Over the years, international organizations have adapted their policies and regulations to the events that have altered both domestic and international affairs. Climate change has been a very delicate issue in the past decade, as scientists have released information that has caught the attention of states across the globe. Human activity has altered the “greenhouse effect” making every single human being culpable and targetable of such change. As a result, states are concerned of the effect this has and might have in their communities in the near future. Governments have been actively involved in the implementation of international treaties to improve the environmental situation globally, decrease the effects of climate change, and prevent atrocious results due to a lack of responsibility.
States have different concerns about the climate, which impedes the establishment of a more robust international institutions. Internationally, governments need to enforce a social contract for a benefit of all parties. Climate change is a global matter and the actions taken in one country will have a domino effect everywhere. If the situation worsens, the food chains will be altered. Living things, such as polar bears, will die and become extinct. The supply of food will decrease as the demand for food will increase. States must increase prices to prevent shortages. The Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement made to address climate change, has been set to run through 2012. However, it is time to reevaluate the commitments previously made and how it has affected the planet.
In order to collectively address climate change, states need to innovate. New technology and large-scale research will control the levels of contamination. To promote cooperation, states must be responsible for measuring, reporting and verifying other states. By increasing state participation in this debate, more states will be bound to sign an agreement; “the effectiveness of an international agreement is limited by the commitment level of the agreement’s least interested party.” Even though states have different concerns, they all have the same interest – make the Earth a better place to live for its citizens. Tracking states’ activities will “urge process” as states do not meet voluntary goals unless they are legally compelled to do so. This leads to the constant debate of who is to be blamed and who should be the state to take the first step.
States must enter a universal agreement. Power nor resources matter; state must develop a collective plan to ensure the future of the planet. Policies and regulations should include both developed and developing countries because both are equally affected by this global phenomenon. The development of such a plan should be left to a small number of individuals, regardless of their citizenship, who are knowledgeable about the situation and that can amend previous regimes in order to slowly but surely end this global problem. As a result, this will prevent states from engaging in any sort of disagreement. The key to a successful plan is a non-binding institution that oblige all states to to report facts about their data, regardless of their stages of development – this will also increase compliance and serve as a non-binding institution.
States all over the world have every right to be concern about how domestic and international affairs are handled and how it affects the planet. By complying and agreeing to a universal contract, states are bound to address and handle this issue. Climate change, as a result of human activity, has affected every state equally. Moreover, it has increase state participation as seen in the active movement to increase consciousness of the environment.