environmental problem solving

• News, Stories & Speeches
• Get Involved
• Structure and leadership
• Committee of Permanent Representatives
• UN Environment Assembly
• Funding and partnerships
• Policies and strategies
• Evaluation Office
• Secretariats and Conventions

• Asia and the Pacific
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• New York Office
• North America
• Climate action
• Nature action
• Chemicals and pollution action
• Digital Transformations
• Disasters and conflicts
• Environment under review
• Environmental rights and governance
• Extractives
• Fresh Water
• Green economy
• Ocean, seas and coasts
• Resource efficiency
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Youth, education and environment
• Publications & data

1. Spread the word

Encourage your friends, family and co-workers to reduce their carbon pollution. Join a global movement like  Count Us In, which aims to inspire 1 billion people to take practical steps and challenge their leaders to act more boldly on climate. Organizers of the platform say that if 1 billion people took action, they could reduce as much as 20 per cent of global carbon emissions. Or you could sign up to the UN’s  #ActNow campaign on climate change and sustainability and add your voice to this critical global debate.

2. Keep up the political pressure

Lobby local politicians and businesses to support efforts to cut emissions and reduce carbon pollution.  #ActNow Speak Up  has sections on political pressure and corporate action - and Count Us In also has  some handy tips  for how to do this. Pick an environmental issue you care about, decide on a specific request for change and then try to arrange a meeting with your local representative. It might seem intimidating but your voice deserves to be heard. If humanity is to succeed in tackling the climate emergency, politicians must be part of the solution. It’s up to all of us to keep up with the pressure. 

3. Transform your transport

Transport accounts for around a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions and across the world, many governments are implementing policies to decarbonize travel. You can get a head start: leave your car at home and walk or cycle whenever possible. If the distances are too great, choose public transport, preferably electric options. If you must drive, offer to carpool with others so that fewer cars are on the road. Get ahead of the curve and buy an electric car. Reduce the number of long-haul flights you take. 

4. Rein in your power use

If you can, switch to a zero-carbon or renewable energy provider. Install solar panels on your roof. Be more efficient: turn your heating down a degree or two, if possible. Switch off appliances and lights when you are not using them and better yet buy the most efficient products in the first place (hint: this will save you money!). Insulate your loft or roof: you’ll be warmer in the winter, cooler in the summer and save some money too. 

5. Tweak your diet

Eat more plant-based meals – your body and the planet will thank you. Today, around 60 per cent of the world’s agricultural land is used for livestock grazing and people in many countries are consuming more animal-sourced food than is healthy. Plant-rich diets can help reduce chronic illnesses, such as heart disease, stroke, diabetes and cancer.

The climate emergency demands action from all of us. We need to get to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and everyone has a role to play.

6. Shop local and buy sustainable

To reduce your food’s carbon footprint, buy local and seasonal foods. You’ll be helping small businesses and farms in your area and reducing fossil fuel emissions associated with transport and cold chain storage. Sustainable agriculture uses up to 56 per cent less energy, creates 64 per cent fewer emissions and allows for greater levels of biodiversity than conventional farming. Go one step further and try growing your own fruit, vegetables and herbs. You can plant them in a garden, on a balcony or even on a window sill. Set up a community garden in your neighbourhood to get others involved. 

7. Don’t waste food

One-third of all food produced is either lost or wasted. According to UNEP’s  Food Waste Index Report 2021 , people globally waste 1 billion tonnes of food each year, which accounts for around 8-10 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Avoid waste by only buying what you need. Take advantage of every edible part of the foods you purchase. Measure portion sizes of rice and other staples before cooking them, store food correctly (use your freezer if you have one), be creative with leftovers, share extras with your friends and neighbours and contribute to a local food-sharing scheme. Make compost out of inedible remnants and use it to fertilize your garden. Composting is one of the best options for managing organic waste while also reducing environmental impacts.

8. Dress (climate) smart

The fashion industry accounts for 8-10 per cent of global carbon emissions – more than all international flights and maritime shipping combined – and ‘fast fashion’ has created a throwaway culture that sees clothes quickly end up in landfills. But we can change this. Buy fewer new clothes and wear them longer. Seek out sustainable labels and use rental services for special occasions rather than buying new items that will only be worn once. Recycle pre-loved clothes and repair when necessary.

9. Plant trees  

Every year approximately 12 million hectares of forest are destroyed and this deforestation, together with agriculture and other land use changes, is responsible for roughly 25 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. We can all play a part in reversing this trend by planting trees, either individually or as part of a collective. For example, the Plant-for-the-Planet initiative allows people to sponsor tree-planting around the world.

Check out this UNEP guide to see what else you can do as part of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration , a global drive to halt the degradation of land and oceans, protect biodiversity, and rebuild ecosystems. 

10. Focus on planet-friendly investments

Individuals can also spur change through their savings and investments by choosing financial institutions that do not invest in carbon-polluting industries. #ActNow Speak Up  has a section on money and so does  Count Us In . This sends a clear signal to the market and already many financial institutions are offering more ethical investments, allowing you to use your money to support causes you believe in and avoid those you don’t. You can ask your financial institution about their responsible banking policies and find out how they rank in independent research. 

UNEP is at the front in support of the Paris Agreement goal of keeping the global temperature rise well below 2°C, and aiming - to be safe - for 1.5°C, compared to pre-industrial levels. To do this, UNEP has developed a Six-Sector Solution . The Six Sector Solution is a roadmap to reducing emissions across sectors in line with the Paris Agreement commitments and in pursuit of climate stability. The six sectors identified are Energy; Industry; Agriculture & Food; Forests & Land Use; Transport; and Buildings & Cities.

• Clean fuels
• Energy Efficiency
• Sustainable Development

Further Resources

• 7 climate action highlights to remember before COP26
• Climate Action Note - data you need to know
• Emissions Gap Report 2021
• Food Waste Index 2021
• Act Now: the UN campaign for individual action
• Count Us In
• Food Loss and Waste Website

Related Content

Related Sustainable Development Goals

© 2024 UNEP Terms of Use Privacy   Report Project Concern Report Scam Contact Us

10 Environmental Problems and Solutions in 2023

There are so many environmental problems we face today, and they all have to be addressed. But which environmental issues demand our attention now?

