The world is starting to reach a tipping point with regard to global climate change. In fact, “several studies have suggested that temperature stabilization at or below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial temperatures should be the goal of climate change policy. Warming above this level would likely cause large areas of the Greenland Ice Sheet to melt, would put the West Antarctic Ice Sheet at substantial risk, and would cause widespread disruption to global ecosystems and the hydrologic cycle.” (Moore, 2009) Therefore, the U.S. decision to sign the bilateral agreement with China, another large contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, will not only have positive effects for the U.S. but the world. While science is not indisputable not only will
…show more content…
Despite the overwhelming evidence confirming anthropogenic climate change deterrents continue to argue that there is still an open debate on the subject. However, the real debate only lies in the political realm. Conservatives refuse to make policy action on climate change resolutions while large industries continue to invest money into creating uncertainty among the public. For example, “The United States continues to struggle with a broad and coherent climate and energy policy. The last attempt to pass climate and energy legislation in the U.S. Congress failed in 2009 and the political conditions have only worsened since.” (Clemencon, 2016) There is no debate on whether climate change is real; the only debate to discuss is how we intend to combat climate change. “If we feel that a policy question deserves to be informed by scientific knowledge, then we have no choice but to ask, what is the consensus of experts on this matter? If there is no consensus of experts—as was the case among earth scientists about moving continents before the late 1960s—then we have a case for more research. If there is a consensus of experts—as there is today over the reality of anthropogenic climate change—then we have a …show more content…
However, the U.S. has argued that “if large emerging economies are not held accountable for their rapidly growing emissions” then the efforts of developed countries to lower their own emission will be worthless. (Clemencon, 2016) This approach is a tragedy of the common or collective action problem and will inevitably lead to the overexploitation of common pool resources (CPRs), in this case the atmosphere, thus contributing to global climate change. “These two characteristics—difficulty of exclusion and sub-tractability—create potential CPR dilemmas in which people following their own short-term interests produce outcomes that are not in anyone’s long-term interest.” (Ostrom, 1999) Those who seek to reap the benefits of common pool resources, such as our atmosphere, do not consider the negative effects of their actions. However, because of the public nature of these no one can stop them from enjoy the benefits of improving such resources. This inevitably gives the incentive to free ride off of the efforts of those who seek to improve the common pool resource for
Despite the overwhelming evidence confirming anthropogenic climate change deterrents continue to argue that there is still an open debate on the subject. However, the real debate only lies in the political realm. Conservatives refuse to make policy action on climate change resolutions while large industries continue to invest money into creating uncertainty among the public. For example, “The United States continues to struggle with a broad and coherent climate and energy policy. The last attempt to pass climate and energy legislation in the U.S. Congress failed in 2009 and the political conditions have only worsened since.” (Clemencon, 2016) There is no debate on whether climate change is real; the only debate to discuss is how we intend to combat climate change. “If we feel that a policy question deserves to be informed by scientific knowledge, then we have no choice but to ask, what is the consensus of experts on this matter? If there is no consensus of experts—as was the case among earth scientists about moving continents before the late 1960s—then we have a case for more research. If there is a consensus of experts—as there is today over the reality of anthropogenic climate change—then we have a …show more content…
However, the U.S. has argued that “if large emerging economies are not held accountable for their rapidly growing emissions” then the efforts of developed countries to lower their own emission will be worthless. (Clemencon, 2016) This approach is a tragedy of the common or collective action problem and will inevitably lead to the overexploitation of common pool resources (CPRs), in this case the atmosphere, thus contributing to global climate change. “These two characteristics—difficulty of exclusion and sub-tractability—create potential CPR dilemmas in which people following their own short-term interests produce outcomes that are not in anyone’s long-term interest.” (Ostrom, 1999) Those who seek to reap the benefits of common pool resources, such as our atmosphere, do not consider the negative effects of their actions. However, because of the public nature of these no one can stop them from enjoy the benefits of improving such resources. This inevitably gives the incentive to free ride off of the efforts of those who seek to improve the common pool resource for