The politics around climate change have muddled the simplicity of the issue at hand.

This calls for a very basic primer on what it means to have a world in which the climate
is changing.
Climate change refers to the phenomenon where man made activities such as constant
pollution and deforestation are leading to permanent changes in our weather cycles.
Some argue that these changes are part of a cycle. However, some of the events we
are experiencing have an unprecedented nature. Snow in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, strong
hurricanes and earthquakes, rising sea levels are just some of the indicators of this
permanent change. The drive towards modernization and extraction of resources is
causing damage, the scale of which could lead to our downfall.
The most obvious way forward is for countries to unite together and deal with the
situation as one force. This has been done through the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris
agreement. In these documents, countries are supposed to impose limits on the amount
of pollution and waste they are producing. The reason why a collective agreement is
absolutely essential is that nationalism has created cross border issues of sovereignty.
Implementing single solutions for each country is not only impractical but also costly. It
also creates differing standards of enforcement, which is the place where we stand
today. It is due to these differing standards that the world is in the mess it is in today. We
can't allow the western countries to use Asian and African countries as a dumping
ground. There should be no arbitrage, there should only be a standard where all parties
participate equally.
The main moral theory which could come close to the solution I have presented would
be utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a concept which endeavours to find solutions which

leads to the best outcomes. It may not suit everybody within that mix, but overall it is the
best outcome. The reason why a collective agreement is a utilitarian concept is that
even though countries may suffer due to lack of industrialization, the collective benefits
through this decision making. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts and it is
through protecting the whole, that all members will benefit.
The main argument which would be put across is that of egoism, which is currently the
case. Why should i sacrifice my growth for yours? You are already a high growth nation,
why are you stifling my growth? These are the common objections to a collective
answer. The best answer that can be given to this approach is that, egoism is why we
are here today. Pursuing our own goals in a limited land mass, Earth, will only lead to
further misery. Since all nations need to share the same planet, it is imperative that
within this issue at least a collective utilitarian framework is adopted to ensure the
survival of all members.