Politics
Developed and developing countries have made different arguments over who should bear the burden of economic costs for cutting emissions. Developing countries often concentrate on per capita emissions, that is, the total emissions of a country divided by its population.[109] Per capita emissions in the industrialized countries are typically as much as ten times the average in developing countries.[110] This is used to make the argument that the real problem of climate change is due to the profligate and unsustainable lifestyles of those living in rich countries.[109]On the other hand, commentators from developed countries point out that total carbon emissions[109], carrying capacity, efficient energy use and civil and political rights are very important issues. World population is the number of humans per unit area. However the land is not the same everywhere. Not only the quantity of fossil fuel use but also the quality of energy use is a key debate point. For example, efficient energy use supporting technological change might help reduce excess carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere. The use of fossil fuels for conspicuous consumption and excessive entertainment are issues that can conflict with civil and political rights. People in developed countries argue that history has proven the difficulty of implementing fair rationing programs in different countries because there is no global system of checks and balances or civil liberties.
The Kyoto Protocol, which came into force in 2005, sets legally binding emission limitations for most developed countries.[101] Developing countries are not subject to limitations. This exemption led the U.S. and Australia to decide not to ratify the treaty,[111] [112][113] although Australia did finally ratify the treaty in December 2007.[114] Debate continued at the Copenhagen climate summit and the Cancún climate summit.
Public opinion
In 2007–2008 Gallup Polls surveyed 127 countries. Over a third of the world's population was unaware of global warming, with people in developing countries less aware than those in developed, and those in Africa the least aware. Of those aware, Latin America leads in belief that temperature changes are a result of human activities while Africa, parts of Asia and the Middle East, and a few countries from the Former Soviet Union lead in the opposite belief.[115] In the Western world, opinions over the concept and the appropriate responses are divided. Nick Pidgeon of Cardiff University said that "results show the different stages of engagement about global warming on each side of the Atlantic", adding, "The debate in Europe is about what action needs to be taken, while many in the U.S. still debate whether climate change is happening."[116][117]Other views
Most scientists accept that humans are contributing to observed climate change.[44][118] National science academies have called on world leaders for policies to cut global emissions.[119] However, some scientists and non-scientists question aspects of climate-change science.[120][121]Organizations such as the libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute, conservative commentators, and some companies such as ExxonMobil have challenged IPCC climate change scenarios, funded scientists who disagree with the scientific consensus, and provided their own projections of the economic cost of stricter controls.[122][123][124][125] In the finance industry, Deutsche Bank has set up an institutional climate change investment division DBCCA)[126] which has commissioned and published research[127] on the issues and debate surrounding global warming.[128] Environmental organizations and public figures have emphasized changes in the current climate and the risks they entail, while promoting adaptation to changes in infrastructural needs and emissions reductions.[129] Some fossil fuel companies have scaled back their efforts in recent years,[130] or called for policies to reduce global warming.[131]
No comments:
Post a Comment