Critique of "Case for Global Environmental Organization"
This essay will critique Daniel Esty's chapter, "The Case for a Global Environmental Organization" in Managing the World Economy. The first part of the essay will discuss the arguments presented by the author. The second part of the essay will criticize these arguments with regard to practicability.
The purpose of Esty's chapter is to propose the formation of a global environmental organization (GEO) to address the environmental problems in the world. Esty immediately notes that the Bretton Woods agreement was reached long before environmental issues were considered serious enough to be addressed by world organizations. At the time the Bretton Woods agreement was reached (at the end of the Second World War) environmental issues largely consisted of local public health problems and minor conservation matters. As a result, the world organizations established by the agreement did not take into account world environmental issues. Environmental issues have only come to the forefront of public attention since the late 1960s. While local and national politicians have attempted to push local and national measures which address these issues, there is no real consensual effort to do so at the international level. Consequently, national environmental policies are not uniform and they frequently conflict with each other (pp. 287-88).
Esty argues that there are three basic reasons for establishing a GEO. First, such an organization is needed to address global environmental issues, such as worldwide pollution spillovers. It is all too easy for polluters to push pollution across borders, where they cannot practically be held liable for the pollution, placing the cost of the pollution on others Second, a GEO is needed to promote shared learning in addressing common environmental problems which are local in nature. Although there is no inherent need to address common local...