It is argued whether the country’s authorities or the inhabitant of the state should take care of the environment. In this essay, I will examine both views based and provide related examples, then I will share my opinion about the issue.
On the one hand, a union is directly responsible for the country’s condition due to the fact it creates environmental safety laws and monitors them perfectly, whether they are being followed, and also, the state manages city services and has the full right to preserve or use the natural resources that the land has. Moreover, the authority can force individuals from illegal actions by a punishment system and set a strict fine for the citizens who break the laws. For example, the ministry of Japan encourages people to collect plastic and glass bottles consequently they can put them in recycling bins in exchange for money. Consequently, an effective power system can prevent pollution and deforestation, as well as protect animal species.
On the other hand, caring for environmental cleanliness starts with those living in the place. Following this idea, citizens’ perceptions toward their city is the first factor that defines whether it has an excellent condition for living or not. Furthermore, in several nations, the population votes for the leader who has their essential standards to benefit the community in every vital section. For instance, in the majority of counties, citizens voluntarily help to clean streets and nature, creating campaigns and collecting funds. As a result, the population’s effective actions significantly influence the overall state of their country, and the appearance of their surroundings.
In conclusion, both levels, individuals and ministry, play crucial parts in keeping the environment clean and safe for live beings. I do believe that to accomplish this challenging task citizens and authority should cooperate, and each one of them has their specific responsibilities.