10 Environmental Problems and Solutions

Want to know even more? Check out our List of Environmental Issues Examples where we discuss the 30 biggest threats earth faces today for a more in-depth understanding of environmental problems.

There is no magic bullet solution for the environmental issues we face. The real solution will come when individuals choose to make decisions in favor of the earth’s welfare .

1. Climate Change

These things are intertwined and many of them have the same root cause – the main one is the burning of fossil fuels.

Climate Change Solutions

The solutions to climate change involve viewing the world differently than we currently do as a global culture.

2. Water Pollution

Water pollution includes marine pollution and freshwater pollution. Let’s take a look at both.

This is the primary cause of our loss of coral reefs around the globe.

Some of these things we can’t avoid, but a lot of it is preventable.

Water Pollution Solutions

3. air pollution.

Air pollution is what we call the suspended particulates that become part of the atmospheric gases that we breathe.

Furthermore, the carbon dioxide is mixed with a slurry of carcinogens and toxins like methane, formaldehyde, phosphorus, styrene, and more.

Air Pollution Solutions

However, we have to be clear that there isn’t a totally clean energy solution .

4. Natural Resource Depletion

The world is full of natural resources that we use to enable life as we know it. Natural resources feed us, give us electricity, wire our laptops, and keep us hydrated.

However, as communities expand across arid areas under the assumption that established water sources will be reliable, the water sources are being used faster than they can naturally replenish.

Natural Resource Depletion Solutions

5. waste management.

Waste management has come a long way in the last decade, but it has a long way to go in certain areas of the United States.

In 1980 each person generated about 3.66 pounds per day. In 2018 that figure had risen to 4.9 pounds per day. This is the trend that we must change.

Waste Management Solutions

Waste management must be solved worldwide, but the only thing we can affect is our own consumption and waste patterns.

6. Urban Sprawl

Urban sprawl is characterized by land use and natural resource consumption .

Regardless, it is a style of living that uses many more resources than a high-density urban lifestyle.

Urban Sprawl Solutions

7. energy consumption.

Our overall high energy consumption is the main contributor to climate change because 61% of the electricity generated in the United States is from burning fossil fuels.

We can’t just stop feeding data centers because we rely on them for work, data storage, and socialization. Younger generations are more dependent on data center capacity and speed than ever before .

Energy Consumption Solutions

8. environmental degradation.

Environmental degradation occurs when human activities change the environment for the worse.

Environmental Degradation Definition

Environmental degradation solutions, 9. deforestation.

Deforestation happens when trees are stripped away or burned away. It can be human-caused or the result of a natural disaster.

Deforestation Solutions

The most obvious solution to deforestation is to replant trees in areas that are logged or burned for any reason. Replanting with native species is a must.

10. Recycling Inefficiencies

The final huge environmental problem that we must solve domestically is our recycling inefficiencies.

Here are the reasons our recycling is not being recycled.

Recycling Solutions

The benefits of recycling clothes and textiles can’t be overstated. Engaging in this circular economy saves money, eliminates fabric waste, and turns fabric into a renewable resource!

Causes of Environmental Problems

Why are environmental problems common in developing countries.

Good question and the answer comes back to excess consumption . Many developing countries receive our excess clothing, recyclables, and used goods.

Instead of exposing the poor to these hazardous materials we should be doing the recycling at home and helping to develop a clean recycling industry abroad.

Final Thoughts

What do you think about these environmental problems and solutions? Do you have more ideas for how we can help to solve these environmental problems? Let us know in the comments below!

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Lawrence Susskind

Ford professor of urban and environmental planning.

• Teaching and Research
• Intellectual Contributions
• Journal Articles
• Role Play Simulations
• Book Chapters

Environmental Problem-Solving – A Video-Enhanced Self-Instructional e-Book from MIT

Submitted by [email protected] on Thu, 2017-05-25 15:33

A sunset lights a glacier in New Zealand's Fiordland National Park. Around the world, many glaciers are melting quickly as the planet warms.

• ENVIRONMENT

Are there real ways to fight climate change? Yes.

Humans have the solutions to fight a global environmental crisis. Do we have the will?

The evidence that humans are causing climate change, with drastic consequences for life on the planet, is overwhelming .

Experts began raising the alarm about global warming in 1979 , a change now referred to under the broader term climate change , preferred by scientists to describe the complex shifts now affecting our planet’s weather and climate systems. Climate change encompasses not only rising average temperatures but also extreme weather events, shifting wildlife populations and habitats, rising seas , and a range of other impacts.  

Over 200 countries—193 countries plus the 27 members of the European Union—have signed the Paris Climate Agreement , a treaty created in 2015 to fight climate change on a global scale. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which synthesizes the scientific consensus on the issue, has set a goal of keeping warming under 2°C (3.6°F) and pursuing an even lower warming cap of 1.5 °C (2.7° F).

But no country has created policies that will keep the world below 1.5 °C, according to the Climate Action Tracker . Current emissions have the world on track to warm 2.8°C by the end of this century.  

Addressing climate change will require many solutions —there's no magic bullet. Yet nearly all of these solutions exist today. They range from worldwide changes to where we source our electricity to protecting forests from deforestation.  

The promise of new technology

Better technology will help reduce emissions from activities like manufacturing and driving.  

Scientists are working on ways to sustainably produce hydrogen, most of which is currently derived from natural gas, to feed zero-emission fuel cells for transportation and electricity.  

Renewable energy is growing, and in the U.S., a combination of wind, solar, geothermal, and other renewable sources provide 20 percen t of the nation’s electricity.  

New technological developments promise to build better batteries to store that renewable energy, engineer a smarter electric grid, and capture carbon dioxide from power plants and store it underground or turn it into valuable products such as gasoline . Some argue that nuclear power—despite concerns over safety, water use, and toxic waste—should also be part of the solution, because nuclear plants don't contribute any direct air pollution while operating.

Should we turn to geoengineering?

While halting new greenhouse gas emissions is critical, scientists say we need to extract existing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, effectively sucking it out of the sky.  

Pulling carbon out of the atmosphere is a type of geoengineering , a science that interferes with the Earth’s natural systems, and it’s a controversial approach to fighting climate change.

