See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331165206

Global Environmental Problems and Politics. An analysis on why global

environmental problems are difficult to address through political solutions

Article · February 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 6,371

1 author:

Frederick Duodu
Stockholm University
4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The rise of AfD View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Frederick Duodu on 18 February 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Department of Political Science

Global Environmental Problems and Politics.

An analysis on why global environmental problems are difficult to
address through political solutions.

Author:
Frederick Duodu

Course Paper: Global Environmental Politics

Political Science III
Spring Semester (2018)

Coordinator:
Naghmeh Nasiritousi

Political Science Department

Stockholm University
INTRODUCTION

The rapid changing nature of the world and the growing number of development systems across
the globe has for the past decade precipitated a considerable need of the earth’s resources. This
constant human action on the environment, and the excessive demand of the planet’s natural
resources has led to several environmental issues. According to Saul, the heightened levels of
innovation and technological advancements fuelled by the rapid pace of globalisation in the 21 st
century, has not only caused a stir within the global market but also government operations,
civil action and environmental virtue (2005). In other words, worldwide integration has evoked
various modifications of the world’s systems including the environment and this, thereby
reveals how globalisation and human actions affect the earth’s system of natural resources. Due
to globalisation and increased transnational trade, environmental problems have become
inevitable for any part of the world because of the active integration among countries.
According to O Neill, economic globalisation has further accelerated and reconstructed the
process of environmental deterioration (2009). The subject of globalisation and global trade,
and the impact of its effects on the environment is a complex one to determine, as there exist
contrasting worldviews on the global environmental change and its relationship to the global
political economy. Clapp and Dauvergne discuss four distinct environmental worldviews
namely; market liberals, institutionalists, bio environmentalists and social greens. Clapp and
Dauvergne’s distinct categorisations show how the impact of globalisation on the environment,
the causes of environmental degradation and the ways to tackle the global environmental
conditions are perceived differently by separate categories of thinkers (2011). Perhaps we can
assume to the fact that part of the environmental problem we are faced with today is caused by
the conflicting environmental worldviews, which makes it complicated to jointly tackle the
problem. Nonetheless, all four environmental worldviews recognise and acknowledge that the
environment is under constant pressure as a result of development and human action and
critically in need of protection (Clapp & Dauvergne, 2011).
There are numerous causal factors mentioned by several environmentalists and
advocates that outline some of the root causes of environmental deterioration. Exorbitant
pollution from human and industrial activities (industrialism), militarisation and wars which
leads to land degradation, spiralling population growth which leads to increasing waste
generation, unequal wealth distribution (poverty), unsustainable agricultural and fishing
methods, overconsumption are all causes of environmental problems (Donohoe, 2003). In
addition, statistics show that, per year, an estimated 55 billion tons of minerals, metals, fossil
energy and bio mass are extracted from the earth due to industrialism, and overall, we use 50
per cent more natural resources than the planet can supply (Worldcounts, 2014).

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS

As already established, the environment is increasingly being altered by the constant human
activities and the overuse of the earth’s resources, urbanisation and increasing waves of
industrialism and globalisation. The planet’s life supporting system has for that matter been
highly damaged. Consequently, the world is being faced with complex environmental problems
that need to be addressed. Some of the significant global environmental problems include;
• Greenhouse effect, Global Warming and Climate Change
• Biodiversity loss
• Transboundary pollution
• Depletion of Ozone layer

