nVideo by Sci-Fi Central.\r\nLicense: Standard YouTube License.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"
Introduction<\/h2>\n
Learning Outcomes<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
8.1: <\/span>Case Study \u2013 Elysium<\/em> (2013)<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n