The issue of climate change because of global warming since the post-industrial period has become and is still a concern at local, national and at the global stage. According to the fourth IPCC reports which were released in 2007 indicated that, numerous lines of proof justify that the post-industrial increase in greenhouse gases is not because of natural systems. However, this is because of the production of greenhouse gases emitted by human activities which is known as anthropogenic. Study by Isenhour (2012), demonstrate that upon all numerous steps taken to mitigate greenhouse gas emission and factual proof to demonstrate the essence for more immediate attention and strong built actions, the rate of total global emissions has still not shown a decrease in returns but rather are on the increase. Majority of current generation advocate that, there is an urgent need to find an effective and efficient measures to minimise and if possibly to prevent the anthropogenic source of pollution. This they think will minimise the risk climate change pose on current generation and to save future generation. However, does individual attitudes and preference, government and political policies, economic policies, local, national and global policies reflect on what people preach about or advocate for? It is in this context that Giddens paradox argues that ‘we act as if climate change is not real’ (Giddens, 2006).
In subsequent discussion, emphasis will be made on why Giddens argue that we act as if climate change is not real, what actions or policies Giddens prefer to be adequately addressing the threat if current actions or policies does not look to take climate as a major priority? Also, obstacle that will or that have the potential to prevent the implementation of Giddens recommendations will be analysed and finally, individual judgemental decision will be made regarding whether USA withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is a major shift in the positive direction or not?To start with, political acts, decisions and measures taken on local, national and international levels, is going to have vital impact as to whether we have the capacity and power to limit global warming, and how we adapt ourselves to current and on-going happening. Currently, however, according to Anthony Giddens (2006) argue that ”we do have a systematic politics of climate change” and for that it becomes very difficult for a consensus implementation of measures to deal with sources, causes and the impact it poses on the environment and on human health. Giddens support his argument base on how Sports Utility Vehicles (SUV) was highly used by majority of U.S. citizens or consumers (Giddens, 2009). The SUV vehicles were the most preferred model.
Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot
This is because during the tenure of President George W. Bush, there was no provision made to impose tax on vehicles that consumes a lot of fuel; Sports Utility Vehicles (SUV) where not energy efficient in terms of fuel consumption. Though these types of vehicle (SUV) do not promote environmental sustainability but however, people purchase to demonstrate their status in the society (Giddens, 2006). As the higher the price of a commodity, the lower the quantity demanded, and vice versa. Majority of motor-vehicle companies in and outside USA proceeded investing and increased the manufacturing capacity. Producers and users of SUV justify that, the level of safety is highly assured in terms of accident compared to small vehicles.
Also, justify that SUV can cope with bad rough terrain and security of users are safe (Giddens, 2006). This encouraged woman to also use SUV. The scale of preference of producers and users of SUV in the USA clearly support Giddens claim.Secondly, failure for current action and polices appears not take climate seriously or as their major priority, alternative recommendations have been made by Giddens to be adequately addressing the threat from anthropogenic source. The practicing of political convergence should be encouraged whereby climate policy needs to overlap with positive social goals.
That is climate change policies must converge with other good things if you are a vegetarian for ethnical belief, you are also contributing to reduction of carbon dioxide. Government should factor vegetarian and climate mitigation not necessary the explicit way but clearly, they will recognise that these are similar policy (Giddens, 2009). In addition to, an ensuring state must act as a regulator and guarantor to help develop politics of climate change. To be able to achieve that, the state must consider that it citizens (diverse group in society) understand the need for both behaviour and way of consumption. For that matter, there should be an effective cooperation and understanding to why it is important that there is the need to be better green and climate neutral. This will help develop a gradual minimisation of carbon emission that drives policy forward. Furthermore, the practice of foregrounding where by climate change becomes and is kept us the main front issue in public and politics.
The ‘development of imperative’, the contribution of less develop countries to global warming is marginal; chance for them to develop must not be restricted even though at this stage where such developmental process may cause a rise in emission. Therefore developed countries must help poor nations gain stability and welfare in the area of global environmental change (Giddens, 2009).Moreover, in the case of over -development, putting up proper measure in place to deal with the adverse impacts of economic growth is paramount and central to policy (Giddens, 2009) Adapting to proactive approach is essential as climate change is occurring, we ought to adapt regardless of mitigation policies. Doing so to cope with global warming, risk and uncertainty, long term perspective planning must be domestically and internationally welcomed into politics.
We should all bear in mind that climate change is all about risk taking and how it managements can be done.Point 3 High cost involves in addressing climate change has, and is hindrance to the implementation of policies. According to the Global landscape of climate change finance (2015), $361 billion was used to mitigate climate change and $35 billion for the adaptation of climate change. The willingness of developed countries like U.S.
to gain competitive advantage in the world market over China and other competitors, using less environmental sustainable method, materials and equipment’s in production and after production process, prevent the implementation of recommendation by Giddens. Again, the highly diverse social cultural and national policies affiliated to a particular demographic society or nation may hinder the implementation of Giddens suggested solutions. A change in different political agenda resulting from change in government undermines Giddens proposed solutions to become fruitful in implementation. Lack of enough funds or aid to support activities of less developed nations in addressing climate change also prevent implementation sine we leave in a global world; pollution caused by either less developed or developed country affect us all.In conclusion, the Giddens paradox and the U.
S. withdrawal from Paris agreement indicates that, to achieve Climate target which is 2 degree Celsius; this involves the participation willingness of the individual, universal cooperation of countries globally and the universal implementation by parties.