Other types of geoengineering involve spraying sunlight-reflecting aerosols into the air or blocking the sun with a giant space mirror. Studies suggest we don’t know enough about the potential dangers of geoengineering to deploy it.

Restoring nature to protect the planet  

Planting trees, restoring seagrasses, and boosting the use of agricultural cover crops could help clean up significant amounts of carbon dioxide .  

The Amazon rainforest is an important reservoir of the Earth’s carbon, but a study published in 2021, showed deforestation was transforming this reservoir into a source of pollution.  

Restoring and protecting nature may provide as much as   37 percent of the climate mitigation needed to reach the Paris Agreement’s 203o targets. Protecting these ecosystems can also benefit biodiversity, providing a win-win for nature .

Adapt—or else

Communities around the world are already recognizing that adaptation must also be part of the response to climate change . From flood-prone coastal towns to regions facing increased droughts and fires, a new wave of initiatives focuses on boosting resilience . Those include managing or preventing land erosion, building microgrids and other energy systems built to withstand disruptions, and designing buildings with rising sea levels in mind.

Last year, the Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law and was a historic investment in fighting and adapting to climate change.

( Read more about how the bill will dramatically reduce emissions. )

Recent books such as Drawdown and Designing Climate Solutions have proposed bold yet simple plans for reversing our current course. The ideas vary, but the message is consistent: We already have many of the tools needed to address climate change. Some of the concepts are broad ones that governments and businesses must implement, but many other ideas involve changes that anyone can make— eating less   meat , for example, or rethinking your modes of transport .

"We have the technology today to rapidly move to a clean energy system," write the authors of Designing Climate Solutions . "And the price of that future, without counting environmental benefits, is about the same as that of a carbon-intensive future."

Sarah Gibbens contributed reporting to this article.

Related Topics

• CLIMATE CHANGE
• ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION
• AIR POLLUTION
• RENEWABLE ENERGY

You May Also Like

Another weapon to fight climate change? Put carbon back where we found it

Which cities will still be livable in a world altered by climate change?

Could seaweed be the 'fastest and least expensive' tool to fight climate change?

Listen to 30 years of climate change transformed into haunting music

How the historic climate bill will dramatically reduce U.S. emissions

• Environment
• Paid Content

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• Photography
• Mind, Body, Wonder
• Destination Guide
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

• Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
• Climate Change
• Policy & Economics
• Biodiversity
• Conservation

Get focused newsletters especially designed to be concise and easy to digest

• ESSENTIAL BRIEFING 3 times weekly
• TOP STORY ROUNDUP Once a week
• MONTHLY OVERVIEW Once a month
• Enter your email *
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Climate Change: Problems and Solutions

We know that climate change will have devastating impacts on the planet. We’re already seeing it now, with extreme weather events causing thousands of deaths around the world and greenhouse gases creating environments inhospitable to leading enjoyable lives. These are some of biggest climate change problems and solutions to help mitigate the crisis. 

What Are the Problems Caused of Climate Change?

Outdoor air pollution.

Poor air quality kills people. In 2016, outdoor air pollution caused an estimated 4.2 million premature deaths , about 90% of them in low- and middle-income countries. Also, preliminary studies identified a positive correlation between COVID-19-related mortalities and air pollution.

In the long term,   air pollution has been linked to higher rates of cancer, heart disease, stroke, and asthma. In fact, in the US alone, nearly 134 million people – over 40% of the population – are at risk of disease and premature death because of air pollution, according to American Lung Association estimates . 

In the short term, air pollution can cause sneezing and coughing, eye irritation, headaches and dizziness. Without fossil fuel emissions, the average life expectancy of the world’s population would increase by more than a year , while global economic and health costs would fall by about US$2.9 trillion .

More on the topic: Air Pollution: Have We Reached the Point of No Return?

Species Extinction 

According to a 2020 analysis , the sixth mass extinction of wildlife on Earth is accelerating. More than 500 species of land animals are on the brink of extinction and are likely to be lost within 20 years; the same number were lost over the whole of the last century. Scientists say that without the human destruction of nature, this rate of loss would have taken thousands of years. 

This rapid rate of species extinction is caused by an ever-increasing human population and natural resource consumption rates. Further, species are links in ecosystems and, as they disappear, the species they interact with are likely to disappear as well.

When a species dies out, the Earth’s ability to maintain ecosystem services is eroded to a degree. Humanity needs a relatively stable climate, flows of fresh water, agricultural pest and disease-vector control and pollination for crops, all services that will be impacted as the sixth mass extinction accelerates. 

Many endangered species are being affected by the wildlife trade, both legal and illegal, which poses a threat to human health. And it’s a major cause of species extinction and is eroding the ecosystem services that are vital for our survival. 

Ocean Acidification

Ocean acidification is a direct consequence of increased human-induced carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in the atmosphere. The ocean absorbs over 25% of all anthropogenic emissions from the atmosphere each year. As CO2 dissolves in seawater it forms carbonic acid, decreasing the ocean’s pH and leading to a variety of changes collectively known as ocean acidification. 

This causes water to heat up, killing marine life and affecting the ocean’s ability to continue absorbing atmospheric carbon dioxide. Ocean acidification also affects coral, weakening its skeleton and causing breakage.

Ocean acidity has increased by 26% since 1850 , 10 times faster than any period within the last 55 million years. 

Food Insecurity

The climate crisis poses a significant threat to agriculture as changes in temperature and precipitation affect crop yield and shift agricultural zones. 

A common misconception about the climate crisis is that warmer temperatures result in plants growing larger and for longer periods. While rising temperatures are causing the shifting of seasons, prompting plants to sprout and turn green sooner than usual, plants are becoming less nutritious, signalling a nutrient collapse and threatening food security .

More on the topic: Why We Should Care About Global Food Security  

The United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) reported that wheat and rice, which are highly sensitive to changes in CO2,  are the main source of protein for 71% of the world’s population. A paper published in Environmental Health Perspectives predicts that given this dependence on plant-based proteins, more than 15% of the global population will be protein deficient, resulting in 90.9 million days lost to illness and 2 million deaths annually by 2050. 

