Globalization Greenhouse Gas Emissions What

Globalization Greenhouse Gas Emissions What do you think is the best principle of fairness for the distribution of the burden of reducing greenhouse gas emissions? Is seems that an equitable solution to the global crisis of greenhouse gas emissions would be for the countries most responsible for the emissions to take the most responsibility for reducing these gases. As the 1992 United Nations on Environment and Development recommended, "Developed nations should 'take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof'" (Singer, 2002, p. 21).

Thus, the nations who contribute most to the problem (developed nations, including the United States, who is the top contributor), should be the first to take action in combating and reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. This only makes sense, as the developed nations are those who can most afford the expenditures, and are doing most of the damage.

Many of the underdeveloped nations are too poor to raise the kind of capital necessary to effectively combat these emissions, and they are contributed far less heavily to the global problem, because they are not as industrialized. Another equitable solution would be to set binding emission standards for vehicles and industry, rather than creating voluntary standards. Again, this would place the burden on the industrialized nations who are the worst offenders at emissions.

It would target the problem and it would force the worst offenders to clean up their acts, as well. The U.S. is again at the forefront in this category, and of all the nations in the world, the U.S. is probably the most capable of making change - and yet it does not.

By making the standards law, it would force the worst offenders to confront and fix the problems in their own countries first, and then the problems in smaller, less polluting nations could be targeted as well. Without laws, it seems many of the worst offenders will simply continue "business as usual," and as these and other studies indicate, that is a dangerous position for the future. The Kyoto Protocol attempted to set these limits, but even the author acknowledges, they were politically motivated, rather than based on fairness (Singer, 2002, p.

22), and this may be one reason the United States is not participating in the Kyoto Protocol, the limits and agreements reached with 178 other nations are not effective in this country. With disregard for solutions such as Kyoto, it seems difficult to see how a global principle of fairness can be reached at all. Clearly, economic fairness must also be discussed in the principle of fairness.

Singer notes that economic forecasts vary, but that many experts believe spending the money to implement global warming and greenhouse gas initiatives would be cost effective in the end, and actually add to the global economy (Singer, 2002, pp. 25-26). It seems Kyoto might be a stepping-stone toward solving the problem, and many experts wonder if the cost is worth the effort. However, Kyoto is a step, and right now, that is more than many nations are doing or even contemplating.

The latest IICC study seems to indicate the problem is growing faster than earlier anticipated, and that means that a solution needs to come about even more quickly. Thus, solutions like Kyoto need to be implemented as soon as possible, and more solutions need to be studied and implemented.