Some would argue that climate change is such a pressing threat that governments should issue mandates to make individuals responsible for protecting the local environment. In my opinion, this might raise environmental awareness, however it is not advisable as other steps are more likely to produce results.
Those who suggest individuals should be compelled to accept responsibility are hoping for a united effort from the general public. The entire reason the Earth faces potential catastrophe is because of over-population and consumer habits. There would be a noticeable improvement if individuals were forced to recycle, clean up litter in their neighborhoods and reduce their carbon footprint by not using private vehicles, single-use plastics, and airplanes. There is the added argument that it is important to instill public duty in the mind of the average person. The government could fix these problems but that would only enable bad behavior from citizens in the same way that an overly permissive parent engenders a spoiled child.
However, the impact from the steps mentioned above would be marginal compared to the regulations governments can enact on various industries. Individuals might not follow the mandates from governments and they would be extremely difficult to enforce in populous nations that value individual liberty such as India, the United States, and Brazil. If governments instead passed laws related to both small and large businesses they could combat global and local issues. Companies that contribute to air and water pollution could be severely fined and the businesses that profit the most from mass consumerism could be forced to institute more environmentally friendly policies. These simple reforms would have tremendous impact.
In conclusion, although this policy would help individuals become more active in their communities, it is more important for governments to enact sweeping regulations on corporations. In this way, the most progress will be made.
Some
would argue that climate
change
is such a pressing threat that
governments
should issue mandates to
make
individuals
responsible for protecting the local environment. In my opinion, this might raise environmental awareness,
however
it is not advisable as other steps are more likely to produce results.
Those who suggest
individuals
should
be compelled
to accept responsibility are hoping for a united effort from the
general public
. The entire reason the Earth faces potential catastrophe is
because
of over-population and consumer habits. There would be a noticeable improvement if
individuals
were forced
to recycle, clean up litter in their neighborhoods and
reduce
their carbon footprint by not using private vehicles, single-
use
plastics, and airplanes. There is the
added
argument that it is
important
to instill public duty in the mind of the average person. The
government
could
fix
these problems
but
that would
only
enable
bad
behavior from citizens
in the same way
that an
overly
permissive parent engenders a spoiled child.
However
, the impact from the steps mentioned above would be marginal compared to the regulations
governments
can enact on various industries.
Individuals
might not follow the mandates from
governments and
they would be
extremely
difficult to enforce in populous nations that value
individual
liberty such as India, the United States, and Brazil. If
governments
instead
passed laws related to both
small
and large businesses they could combat global and local issues.
Companies
that contribute to air and water pollution could be
severely
fined and the businesses that profit the most from mass consumerism could
be forced
to institute more
environmentally
friendly policies. These simple reforms would have tremendous impact.
In conclusion
, although this policy would
help
individuals
become more active in their communities, it is more
important
for
governments
to enact sweeping regulations on corporations. In this way, the most progress will
be made
.