Greenhouse effect, Global Warming: According to a report put forward by the European
Environmental Agency (EEA), there have been a significant increase in the global and
European annual mean air temperatures. By the commencement of the 20th century, the annual
global mean temperatures rose from 0.3 to 0.6°C and 1998 was recorded as the warmest year
on record (EEA, 1998). Furthermore, other recent studies have shown that, annual global mean
temperatures in the last decade have risen drastically from 0.87 to 0.92°C. The EEA recorded
that out of the 17 hottest years on record, all but one has happened since the year 2000. In
addition, the year 2016 was reported as the warmest year, 1.1°C warmer than the levels of the
pre-industrial period (Ibid). There is strong evidence that greenhouse gases emissions, mainly
carbon dioxide (CO2) is provoking the earth’s surface temperatures to rise (Global Warming),
and the result of this increase in temperatures lead to the global environmental issue of climate
change. That is, impact of the rising temperatures and its side effects such as melting glaciers
and destructive rainstorms pose a long-term threat with drastic changes in climate and average
temperature and precipitation. (Kennedy & Lindsey, 2015). Innumerable climate models
predict further increases beyond the previous and present levels, of about 2°C by the year 2100,
and an instantaneous 50-70% cutback in international CO2 emissions would be necessary in
order to stabilise the present global CO2 concentrations (IPCC, 2007).
Biodiversity Loss
All the global environmental problems the world faces are said to be related. According to
O’Neill, the issue of Climate Change is expected to be the principal cause of biodiversity loss
and other problems such as desertification and transformation of terrestrial and marine
ecosystems (2009). The World Wildlife Fund’s 2014 ‘Living Planet Report, which was based
on a scientific research with over 3000 species of an array of animals from across the planet
made a stunning discovery. The report concluded that between the year of 1970 to 2010, the
earth has lost over 52% of its biodiversity (Andrews, 2014). Furthermore, within the same 40-
year period, there has been a doubled growth in human population, a 76% loss of freshwater
wildlife and a 39% loss of terrestrial wildlife and marine wildlife (Ibid). The issue of
biodiversity loss develops from factors such as extensive clearing and burning of woodland, the
haphazard use of pesticides, overharvesting of animals and plants, harmful farming and fishing
practices, urbanisation and so on. Emerging research suggests that the increased proportion of
extinction will further accelerate and the loss of species and the disruption of the ecosystem
will have a damaging effect on human health (Anand, 2013).

Transboundary Air Pollution

Globalisation, free trade and the interconnectivity among nations with regard to the
geographical borderless nature of countries has meant that there are shared substantive growth
among many economies. However, as economic growth is shared, so are environmental
hazards. There are various examples of transboundary environmental issues including long-
range transboundary air pollution such as acid rain, pollution of waterbodies and worldwide
trade in hazardous wastes (O’Neill, 2009). Transboundary air pollution is air pollution
generated in one country and affecting other countries. It contributes to summer smog and
acidification, soil and water eutrophication and the dispersion of dangerous elements (EEA,
1998). The principal sources of transboundary air pollution consist of industrialisation, energy
use and transportation including both local transportation and international shipping (Ibid). The
1986 Chernobyl disaster which took place in Ukraine when a nuclear reactor exploded, and
radioactive gases were released into the atmosphere is a vivid example of transboundary air
pollution that led to devastating effects in Ukraine and neighbouring countries (World-Nuclear,
2016).
Depletion of Ozone layer
According to Clapp and Dauvergne, various scientists in 1974 made a unique discovery that
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which is also considered as a greenhouse gas, were drifting into
the atmosphere and causing a gradual depletion of the ozone layer. A depletion of the isothermal
layer which protects humans against the adverse effects of the ultraviolet sun rays. Scientists
found out that an exhausted ozone layer could cause devastating effects such skin cancer
conditions and cataract, reduce the disease immunity in humans and weaken the productivity
of plants (2011). There are several other global environmental problems that we are faced with
in the 21st century such as desertification (caused by over cultivation, overgrazing, deforestation
and so on), overpopulation, waste disposal, ocean acidification, genetic engineering among
others.

