Introduction Environmental problems such as global warming, deforestation, and pollution are among the greatest challenges facing humanity. While some people believe that these issues should be addressed through...
Faglig kvalitetssikret av lærere og toppstudenter · Følger læreplanen (LK20) · Sist oppdatert 2026-09-06
This guide on solving environmental problems breaks down how to structure a high-scoring essay, analysing the complexities of global versus national approaches with specific examples from international treaties and domestic policies.
The theme of solving environmental problems is a recurring and highly relevant topic in the English subject curriculum, particularly for written exams in VG1, VG2, and VG3. Examiners frequently use this topic to assess your ability to construct a balanced, well-reasoned argument on a complex contemporary issue. Tasks are often framed as "discuss both views" or "to what extent do you agree or disagree," requiring you to navigate multiple perspectives. This topic is interdisciplinary, connecting English with subjects like social studies and natural science, and demonstrating this breadth of knowledge is highly valued.
You might encounter prompts such as:
Mastering this topic demonstrates not only your command of English but also your critical thinking skills and your awareness of major global issues, all of which are central assessment objectives.
To write a sophisticated essay on this topic, you need to understand and use precise terminology. Using these terms correctly will elevate your analysis and show the examiner a deeper level of engagement with the subject matter.
| Concept | Definition | Relevance to the Essay |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty | A nation's independent authority and right to govern itself without external interference. | National sovereignty is often cited as a barrier to binding international environmental agreements, as countries may be unwilling to cede control over their domestic policies. |
| Supranational Agreement | A treaty where member states delegate some decision-making authority to a shared international institution (e.g., the European Union). | These agreements are crucial for creating enforceable, region-wide environmental laws, such as the EU's Emissions Trading System, which go beyond simple cooperation. |
| Transboundary Pollution | Pollution that originates in one country but is able to cause damage in another country's environment, by crossing borders through pathways like water or air. | The existence of transboundary issues like acid rain or plastic pollution in the oceans is a powerful argument for why national-only approaches are insufficient. |
| Sustainable Development | Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. | This principle, central to the UN's goals, provides a framework for balancing the often-competing demands of economic growth and environmental protection. |
| Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) | The climate action plans submitted by each country that has joined the Paris Agreement, outlining their targets for emission reductions. | NDCs are a key example of a hybrid approach: a global framework that relies on individual national commitments, respecting sovereignty while aiming for a collective goal. |
| Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) | A principle acknowledging that all states are responsible for addressing global environmental destruction yet not equally responsible. It recognizes the historical contribution of developed nations to the problem. | This principle is fundamental to climate negotiations, justifying why developed countries are often expected to provide financial and technological support to developing nations. |
Environmental problems such as global warming, deforestation, and pollution are among the greatest challenges facing humanity. While some people believe that these issues should be addressed through international cooperation, others argue that it is more practical for individual countries to take responsibility and act independently. Both perspectives have valid arguments, but this essay will argue that although national efforts are crucial, environmental problems are global in nature and can only be solved effectively through coordinated international action.
Those who believe that environmental problems should be handled at the national level argue that governments are better equipped to understand and manage their own environmental situations. Each country has unique challenges—such as desertification in African nations, industrial pollution in China, or deforestation in Brazil—and local governments can tailor policies that best fit their contexts. For example, Norway has implemented national laws to protect its forests and marine ecosystems, while Singapore has developed efficient waste management systems suited to its urban environment. Another powerful example is Costa Rica, which reversed decades of deforestation through its national "Payment for Environmental Services" (PES) program, which financially incentivizes landowners to conserve forests. This policy was highly specific to Costa Rica's geography and land-ownership structure and would be difficult to impose through a global treaty. National governments can also enforce environmental laws more effectively than international organizations, which often lack the authority to impose penalties.
Another argument for a national approach is that countries differ in their economic capabilities and development priorities. Developing nations may rely heavily on industries that cause pollution, such as mining or manufacturing, to support their economies. Expecting them to meet the same environmental standards as rich countries can be unfair and unrealistic. National policies allow flexibility and enable countries to balance environmental protection with economic growth. Furthermore, global agreements sometimes fail because of political disagreements and unequal contributions, as seen in the slow progress of climate negotiations like the Kyoto Protocol. A key weakness of the Kyoto Protocol was its top-down approach, which set binding targets for developed nations but not for major developing emitters like China and India, and the United States ultimately refused to ratify it, citing economic concerns. This highlights how questions of fairness and economic impact can derail global efforts. Therefore, some argue that focusing on local policies and innovation, such as investing in renewable energy at a pace suitable for the national economy, may yield faster, more concrete results. The debate often questions whether governments should prioritize global warming over local environmental problems, and a national approach allows a country to focus on what it deems most urgent.
However, proponents of global solutions emphasize that environmental problems do not respect national borders. Air pollution, ocean plastic, and carbon emissions affect the entire planet regardless of where they originate. For instance, greenhouse gases emitted by one country contribute to climate change worldwide. The 1980s acid rain crisis in Europe is a classic example of such transboundary pollution; sulphur emissions from factories in the UK and Germany caused forest death in Scandinavia, a problem that could only be solved through the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution. Therefore, international cooperation is essential to ensure that all countries share responsibility for protecting the Earth. Global agreements like the Paris Climate Accord aim to unite nations under common environmental goals, encouraging both developed and developing countries to act collectively. The Accord's innovative structure, using Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), allows countries to set their own targets, which respects national sovereignty while still contributing to a global framework. Only through such cooperation can humanity effectively manage shared resources such as the atmosphere and oceans. …