Environmental Problems: Improving the Quality of International Agreements

Though the problem of environmental damage is a global one, there is nothing stopping Canadians from solving it in their own

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement framed into the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It was raised the 11th of December of 1997 in the

We once lived in a world lush and plentiful where we enjoyed all the natural resources peacefully. However at the beginning of the industrial revolution more people moved to the cities therefore increasing their dependency load. Fastforward to today and the world has seen a drastic change in the loss of natural resources as well as a number of health related illnesses like asthma. This is mainly due to the effects from carbon pollution, greenhouse gases and global warming. Canada as a country is thought of as environmentally aware and progressive. Actually has many issues regarding this topic and if it is not taken care of it will affect the future of the nation. I care about this topic because it has to

The government responsible to take charge for this issue are global, federal and provincial. As a planet, we must coalesce with each other to find solutions to preserving the planet. World leaders are meeting with each other, discussing ways to fix the damages humans created. The government of Canada is dedicated on working with leaders all over the world to make changes that will help resolve the effects of climate change. Also, Canada is committed to supporting and helping out third world countries who need help in accommodating to the effects of climate change. Investments are being made to reduce emissions as well. The government of Canada and its provinces and territories are uniting together to encounter the effects of climate change. They aim on federal funding, the flexibility to design their own carbon pricing policies on putting a price on carbon and reducing carbon pollution.

It is also important to point out that, unlike the US movement, Canada’s environmental justice

The reason this question has to be answered is simple, Canada sits at a very important junction in its evolution; does it continue to push forward to become an energy superpower or does it let the environmental conversation win, pushing forward instead with a clean energy agenda? This essay will hopefully drive this conversation forward.

In Canada, concerns involving environmental security are not the top priority. But due to recent research, Canada must be more strongly committed to environmental security due to increasing environmental problems internationally. There are many ways Canada can stay committed to environmental security, for example, increased funding to Canada’s Department of National Defence’s Environment Department. Also to stay committed to increased access and support to Voluntary Environmental Programs across Canada. Finally to completely stay up to world standards in environmental security, Canada must implement an effective environmental planning system. Throughout the essay, the topic at hand will be if Canada is able to implement these actions to

Canadians do not need to rethink how they are currently treating our environment, as they have previously done that. Citizens have already made significant changes in how they live their lives, and Canada has seen an overall improvement in our environment situation. After the government began to certify certain merchandise as environmentally-friendly, Canadians have become more aware of the fact that Canada needs to be a more green country. They started buying these products, contributing to bettering Canada’s environment. Yet it may seem unrealistic that by buying more eco-friendly items, one is positively contributing to the environment, it is very true. The only people who are in charge of the environmental standards are the consumers. And

Significance of economy to voters nothing unexpected, however environmental concerns are rising. The absolute most critical issue in this decision battle is the economy, with the environment coming next. Environmental change touches each part of our economy and vitality framework. Natural issues have assumed an imperative part in the current year 's government race — and Canada 's political pioneers offer distinctive methodologies and levels of aspiration while addressing them. Regardless of the clamor, the leader 's verbal confrontation upheld the thought that nature and economy are inseparably connected to each other. Presently, in the first phase I am going to examine about stages of distinctive political gatherings on environment.

In 1988, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration had conclusive proof products adding to the output of carbon dioxide and methane gases in the atmosphere were causing the earth to warm; and, if not stopped will make it inhabitable for human life. In the 1970’s the United States had conclusive proof that products releasing Chlorofluorocarbons into the atmosphere were causing the ozone layer to deplete; and, that if continued would be dangerous for human life. The United States took international global action, by joining the Montreal Protocol, to phase out the products producing chlorofluorocarbon and the ozone layer has been successfully replenished .

