Introduction
The subject of Environmental politics hinges on four facets of its study, which basically, but not entirely limited to, are rather inclined to political contingencies in the affairs of industrialized nations. These facets include examination of the evolutions of environmental parties and activators, the provision of analytical instrumentalities that make and support public policy implementations of environmental regulations at inter-country and intra-country levels, the transmission of spawned ideas by several environmental organizations and movements as well as individual theorists, and then the aim to envelope issues regarding the environment, internationally, which have continually remained to be salient. To a reasonable extent, environmental politics, therefore, is a microform of an entire political culture of a large-scale democracy which is surveyed through appropriate examination of the environment and could adopt approaches for examination of the eco-space. In this regard, the sustainability of environmental politics is situated in the accountability of the democracy which rules the politics. It is the expectation in this paper to address the topic of environmental politics in the totality of its sensitivity to objective peculiarities of the upkeep and fundamental reorganization of social and political predilections which seek to survey the boundary linking goals, instead of favoring a singular modern-day debated position as has been discussed in The Politics of Operationalisation: Sustainable Development and the Eco-space Approach.
Literature Review
Ziegler (2009) has considered in moments and efforts centered for the profitability of the environment through Environmental Politics. For example, he says that in 1996, Germany’s eco-space control agency negotiated for the BUND- which was termed ‘Friend of the Earth’- and was put in place to foster environmental check, politically. This was preceded by an Opschoor-lead report to regenerate the ‘neutrality’ of the environment through available resources. In considering the scope of environmental politics, it is necessary to measure and evaluate inputs such as land, water and energy use as well as outputs including measurements of toxic and harmful emissions like SO2 and CO2, the author identifies. With appropriate evaluations, indicators of environmental control through stratified political frame-works are vital for accurate forecast for revitalization of the environment as was noted from the Opschoor-lead report.
The efficacy of the operationalization and sustainability of environmental politics therefore, Ziegler (2009) says calls for clear specifications of a variety of environmental indicators as well as goals-setting with regard to the indicators. But then, the very limitation of environmental issues, what may be regarded as ‘space-boundary-language’, is evoked by the politics of inter-country and intra-country politics and may be misleading to a proper curtail of environmental issues. Instead, these issues should play the significant role of organizing the operationalization of inter-locale environmental measurements.
Otherwise, in a bid for potential Earth-rattling, there is the indication of neglect from the international community on certain encumbered underdeveloped nations against ‘insensitivity’ to oil drills. Convincingly, much of the earth’s reserve is been given away to the extraction of oil and biodiversity in many parts of the world, thus resulting into the insensitivity of politics to the environment. Consequently, several millions of metric tons of horrible emissions from burning oils and industries are resultant. However, the global community, yielding to inter-country politics, over the years, has expressed adamancy in responding financially to climate change and to better options for the renewal of environment.
The Cancun Climate Summit in Mexico is another expression of dull responses by the international community to negotiations on climate change. Commenting on the prospect of the summit, Ziegler (2009) notes the obviousness and likelihood of the remoteness of the possibility for reformations in the interest of global warming. This note is as a result of U.S mid-term elections and political issues.
This point by Ziegler is evident of expressions of the depth of scholarly perception to the adamant response of the international community towards environmental ‘rejuvenation’. However, it cannot be denied completely the totality of response of politics to environmental concerns. For instance, the state of California lunched a global scheme which was focused towards the reduction greenhouse gas effects, and which would transit towards minimizing the economy of carbon where there is no standing deal for global climatic changes.
However, a reflection of such fantastic moves has regularly been stampeded and hampered by decision on parliamentary round-tables or emergent political matters. For instance, it is clearly stated by (Ziegler, 2009) that the democratic setting of Democrates in the U.S., shortly after the party won the mid-term elections, brought in denier against the prospect of a bill in favor of climatic changes. This, Ziegler says was arrow headed by Florida’s Marc Rubio, Paul Rand, a senator from Kentucky. The distraction which was clearly political affected the cleavage of the administration of the U.S to yield to red-light from environmental scientists.
The need is obvious and urgent for stakeholders in environmental politics to be more responsive (without necessary limiting their decisions to country boundaries). More physical effort must be put in place to save the environment.
Internal consistency
It is clear from the forgoing discussion that environmental politics do not provide an internal consistency for the upkeep of the environment, Ziegler noted. Considering the operationalization and sustainability of strategic environmental protection, the question comes to mind as whether to follow arguments by academics who have considered sustainability of internal politics on similar topics.
The question of whether there is an internal consistency to environmental politics poses a twofold complication: whether the right decisions are resolved continually or whether they are regularly mixed with erotic ones, and then whether –at all – the right decisions are implemented at the right time. In our present democracy, negativity to internal consistency is the obvious.
Theories
Notable theories applicable to environmental politics are those of Karl Marx, John Mill, Thomas Hill, Martin Heidegger, Carl Schmitt, Giovanni Gentile, John Dewey, Franz Neumann, Antonio Gramsci, Herbert Marcuse, Friedrich Hayek, Isaiah Berlin and a number of others. Most of these theories contend for fundamental liberty in democracy which is relative to environmental politics in a utilitarian framework. For example, the integration of Spinoza, Marx, and Engels into a singular fused theory by Antonio Gramsci supports the need for consistency in environmental politics.
Evidence
Environmental politics is conquered by delineated policies defined within the context and language of ‘international boundaries’ dully deliberations at the fore-burner. The reason for the slack in maintenance of sound structures to curtail emerging environmental hazards through uncoordinated political policies is nearly linked with the fact that politics and science has refused to merge in unison and for a common front, in this regard, for the benefit of the environment. The unification of science and policies the affect the implementations of science, which are political, seen to have the ray of hope for an uplifted and sustained environmental politics.
Assumption
This paper maintenance the assumption the environmental politics worldwide is driven by industrialized nations; as such, their policies and implementations, or neglects can be considered to be the global occurrence. It also supposes that the best approach to understand confronting issues which affect the environment is through intensive academic research. As such, the research presented by Ziegler (2009) could be considered to be bedrock for internalizing the problems of the environment through political mechanism. As well, it is supposed that leadership decisions, as they affect the environment, are political and emerge from bias of democratic governments. These assumptions are not just obtainable from serious academic researches, but also they are facts as seen in the day to day politics of governments.
Conclusion
This paper has addressed the topic of environmental politics as a sensitive and objective issue which has peculiarities for the reorganization of social and political predilections which seek to survey the boundary linking goals, instead of favoring a singular modern-day debated position. The stand point of the paper is necessary in line with academic suggestions which propose the central role of politics and politicking upon the environment. This ‘central role’ of the politics over the environment is so far mistaken through streamlined political debates which may not necessarily be beneficial to humankind and the environment at large. It is found in the review of The Politics of Operationalisation: Sustainable Development and the Eco-space Approach that in order to save the environment, politics, power, and science must merge uniformly with a common drive through environmental protective frameworks. Also, there must be demarginalization of poor political economies such that deposition of waste such as e-wastes in such countries will be controlled for the benefit of humankind, generally.
List of References
Ziegler, R., 2009. The politics of operationalisation: sustainable development and the eco-space approach. Environmental Politics, 18 (2), pp.163-181.