When the issue of Climate Change/ Global warming is addressed, tensions easily escalate as opinions quickly overshadow fact. Most disagreement can be dispelled if the conversation remains on topic. Simply put, whether or not Global warming exists is altogether a different issue compared to what actions need to be followed in relation if it does exist. Therefore, let us assume that Climate Change/ Global warming is an actual phenomenon, caused by man’s utility of the earth, and not a part of the natural cycle of the earth.
If the latter is the case, and the actions of human being are responsible for an abnormal condition of the earth, the solution would appear to be to stop or reverse the actions that have led to such a condition of the earth. Nonetheless, while the solution may seem easy, how to implement needed change is very contentious. Further adding to the complexities of this issue is that Global warming encompasses the entire planet, not just a single nation. Fortunately, any actions taken to remedy climate change will be acts from singular nations, acting either separately or together, and for this reason we can narrow this issue down as to what is the right type of action needed to resolve this most complex of issues.
There are some who suggest that the change in action needs to be dramatic to undo the generations of damage. Others will say that a more gradual approach to changing behaviors is the correct method to solving Global warming. Regardless of which camp a person falls into, there are really only 3 methods to corrective action, Government regulations, Charity, and Marketplace solutions. Starting with Government regulations is appropriate since many will believe this to be the best method, or the only method, for imposing a solution(s).
Solutions based on governmental involvement are slow to occur, ineffective, and will impose an undue financial burden on industry and societies at large. We know this to be true of Governmental action because for all its influence Governmental actions can only be the power to restrict industry through the imposition of fees, fines, levying taxes or prosecuting individuals. In other words, Governmental action can only impose negative consequences on behavior already engaged in; it has little power to change behavior through encouraging solutions other than the removal of restrictions, such as tax breaks. At any rate, the power of government restrictions pales in comparison to actions taken by the following two methods of change.
The correct mode of action for correcting this problem happens to be the correct method for most problems, through encouraging marketplace solutions and fostering private charity. By promoting the self-interest of the company, individual, or entrepreneur, marketplace solutions can act in a more purposeful, efficient, and effective manner than any singular government can achieve. Simply put, when bureaucracy is removed, and individuals have more freedom to explore, create, and develop ideas and products, the result is greater diversity in knowledge and products to meet the needs of human beings. One great example of this phenomenon at work is the development of ‘green technologies’. While the government is limited to enticing solutions through offering tax breaks for those who engage in such ‘green’ practices or by imposing restrictions on those who don’t, business are busy at work actually developing the ideas, tools, equipment, products, and infrastructure to make transitions into a more ‘green’ world possible. Government, in contrast to business, can only act as a facilitator at best; meanwhile, its businesses that provide the foundation for real change amongst the society because it is businesses that are the ones actually producing. Government doesn’t produce anything except more government.
Finally, private charity, and actions preformed by non-profits, foundations, humanitarian cooperation, etc. can also have a dramatic impact on fostering solutions for climate change. While they can engage in business, private charity excels in changing attitudes and crossing boundaries of nations easier and with fewer objections than either businesses or governments. With the flexibility to influence many nations at once under the guise of what is best for humanity, the contributions of private charity should not be over looked or underestimated. Consequently, climate change, if it is a real phenomenon caused by man, can be addressed much more effectively by charity and marketplace solutions than government is capable; and therefore, the intervention of government into the field of global warming should be at a bare minimum.
|