Environmental Issues

Brazil Report
As agreed by various scholars today, climate is becoming such a serious concern globally evident by fact that every country is busy enacting policies that will better safeguard our earths climate condition and also participating in collective global efforts to have unified policy on climate change. In this regard, during my simulation on global climate change, I took a collaborative approach that facilitated me to cooperate with other countries representatives with aim of achieving a multilateral support on the final resolution. It should be known that my focus is driven by the concept that a good environment is a condition sine qua non if human beings are to live their lives to the fullest.

During process of my research, I realized that Brazil as a country and a critical global team player bring with it a wealth of tangible concepts, facts, and world views that are fundamental in reaching a more compelling and meaningful solution to daunting challenge facing our world today of climate change. In this connection, this simulation report on Brazil offers and proposals towards other team player in the world shall throughout critically evaluate and analyze the proposals advanced by Brazil in respect to conservation of environment to establish viability orand rationale prompting those proposals.

From the perspective of Brazils old proposal, Brazil notes that islands are sinking as a result of the adverse effects of carbon emissions and greenhouse gases and yet the rest of the world ignores these dangerous outcomes. There are no substantial amendments done to the environmental policy. States must join hands and settle for an amicable and mutual ground. It is important that all team up if any success is to be realized. This is important since environmental hazards pose dangers to the whole human family across the world. It cannot be a war of only one country neither can it be fought unilaterally. So, the whole world ought to consider this problem as a global threat. This reaffirms the Brazils invitation to other states in embracing dialogue and cultivation of team spirit across the board.
Brazil intends to reduce its GHG emissions by 35 to 39 by 2025. Much focus should not be on the economic problems, but on the real problem of climate change. Among the countries that concur with the Brazils proposal is India. It expressed its intention in working with Brazil in a bid to come up with a solution that would profit Brazil as far as ethanol trade market is concerned.
 
The fundamental proposals that Brazil underscores are as follows that there be a clean energy, renewable trade market that will lower the prices of green technology occasioned by competition and as a result promote emergence of new technologies countries to throw in 1 of its GDP in support of the climate change funding tough penalties like losing IMF and World Bank loans to be advanced to those countries undermining the GHG reduction objectives and the integration of land use activities as a channel to reducing GHG emissions (Brazil 1). The integration of land use activities to cub GHG emissions can be achieved through WBC corporate carbon sinks, afforestation, and sustainable agriculture, and planting vegetation to tap GHG emissions from air.

However, the proposal advanced by Brazil is subject to evaluations and amendments. In this regard, the following transpired during the evaluations carried out. It is hard to ascertain that establishment of clean energy and renewable resources will lower the prices as this is only possible from a theoretical point of view. From a capitalist point of view, competition occasions low prices of goods but it is not clear who will invest in the new technology.  It is not even clear where this purported technology will be developed. It is quite difficult to ascertain that developing countries will at all invest in the new technology and also make available mechanisms that can be utilized in implementation of the whole process.

If developing countries consider donating 1 towards the climate change funding it might prove difficult to some other countries that are undergoing economic difficulties. South Africa, for example, is supposed to donate 2.77 billion which is not so significant to its GDP. However, South Africa is faced with enormous economic challenges which make it hard to surrender the 1 of its GDP. In deed, there are other countries going through the same, worse conditions than this. Therefore, by logical implication, the 1 may not be feasible to most developing countries considering their difficult economic circumstances.

It is impressive however to note on the incentives Brazil proposes to those countries that fail to meet the GHG reduction measures. It does not elaborate clearly what those reduction measures will be for every country. Indeed, a country like South Africa would abide by this incentive where IMF and World Bank loans would be withdrawn for any country that forfeits this however, most citizens are not comfortable with the idea of increasing taxes on loans that have been already advanced. This is because these loans had been implemented prior to the establishment of this policy and so should only apply to the subsequent enacted loans.

However, there is more that needs to be clarifying in this proposal as more flesh and detail is needed to it. It needs to spell out clearly how integration of land use activities can help in cubing GHG emissions. This, on the other hand, should not mean that the overall intentions and objectives of the proposal are not of substantial value.

The EU expresses its desire in supporting the proposal presented by Brazil. Contrary to what many believe it gives a framework that would lead the world in reduction of GHG emissions. All that is needed is carrying out some amendments by all countries. It is also welcome that those countries who feel oppressed by some of the incentives to present their opinions and be incorporated in the amendments accordingly. However, the resolution should be left to stand as it is the best and the most supported in the international community. The Oasis recommendation that there be an 80 emission reduction may be a recipe for global poverty and insolvency.