Deforestation 

For the past 20 years, the world has lost around 5 million hectares of forest every year to deforestation, mostly in the tropics. A third of tropical deforestation is concentrated in Brazil, home to the Amazon rainforest, where deforestation has surged to a 12-year high under far-right president Jair Bolsonaro. Alongside Brazil, Indonesia also stands out with the second largest proportion of tropical deforestation in a single country. 

Forests are one of the most important carbon sinks on the planet as a whole, and the carbon they absorb is released when they are cut down or burned. Because of this, eventually forests will become sources of carbon , as opposed to carbon sinks. Unfortunately, this process has already started in the Amazon rainforest.

Food production is the leading cause of deforestation, beef, soy and palm oil in particular. In fact, three quarters of all deforestation today is linked to agriculture.

You might also like: 10 Deforestation Facts You Should Know About

Plastic Waste Crisis

Every year, 500 billion plastic bottles are produced globally and ​​more than 8 million tonnes of plastic enter the ocean every year . Scientists have found microplastics in virtually every part of the world, from the deepest depths of the Mariana Trench to the highest point of Mount Everest. It is estimated that 100,000 marine mammals and turtles and one million sea birds are killed by marine plastic pollution annually.

More on the topic: 8 Shocking Plastic Pollution Statistics to Know About

Producing one tonne of plastic generates up to 2.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide and plastic production has been forecast to grow by 60% by 2030 and to treble by 2050. Sadly, only about 9% of all plastic ever produced has been recycled. About 12% has been incinerated, while the rest — 79% — has accumulated in landfills, dumps or the natural environment.

Other Problems

Other problems brought on by climate change, including rising maximum and minimum temperatures, rising sea levels, shrinking glaciers and thawing permafrost.

What Are Some Climate Change Solutions? 

Reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The importance of this can’t be stated enough –  greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced rapidly in order for the planet to have a chance of meeting climate goals. However, current efforts won’t have the effects that are needed; as of April 2021, commitments will still lead to 2.4°C of warming by the end of the century if implemented in full. Scientists at the IPCC have said that emissions should fall 45% from 2010 levels by 2030 to limit temperatures to 1.5°C by 2100, however the latest IPCC report has found that global temperatures will very likely rise 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2040. It is up to governments to ensure that corporations stop emitting harmful greenhouse gases, and arguably the best way to do this is to implement a carbon tax.

Implement a Carbon Tax

Imposed by a government, a carbon tax is a per-ton tax on the carbon emissions produced by burning fossil fuels or other pollutants. By putting a direct price on greenhouse gas emissions, carbon-intensive activities and products become more expensive, and so people, businesses and governments are incentivised to lower emissions through cleaner fuels. This is be one of the more effective climate change solutions we have at the moment. 

As one of the first countries in the world to impose a carbon tax, Sweden is a leader in the carbon taxation sphere . In 1991, the country introduced a carbon tax on transport fuels at $26 per ton of CO2, steadily increasing to today’s rate of $126 – the highest in the world. It currently covers approximately 40% of Sweden’s greenhouse gases emitted due to the numerous exemptions for the industrial sector, as well as the mining, agricultural and forestry sectors. The result? The carbon tax has been credited with being an environmental and economic success. Since the tax was introduced, CO2 emissions from transport declined almost 11% in an average year, with 6% being from the carbon tax alone. Similarly, in the electricity, gas and heat sector, greenhouse gas emissions were 31% lower in the first quarter of 2020 , compared with the same period in 2019; this can be attributed to the substitution of fossil fuels for biofuels.

As of 2019, carbon taxes have been implemented or scheduled for implementation in 25 countries; while 46 countries have put some price on carbon, either through carbon taxes or emissions trading schemes. 

More on the topic: What Countries Have a Carbon Tax?

Switch to a Plant-Based Diet

The UN predicts that there will be close to 10 billion people in the world by 2050. To meet this demand, we will need to increase food production by 50%. Agriculture takes up around 50% of all habitable land, equal to roughly 50 million sq km. The global production of food is responsible for releasing 30% of greenhouse gases and a massive part of this is raising animals for meat. 

Switching to a plant based diet is one of the more easily achievable climate change solutions, and it will reduce deforestation – according to the World Wildlife Fund, beef and soy drive more than two-thirds of the recorded habitat loss in Brazil’s Amazon, where the bulk of tropical rainforest loss occurs. It would also help reduce the amount of land used for agriculture by three quarters; this is due to the amount of cropland and pasture that goes into animal rearing. 

Reduce Food Waste

Roughly one-third  of the food produced that is intended for human consumption every year – around 1.3 billion tons and valued at US$1 trillion- is wasted or lost. This is enough to feed 3 billion people. The water used to produce the food wasted could be used by 9 billion people at around 200 litres per person per day. 

If food loss was a country, it would be the third-largest greenhouse gas emitter , behind China and the US, making it an incredibly important sector to focus on when devising emission-reducing strategies.

Consumers also need to be given more education on how they’re unknowingly contributing to food waste; ​​according to a survey conducted by Respect Food , 63% of people don’t know the difference between the “use by” and “best before” dates. Foods with “use by” dates are perishable and must be eaten before the given date. Foods with “best before” dates can be eaten after the given date, but it won’t be at its best quality. 

A big cause of food waste is the myth perpetuated by supermarkets that food must look “perfect” to be edible. Unfortunately, because of quality standards that rely too much on appearance, crops are sometimes left unharvested and rot. 

One of the many climate change solutions we can also consider is to support small farmers and local farmer’s markets to reduce food waste. 

Reduce Use of Single Use Plastics

While plastic has undeniably made our lives easier and more convenient, it has had a massive negative impact on the planet. 

Some ways to reduce your intake of single use plastics include avoiding plastic straws, plates and cutlery, buying in bulk so as to use less packaging, using reusable containers, doing your food shopping at a local farmer’s market, recycling the plastic you do use, buying less clothing and ensuring that the clothing you do buy is made from natural fibres like cotton, hemp and linen and composting food to use less plastic garbage bags. 

Invest in Renewable, Clean Energy

Mining for fossil fuels burns carbon dioxide, one of the major greenhouse gases driving climate change. We need to shift away from coal rapidly to have a chance of meeting climate goals; global unabated coal use must fall by around 80% this decade if warming is to be limited to less than 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures, according to recent Carbon Brief analysis.

