Developing countries
argue rich nations are responsible for the bulk of historical greenhouse gases and must lead the way.
Not exact matches
Achieving worldwide peak stuff, critics
argue, would require heading off rising demand in the developing world, while seeing a much more sustained fall in consumption among
richer nations.
But poor
nations argue that more pressing issues need to be ironed out, for example the overarching dispute between
rich and poor countries over how to share efforts to cut emissions, before more market - based mechanisms are developed or the groundwork for a global trading scheme is laid.
The Pisa report
argued that the image of a world divided into
rich and well - educated
nations and poor and badly - educated countries was «out of date».
«Climate - Change Activists Call for Tax Policies to Discourage Childbirth --» Climate - change activists are mobilizing to cut the birthrate,
arguing that
richer nations should discourage people having children in order to protect them from the ravages of global warming and reduce emissions.»»
Because poor
nations, as they industrialize, will likely continue to increase emissions at least in the short term, many
argue that
richer ones should redouble efforts to cut carbon pollution.
Literally nobody has ever
argued that cutting the average income of
rich nations would automatically produce better social outcomes.
This is particularly so, they
argue, since the developing countries» emissions are expected to surpass those of the
rich nations in 20 or 30 years.
Many commentators
argue that focusing on where emissions are produced is unfair, because much of the carbon output of countries such as China are generated as a result of producing goods that are ultimately consumed in
richer nations.
People in the poorer
nations argue that the average person in the
rich countries eats more food, consumes more energy and poisons the air more than they do.