Politicians are more responsible for the protection of the environment than individuals. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In contemporary times, a school of thought believes that lawmakers are more answerable for the safety of nature than common people, while others do not think so. In the following paragraphs I will discuss both perspectives.
To begin with, elected representatives have the jurisdiction over the land and have all the rights to take strict action against those harming the environment and can pass laws to ensure this. The guidelines meant for prevention of ecological degradation are followed by everyone as no one wants to face penalties and punishment. Also, they can provide people with knowledge about environmentally friendly practices, so that the latter follow measures enthusiastically. On top of that, they also have a clear view of the approaching problems and also know-how about the required remedies suitable for countering the issues facing the planet since they have expert teams with them to suggest them best solutions.
However, citizens should also be responsible for mitigating the problem as they are the ones creating the mess and problems. If they act responsibly, the issues related to environmental degradation will be reduced. For instance, eliminating plastic and overuse of their vehicles will help stop littering of plastic and also bring down emissions caused by fossil fuel. It is also their requirement that is setting the whole system of creating pollution into the moment. Thus, if they do not waste things by overshopping, there will be no adverse effect on nature because factories will not exploit natural resources and also cause deforestation.
To conclude, in my opinion, the regime should be the one to take the onus for ensuring safety of the environment as they have the power and resources to create legal statutes, and everyone will follow their guidelines without reluctance.