Transitioning to clean energy is one of the most effective climate change solutions out there. And it’s already cheaper than fossil fuels; o f the wind, solar and other renewables that came on stream in 2020, nearly two-thirds – 62% – were cheaper than the cheapest new fossil fuel , according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).

Retiring coal plants would stop the emission of about three gigatonnes of CO2 a year – 20% of the reduction in emissions needed by 2030 to avert climate catastrophe.

Further, cheaper renewables give developed and developing countries a reason to phase out coal while meeting growing energy demands, saving costs and adding jobs to the economy.

Wildlife Conservation Efforts

Governments need to class endangered species as such in law and provide funding so that their preservation can be focused on by animal and wildlife conservation groups. Further, heavier penalties for hunting protected animals should be implemented and strictly enforced. 

To mitigate climate change and prevent a catastrophic global climate breakdown, we need a combination of solutions that consumers can take in their daily lives, innovative technological solutions and government intervention to stop emissions at the source. Our lives quite literally depend on it.

You might also like: 15 Biggest Environmental Problems of 2024

This story is funded by readers like you

Our non-profit newsroom provides climate coverage free of charge and advertising. Your one-off or monthly donations play a crucial role in supporting our operations, expanding our reach, and maintaining our editorial independence.

About EO | Mission Statement | Impact & Reach | Write for us

15 Biggest Environmental Problems of 2024

Water Shortage: Causes and Effects

What Are the Countries Most Prepared for Climate Change?

Hand-picked stories weekly or monthly. We promise, no spam!

Boost this article By donating us $100, $50 or subscribe to Boosting $10/month – we can get this article and others in front of tens of thousands of specially targeted readers. This targeted Boosting – helps us to reach wider audiences – aiming to convince the unconvinced, to inform the uninformed, to enlighten the dogmatic.

Jump to navigation

• Current Issue

Five Key Lessons

Environmental philosophy and ethics.

Taught at the College of Natural Resources by Professor Carolyn Merchant since 1979, Environmental Philosophy and Ethics begins with a background on the history of philosophy. The course then investigates our current global ecological crisis, dips back into ethical systems of the past, and applies new ethical and philosophical approaches to today’s problems. In addition to common environmental themes like population and sustainable development, students discuss such topics as genetic engineering, ecofeminism, deep ecology, and Eastern philosophy—all with an awareness of how race, class, and gender play a part. These five key lessons guide students as they each form a personal environmental ethic.

• Explore your ethics. Informing every decision, every negotiation, and every approach to a major environmental issue is an ethical stance: What is good? What is right? How ought we to act? In turn, all ethics have philosophical principles, histories, and assumptions at play. Learn to identify the underlying ethics of your colleagues and fellow negotiators, as well as how to apply your own.
• Choose to care. Whatever your occupation, choose an environmental issue you care deeply about and devote time and energy to solving it.
• Creativity is critical. Think about new approaches and new angles on resolving environmental problems.
• We are all one earth.  We share this planet with all living and nonliving beings. Considering the interactions among all of them is crucial to how we move forward.
• Race, gender, and class matter.  Consider these factors when examining any environmental issue. Propose gender-based, socially sensitive solutions to environmental problems.

ScienceSphere.blog

Unveiling The Secrets: How Scientists Tackle Environmental Problems

Table of Contents

Hook: The pressing need to address environmental problems

The world is facing numerous environmental problems that require immediate attention. From climate change to deforestation, these issues have far-reaching consequences for the planet and its inhabitants. The urgency to address these problems has never been greater, as the future of our planet hangs in the balance.

Brief overview of the role of scientists in tackling these issues

Scientists play a crucial role in understanding and solving environmental problems. Their expertise and research are instrumental in identifying the causes and effects of these issues. Through their work, scientists provide valuable insights and data that inform policy decisions and drive positive change.

Thesis statement: This blog post will explore the various ways scientists approach and solve environmental problems.

In this blog post, we will delve into the world of environmental science and explore the diverse approaches scientists take to tackle environmental problems. From research and data collection to collaboration and innovative solutions, scientists are at the forefront of finding sustainable solutions to protect our planet.

Environmental problems are complex and interconnected, requiring a multidisciplinary approach. Scientists from various fields come together to address these challenges, leveraging their expertise to develop innovative solutions. Through their work, scientists not only contribute to the body of knowledge but also influence policy decisions and advocate for environmental protection.

In the following sections, we will explore the different aspects of scientific approaches to environmental problems. We will discuss the importance of understanding the problem, the role of research and data collection, the power of collaboration and interdisciplinary approaches, the impact of innovative solutions and technologies, the influence of policy and advocacy, and the challenges and limitations faced by scientists in their quest to protect the environment.

By the end of this blog post, you will have a deeper understanding of the critical role scientists play in addressing environmental problems. You will also be inspired to support and engage with scientific efforts to protect the environment, as we all have a responsibility to preserve our planet for future generations.

Now, let’s dive into the first section: “Understanding the Problem.”

Understanding the Problem

Environmental problems are pressing issues that require immediate attention. These problems have a significant impact on the planet and its inhabitants. In order to effectively address these issues, scientists play a crucial role in understanding the complexity and interconnectedness of environmental problems.

Defining Environmental Problems and Their Impact

Environmental problems encompass a wide range of issues that affect the natural world. These problems can include climate change, deforestation, pollution, loss of biodiversity, and depletion of natural resources. The impact of these problems is far-reaching and affects not only the environment but also human health and well-being.

Climate change, for example, is causing rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and sea-level rise. This has detrimental effects on ecosystems, agriculture, and human settlements. Deforestation leads to the loss of habitat for countless species and contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. Pollution, whether it be air, water, or soil pollution, poses serious health risks to both humans and wildlife. Loss of biodiversity disrupts ecosystems and can have cascading effects on the entire planet. Lastly, the depletion of natural resources threatens the sustainability of our way of life.

Complexity and Interconnectedness of Environmental Problems

One of the key challenges in addressing environmental problems is their complexity. These problems are often interconnected and have multiple causes and consequences. For example, climate change is influenced by various factors such as greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, and industrial activities. These factors are interconnected and exacerbate the problem.