Looking at Brazils Amended Proposal, the objectives of the proposals are not sharply different from the previous proposal. However, there are amendments that have been incorporated to make it more acceptable.

There should be established a clean energy, renewable resource trade market that will enhance the reduction of prices of green technology products through competition. In this regard, emergence of new technologies will be encouraged. In a bid to achieve this, there can be established a subcommittee from the IPCC that will regulate and supervise such markets. This subcommittee can be referred to as Green Energy Market. The regulations enacted ensure that the profit margin is not more than 10 and all regulations to be inconformity with UN standards on human rights.

G20 countries should be encouraged to surrender 1 of GDP by 2015 in order to support the international fund for climate change. To make it easy and manageable for all, the contributions can be effected on annual basis with respect to IMF, WB report on GDP. The fund will be managed by the IFCC as per the IPCC prescriptions. In this regard, the IPCC will educate on the magnitude of GHG a given state can emit it will guide on realistic and achievable reduction goals for each country and that which a country ought to comply if it is to receive the fund.

The need for a new building will acquire one third of its recyclable power exhibited in their building codes enacted by 2025.  The building codes shall be studied by the IPCC. In addition, countries intending to receive aid from the IFCC must adhere to the building codes. Both IFCC and IPCC will have dominion and influence over any new building. They will see to it that the code is followed to the letter.

The view that countries lose IMF and World Bank Loans and that interests on their prior loans be increased had the following amendments. The IPCC and IFCC will be accountable for ensuring that countries comply with the GHG reduction objectives. The IPCC wills set goals to individual countries fittingly. Again, interests on future loans will be raised by 2 annually with respect to the countrys observance of the goals. Finally, there should be a consistent land usage manual created by the IPCC. Again, both the IPCC and IFCC shall provide a framework that can be followed on GHG removal through planting of new vegetation. It is worth noting that the planting of new vegetation does not involve the planting of tree monocultures that are widely found in the timber industry in a bid to eradicate biodiversity loss. Still, vegetation is to be determined by geography and it has to be native and non-invasive.

International Environmental Policy
Notably, the international environmental policy has undergone dramatic change over the years. This is orchestrated greatly by the concerns over unprecedented and far-reaching alterations in global environmental trends with respect to climate change, loss of biodiversity, deforestation, degradation of marine, and expansion of trade and consumption. This poses great challenges to the governments, corporations, local communities, NGOs and other individuals especially in their behavior and decision-making processes.

Environmental issues call for a daily political consideration and media awareness and coverage in all countries. This awareness provides adequate insights to the stakeholders in realizing that many challenges ranging from preservation of wetlands and wildlife all the way to the protection of the global atmosphere cannot be tucked only through domestic policies. Indeed, there is need to think outside the box and somewhat settle for an international policy framework.

Achievement of successful and feasible solutions in to these problems demands that nations cooperate regardless of their values, resources, priorities or levels of wealth. It is evident of nations that have reached international agreements although in other nations treaties continue to be elusive. In the quest to address these problems, an understanding of the rot causes of such problems is very important. Again, there should be an ability to evaluate environmental concerns with other considerations, and a positive reception for differing standpoints on the environment. In most cases, people would concur that environmental issues ought to be solved divergent opinions suffice over the question of how much cost should be put in tackling and minimizing these problems and how to succeed in this fight.

In conclusion of my simulation, I clearly see that there is no good achievement that comes without a price. This is to support the idea that countries must incur certain financial sacrifices in order to realized desired ends. The 1 boost from every countrys GDP should not be disputed. In fact, it should be part of the governments budget to safeguard and conserve the environment. The Brazilian invitation that this sacrifice be made is not a mere political gimmick it is an obligation to the government at all times. Just as how tax payers money is used to enable the government steer education or health or security so should the tax payers money be directed towards environmental preservation. There is no point of having a very good education system or health facilities in a polluted environment it does not make sense at all.

The amendments done to the proposal are perfect and conform to the international environmental policy. The tough measures are justifiable since they equal the adverse effects of a dying environment. In my opinion, these measures need to be tougher so that non-conformists can suffer the consequences. The issue of environment is normally looked down upon and it should never be the case. I hope that bodies like UNEP get to evaluate this amended proposal and somehow borrow ideas from it. This should also apply to the international environmental policy act.