Is there an attempted solution to solve global warming and if so why has there been no action on the part of the government or the corporations?
Patchell, Jerry, and Roger Hayter. "How Big Business Can Save The Climate: Multinational Corporations Can Succeed Where Governments Have Failed." Foreign Affairs 92.5 (2013): 17-22. EconLit. Web. 4 Mar. 2015.
This source regards a solution to the global warming and climate change issue. In times of need, many people turn towards the government seeking a solution. The truth is that the government can be extremely inconvenient and often entertains frustrating gridlock that makes it impossible for any solutions to be obtained. Rather than create a set of global rules in the UN, countries should create carbon clubs that serve the goal of stopping emissions. These corporations could essentially solve the climate change issue. Companies have the power to lead the way towards a better future by reducing global warming.
I considered this an interesting thought. I have been very condescending while researching this topic, specifically towards the greed of the corporations and the lack of productivity in congress regarding climate change. I saw them both as two evils who were reluctant to participate in preservation. However, this article allowed me to consider the possibility that different nations around the world my simply be afraid to jump into the pool first. Cutting carbon emissions can be a frightening commitment when an entire economic system is relying on it. It leads me to ask what this plan would look like if it were in action? Is something like this really possible? Finally and most importantly, are corporations likely at all to participate if something like a "Carbon Club" is created? Is it the responsibility of the corporation to begin reform? Is there a motive for them to do so?
This article offers a unique solution. While many sit and blame congress and inaction in the UN for a lack of reform as our world deteriorates, Jerry Patchell and Roger Hayter offer corporations an incentive to initiate the reform on their own. This is a bit contradictory to source 1, which points the finger at the consumer, stating that people are not interested in the ethical choice. This leads me to think that maybe if people truly are not interested in the ethical decision that corporations are. Could this really be the time for money to stop talking? I see this as a reasonable incentive for corporations to adapt environmentally friendly strategies. Not only can the companies then feel good about what they are doing but can also spin this operation and movement into a brilliant marketing scheme. 'So and So' members of the worlds first ever carbon club. This could be a satisfying trend for everyone. If the consumer has no choice but to be ethical, so be it.
This source has opened some new doors. It has led me in the direction of thinking where I can no longer point fingers. The reality is that everyone is responsible. Now, how can we turn this inaction into a movement? This article offers an insightful idea for a first step. These companies really have a chance to be the big brother to the climate change solution. But will they participate? Who specifically is still withholding a movement from happening?
No comments:
Post a Comment