GLOBAL POLICY RESPONSE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Consequently, the beginning of an international awareness to the critical problems faced by the
planet due to human action and other causes, and the negative effects these problems have on
both natural resources and human health has called for a myriad of global collective actions in
order to tackle these issues. Linnér and Selin argue that, although the United Nations have been
constantly criticised for its inadequacy in efficiency, the international organisation still plays a
paramount role in terms of global governance (Linnér & Selin, 2013).
The first major conference of the United Nations to address international environmental
issues was the ‘United Nations Conference on the Human Environment’ (Stockholm
Conference) held in Stockholm, Sweden from June 5-16, 1972. This conference, assembled
through the support of United Nations auspices was the first to highlight the global need for
response to global environmental problems (UN, 2018)
The concept of sustainable development is derived from the belief that, the primary
standard of living among the planet’s population can be raised without needlessly putting a
strain or pressure on existing natural resources and causing further damages to the environment
(Danesi & Cherif, 1996). The international community agreed and enacted a strategic plan
known as ‘Agenda 21’ at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED) which took place in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. Agenda 21 was devised to deal
with the global challenges of the 21 st century as it addresses crucial world issues, and proposes
several corresponding actions needed to be taken by key players in different countries according
to their capacities and priorities (while considering the principles contained in the Rio
declaration on Environment and Development). Agenda 21 addresses various themes within
the concept of sustainable development. Categorised in 40 chapters, Agenda 21 covers subjects
such as the protection of the atmosphere, combating deforestation, poverty eradication, toxic
chemicals and waste management, sustainable agriculture and development. Albeit the
responsibility of governments for the implementation of Agenda 21, international cooperation
is needed to assist and complement (Ibid).
Following the global efforts led by the United Nations to bring governments together to
tackle global environmental threats in 1992, another summit was organised forty years on to
ensure continued commitment to the global action plan of sustainable development. The United
Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) was held in Rio de Janeiro in June
2012 with an objective of securing renewed political commitment for sustainable development,
assessing the progress level and remaining gaps in the implementation of the earlier plan
(Agenda 21) and to discuss the rise of new challenges (Linnér & Selin, 2013). Particularly, the
focus of the UNCSD was firstly, a green economy in the context of sustainable development
and poverty eradication and secondly, the institutional framework for sustainable development
(as cited in Linnér & Selin, 2013:971).
Besides the above mentioned, there have been a series of more precise efforts directed
at particular environmental issues. Adopted in Kyoto, Japan on the 11th of December, 1997 and
enacted on the 16th of February, 2005, the Kyoto Protocol is a global agreement connected to
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, that commits the parties
involved to abide by the globally binding emission reduction targets. The protocol lays a
considerable amount of responsibility on developed nations under the principle of ‘common
but differentiated responsibilities’, because it recognises that these countries are culpable for
the recent immense levels of Greenhouse gases emissions in the atmosphere (UNFCC, 1998).
The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD), also set up during
the Earth Summit in 1992, sought to institute three primary objectives: conservation of
biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing
of the benefits from the use of genetic resources (as cited in Anand, 2013:7).
The Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer achieved in Vienna in 1985 is
considered a milestone in international collective action towards global environmental
problems. The Vienna Convention is thought to have set a significant benchmark as it was the
first-time governments concurred in principle to deal with a global environmental issue before
its impact or effects (Anand, 2013). In addition, the convention’s 1987 Montreal Protocol on
substances which exhaust the ozone layer has achieved great results as it has led to the
elimination of the manufacturing of harmful ozone depleting substances (Ibid). Figure 1 shows
a graphical representation of data acquired from the International Agreement Database. The
graph illustrates the development in the ratification of numerous environmental treaties,
protocols and agreements from the period of 1850 to 2016.

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS AND POLITICAL SOLUTIONS

The global environmental crisis we are faced with have prompted several critical international
actions by the United Nations, national governments and an array of non-state actors.
“No crisis in history has so clearly demonstrated the interdependence of nations as the
environmental crisis.” (UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, 2000). Undoubtedly, the global
environmental crisis has brought together a global collective response to the problems, however
there exist several challenges to an effective global environmental governance or political
solutions to the environmental crisis faced. A major issue of global governance is that no matter
how rapid the developments in global economic integration advances, national governments
and political actors will continue to have political authority over a wide range of issues (V.
Cable 1999).
Multiple Multilateral Environmental Agreements
“States, especially developing countries, struggle to meet institutional demands as the number
of institutions increases. Participation in GEG represents a challenge for all states, especially
developing countries, which use very scarce resources to participate in negotiations and
meetings, and to satisfy reporting requirements and other MEA demands.” (Najam et al,
2004:28). The constant expansion of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) and the
decentralisation of countless global environmental institutions is outlined as one of the primary
challenges of addressing global environmental issues politically. Due to the accelerated
increase in global environmental agreements, there exist discrepancies in rules and norms and
the stress of abiding by the myriad of action plans can be overwhelming and financially costly
for political actors especially governments (Najam et al, 2004). The existence of excessive
MEAs has meant that the resources of national governments, institutions and organisations are
strained and thus they become unable to act effectively in addressing all the global
environmental problems. This may leave several environmental issues undiscovered or
unresolved because in the attempt to solve the environmental problems, the incomprehensible
system of solutions become too complex than the issue itself (Ibid). For example, there exist
more than 500 MEAs which are registered with the United Nations including 155 on
biodiversity, 179 related to harmful substances and waste, 61 on atmosphere related, 46 land
conventions, and an extra 196 related to marine (Knigge et al., 2005; Roch & Perrez, 2005).
The massive amount of MEAs mentioned make it too complex for political actors to actively
address global environmental problems.

