Many nations find it challenging to balance economic progression with environmental protection, and some believe that it is highly improbable for a nation to do both at the same time while others oppose this view. From my point of view, I think that a nation can have economical progress while protecting the environment.
First, supporters that believe it is impossible for nations to balance economic progress with environmental protection argue that the development of economy itself occurs through the destruction of the environment. For example, Indonesia’s primary cause for forest loss is deforestation to expand palm oil plantations and other agricultural endeavors for economic interests. From this perspective, a country sacrifices their environment in favor of economic growth, thus leading to damaged ecosystems and loss of biodiversity.
Second, those who support the view that nations could protect the environment while ensuring economical growth argue that environmental protection have economical benefits such as sustainable amount of available resources, new economic opportunities, and preventing financial burdens from man-made disasters such as landslides or floods. For instance, the United Kingdom – which had heavily invested in renewable energy and made policies that are beneficial for the environment – remains prosperous by providing new work opportunities for its citizen as it transitions from fossil fuels to more environmentally friendly source of energy in an attempt to reduce net carbon emission to zero by 2050. In this viewpoint, a nation is able supports the environment in a way that benefits both nature the economy, which allow them to grow and prosper while protecting the environment.
In conclusion, it is realistically possible for a nation to support the environment and their own economy, but it requires careful planning and formulating win-win solutions that promotes economic performance and the preservation of ecosystems.