The problem lies
within the amount of enforcement that is dedicated on ensuring that the policies
are practised to the full extent. Not every country has the same view when
enforcement of policy is the issue. Some nations are better off than others so
it is easier for them to proceed with strict enforcement but Third World
countries, in order to compete in the world market, are more lenient because of
the need to better establish a prosperous economy. This is a main concern among
many because the problem is never fully solved but simply reallocated. This is
when international policy becomes a suggested solution. Governments need to
strike a common chord with each other when it comes to environmental
sustainability. It needs to be seen that if restrictions are present and
enforced equally throughout all nations then the concept of conservation will be
spread throughout globally. In order for this to succeed a new flow of financing
and technology for environmental conservation needs to be achieved.14 Third
World nations would also not feel the pressure to exploit for maximum profit if
debts were alleviated and industrial countries initiated programs to provide
access to technical assistance, training technology transfer, and planning
grants to increase their capacity to manage environmental and energy
challenges.15 Through this method it would allow nations to stand on equal
ground and be able to maintain a harmony between nature and industry. This is a
fantasy to be achieved for the motive of wealth is always the motivation that
leads to the neglecting of policies. The proposal of a world government is an
idea that could ensure that a universal policy be followed by all countries and
ensure that enforcement be weighted equally among all nations. A world
government generates both relief and fear when it boils down to policy making.
The relief comes that all nations are treated equally and must follow all laws
that have been passed by this supreme institution. Yet, not all nations are
equal even though the idea of it sounds appealing. Some nations are better off
than others are so it is difficult for everyone to participate fully when some
nations can achieve goals easier than others can. The main fear springs from the
idea of losing identity and power. A single government representing the world of
many different cultures and beliefs is very hard to imagine. Minorities might
feel threatened in that they have no legitimate say in the outcomes of producing
legislation. This in turn leads to the representation of governments in
countries. They would feel threatened in the sense that they truly have no power
since the world government would be the one in control of matters of all
countries globally. So, what needs to be done is not the production of a world
government but an alliance between world organisations and existing governments.
Globalisation through this method does not infringe on the power of government
but allows for compromise to occur and for then to understand the need for a
unified co-operation to maintain the environment and resources for future
enjoyment and use. In Australia for instance, the Confederation of Australian
Industry and the Australian Conservation Foundation, along side with a number of
state governments, agreed to endorse the National Conservation Strategy for
Australia in 1986.16 This promoted the need to save the environment and
ecological beauty of Australia for there was a realisation that damage to the
environment would lead to damage to the economy. The concern was in tourism. The
natural environment is a critically important part of tourism and is
increasingly being recognised as such through the term “Ecotourism”.17 Through
globalisation and government assistance it is possible to see the importance of
conservation which in turn would set precedence for other countries to follow.
This was the main intention by the Australian Tourism Industry Association who
argued that tourism can and does (i) enhance environmental appreciation by
changing people’s attitudes; (ii) act as a justification for environmental
conservation; (iii) enhance environmental management for conservation; and (iv)
enrich the social and cultural environment of the Australian community.18 A
global government may have a unilateral authority and may think broadly but it
can not possibly reach out to everyone’s interests in the decision making.19
Mutual adjustment is the best method to solving the environmental problem by the
use of global co-ordination. When this occurs it produces policies and plans
that take account many positions that exist. A country’s own government needs to
be aware of the essential needs of its people and must respond to the concerns
of various authorities of energy, roads and highways, land use, city planning,
air and rail transport, and industrial policy.20 These needs then need to
co-relate with those needs presented by organisations that stand for the
protection of the planets resources and environment. Governments have not lost
power but need to re-learn how to distribute their influence. Both the federal
and provincial governments, at least in Canada, hold the distribution of
authority over environmental policy. The municipal governments still participate
even though they have been given no authority over the matter.21 But the
majority of the work is achieved by organisations that press governments for
swifter actions towards policy making. In Canada, the Greenpeace group, located
in Vancouver and Toronto, had a revenue of 7.4 million dollars without
government or corporal aid from 1987 to 1990.