The Challenge of Accountability

Despite the success of cooperation between national governments, institutions, non-state actors
and other involving parties in establishing and enacting various commitments, frameworks and
treaties set up to address global environmental issues, there exist the problem of accountability
(Bowen et al, 2017). According to Najam and Halle, the non-existence or lack of accountability
in global environmental governance poses a grave challenge. They argue that the success of
global environmental agreements that address issues should not be measured by the exuberance
of the negation process but by the tenacity of the implementation of those agreements. Najam
and Halle expound further that governments, institutions and all other actors involved should
be evaluated based on a measurable implementation of obligations and objectives and not by
their statements of goodwill (Najam & Halle, 2010). Bowen et al on the challenge of
accountability in the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) framework
argued that, accountability requires the consideration of four distinct forms; the normative
behaviour standards for actors, the connection between actors ‘held to account’ and actors who
‘hold to account’, the evaluation of the behaviour of those held to account and how those ‘held
to account’ are responsible for their actions along with how sanctions are advocated. These four
aspects apply differently with regards to the actor (Bowen et al, 2017).
Accountability is therefore one reason why global environmental problems is difficult
to address through political solutions. Although several national governments, institutions and
other actors make varied efforts in addressing environmental issues by establishing frameworks
to pursue there is the problem of accountability or answerability. Who do governments and the
diverse actors answer to in the event of a failure to abide by the commitments pledged? Mere
statements that reflect desired commitments is inadequate and some form of accountability in
the implementation objectives is required in order for a successful solution.
Following almost two decades of passive negotiations, the ‘Accord de Paris’ (Paris
Agreement) was adopted in December, 2015 with the participation of almost every country on
the planet. However, on June 1, United States President Donald Trump disregard several
petitions from major business, political figures and members in his own administration to
announce the withdrawal of the US from the Paris agreement. While this came as an epochal
shock, many climate change proponents have brought up the issue of the lack of accountability
(Schleich, 2017).

The Challenge of Diversity in Cooperation and Interests

In order for a successful implementation of the various frameworks, agreements and the
achievement of objectives to solve global environmental issues, there is the critical need for
cooperation among numerous actors such as national governments, institutions, non-
governmental organisations and so on. The huge number of diverse political actors involved in
efforts to the solution of the environment’s problems poses a challenge. Although collective
action is fundamental to the implementation of environmental development objectives, it still
presents a challenge as there involves different actors, multiple subdivisions and jurisdictional
levels, with differing and sometimes conflicting interests (Bowen et al, 2017). According to
Bowen et al, the conceptualisation of collective action can take different forms; a coordination
problem which stresses institutional economics and public choice or a political problem which
emphasises the political behaviour among actors with different and conflicting interests such as
alliances that either promote or hinder a change in policy (Ibid). The fact that there are several
multiple actors cooperating makes the political solution to global environmental problems
difficult because all the actors involved may have different and conflicting interests.

The Challenge of Compromise

According to Bowen et al, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) is aimed at
demonstrating an undivided vision of economic development, environmental sustainability and
social inclusion, nonetheless there will always arise tensions between them which will
recognise the need for trade-offs or compromises (2017). In the process of the SDG framework,
multiple goals or targets are interrelated with each other and the realisation of one goal may
depend on the other, that is meeting one target may mean the compromise of another goal. Thus,
“win-wins may not always be possible, and difficult choices will need to be made in a multitude
of ways” (Bowen et al, 2017:92). Challenges with regards to compromising a set of goals for
others is problem to the implementation of frameworks established to counter global
environmental issues however, the real challenge perhaps lies with the identifiability of actors
who will be in charge to make the choices of what to compromise and what not to compromise.
There is still an open question in relation to how the choice of compromise is made and whose
responsibility it is to make them (Ibid).

