On the topic of the ways to tackle environmental issues, there are divided opinions. Some of are in support of globally oriented efforts; however, others think to handle it regionally would be more effective. Thus, before commenting on a decision, both the viewpoints are justified further.
With regards to the former view, the main advantage is that every nation will have a common goal. To be more specific, each country’s participation will make them to follow certain rules and regulation in every part of the world. Consequently, it leads to good relationships among countries. Besides this, the global organizations cab set a time bound target to reduce the environment related problems. Nowadays, for example, United Nations has decided to drop the level of carbon dioxide emissions to 30% by 2035. As a result, each continent will put their best to reach the target.
Referring the latter view, own motherland oriented methods will be more beneficial argued by others. To begin with, the nation can take decision based on their own pace. In other words, the measures can be implemented by considering different factors such as, population, geography, culture and so on. For instance, in 2024, the government of India has established wind power stations on the coastal areas. Additionally, nations will be more focused to race with others. This competitive behavior may force them to do their best.
In conclusion, both the arguments have their own strength and significance. In my opinion, I support the latter view than the former, because national efforts will eventually meet at global level. It will allow nations not only to make rules according to their diversity but also to compete with other countries.