The environment began to beseen as being a serious difficulty for some during the 1970's. Several politicians at thatpoint in time did not regard the environment as getting an important issue,although the oil crisis of 1973 did make folks take into account pollution andresources. Concern for ones environment was manly confined to ecologists and afew fringe environmental groups for instance FOTE. However, greater scientificevidence of environmental damage that could seriously damage the future of theplanet placed the environment firmly over a global political agenda (Evans& Newnham, 1998, p.149). Whilst the environment got onto the politicalagenda it has not proved straightforward to obtain fully internationalco-operation over taking meaningful measures to reverse or at least haltenvironmental damage. Potent co-operation has been delayed by the reluctanceof some nations to reduce their pollution levels, since it would mean loweringtheir prosperity like the United States. Also the resentment of third worldcountries that they should stop their economic development mainly because the Westhave already employed most from the global resources. You can find issues with regards to whoowns the remaining natural resources and who pays to your pollution that thatthey cause (Bannock, Baxter & Davis, 2003, p.120).
Ecological movements are notnew for the late 20th century and the early 21st centuryyet the amount of influence that environmentalists have is greater than ever.There were people and movements opposed to industrialisation because of its socialas well at its environmental impact (Eatwell & Wright, 2003, p.231).Ecological movements would generally have more expansive plans for reversingenvironmental damage and would not be well-known with political leaders, consumersand voters. Politicians instead of ecological movements almost alwaysdetermine the pace and direction of international co-operation on the environment.The ecological movements have won a partial victory in that the environmentlooks set to remain on a agenda indefinitely. The hard component is to makesure that agreements just like the Kyoto Protocol are genuinely co-operative andeffective rather than just meaningless gimmicks by all governments that signedup to it (Eatwell & Wright, 2003, p.250).
It was possibly nocoincidence that contemporary ecological movements emerged within the West during the1960s after growing affluence amongst the young middle classes allowed them thechance to contemplate the global economy as well as the impact that it had upon theglobal environment. In the 1960s many individuals if they notion about theenvironment at all assumed it meant absolutely nothing a lot more or much less than making the airand water clean (Hobsbawm, 1994, p. 262). The primary political and economic tocapitalism, communism may perhaps have had a variety of aims to its capitalist rivals yetit even now aimed at rapid economic growth. Neither capitalism nor communism wereor are intended to be guardians with the environment. On the other hand growing knowledgeof the damage getting caused on the environment would force countries toco-operate with each other especially following the fall of communism in Centraland Eastern Europe (Brown, 2002, p. 240). During the ever increasing consumptionof natural resources and increasing levels of pollution arguably intensifiedthe Global Warming difficulty and would mean that co-operation over theenvironment would turn out to be a major area of contention. For ones example theUnited States consumption of oil elevated by 300 per cent in between 1950 and thestart with the oil crisis in 1973. The extremely ineffective factories of theSoviet Union made nearly up to america for your production offar a lesser amount of products (Hobsbawm, 1994, pp. 252-253).
Complacency about theenvironment began to be lifted during the 1970s eventually leading tointernational protocols to reduce pollution. The oil crisis of 1973 led tosome attempts to discover alternatives to fossil fuels even though it did practically nothing inthe long word to reduce oil consumption even if it did hurt the pockets ofWestern motorists and Third Globe governments. As the human populationcontinues to grow upwards of 6 billion plus beyond the use of resources andresulting pollution will grow (Nicholson, 1998, p.157). Environmental andecological movements began to build headway in Western Europe and NorthAmerica with concerns about acid rain, the emission of CFC's reducing the ozonelayer and most much global warming (Brown, 2001, p.252).
Global warming is now aconcern of most governments while they don't have an equal say as to thepolicies that should be pursued to stop or reverse the process. Rising sealevels are much more of a threat to the Netherlands, parts of Britain or Bangladeshthan they're towards the United States, Russia and China. The relative wealth ofthe Netherlands and Britain make their co-operation in the Kyoto Protocolthan that of Bangladesh. The exclusion from the United States, Russia and Chinaplus India would seriously damage the co-operation needed to generate the KyotoProtocol near getting powerful (Nicholson, 1998, p.165).
It has been encouraging thathas been co-operation between governments more than the environment. Nonetheless thatco-operation has being brought about by a method of negotiations andcompromises with smaller to force countries especially more strong ones suchas the United States, Russia and China into agreeing to highly effective measures toprotect the environment. Aside from appealing to sense and reason there islittle way of enforcing measures agreed at the Kyoto Protocol or any otherenvironmental summit. The Kyoto Protocol, like its predecessor the Rio Earthsummit was the result of extended drawn out talks similar in complexity for the GATTrounds or EU treaties or summits. Co-operation over the environment is usually tothe minimum restrictions and measures which could be agreed rather than themaximum. The agreements over reducing CFC (chloroflurocarbons) emissions can beregarded as starting the program on international co-operation to slow downenvironmental damage while it amply demonstrated that politicians are onlywilling to take action once there's sufficient scientific of environmental damage.By that time much damage has already been done (Brown, 2002, p. 240).
