The phenomenon of Global Warming, the gradual warming of the earth’s atmosphere due to emissions of greenhouse gases associated with human industrialization activities is a major concern for the world community. Most nations are in agreement that addressing greenhouse gas emissions as a way to contain Global Warming and its disastrous consequences is imperative, yet still; the world community has yet to form a comprehensive policy that gives each individual country reasonable standards which to abide by. So the question remains, to what extent will countries in the coming years cooperate to slow global warming? While there has been meager cooperation among European nations, the sustained world cooperation that is necessary is absent. The
…show more content…
Drops in a bucket policy would require each state to commit to a certain standard of responsibility that is proportionate to their input of greenhouse emissions into the atmosphere. The current problem with that policy would be that there are nations in the world who are unwilling to commit proportionate input due to the effect that would have on their economic stability. When major states are unwilling to adopt the drops in a bucket policy, then the weakest link principle is formed. An institution is only as strong as its weakest link; therefore the world cannot afford the drops in a bucket policy because any credible community is only as strong and meaningful as its weakest link. Many argue that the world’s last standing superpower, The United States, which has the disproportionate ability to solve this issue single-handedly, should do so. But the United States has no interest in being ‘the best shot’ for the world at this time, believing it does not gain the disproportionate benefit from solving the problem, therefore it is only willing to cooperate to a certain extent. The most reasonable solution in the short-term to address this dilemma would be if all major nations joined together to form a community of shared purpose; a community that understood the incentive of lowering greenhouse gas emissions ultimately would benefit
Drops in a bucket policy would require each state to commit to a certain standard of responsibility that is proportionate to their input of greenhouse emissions into the atmosphere. The current problem with that policy would be that there are nations in the world who are unwilling to commit proportionate input due to the effect that would have on their economic stability. When major states are unwilling to adopt the drops in a bucket policy, then the weakest link principle is formed. An institution is only as strong as its weakest link; therefore the world cannot afford the drops in a bucket policy because any credible community is only as strong and meaningful as its weakest link. Many argue that the world’s last standing superpower, The United States, which has the disproportionate ability to solve this issue single-handedly, should do so. But the United States has no interest in being ‘the best shot’ for the world at this time, believing it does not gain the disproportionate benefit from solving the problem, therefore it is only willing to cooperate to a certain extent. The most reasonable solution in the short-term to address this dilemma would be if all major nations joined together to form a community of shared purpose; a community that understood the incentive of lowering greenhouse gas emissions ultimately would benefit