In many parts of the world, there is a suggestion to expend more on vulnerable species’ protection. However, some possess skeptical attitude toward this notion by stating that it is absolutely wasteful, as that money can be used more valuable in other sectors This essay believes that protecting those organisms is important, but the expenditure needs to be stabilized so that it will not excess any standard level causing minimum fund for other more important aspects, such as public development.
Conservating endangered species may be beneficial if the management is conducted structurally well. Therefore, there should be an annual plan particularly for this matter so that the implementation will always be under control, causing no harmful effects to society. Moreover, it needs to be conducted under professional circumstances and discretion in order to organize the mechanism; if the handing process witnesses difficulties, these authorities would be responsible to resolve it. For example, Indonesia has always prepared expenses for its national conservation under the ministry of environment, which results in the stable management for species in vulnerability.
While this program can attract tourists and improve the creative economy, focusing the national budget on this project is not significant, as it will abandon other crucial sectors. The sustainability of local lives does not solely rely on tourism; it has broader scope of development. National budget on conservation should not excess any scale of other country’s project. Furthermore, setting it higher will merely result in social crisis. Citizens are prone to face harsh challenges, coming from all aspects because the government spares enormous amount of money for organisms’ protection which should be allocated to public services, such as medical and food security. As an illustration, a nation which cuts the budget on food supplies for an animal’s preservation will absolutely experience food crisis, leading to population issue and economical downward trend. Factually, it contains huge possibility of national bankruptcy.
In conclusion, there is a multitude of ongoing arguments about how we should set the whole budget to conserve endangered populations. Nevertheless, I believe that although a nation should have appropriate preservation projects, they must ensure that the number of spending will not surpass the standard of local costs for other scopes of development. Subsequently, it should undergo competent authorities’ evaluation in order to secure any potential that could hinder national progress.In most parts of the world, environmental difficulties experienced by all countries are prone to be the same, such as climate change. It evidences that these domain challenges are an international concern that must be combated together. In this case, collaborating with all countries on an international level is very beneficial to discover breakthroughs for this issue. Moreover, significant progress to solve this particular matter could be accomplished if global-scale policies, regarding the environment, are implemented with a well-rounded approach. As an illustration, climatic change is a crucial and trending topic everywhere; therefore, globally developing innovations can tackle this matter from causing harsher impacts on global society.