Some people say attaining economic expansion is essential to ending world hunger and poverty while some people believe that the environment is being harmed due to economic growth and it should cease. I would argue that economic growth is negatively affecting the environment.
On the one hand, there are many convincing reasons as to why people assume that economic growth alone is the sole cure to eradicate global poverty and starvation. It often comes along with increased job opportunities and improved living standards for citizens. Apparently, economic expansion leads to the establishment of new businesses and industries, which in turn fosters job creation. Therefore, people, especially underprivileged populations, can fulfill their basic needs like food and shelter, paving the way for a stable life and achieving a sustainable escape from poverty and starvation. An illustration can be seen in rural areas in Vietnam, where the influx of new companies has lifted thousands of local people who previously struggled to make ends meet out of poverty. Furthermore, economic growth bolsters government revenue through increased tax collection, expanding the fiscal space for investments in targeted poverty reduction initiatives and food security policies, for example, directly addressing the hunger and needy.
On the other hand, concerned that the rapid development of the economic situation would take a heavy toll on the environment, I am of the opinion that this tendency should stop. In order to achieve such economic growth, several factories are exploiting and burning excessive amounts of natural resources while farms are using more chemicals in fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides to raise output. As a result, serious air pollution as well as water contamination takes place, triggering more fatal diseases ranging from pneumonia to cancer, pushing more people back to the poverty line. Regardless, instead of curbing economic growth, the government can impose more stringent punishments on individuals or organizations that are advertently doing harm to the environment. For example, in South Korea, the state has administered strict policy on plants that deliberately discharge harmful chemicals into the air or untreated water to rivers, resulting in improved environmental quality in this nation.
In conclusion, the benefits of economic growth cannot be denied. However, the environment is seriously affected because of economic growth. I am of the opinion that protecting the environment should come first while avoiding the tendencies of economic growth that overlook the significance of the environment