Similarly, pollution can be caused by various sources, including industrial waste, agricultural runoff, and vehicle emissions. These sources are interconnected and contribute to the overall pollution levels in the environment. Understanding the complexity and interconnectedness of these problems is crucial in developing effective solutions.

Importance of Scientific Research in Finding Solutions

Scientific research plays a vital role in understanding and finding solutions to environmental problems. Scientists conduct rigorous studies to gather data and analyze the causes and impacts of these problems. Through research, scientists can identify patterns, trends, and potential solutions.

Research also helps in assessing the effectiveness of existing policies and interventions. By collecting and analyzing data, scientists can evaluate the outcomes of different approaches and make informed recommendations for future actions. This evidence-based approach is essential in guiding decision-making and policy formulation.

Furthermore, scientific research helps in raising awareness about environmental problems. Through publications, conferences, and public engagement, scientists can communicate their findings to a wider audience. This helps in mobilizing support and creating a sense of urgency among policymakers, businesses, and the general public.

In conclusion, understanding the complexity and interconnectedness of environmental problems is crucial in finding effective solutions. Scientists play a vital role in defining these problems, assessing their impact, and conducting research to develop innovative solutions. Through their work, scientists contribute to the collective effort of protecting the environment and ensuring a sustainable future for generations to come.

Research and Data Collection

Scientific research plays a crucial role in understanding and addressing environmental problems. Through rigorous data collection and analysis, scientists are able to gain valuable insights into the complexities of these issues and develop effective solutions. In this section, we will explore the process of research in environmental studies, the importance of data collection, and the role of technology in monitoring and analyzing data.

Explaining the process of scientific research in environmental studies

Scientific research in environmental studies involves a systematic approach to understanding and solving problems. It begins with identifying a research question or problem statement that needs to be addressed. This could be anything from studying the impact of pollution on marine life to investigating the effects of deforestation on biodiversity.

Once the research question is established, scientists design experiments or observational studies to collect relevant data. This may involve conducting fieldwork, setting up monitoring stations, or analyzing existing datasets. The data collected is then carefully analyzed using statistical methods to draw meaningful conclusions.

Discussing the collection and analysis of data

Data collection is a critical step in scientific research. It provides the foundation for understanding the problem at hand and developing effective solutions. In environmental studies, data can be collected through various methods such as surveys, sampling, remote sensing, and laboratory experiments.

The collected data is then subjected to rigorous analysis. Statistical techniques are used to identify patterns, trends, and relationships within the data. This analysis helps scientists draw conclusions and make informed decisions about the environmental problem being studied.

Highlighting the role of technology in data collection and monitoring

Technology has revolutionized the way scientists collect and monitor data in environmental studies. Advanced tools and instruments have made it possible to gather data more efficiently and accurately. For example, remote sensing technologies such as satellites and drones enable scientists to collect data over large areas and inaccessible terrains.

Furthermore, the development of sensors and monitoring devices has allowed for real-time data collection. These devices can be deployed in various environments, such as oceans, forests, and urban areas, to continuously monitor parameters like temperature, air quality, and water pollution levels.

The use of technology in data analysis has also improved the accuracy and speed of processing large datasets. Powerful computers and sophisticated software enable scientists to analyze complex data and extract meaningful insights more effectively.

In conclusion, research and data collection are fundamental to understanding and addressing environmental problems. Scientists employ a systematic approach to gather and analyze data, which helps them gain insights into the complexities of these issues. The role of technology in data collection and monitoring cannot be overstated, as it has revolutionized the way scientists study the environment. By leveraging innovative technologies and interdisciplinary approaches, scientists can continue to make significant strides in solving environmental problems and protecting our planet.

Collaboration and Interdisciplinary Approaches

Collaboration among scientists from different fields and the adoption of interdisciplinary approaches play a crucial role in solving environmental problems. By combining their expertise and perspectives, scientists can develop innovative solutions that address the complexity and interconnectedness of these issues. This section will explore the importance of collaboration and interdisciplinary approaches in tackling environmental problems, providing examples of successful collaborations and their impact.

Importance of Collaboration

Collaboration among scientists from various disciplines is essential because environmental problems are multifaceted and require a comprehensive understanding. By working together, scientists can pool their knowledge and skills to develop holistic solutions. For example, a collaboration between ecologists, chemists, and engineers can lead to the development of sustainable technologies that mitigate pollution and protect ecosystems.

Collaboration also fosters creativity and innovation. When scientists from different fields come together, they bring unique perspectives and approaches to problem-solving. This diversity of thought can lead to breakthroughs and novel solutions that may not have been possible through individual efforts alone.

Benefits of Interdisciplinary Approaches

Interdisciplinary approaches involve integrating knowledge and methods from multiple disciplines to address complex environmental problems. These approaches recognize that environmental issues cannot be solved by a single discipline alone. By combining insights from various fields such as biology, chemistry, economics, and sociology, scientists can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the problem and develop effective solutions.

Interdisciplinary approaches also promote a more holistic and sustainable approach to problem-solving. For example, when addressing climate change, scientists need to consider not only the scientific aspects but also the social, economic, and political dimensions. By incorporating diverse perspectives, interdisciplinary teams can develop solutions that are not only scientifically sound but also socially and economically feasible.

Examples of Successful Collaborations

There have been numerous successful collaborations that have made a significant impact on addressing environmental problems. One notable example is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which brings together scientists from various disciplines to assess the scientific basis of climate change. The IPCC’s reports have played a crucial role in shaping global climate policies and raising awareness about the urgency of climate action.

Another example is the collaboration between marine biologists and engineers to develop innovative solutions for coral reef restoration. By combining their expertise, these scientists have successfully implemented techniques such as 3D printing of artificial reefs and coral transplantation, contributing to the conservation of these vital ecosystems.

Furthermore, collaborations between social scientists and conservation biologists have led to the development of community-based conservation initiatives. By involving local communities in conservation efforts, these projects have achieved both environmental and social benefits, ensuring the long-term sustainability of conservation practices.

In conclusion, collaboration among scientists from different fields and the adoption of interdisciplinary approaches are essential in solving environmental problems. By working together, scientists can leverage their diverse expertise and perspectives to develop innovative and holistic solutions. Successful collaborations have demonstrated the power of interdisciplinary approaches in addressing complex environmental issues. As we continue to face environmental challenges, it is crucial to foster collaboration and interdisciplinary research to protect our planet for future generations.

