The situation described in the article concerns storing chemicals in residential areas and how this conflicts with moral expectations in other societies discussed in the article, such as Western societies in which the major corporations are based Respond: Is this a conflict of relative development or a conflict of cultural tradition

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

Unfortunately, you forgot to include the article or lecture to know what is the context or the topic. Without the article, we do not know the content of it.

However, trying to help you, we can comment on the following.

When there are situations concerning storing chemicals in residential areas, we are talking about a major issue. Under the Laws of the United States and other first-world European nations, the law is very clear and prohibits the establishment of chemical industries next to residential areas. Period.

However, when these same industries built ist facilities in undeveloped nations in Africa, India, or South America, they have no problem building their facilities next to residential areas or next to rivers or lakes, for the conveniences to do so.

This is an ethical conflict of cultural tradition in which underdeveloped countries allowed these practices due to corruption of politicians that accept bribes because "that is how things work here," in their underdeveloped countries.

But the question here is how intelligent, moral, and educated people from developed countries, accept those practices when they know they are going to affect the environment and risk the health of hundreds or thousands of people.

this statement is true.

forests are public goods, available for everybody. when usage of such a good becomes interesting for consumers and its usage increases, there can be a risk of overexploitation. it is a non rival good therefore, if one person consumes the good it does not reduce the availability for subsequent consumers.

these caracteristics require the establishment of measures in order to prevent the destruction of a commonly owned space, for example, to restrict the amount of people that have access to the same time.