Some people think that environmental problems should be solved on a global scale while others believe that it is better to deal with them nationally.

Environmental difficulties affect all the places in the world. These environment-related issues can be addressed either globally or locally. This essay will discuss why countries can address environmental problems on their own but why a global approach is more efficient. The different areas in the earth have approached their environment problems locally. The former has helped each geographic area focus on the specific problems that affect a particular region. For example, in Kenya, the effects of global warming have been counterbalanced with environment-friendly housing. Wood is preferred as a material for a house than brick. Acting locally helps countries focus on environment problems at a small-scale. Nevertheless, pollution problems could not be solved if geographic areas did not act at a global-scale. Environmental damages do not have boundaries and a global system that coordinates actions to counterbalance environment problems is needed. To illustrate, the Kyoto protocol has not only raised awareness on the guidelines that must be followed in order to counteract the harms already done to nature but also generated penalties for the most polluting countries. International approaches to environmental problems are more effective than local solutions given that several countries act on a same issue at a same time thus creating wider positive effects on the planet. This essay discussed why local approaches to environment problems are effective but why international ones are more efficient. In my opinion, a global solution is far superior than a local one since international approaches lead several places to a common goal.