Innovative Solutions and Technologies

In today’s rapidly changing world, environmental problems have become more pressing than ever before. Scientists are at the forefront of finding solutions to these issues, using innovative approaches and cutting-edge technologies. In this section, we will explore the role of innovation in addressing environmental problems and discuss some of the groundbreaking solutions that scientists have developed.

Role of Innovation

Innovation plays a crucial role in addressing environmental problems. It involves thinking outside the box and coming up with new ideas and approaches to tackle complex issues. Scientists are constantly pushing the boundaries of knowledge and developing innovative solutions to protect the environment.

One example of innovation in environmental science is the development of clean energy technologies . As the world grapples with the challenges of climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, scientists have been working tirelessly to find alternative sources of energy. Renewable energy technologies such as solar power, wind power, and geothermal energy have emerged as viable alternatives to fossil fuels. These innovations not only help reduce carbon emissions but also contribute to the creation of a sustainable and greener future.

Cutting-Edge Technologies

Advancements in technology have revolutionized the way scientists approach environmental problems. Cutting-edge technologies enable researchers to collect and analyze data more efficiently, monitor environmental changes in real-time, and develop innovative solutions.

One such technology is remote sensing , which allows scientists to gather data about the Earth’s surface and atmosphere using satellites and other airborne sensors. This data provides valuable insights into various environmental parameters such as land cover, vegetation health, and air quality. Remote sensing has proven to be a powerful tool in monitoring deforestation, tracking the movement of pollutants, and assessing the impact of climate change.

Another groundbreaking technology is nanotechnology , which involves manipulating matter at the atomic and molecular scale. Nanotechnology has the potential to revolutionize various industries, including environmental science. Scientists are exploring the use of nanomaterials for water purification, air filtration, and soil remediation. These nanomaterials have unique properties that make them highly effective in removing pollutants and contaminants from the environment.

Examples of Innovative Solutions

Scientists have developed numerous innovative solutions to address environmental problems. One notable example is the development of biodegradable plastics . Traditional plastics pose a significant threat to the environment due to their long decomposition time. However, scientists have successfully created biodegradable plastics that break down naturally, reducing their impact on ecosystems.

Another innovative solution is the use of drones for environmental monitoring. Drones equipped with high-resolution cameras and sensors can collect data from remote and inaccessible areas, providing valuable information about biodiversity, habitat loss, and illegal activities such as poaching and deforestation. This technology allows scientists to monitor and protect fragile ecosystems more effectively.

Furthermore, scientists have been exploring the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in addressing environmental problems. AI algorithms can analyze vast amounts of data and identify patterns and trends that humans may overlook. This technology has been used to predict and mitigate the impact of natural disasters, optimize energy consumption, and develop more efficient waste management systems.

In conclusion, innovation and cutting-edge technologies are essential in addressing environmental problems. Scientists are constantly pushing the boundaries of knowledge and developing innovative solutions to protect the environment. From clean energy technologies to nanomaterials and AI, these advancements have the potential to create a sustainable and greener future. It is crucial to support and engage with scientific efforts to ensure the successful implementation of these innovative solutions.

Policy and Advocacy

Policy and advocacy play a crucial role in addressing environmental problems. Scientists have a unique position to influence policy decisions and advocate for effective solutions. In this section, we will explore the role of scientists in policy-making and the importance of advocacy for environmental issues.

Exploring the role of scientists in influencing policy decisions

Scientists have the expertise and knowledge to provide evidence-based recommendations for policy decisions. They conduct research, analyze data, and identify the most effective strategies to address environmental problems. By presenting their findings to policymakers, scientists can influence the development of policies that prioritize environmental protection.

Scientists act as advisors to government agencies, non-profit organizations, and international bodies, providing valuable insights into the potential consequences of different policy choices. Their expertise helps policymakers understand the scientific implications of their decisions and make informed choices that align with environmental goals.

Discussing the importance of advocacy for environmental issues

Advocacy is a powerful tool for raising awareness and mobilizing support for environmental issues. Scientists can use their expertise to advocate for policies that promote sustainability, conservation, and the protection of natural resources. By engaging with the public, policymakers, and other stakeholders, scientists can drive positive change and create a more sustainable future.

Advocacy efforts can take various forms, including public speaking, writing articles and op-eds, participating in public debates, and collaborating with environmental organizations. Scientists can use these platforms to communicate the urgency of environmental problems, highlight the potential consequences of inaction, and propose evidence-based solutions.

Providing examples of scientists who have made a significant impact through policy and advocacy work

Several scientists have made significant contributions to environmental policy and advocacy. One notable example is Dr. Jane Goodall, a renowned primatologist and conservationist. Through her research on chimpanzees, Dr. Goodall has become a prominent advocate for wildlife conservation and environmental education. Her work has influenced international policies and inspired countless individuals to take action for the protection of endangered species and their habitats.

Another example is Dr. James Hansen, a climate scientist who has been at the forefront of raising awareness about climate change. Dr. Hansen’s research on the impact of greenhouse gas emissions has been instrumental in shaping climate policies and international agreements. His advocacy efforts have helped mobilize global action to mitigate the effects of climate change.

These examples demonstrate the significant impact scientists can have on policy decisions and public opinion. By leveraging their expertise and engaging in advocacy, scientists can drive positive change and contribute to the protection of the environment.

In conclusion, policy and advocacy are essential components of addressing environmental problems. Scientists have a unique role in influencing policy decisions through their expertise and research findings. By engaging in advocacy efforts, scientists can raise awareness, mobilize support, and drive positive change. The examples of Dr. Jane Goodall and Dr. James Hansen highlight the significant impact scientists can have on policy and public opinion. It is crucial for scientists to continue their advocacy work and collaborate with policymakers and stakeholders to create a sustainable future.

Challenges and Limitations

Environmental problems are complex and multifaceted, requiring scientists to navigate numerous challenges and limitations in their quest to find solutions. In this section, we will explore some of the key challenges faced by scientists and the limitations of scientific research in addressing these complex issues.

Challenges Scientists Face

Limited Funding : One of the major challenges scientists face is the availability of funding for their research. Environmental studies often require significant resources, including equipment, fieldwork, and data analysis. Securing funding can be highly competitive, and limited financial support can hinder the progress of scientific research.

