In this day and age, international organization is accountable for tackling landscape issues, instead of being left to individual state-wide government. Personally, I firmly agree with this stance.
On the one hand, one major contribution to each national authorities’s responsibility on environmental problems is the different level or type of pollution of each countries. Depend on geographical characteristics and industrialization, individual nations would deal with their own landscape issue. For example, due to expansion of industrial factories, Chinese air quality index is increasingly higher, thereby facing serious problems of air pollution. Conversely, Arab, where fossil oil were exploited, faced the issues of landscape dumpings, thus worsening water pollution there. Moreover, individual national authority is able to manage more efficiently than international organizations do. This is because it would minimize the amount of works and campaigns that the government need to address, while mismanagement can be made since international institution might be overwhelmed to resolve all countries’ environmental problems. As a result, individual national authority would understand the challenges they are confronting rather than a international organiztion being busy with the waiting list of environmental difficulties.
On the other hand, the unity strength can served as the primary attribution to the international establishments ‘s taking over environmental challenges. Specifically, creating a connection between countries can assist in fostering the unity strength, which can effectively tackle several adverse landscape issues by the large amount of resources being funded. For instance, developed nations such as USA, UK, Germany,… are capable of supporting others by sharing state-of-the-art technological tools; similarly, developing countries including Vietnam,Thailand,Philipines,.. can send the experienced labour. Therefore, international cooperation notably facilitates sustaining future landscape.
From my perspective, a balanced appoarch can mitigate this issue. A international establishment can assist each national government’s process to tackle environmetal issues, while individual national authority still takes main accountability.
In conclusion, the unity strength is the positive side of international establishments ‘s responsiblity on environmental challenges, however, the disadvantage of mismanagement cannot be overlooked. In the mean time, local authority can offer some considerable benefits due to their well-understanding about national landscape difficulties and better managment, which enhances their greater responsibility of solving environmental problems.