In modern period, there has been a great increment in a large category of people considering that the raising environmental problems have to be solved global whereas others argue that solving nationally is a proper way. as such, these both views are suitable to apply, although I opine the former one.
To begin with, they are numerous arguments favouring of solving environmental problems on a global level. The most preponderant one is that the environment can be protected equally all around the globe. It cannot only contribute to make people aware about overuse of natural resources but also leads to a wide array of benefits in almost all areas of life. Similarly, running global programs help to increase universal brotherhoodness and make people to involved in their desired work. For instance, on June 5, people gather all around the globe and celebrate ' World Environment Day' with harmony and conduct programs to protect nature. Needless to say, all these upsides stand in a good position when it comes to achieving excellence in various fields.
However, others believe that there are more significant ways to eradicate such problems in national level rather than globally. The predominant one is that citizens can be made aware by conducting awareness throughout the country in their own language which helps to understand more in details so that misunderstanding is not likely to be happen. Also, people can suggest affectable solutions to the government to protect the nature. Nepal, for instance, has its own site since 2010 where people can give their own views about environmental protection and run program accordingly. Hence, it is apparent why some people are in favour of this.
From what has been discussed above, it can unarguably be concluded that, in my opinion, although both ways can be effective, the overwhelming benefits of running program globally are indeed too great to ignore.
In modern period, there has been a great increment in a large category of
people
considering that the raising environmental problems
have to
be solved
global whereas others argue that solving
nationally
is a proper way.
as
such, these both views are suitable to apply, although I opine the former one.
To
begin
with, they are numerous arguments
favouring
of solving environmental problems on a global level. The most preponderant one is that the environment can
be protected
equally
all around the globe. It cannot
only
contribute to
make
people
aware about overuse of natural resources
but
also
leads to a wide array of benefits in almost all areas of life.
Similarly
, running global
programs
help
to increase universal
brotherhoodness
and
make
people
to involved in their desired work.
For instance
, on June 5,
people
gather all around the globe and celebrate
'
World Environment Day' with harmony and conduct
programs
to protect nature. Needless to say, all these upsides stand in a
good
position when it
comes
to achieving excellence in various fields.
However
, others believe that there are more significant ways to eradicate such problems in national level
rather
than globally. The predominant one is that citizens can
be made
aware by conducting awareness throughout the country in their
own
language which
helps
to understand more in
details
so
that misunderstanding is not likely to be
happen
.
Also
,
people
can suggest
affectable
solutions to the
government
to protect the nature. Nepal,
for instance
, has its
own
site since 2010 where
people
can give their
own
views about environmental protection and run
program
accordingly
.
Hence
, it is apparent why
some
people
are in
favour
of this.
From what has
been discussed
above, it can
unarguably
be concluded
that, in my opinion, although both ways can be effective, the overwhelming benefits of running
program
globally are
indeed
too great to
ignore
.