Term Maldives, and Kiribati being threatened their states’

paper “International environmental issues”

In this modern generation, we have some
international problems that it is difficult to solve without many countries’
cooperation. Especially, I think that environmental issues need all countries’
cooperation to solve because if we want to improve world environment, it is not
enough that few countries try to improve it, but we need to make effort all
over the world. I think that environmental issues are one of the most important
issues because these problems have large influence for all over the world. It is
really dangerous matters for small island states because if they do not solve
these issues, they may sink into the sea in the future. Therefore,
environmental issues threaten states’ survival. However, for other countries,
environmental issues are not the most significant problems because they can
continue to survive.?In addition to this, developing countries
have less interest in environmental protection than developed countries. I
think that these gaps between each state make solving environmental issues

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now


One of the most serious problems is rising
of sea levels. It has a large influence to some countries because they may sink
in the sea in the future. For example, Tuvalu, Maldives, and Kiribati being
threatened their states’ continuance of existence. These countries are
comparatively small and island countries. Therefore, they have smaller power
under the anarchic international society. The rising of sea levels is caused by
the increase of a temperature in the world and it is occurred by environmental
pollution especially emission of gas such as chlorofluorocarbon. We can call
the gas “CFC” for short. CFC was used as parts of refrigerators and air
conditioners in the past but people avoid to use it now. Emission of CFC takes
place destruction of the ozone layer. The surface of the earth is covered with
the ozone layer and the ozone layer defends to reach sunlight the earth
directly. If we lose a part of the ozone layer, ultraviolet rays reach us
directly so a temperature of the earth increases and the number of people who
have skin cancer also increases. The rising of a temperature may also bring
about unusual weather such as tornados and typhoons all over the world. In
addition to this, ices in the arctic ocean constantly dissolve by the rising of
a temperature. If ices in the arctic ocean continue to dissolve, animals like
polar white bears will lose their residence and they may extinct. Therefore,
the rising temperature has large effects on a lot of areas. In addition to
this, if we lose all the ozone layer, all lives are killed by ultraviolet rays.
Therefore, the ozone layer is really important for all lives. However, we can
see that there is ozone hole in the sky of the Antarctic. Decreasing of the
ozone layer usually causes between spring and early summer and some scientists
prove that this decreasing started in the first half of the 1970s. this hole
had expanded gradually since the 1970s and we made sure that the size of the
ozone hole was the biggest in 2003. However, the size of the ozone hole is
gradually diminishing now. According to NASA’s 2015 research, we can expect
that the hole will close at the end of 21 century.


Why can the size of ozone hole be
decreasing? It is because a lot of countries applied to Montreal protocol in
1978. This protocol regulates to emit the number of substance that damage the
ozone layer like CFC. This regulation has larger effects than other
environmental protocol such as Kyoto protocol. Kyoto protocol regulates to emit
the number of greenhouse gas such as carbon dioxide. This kind of gases is also
one of the causes of the rising of world temperature. However, if a nation
wants to develop its economy, it is sometimes necessary for the nation to emit
greenhouse gas. For example, developed countries like the USA emitted a large
number of greenhouse gas in the past. Therefore, some developing countries may
feel that it is not fair to regulate their emission of the number of greenhouse
gas because only developed countries enjoyed the benefits of emission of
greenhouse gas. On the other hand, Montreal protocol is efficient because
people have a substitution of CFC and the alternative substance is relatively
cheap so not only rich countries but also poor countries could afford to avoid
to use CFC. Therefore, it is easy to make cooperation between all countries.


When it comes to saying Montreal protocol,
I think that all countries can benefit the advantage of regulation of emission
of CFC and there is few disadvantage for all countries. In addition to this,
the substitution of CFC is relatively cheap so it is not burdened for
developing countries. As a result, it is easy to make cooperation so we can say
that this regime could carry out its role. On the other hand, I think that
Kyoto protocol has less meaning compared with Montreal protocol. This protocol
has difficulties to make cooperation between all countries because developing
countries have more disadvantages compared to developed countries by applying
to Kyoto protocol. It is different from Montreal protocol. It is relatively
easy for developed countries to decrease the amount of emission of greenhouse
gas because they have already developed. They already have large wealth. I
think that these countries have less the need to grow their own economy than
developing countries. The government of developed countries can provide better
infrastructure and get military power and so on. I think that developed
countries afford to do many things. They could develop their economies because
of emission of greenhouse gas in the past so I think that it is not fair for
developing countries. They have to improve their economies and to make their
population’s life better. They do not afford to decrease the amount of emission
of greenhouse gas. However, I think that it does not mean that developing
countries do not have to diminish emission of greenhouse gas. If developing
countries are allowed to emit greenhouse gas freely, it is more difficult for
all countries to improve the environment. The rising temperature is a problem
for all the world.


I think that imposing the same regulation
on all countries is not fair so it is necessary to consider each state’s
economic situation. For example, developed countries are imposed relatively
strict regulation and developing countries should be allowed to emit to some
extent the number of greenhouse gas. This is already adopted in Kyoto protocol
but some countries like China and India are not satisfied with contents of
Kyoto protocol and they do not apply to Kyoto protocol. In addition to this, the
USA also reject Kyoto protocol. Therefore, I think that this kind of regulation
needs to have little binding force. For example, if one state does not follow
the regulation and it emits greenhouse gas greatly, the other states can sue
the state to international court. Too strong binding force is not necessary for
us because it has the possibility of invading each state’s sovereignty.
However, I think that this anarchic society needs moderate binding force to
solve environmental issues. I think that it is difficult to make cooperation
about decreasing the number of emission of greenhouse gas without moderate
binding force. If we do not have moderate binding force, there are little
incentives to obey the regulation for developing countries that do not face the
crisis of sinking in the sea. If they do not obey the regime, they can get more
benefits than following the regime. I think that each state focus on their own
survival so they especially not developed states focus on getting their wealth
more than solving environmental problems for the world. They do not afford to
avoid the emission of greenhouse gas at a great cost.


In conclusion, I believe that cooperation
between all states is necessary for international society to resolve
environmental issues. All states need to make efforts to improve the
environment and the regulation of greenhouse gas emission. I think that international
society had better have a moderate binding force to prevent some states from
cheating. However, the quantity of reducing greenhouse gas should be decided in
proportion to the level of economic development of each state. In addition to
this, developed states should take the lead in reducing the number of
greenhouse gas emission. However, it does not mean that developing states do
not have to make efforts to protect the environment. All states have to make
efforts to prevent from getting worse the world environment. Environmental issues
are really important for all of us.