Introduction The state of the environment has become a major concern worldwide, with problems such as pollution, climate change, and deforestation threatening the planet’s future. While some people believe that only...
Faglig kvalitetssikret av lærere og toppstudenter · Følger læreplanen (LK20) · Sist oppdatert 2026-09-06
The question of whether individuals can help the environment or if responsibility lies solely with larger entities is a central debate in modern society. This guide deconstructs a high-level discussion essay on this topic, providing detailed analysis, examiner insights, and concrete strategies to help you elevate your own writing from a simple summary to a nuanced, well-supported argument.
Argumentative essays about societal responsibility are a staple of English exams in upper secondary school. You will frequently encounter prompts that ask you to discuss complex problems with no easy answers, such as environmental protection, public health, or economic inequality. The core skill being tested is your ability to understand a multifaceted issue, present opposing viewpoints fairly, and construct a logical, evidence-based argument for your own position. An exam task might be phrased like the one included with the original essay: “Developed countries have created many environmental problems in the world, particularly in their contribution to global warming. What can be done to reduce the dangers of global warming?” This prompt requires you to move beyond simply assigning blame and instead propose and evaluate solutions, which inevitably involves discussing the roles of different actors—individuals, corporations, and governments. This theme aligns with core curriculum elements focusing on sustainable development and democratic citizenship, making it a recurring and relevant topic.
To write a sophisticated essay, you need to use precise terminology. Understanding these concepts will allow you to articulate your arguments with greater clarity and depth, showing the examiner that you have a firm grasp of the topic.
| Term | Definition | Example in Context |
|---|---|---|
| Systemic Change | Fundamental change to the way a system or structure operates, addressing root causes rather than symptoms. This contrasts with individual behavioural changes. | Implementing a nationwide carbon tax is an example of systemic change, as it alters the economic incentives for all industries, rather than relying on individual companies to voluntarily reduce emissions. |
| Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) | A business model where companies integrate social and environmental concerns into their operations and interactions with their stakeholders. | Patagonia, an outdoor clothing company, demonstrates CSR by donating 1% of its sales to environmental groups and using recycled materials in its products. |
| Grassroots Movement | A campaign or movement that originates from the efforts of ordinary people in a community, rather than from established powers like politicians or corporations. | The Fridays for Future movement, started by Greta Thunberg, is a classic grassroots movement that mobilized millions of students worldwide to demand climate action from their leaders. |
| Carbon Footprint | The total amount of greenhouse gases (including carbon dioxide and methane) that are generated by our actions. | An individual's carbon footprint can be reduced by flying less, eating a plant-based diet, and using renewable energy. A corporation's footprint includes emissions from its factories, supply chain, and product usage. |
| Consumer Power | The influence that consumers have on the production and marketing of goods and services. By choosing what to buy, consumers can pressure companies to adopt more ethical or sustainable practices. | The widespread consumer demand for electric vehicles has forced traditional car manufacturers like Ford and Volkswagen to invest billions in developing their own electric models to compete with Tesla. |
| Greenwashing | The practice of making misleading claims about the environmental benefits of a product, service, or company policy to create a false pro-environmental image. | An oil company running advertisements that focus on its minor investments in renewable energy while the vast majority of its business remains in fossil fuels is a form of greenwashing. |
| Circular Economy | An economic model that aims to eliminate waste and promote the continual use of resources. It involves designing products for durability, reuse, remanufacturing, and recycling. | The Dutch phone company Fairphone designs its smartphones to be modular, allowing users to easily repair and upgrade components instead of replacing the entire device, thus extending its life and reducing e-waste. |
The state of the environment has become a major concern worldwide, with problems such as pollution, climate change, and deforestation threatening the planet’s future. While some people believe that only governments and large corporations have the power to make a meaningful difference, others argue that individuals also play a crucial role in protecting the environment. This essay will discuss both perspectives before concluding that although large-scale action by governments and businesses is essential, individual choices and behaviour remain equally important in driving real, lasting environmental change.
Examiner's Commentary: This introduction is highly effective. It starts by establishing the context and significance of the topic. The key strength is its clear, nuanced thesis statement in the final sentence. It doesn't just say "this essay will discuss both sides"; it presents a specific argument—that both systemic action and individual choice are essential and interconnected. This immediately signals a sophisticated, integrated approach to the examiner.
Supporters of the idea that individuals have little influence on environmental issues argue that the biggest sources of pollution and carbon emissions come from industries and governments, not from ordinary people. For example, factories, energy plants, and large-scale agriculture contribute far more to greenhouse gas emissions than households do. A 2017 report by the Carbon Disclosure Project revealed that just 100 companies have been the source of more than 70% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions since 1988. This statistic powerfully underscores the scale of corporate impact. Governments also control crucial areas such as public transportation, energy policy, and waste management, all of which have a massive impact on the environment. Without strict laws and regulations, companies are unlikely to reduce pollution voluntarily because doing so may reduce their profits. Thus, systemic change led by governments and corporations is necessary to achieve significant environmental improvements.
Examiner's Commentary: This paragraph masterfully argues the case for top-down responsibility. Its primary strength lies in the use of a specific, powerful statistic: "just 100 companies have been the source of more than 70% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions". This piece of evidence elevates the argument from a general claim to a well-supported, persuasive point. The paragraph is logically structured, moving from a general assertion to specific evidence and then to a concluding sentence that summarizes the argument.
Furthermore, governments have the authority and resources to implement nationwide or global policies. They can impose taxes on carbon emissions, ban harmful materials like plastic, and provide incentives for green innovation. The Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change, is a prime example of top-down action, where nations commit to collective goals. Similarly, corporations possess the technology and capital needed to transition to renewable energy, develop eco-friendly products, and promote sustainable supply chains. For instance, multinational companies like Tesla and Apple have already made substantial progress toward sustainability, influencing entire industries. Tesla catalysed the electric vehicle market, while Apple has pledged to make its entire supply chain carbon neutral by 2030. Therefore, meaningful environmental change often starts at the top — with policy reform and corporate accountability. This perspective suggests that while individual actions are not worthless, their impact is dwarfed by the structural changes that only powerful institutions can enact, making some wonder if are environmental problems too big for individual countries to handle, let alone individual people.
Examiner's Commentary: This paragraph builds effectively on the previous one by providing high-level, specific examples. Mentioning the Paris Agreement, Tesla, and Apple demonstrates strong topic knowledge. The analysis is sharp; it doesn't just list these examples but explains their significance—Tesla "catalysed" a market, Apple influences "entire industries." The use of the transitional word "Furthermore" ensures a smooth flow from the previous point, creating a cohesive argument. …