CONCLUSION

To reiterate, global environmental problems such as global warming, ozone layer depletion,
biodiversity loss, transboundary pollution, desertification, ocean acidification, harmful
substance and waste disposal among others have been recognised. From the commencement of
global environmental issues, efforts have constantly been made by the international community
including national governments, institutions and non-governmental organisations to effectively
address and tackle those issues. Nonetheless, while efforts are being made to counter global
environmental problems, it has become rather difficult to approach those problems through
political solutions. Factors such as the rapid and increased numbers of Multilateral
Environmental Agreements and the fragmentation of environmental institutions including its
complexities, the lack of accountability, diverse interests in cooperation and the challenges with
regards to compromise all lead to the reasons behind why global environmental problems are
difficult to address through political solutions.
REFERENCE LIST
• Anand SV (2013) Global Environmental Issues. 2: 632 doi:10.4172/
scientificreports.632

• Andrews C. G., 2014. WWF Report: 52 Percent of the World’s Biodiversity Is Gone.
Good Nature Travel.

• Bowen, K, Cradock-Henry, N, Koch, F et al 2017, 'Implementing the "Sustainable

Development Goals": towards addressing three key governance
challenges?collective action, trade-offs, and accountability', Current Opinion in
Environmental Sustainability, vol. 26, pp. 90-96pp..

• Cable, V. (1999). Globalization and global governance. London: Royal institute of

international affairs.

• Clapp, Jennifer, and Peter Dauvergne. Paths to a Green World: The Political Economy
of the Global Environment. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2005.

• Donohoe, M., 2003. Causes and health consequences of environmental degradation

and social injustice. Soc. Sci. Med. 56, 573e587.

• Danesi P. R., Cherif H. S., 1996. Environmental changes in perspective: The global
response to challenges.

• EEA (1998) Europe’s Environment: the Second Assessment. Copenhagen.

• Emphasised by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, “No crisis in history has so clearly

demonstrated the interdependence of nations as the environmental crisis.” UNEP
2000.

• IPCC, 2007, “Climate change 2007: Synthesis report”, Contribution of Working

Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, Geneva

• Knigge, M., Herweg, J., Huberman, D., 2005. Geographical Aspects of International
Environmental Governance: Illustrating Decentralisation. Ecologic Institute for
International and European Environmental Policy, Berlin.

• Kennedy C., Lindsey R., 2015. What's the difference between global warming.
Climate.gov
 • Linnér, B-O, Selin, H, 2013, “The United Nations Conference on Sustainable
Development: Forty years in the making” Environment and Planning C: Government
and Policy 31 971–987

• Najam, A., Christopoulou, I. and Moomaw, B., 2004. “The Emergent System of
Global Environmental Governance.” Global Environmental Politics, 4(4): 23–35

• Najam A., Halle M., 2010. Global Environmental Governance: The Challenge of
Accountability. The International Institute for Sustainable Development

• O’Neill, K. (2009). The Environment and International Relations. Cambridge, United

Kingdom: Cambridge University Press

• Roch, P. and Perez, F. X., 2005. “International Environmental Governance: The Strive
Towards a Comprehensive, Coherent, Effective and Efficient International
Environmental Regime.” Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and
Policy, Volume 16, Number 1, Winter.

• Saul JR (2005) The collapse of globalism and the reinvention of the world. The
Overlook Press, New York, NY

• Schleich, J. A, 2017. A fair climate deal? Accountability first! The conversation

Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/a-fair-climate-deal-accountability-first-
78935

• United Nations, 2018. United Nations Conference on the Human Environment

(Stockholm Conference)

• UNFCCC, 1998. Second compilation and synthesis of second national

communications from Annex I Parties.

• TheWorldcounts, 2014. Is there really a hole in our Ozone Layer?

http://www.theworldcounts.com/stories/ozone_layer_depletion_facts

View publication stats