It is commonly believed that environmental issues should be approached on a global scale why others argue that it will better address on a national scale. While both approaches are beneficial, I will agree with the latter because it is more effective for individual nations. Although a global intervention tends to be more efficient.
On one hand, environmental pollution and hazards are more pronounced in certain countries in comparison to others. Nations with such problems are in a better position deal with them. Because this can be included in the annual budget and resources, and Manpower can be channelled to solve these issues. if this is done on a global scale, countries without such problem have to allocate a part of their resources to solve issues that do not benefit its citizen, meaning the citizen of this nations suffer in other areas like health, education, and transport, when these resources would have been channelled to these sectors. For example, during the Australian White Fire of 1889, all common wealth nations were mandated to give 20% of it annual revenue to combat the wildfire. Countries like India recorded a sharp increase in inflation rate the following year, which led to the 1890 riots in Mumbai.
On the other hand, when these issues are combated on a global scale, there is a high degree of efficiency as finance and manpower can be put together to address these challenges. Also, this provides an opportunity for innovation, exchange of knowledge, and areas of future research. For example, during the Kyoto, nuclear plants melt down in Japan. Radioactive materials were washed up on and into the ocean. Countries as far as the USA was affected. Yhe united nation member states, which comprises of 180 countries decided to intervene, and the Japanese were supported with all kinds of cutting-edge technology, researchers, nuclear physicists and with their combine effort, the issue was brought under control.
In conclusion, environmental challenges threaten the peaceful existence of humans on the planet. While a global approach may seem effective and attractive. I think a national approach is preferable and more feasible.