Hardin’s work on the “Tragedy of the Commons” has developed the shared conception that both domestic and international environmental problems are collective action dilemmas (Hardin, 1968). One of the main issues is the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as it has a global impact, unlike some other forms of pollution. Pollutants carried by air and water do not account for national borders. Whether they are emitted in Asia, Africa, Europe or the Americas, they rapidly disperse evenly across the globe. This is the reason why efforts to address climate change need international collaboration and agreement. However, solutions to international environmental problems such as ozone depletion, global warming, and acid rain may be hindered
…show more content…
It assumes that all countries will act in a fundamentally rational way and it also assumes that all the players will share the basic aim of climate protection. However, as we know, any country that does not take climate change seriously cannot be acting rationally. Secondly, the selfish behavior of countries that we have seen in previous years of climate talks shows that the basic aim of cutting emissions and stabilizing the climate tends to be forgotten in …show more content…
Failing to act rapidly, or even taking less ambitious courses, might lead to higher costs in the long run. Levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which are produced by everything from automobiles, factories, coal fired power plants to farming, forest fires and decomposing waste have risen 70 percent since 1970 (IPCC, 2007). If we do not start to control emissions more effectively, the level of greenhouse gases is projected to increase another 25 to 90 percent by 2030—a level that affects wildlife, public health and mass migration due to floods, droughts and rising sea levels. Paul Krugman, a renowned economist, summarizes these thoughts and says, “Its easier to slash emissions than seemed possible even a few years ago, and reduced emissions would produce large benefits in the short-run. So saving the planet would be cheap and maybe even come free. The idea that economic growth and climate action are incompatible may sound hardheaded and realistic, but its actually a fuzzy-minded misconception. If we every get past the special interests and ideology that have blocked action to save the planet, we’ll find that it’s cheaper and easier than almost anyone imagines” (Krugman,
It assumes that all countries will act in a fundamentally rational way and it also assumes that all the players will share the basic aim of climate protection. However, as we know, any country that does not take climate change seriously cannot be acting rationally. Secondly, the selfish behavior of countries that we have seen in previous years of climate talks shows that the basic aim of cutting emissions and stabilizing the climate tends to be forgotten in …show more content…
Failing to act rapidly, or even taking less ambitious courses, might lead to higher costs in the long run. Levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which are produced by everything from automobiles, factories, coal fired power plants to farming, forest fires and decomposing waste have risen 70 percent since 1970 (IPCC, 2007). If we do not start to control emissions more effectively, the level of greenhouse gases is projected to increase another 25 to 90 percent by 2030—a level that affects wildlife, public health and mass migration due to floods, droughts and rising sea levels. Paul Krugman, a renowned economist, summarizes these thoughts and says, “Its easier to slash emissions than seemed possible even a few years ago, and reduced emissions would produce large benefits in the short-run. So saving the planet would be cheap and maybe even come free. The idea that economic growth and climate action are incompatible may sound hardheaded and realistic, but its actually a fuzzy-minded misconception. If we every get past the special interests and ideology that have blocked action to save the planet, we’ll find that it’s cheaper and easier than almost anyone imagines” (Krugman,