Some people argue that the authorities must prioritise environmental issues, while others claim that economic issues should hold more concern. Despite the impact of economic growth on creating employment opportunities, therefore improving the quality of life, the effect of environmental problems, such as air pollution, on people’s health as well as plants and animals is considered more important. It is, therefore, argued that the government should focus their efforts on mitigating environmental issues.
On the one hand, those who advocate for the importance of solving environmental problems claim that it is widely affecting human health. For instance, asthma, which is a respiratory disease, has been reported to increase significantly as a result of air pollution. Moreover, other environmental issues, such as water pollution, directly affect animal populations. As reported in Africa, large numbers of wild animals have gone extinct due to polluted river water. In addition, plants are also affected as a result of climate change and water pollution, which leads to a reduction in their growth and photosynthesis. Environmental problems, therefore, lead to a loss of biodiversity.
On the other hand, opponents claim that economic problems affect people’s quality of life. Economic growth creates employment opportunities for many people, therefore reducing poverty. For example, Norway was a poor country before it implemented the global economy policy, which allowed it to alleviate inflation problems and increase per capita income.
Although the impact of economic issues on people’s income and working opportunities cannot be denied, negative environmental effects on humans, plants, and animal populations are far more important. Consequently, it is strongly advised that governments should allocate more resources to tackle environmental issues.