The Pros And Cons Of The Paris Agreement

1700 Words7 Pages

The Paris Agreement was drafted and discussed amongst representatives from 197 countries apart of the United Nations, in a joint effort to halt the future and current risks imposed by rising global temperatures. Since November of 2016, 175 countries have ratified and adopted measures to reduce rising emission rates. The United States Environmental Protection Agency concludes that the primary source for climate change is due to the increase in emissions of greenhouse gases. In 2015, 179 sovereign nations gathered in Paris, France to officially discuss the measures that would be imposed by the nations in agreeance, to cut greenhouse gas emission. The European Union has some of the toughest policies and standards aimed at protecting and sustaining the …show more content…

The European Union implemented programs based around the 7th Environment Action Programme which highlights protecting natural resources, requiring citizens to move towards "resource-efficient" technologies, and protecting citizen's health. Other actors agreed to similar measures in a cohesive effort to reduce emission rates. Vast support across the world included that of the United States which resulted in the Obama administration enacting new policies. This led to commentary amongst contemporary realist and idealist scholars. Realist scholars argue that policies implemented under new restrictions to reduce emission must go through Congress, or they are in violation of the United States Constitution. These realists also believe that a nation is not supporting policy interests of its people, but that of other global actors under the Paris Agreement and that they are only participating so they can lay claim over impoverished nations. Idealist scholars are asserting that the constitutionally sound Paris Agreement, is being supported by major actors because it is enriching participants' economies and giving them overall clout in the International