It is argued that international organizations should take responsibility for tackling environmental problems
instead
of each country’s government Linking Words
while
others believe the opposite opinion. I completely agree with both of the viewpoints and I will elaborate on the reasons below.
On the one hand, there is no doubt that there are benefits when universal organizations take the lead. Linking Words
To begin
with, worldwide problems are having effects not only in a region but all over the world. Linking Words
For example
, global warming is happening at every corner of the earth. Linking Words
Therefore
, the world will need a global-level leader. Linking Words
Subsequently
, everyone on Linking Words
this
planet is the culprit for these issues so they need to take responsibility for their action. The Linking Words
last
point is that if there is no help, countries that are poor may not tackle these obstacles.
Linking Words
On the other hand
, it is Linking Words
also
obvious that there are reasons for each nation to make its own plan. Linking Words
Firstly
, each of them Linking Words
is having
a different problem source and various kinds of solutions. Wrong verb form
has
For instance
, forest fires are the source of pollution, which is air contamination, in the US and Canada, Linking Words
while
China has water pollution Linking Words
due to
over-exploit its resources. Linking Words
Secondly
, their priorities are different Linking Words
therefore
each country will have a different plan. Linking Words
For example
, countries that lack fresh water will try to purify the water first.
In conclusion, Linking Words
although
there are clear benefits when only one takes responsibility, I believe that cooperating between nations and international Linking Words
agency
will bring profits for a long time.Fix the agreement mistake
agencies
cathyngo1512