Do you think that environmental problems will produce better results if it is addressed globally or it should be addressed by individual countries?

Some environmental issues are becoming a huge threat to the world. As a result, each country is taking serious steps to prevent them. However, there is a prevailing belief that environmental problems should be dealt on a global level. In my opinion, if you want to get a long-lasted result, you have to globally cope with environmental issues. To start with, in many developing countries people have already done colossal irreparable damage to the environment without even noticing it. Consequently, these countries are trying to prevent it, but due to the dearth of equipment and poverty, they can not do it effectively. In such cases, aid from another developed countries is essential. For instance, one of the most common problems in India was the lack of access to clean water. In practice, it required a significant amount of money to prevent such a global problem. Only with the help of United States of America they were able to afford needed environment. Another point is that if you want to deal with a problem effectively, you must have the same rules all over the world. The greatest advantage of this is that you are able to see remarkable results which are being achieved in other countries. Another advantage is that you become more obedient. For example, both Italy and Spain have already established rules which are connected with prevention of pollution issue. Not surprisingly, there is a marked decline in the garbage in the cities. Taking everything into account, even though it is not fully confirmed that dealing with environmental issues globally is far better than dealing with them individually, many countries show that it is much more effective to chose a global solution.