The Negative Impact Of Globalization And Climate Change In Ghana

With global temperatures increasing simultaneously with increased liberation of cross-border trade, one cannot help but question whether the two are interrelated. Phillipe LeGrain, author of ‘Open World: The Truth about Globalization’, states that the world consumes roughly 70 percent more energy than three decades ago with consumption steadily increasing. Critics of globalization assert that government reduction of trade barriers are the main culprit behind global warming, at first glance this may seem entirely plausible but it is important to delve into the details to see the real reasons, especially considering the fact that trade barriers are continuously decreasing.

Contrastively, globalization itself has great damage to the environment. Due to developed countries going into developing countries to exploit their resources, the natural resources is depleting at a rapid speed, yet we are still not doing enough to stop it. As there are strict laws regarding the environment in developed countries, these companies turn their eyes onto developing countries whose environmental laws are more relaxed in comparison. As these developing countries also want to earn revenue and income that these companies bring, they open the door to them, but destroying Mother Earth at the same time.

The argument about man’s role in climate change and the role of government, the role of industry and the role of citizens is a significant challenge that crosses all levels of government, crosses all geopolitical boundaries and crosses all sectors of business. National governments across the globe are dealing with the issue in different ways, but one overarching aspect of control and mitigation can be seen in the oversight and regulation of the electric energy industry. One significant challenge facing each nation is the cost to lower carbon emissions and the question of who will pay the additional cost for compliance. Though the cost issue is significant, a much more difficult question is whether any decision on lowering emissions can make

In recent years , there is a colossal upsurge in the number of environmental concerns with climate change being a pivotal one. Although convergent efforts, be it an individual , company or a government, are made to ease this concern. I think government play a vital role in this regard.

The main claim of Pamela Chaseks’s presentation was that through government and industry climate change can be stopped. Chasek discusses several instances when governments united regarding climate change as well as how these governments have impacted climate change, if at all. For example,a successful negotiation was Lima 2014, the United States and China agreed to reduce emissions; however, at the Copenhagen Climate Conference in 2009 developed countries made an agreement that left developing countries out of the loop. This caused smaller states weary of states who hold more power. This displays that government cooperation and communication is needed to successfully execute the issue of climate change. Without concise agreements and negotiations

This paper will address the institutionalized road blocks in the United States that have prevented successful climate change action for the last twenty-five years. First, the United States government has become increasingly influenced by and connected to private industries. The private industries and the government work together as partners. While this likely has been beneficial in some ways it has kept out innovation, competition and prevented the implementation of successful health and public welfare regulations. Second, the Banking, Energy and Media Industry are linked together to promote consensually agreed to messages. These industries work together to keep fossil fuels as our major energy source. Third, each industry works together in non-profit

Global Warming has silently crept into our society today because of big business, lack of technology, and greed. And now with a new generation of citizens who understand what we have been doing to our earth have to stand up and do what is right. Global Warming refers to the increase in the earth’s average temperature induced by human activity. Most discussions on Global Warming today show similarities between an increase in global temperature and the increase in carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, and chlorofluorocarbons in the atmosphere. Human activity increases the amount of these gases in the atmosphere and, as a result of the greenhouse effect, increases

Disruptive climate changes are a result of our actions. From 280 molecules of carbon dioxide in 1750 to a 384 presently is due to the rapid Industrial Revolution. The readers are convinced to an extent of the alarming increase of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. These facts should help to galvanize people, governments, organizations and individuals to work on a better environment. My ideas about such a circumstance do not change because we humans are the cause of this depleting environment. Through discussions it was observed how globalization has greater negative than positive

In the contemporary world, the importance of the environment, human lives in, which was always debatable, has now become controversial. The substantial influence of global warming has sparked the controversy over the potential impact of this trend on climate change in recent years. It can be agreed that governments as a more powerful body is responsible to control this unwanted change, however, multitude individuals claim that all companies and citizens themselves are part of the solution. This essay will examine all arguments on this contentious issue under scrutiny prior to reaching an informed conclusion.

When looking at the corporate businesses and the undoing of the human habitat; the United Nations has sanctioned many organizations to track climate change such as the UNEP, the World Meteorological Organization and the IPCC. Since the mid-eighties, these agencies have monitored the changes, yet have failed to convey the significance. Studies done by these agencies have concluded that the last fifty years are attributable to human activities and big corporations which lead to the changing in the compositions of the atmosphere throughout the 21st century (Saltori). These activities that are mentioned are those by means of businesses that grew into national conglomerates. Concurrent with business growth, the greenhouse gas emissions have grown seventy percent from 1970 to 2004 (Lehner). Recent studies have shown that 122 corporations produce eighty percent of greenhouse gases (IPCC). The climate is going to drastically change the world forever, but at whose expense? What exactly does the political eminence of these companies have

Over the past century, the Earth has experienced a dramatic change in temperature and we need to work to reverse it. Politicians have debated the idea of climate change for years now and nothing has really been done to improve the situation. Some politicians have been exposed to the facts about climate change, while others believe in a hypothetical theory that the Earth goes through “cycles”. The government needs to stop arguing and act now, to educate the public and regulate the phenomenon of climate change, before it is too late.

In recent years, the controversial subject of global warming has been more predominantly brought to our attention. Is the threat of global warming real? Is it man-made or is this just a natural cycle of earth? Does it really affect earth’s inhabitants? Should action be taken against it? If so, what kind and to what extent? It cannot be only a coincidence that the alarmingly rapid climate change coincides perfectly with the increased amount of pollutants that humans release into the environment. The once stable climate has in recent years begun to skyrocket, thus altering the delicate structure of earthly life. This proves to be hazardous to the future of the planet; some people worry that many of the resources the environment provides that

Whilst entering the new millennium society and the earth as whole faces its biggest challenge to date, climate change. With this new challenge come new approaches, strategies to live sustainably, some will fail and some will work, but eventually we will defeat it. But if this is the case, why do we continue to tackle climate change using approaches which have proven to lead to dead ends, and not made effective changes, and which are restricting us and not allowing us to make the differences we have the potential to make. I wholeheartedly agree with the statement at the top. Climate change is a systemic problem which requires collective action(i.e from corporations and governments). Up to now, the most acknowledged models have placed the burden of responsibility on the individual, you. However in this essay I will be arguing that a shift in focus away from the individual, and on to the political infrastructures that our way of life is founded upon on is crucial if we are to achieve the rate of change required to save the earth from climate change. In the first section of this essay I will delve further into the “blindspots” and dead ends in which attempting to intervene against individual behaviour has brought us into. I will then develop this argument further by explaining the benefits of approaching this

Globalization have some positive impacts on the environment to some extent but there are still some crucial negative impacts of globalization in play. The negative impacts are mainly export-orientated* destruction on the environment whilst the positive impacts are increase awareness and multinational corporations’ research into eco-friendly technology.

Climate change does not only affect the environment and its natural resources but it also affects human health negatively, and the way in which people live. The effects of climate change includes warmer temperatures which not only increase intensity and duration of heat waves but also cause human health risks on the most vulnerable people, which are the elderly and young children. Drought results in shortage of water which ultimately has an impact on agricultural and farming activities. If more farming activities are stopped, the country will produce less exporting products having a negative impact on the economy. Spread of diseases due to bad water quality and poor air quality then increases rapidly affecting the health and mortality rate of the population concerned (Environmental Protection agency, 2016).