# FILE NAME: 00001661.soc
# TITLE: Should there be a ban on non-essential travel? [b0e7d217f8f70aa89d7a5a21c474efa0]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 4
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - There should not be a ban on non-essential travel.  People need to look after their health and well being by travelling.  The definition of non-essential travel is very subjective and so it is unfair to place a ban on it.  People can make their own minds up with reference to climate change or other issues regarding their own travel arrangements and should not be forced into staying in the same place just because of central authority control.  Travel for pleasure is a great contributor to global peace and understanding.  However, people should be encouraged to consider the carbon footprint of their travel and should be encouraged to consider alternatives to flying. Conclusions: This week's simulation demonstrated that by having the opportunity to exchange views with people who have a different perspective, all participants were able to reach a consensus view, and that this consensus view was reached after a good debate, taking into account all of the critiques, and a revised draft consensus statement.  The consensus statement was reached without any vote, and instead through a process of active listening, considering others' views and debating with them.  The simulation demonstrated that the Delphi Method could potentially be used to overcome the issue of groupthink, and also overcome the problem of having to achieve a
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - There should not be a ban on non-essential travel.  People need to look after their health and well being by travelling.  The definition of non-essential travel is very subjective and so it is unfair to place a ban on it.  People can make their own minds up with reference to climate change or other issues regarding their own travel arrangements and should not be forced into staying in the same place just because of central authority control.  Travel for pleasure is a great contributor to global peace and understanding.  However, people should be encouraged to consider the carbon footprint of their travel and should be encouraged to consider alternatives to flying.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - There should not be a ban on non-essential travel.  People need to look after their health and well being by travelling.  The definition of non-essential travel is very subjective and so it is unfair to place a ban on it.  People can make their own minds up with reference to climate change or other issues regarding their own travel arrangements and should not be forced into staying in the same place just because of central authority control.  Travel for pleasure is a great contributor to global peace and understanding.  However, people should be encouraged to consider the carbon footprint of their travel and should be encouraged to consider alternatives to flying.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - A ban on non-essential travel would restrict people’s freedoms. Travel for pleasure is a great contributor to global peace and understanding.  People should be encouraged to consider the carbon footprint of their travel and should be encouraged to consider alternatives to flying. Critical thinking resources to support teaching
2: 2,3,4,1
1: 1,3,2,4
1: 2,1,3,4
1: 3,2,1,4