The Rio Earth Summit wasintended to introduce measures and co-operation to tackle global warming on agreater scale. To a particular extent it succeeded in doing co-operation evenif it was hampered by the unwillingness in the Bush senior administration toagree towards most stringent measures that could have been agreed. The UnitedStates remains the world's largest individual polluting region yet itsgovernments are normally unwilling to jeopardise American living standards tosave the planet. The Bush senior administration did not on the other hand block theagreement at R because it could have done. The united states government came underpressure from other governments to consume higher action yet did yield to it(Brown, 2002, p. 243).
Third World and developingcountries have been not happy and remain unhappy that the United States does not domore to protect the environment as it gained most from the way that the globalenvironment operates (Nicholson, 1998, p.173). Other countries mainly during the EUand Scandinavia have been much more active in seeing the environment as being ofvital value and wished to go extra how the agreements reached at Rio.The EU can play its component in protecting the environment since it can passlegislation and regulations that its member states need to conform to(McCormick, 2002, p.128).
EU states plus Australia andNew Zealand played their part during the Kyoto Protocol. Once more the UnitedStates proved reluctant to adopt hard measures. That reluctance was despitePresident Bill Clinton becoming keen on environmental issues. He was unwilling tocut American living standards and also realised that tough restriction wereunlikely for getting through a Republican controlled Congress (Crystal, 2003, p.513).
Europeancountries for example Britain, France and Germany were unhappy for the lack ofUnited States support for your Kyoto Protocol. Tony Blair was especiallydisappointed as he expected Bill Clinton to obtain been far more supportive of theKyoto Protocol and protecting the environment (Young, 2003, p.150). George WBush was even a smaller amount willing for ones United States to be constrained by any partsof the Kyoto Protocol. Indeed prior to the 9/11 attacks the bush administrationseemed cool towards the concept of government co-operation most issues. Since 9/11 theUnited States federal government has been a lot more interested in pursuing the war onterrorism rather than co-operation to uphold the Kyoto Protocol or protectingthe environment. The campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq have done harm to theenvironment. The soaring oil costs noticed following the invasion of Iraq may howeverboost the moves to the finding choice fuels up to any of the targetson reducing emissions agreed within the Kyoto Protocol would have done on theirown. OPEC countries glimpse far happier to cut oil production to retain highprices, as it just isn't in their economic interests to co-operate with othercountries to reduce oil production. Such is the demand for oil that theconsumption doesn't decline even once costs are at record levels. Westerngovernments after talking with OPEC nations would rather get the oilproduction quotas raised than discuss co-operation on the reduced consumption(Evans and Newnham, 1998, p. 397).
The require forglobal co-operation to obtain the 5 per cent emission targets set out with theKyoto Protocol would glimpse to gathering with global warming seeming tocontribute to climate changes which are increasingly expensive and dangerous(Crystal, 2003, p. 513). Climate changes have and will make floods anddroughts far more well-known though lack of sufficient foods and water supplies willcontribute to higher instances of famine and severe poverty. Whilstcountries can consume steps to avoid economic problems there is smaller they are able to doto stop a hurricane or tsunami. The prices of reducing pollution or improvingirrigation and building up flood protection high without the need of certainty that theywill be successful (Eatwell and Wright, 2003, p. 251). There was large-scaleinternational co-operation to help the Asian countries devastated by thetsunami of December 2004. Nations can only hope that this sort of disasters areconfined to unpopulated or lightly populated areas to preserve death anddestruction to a minimum. Aside from these kinds of hopes countries can improve theirlevels of co-operation by encouraging recycling, energy and water conservationschemes to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.
Thereforealthough the Kyoto Protocol was a sign of global co-operation to start reducingpollution and trying to produce the global environment safer it has had itslimitations. The failure on the United States to co-operate in the processmeans how the world's very best polluter is not taking active steps to helpprotect the environment. Maybe that may perhaps improve depending on who succeedsGeorge W Bush towards the presidency. Not every region has signed up to the KyotoProtocol and of those people that did not all have ratified it. Ought to the currenthigh oil prices continue there perhaps co-operation to find choice fuels thatare cheaper and possibly lead to much less pollution. Some nations are morecommitted to co-operation so that you can protect the environment. The memberstates of the EU are formerly aiming to the sustainable development and theemission reductions agreed to as part on the Kyoto Protocols.
Theselfishness of the United States along with other nations that fail to co-operate toreduce environmental damage will arrive back to haunt us all and leave a terriblelegacy to our descendants to deal with its full consequences. Nonetheless the RioEarth Summit and also the Kyoto Protocols have provided a framework for globalco-operation that must be made upon. Perhaps global co-operation could beincreased through the auspices in the United Nations and aided by scientificevidence with the urgent must act now. People must also look at acting onan individual and community basis to conserve and protect the environment asbest they could by recycling and conserving water and energy.
Order your essay at
Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.