Canada was a land of vast distances and rich natural resources, and became a hegemonic authority in 1867, while maintaining relations with the British Crown. Economically and technically, the nation has developed parallel to the United States, its neighbor to the south across the longest international border in the world. Canada faces the political challenges of meeting public demands for quality improvement in health care, education, social services and economic competitiveness. Canada also aims to develop its diverse energy resources while maintaining its commitment to the environment. (1)

The protocols worthy of attention from the UNFCCC are the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris agreement. The Kyoto Protocol was signed in 1997 by the liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien and was passed onto Stephen Harper’s Conservative government where it was implemented in 2005 (Schiermeier, 2012). The liberal government had the target of 6% total reduction of GHG by 2012 compared to 1990 levels (Curry, 2017). The Kyoto Protocol did not include both of the world’s largest emitters: USA and China which resulted in Canada withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol by the Harper government in 2011 (Curry, 2017). Canada should not have pulled out because Russia and Japan who also disliked the commitments in the protocol tried to fix and adapt to the changes (Curry, 2017). The Harper government, infamous for its political decisions on climate change had failed to fulfill Canada’s responsibilities towards climate change. On the other hand, the Paris Agreement which wanted to control the global temperature rise below 2 °C (Shepherd, 2015) showed Canada’s resilience to take on a leadership role without the USA.

Few environmentalists have positive things to say on the impact of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on the environment. WTO legal obligations are frequently cited as the most significant impediment to a range of environmental initiatives, including notably meaningful international coordination to combat climate change, particularly through carbon tax initiatives, and imposition of electronic waste disposal export bans. In this vein, adverse findings of WTO dispute panels on environmental conservation measures tend to attract the ire of international civil society. The tensions between liberal trade and environmental protection can be traced back to the days of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) of 1947, which pre-dated the WTO. Under the GATT 1947, trade and environment disputes tended to be resolved through diplomatic channels. The WTO Agreements were intended to provide a more predictable and legalistic means by which to resolve such disputes, in exchange for deeper commitments on domestic regulation, a domain historically deemed off limits to international disciplines. Two of these agreements in particular, the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) and the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement), introduced binding disciplines with serious implications for domestic environmental decision-making, a subset of domestic regulation. The expectation was that the depolitization of WTO disputes would afford more

Professor of natural resource economics at Columbia University, Scott Barrett, is responsible for producing ‘Environment & statecraft: The strategy of environmental treaty-making’, a book that in his words, “develops a theory of how states can cooperate in protecting their shared environmental resources ” and should utilised to analyse the successfulness of agreements and treaties. What sets this text apart is not his presentation of newly founded information, but rather the craftful piecing together of what Barret labels “disparate ideas” of economic/game theoretic approaches to international cooperation and “to combine and package them in a coherent fashion” (p.358). This is not to suggest that Barrett did not include his unique findings however. Barrett persistently brought to light seemingly original examinations into specific factors influencing poor successful examples of cooperation. This approach results in an extensively scoping survey that highlights the dominant themes in a fashion that allows the information to be accessible and feasibly consumable to any audience willing to follow the core models and is also analytically robust. Notably Barrett put an intensive focus, not only on theory but on how the theory was could be applied in practice. Barrett does this as international cooperation in theory should “provide an approach for the conduct of policy”, and “practitioners need to think deeply about these problems” (p 358). The combination of the ideas and themes

Annex I countries are industrialized nations with large carbon emissions, such as the US, Australia, EU, and Russia. The agreement has four implementation mechanisms designed to achieve the desired reductions in emissions, but only asks that countries comply with the reductions rather than suggesting a methodology. The primary method for countries to reduce emissions is through domestic policies, traditionally taking the form of governmental controls, which each nation would be responsible for creating and enforcing. Domestic policy is “…likely to become a ‘hook’ to ensure that the industrialized countries implement the policies necessary to spur real changes towards less carbon-intensive production and consumption patterns (Depledge 11).” The domestic policy article in the Kyoto Protocol is intended to provide governments, not an international body, with direct control over domestic emissions.