- + Tosmellornottosmellx joined The British Council
- + Peli Kiffvoide joined The British Council
- + Cogsfluommots joined The British Council
- + Киргызтан joined The British Council
- + Bleace Fieveaw joined The British Council
- + Flovatelo joined The British Council
- + Enhageanync joined The British Council
- + Donno B126 joined The British Council
- + Scooveepics joined The British Council
- + Sefedgedalinz joined The British Council
- + Fap Viarcecage joined The British Council
- + Salome joined The British Council
- + Htpc King joined The British Council
- + Nowshin joined The British Council
- + Anjali joined The British Council
Agreeing mutually acceptable emissions targets will be more effective in tackling climate change than pressing for tough, legally binding targets for every country.
Current version: 25 Nov 2009 | 01:48 | mridulnaidu
All versions
Key
- Text coloured Greenhas been added snce the previous version
- Text marked
red and striked-throughhas been deleted
No, because... Legislation is the need of the hour
Legalization on a universal level is not something that is as easy as it seems to achieve. The framework can at best impose financial penalties and or incentivize good practices. Most nations are going to say big deal and totally ignore the targets. The need of the hour is a mutual agreement to work together towards climate change and encourage every nation to take remedial measures with global assistance. Its like the big stick policy , nations would adhere to it but slowly but surely they would also resent it and opt out of the framework eventually.
In order to bring about steps against climate change, we need to have legal binding targets for every country. Frankly speaking, the time to make amends through mutual agreements on milder targets has not led us anywhere so far. Unless, we do not have a legislation that imposes a necessary target limitation, we cannot achieve the desired results.