Saturday, May 10, 2008

1:21 AM

It is impossible to reach a global consensus on environmental conservation efforts. Do you agree?

It is indeed quite impossible to reach a global consensus on environmental conservation efforts in our world today. Though efforts have been constantly made as people are increasingly aware of the importance of environmental conservation, there is a great disparity in views on how this should be achieved.

Take the Kyoto Pact for example. The Kyoto pact was brought about to reduce the carbon emissions of countries, so as to boost environmental conservation. However, though some people may agree this is a positive measure, many others feel that it is ineffective as 3 countries who are major producers of carbon emissions, are not included in the pact. One of the countries in dispute is China, which was excluded as it is still in the process of development. This shows that key personnel of environmental conservation feels that development and economic growth of the world as a whole should take precedence and priority over saving and preserving Mother Earth. On the other hand, many members of the public would feel that every country should play their part in environmental conservation as no matter how small a country is, they are bound to produce carbon emissions. Thus, they should shoulder part of the burden of conservation for fairness and equality to be upheld. After all, isn’t this one of the key goals of democracy, to uphold equality? As a result, a global consensus is not reached.

Another reason why a global consensus is impossible is because different people living in different environments may have different perceptions on the severity of environmental degradation. For example, a person living in a highly industrialized country like China would most likely be exposed to higher levels of pollution, leading them to call for greater and more stringent conservation measures. However, a person living in farmlands, away from urban areas, such as the farming areas in New Zealand, may experience relatively good environmental conditions. They are thus more likely to take the importance of conservation lightly, and may not press for, or want to take part in measures introduced.

Sometimes, effects of environmental degradation might also be exaggerated. For instance, the threat of biodiversity loss is indeed present, but the statistics are often exaggerated to make the situation more severe than it really is. For instance, even though forests in the eastern United States were reduced to fragments totaling just 1-2% of their original area, there was only extinction of one forest bird. This shows us that people often tend to think worst of situations, arising from imperfect knowledge. As such, people would suggest many different measures to solve the problems, and it is highly unlikely that a consensus would be made under such circumstances. Thus, for global consensus to be reached, everyone must have the same mindset and mentalities, which is obviously unattainable given the different genetic make-up of people.

Response to kiawoon's post: I agree with Kiawoon that people cannot be overly-anxious to solve global environmental issues all at one go, or their efforts may backfire. After all, there's a phrase that goes, "more haste, less speed". I feel that even though environmental conservation should be high on the list of people's agenda, people should start with realistic measures like reducing the amount of fossil fuels burnt by switching to public transport. Though this might seem insignificant, its cumulative effects would help to boost conservation efforts.

Melissa :)

0 comments

March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008