Some people think that environmental problems should be solved on a global scale while others believe it is better to deal with nationally. Discuss both sides and give your opinion

According to manifold people discussing environmental issues at an international platform is better, whereas, others consider it can be resolved at the domestic level. In my opinion, I do believe with

this

notion because the challenges that have been impacting worldwide should be discussed at a broader side,

however

, basic hurdles can be handled in a nation itself. On the one hand, it is imperative to talk about the common unresolved environmental difficulties at a larger platform to get the possible outcomes. To be more precise, global warming, deforestation, and overpopulation are certain obstacles that are growing rapidly and crumbling the world.

Thus

, if these debates can be taken to the United Nation and the stringent laws make against them

such

as carbon-free transportations for a better climate, proscribe the cutting down of trees to prevent the denuding, and one family one-child policy to forbid the increasing population all over the world.

On the other hand

, various obstacles can be resolved in a country itself. Simply stated, air and water pollution, and littering cities around the nation. The state government can set on these troubles in many ways,

for instance

, banned on petrol and diesel vehicles on the roads to purify the air quality, placing garbage bins on the beach and on the roads to keep them clean.

Moreover

, if somebody breaks these stringent regulations, a heavy penalty must be charged against them.

As a result

, swiftly these huddles get solved in the country itself. In conclusion, I profoundly affirm that myriad frequently larger atmosphere issues like mass population, climate change, and deforestation need to be talked at the universal level,

however

, other basic difficulties namely pollution, and debris in the towns can clear up at a domestic area.