Political Interference : Environmental issues are often intertwined with political agendas, making it challenging for scientists to conduct unbiased research. Political interference can influence the direction of research, limit access to data, or even suppress findings that may be inconvenient for certain stakeholders. This interference undermines the integrity of scientific research and hampers efforts to find effective solutions.

Lack of Public Awareness : Despite the growing awareness of environmental problems, there is still a lack of public understanding and support for scientific research. This can make it difficult for scientists to garner public support and funding for their work. Educating the public about the importance of scientific research and its role in addressing environmental problems is crucial for overcoming this challenge.

Data Limitations : Environmental issues are often complex and require extensive data collection and analysis. However, there are limitations in the availability and quality of data, especially in developing countries or remote areas. Insufficient data can hinder scientists’ ability to accurately assess the extent of environmental problems and develop effective solutions.

Limitations of Scientific Research

Complexity of Environmental Problems : Environmental problems are inherently complex, involving numerous interconnected factors. Scientific research often focuses on specific aspects of these problems, which can limit the understanding of their full complexity. Addressing environmental problems requires a holistic approach that considers the interplay of various factors, which can be challenging to achieve through scientific research alone.

Time Constraints : Scientific research is a time-consuming process that requires careful planning, data collection, analysis, and peer review. The urgency of addressing environmental problems often clashes with the time-consuming nature of scientific research. This time constraint can hinder scientists’ ability to provide timely solutions to pressing environmental issues.

Ethical Considerations : Scientific research must adhere to ethical guidelines to ensure the well-being of humans, animals, and the environment. This can sometimes limit the scope of research or impose restrictions on certain methodologies. Balancing ethical considerations with the need for comprehensive research can be a challenge for scientists.

Uncertainty and Complexity of Outcomes : Environmental problems are often characterized by uncertainty and complexity, making it challenging to predict the outcomes of scientific interventions accurately. The long-term effects of certain solutions may be difficult to determine, and unintended consequences can arise. Scientists must navigate this uncertainty and complexity to develop effective and sustainable solutions.

Overcoming Challenges through Collaboration and Continued Research

Despite the challenges and limitations, scientists are continually striving to overcome these obstacles and find innovative solutions to environmental problems. Collaboration among scientists from different fields and interdisciplinary approaches play a crucial role in addressing these challenges. By pooling their expertise and resources, scientists can tackle complex problems more effectively.

Furthermore, continued research and technological advancements are essential for overcoming the limitations of scientific research. Investing in research and development, improving data collection methods, and embracing emerging technologies can enhance scientists’ ability to address environmental problems.

In conclusion, scientists face various challenges, including limited funding, political interference, and a lack of public awareness. Additionally, scientific research has its limitations, such as the complexity of environmental problems and time constraints. However, through collaboration, continued research, and technological advancements, scientists can overcome these challenges and contribute to finding sustainable solutions for our planet. It is crucial for society to support and engage with scientific efforts to protect the environment and ensure a sustainable future.

Unveiling The Shelf Life: How Long Does Citric Acid Last?

Unveiling The True Value: How Much Is Jcoin Worth In Today’s Market?

Rebooting Your Booze: How To Reset Alcohol Content

Quick And Easy: Mastering The Art Of Thawing Tuna

Unveiling The Dynamic Interplay: How Physical And Human Systems Shape A Place

Unlocking The Power: How Long Does It Take For Royal Honey To Activate?

Mastering Residency: A Guide On How To Study Effectively

Mastering The Art Of Die Cast Mold Making: A Step-By-Step Guide

Unveiling The Energy Consumption Of Water Coolers: How Much Electricity Do They Really Use?

Mastering Virtual Reality: Unlocking The Secrets To Altering Your Height

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

6 global environmental issues and ways you can help

1. loss of biodiversity .

In 2019, the United Nations published a groundbreaking report stating that more than one million animal and plant species are at risk of becoming extinct in the upcoming decades. Conservationists have been urging us to protect wildlife for years, and now it’s a race against the clock. The world needs biodiversity. Birds transport seeds across rainforests, sharks balance ocean food webs, mangroves hold important nutrients in wetlands… without diverse species and their unique ecological roles, our planet would suffer greatly. 

What you can do: 

Habitat loss and fragmentation is one of the fastest growing threats against species’ survival. From shrinking elephant corridors in India to bulldozed koala eucalyptus groves in Australia , animals are losing their habitats at a startling rate. Help make a difference by respecting natural landscapes and participating in habitat restoration projects. Like all environmental issues, we also need large scale government action to help save endangered species. Support international and local wildlife protection legislation like the Endangered Species Act, and vote for candidates who advocate for conservation.  

2. Human-wildlife conflict 

Today’s human-dominated landscapes can make it difficult for animals to find abundant habitat and resources. Conflict — real or perceived — between people and wildlife looks different all around the world. For people in Malawi, conflict may include unexpected encounters with large animals like leopards, crocodiles, and hippos that cause serious injury - sometimes leading to retaliatory killing of wildlife. In India, community members face conflict with elephants who graze on crops and cause great economic loss. Across Canada and the United States, government programs kill thousands of wolves, beavers, bobcats, and bears through unscientific poisoning and cull initiatives. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, closed cities and quieter communities led to more accounts of wildlife sightings as animals came out of hiding. In this ever-changing world, it’s important that we understand the role of wildlife and learn how to respect all species so we can better coexist.  

Human wellbeing and wildlife protection are interconnected. When animals are treated with respect and able to play their natural role in the environment, humans benefit greatly. Ecosystems heal, lifestyles improve, eco-tourism thrives, and we get to appreciate the intrinsic beauty of wildlife. 

• In urban areas and neighborhoods, approaches to human-wildlife coexistence can be as simple as using animal-proof trash cans and walking pets on leashes. 
• In rural areas, sustainable measures may include installing fencing around crops, training wildlife rangers, and securing wildlife corridors where animals can safely migrate without human encounters. 

Coexistence is possible and there are countless innovative solutions that promote the wellbeing of animals and humans.   

3. Ocean noise and vessel strikes  

These days, most of us can order an item online with the click of a button—but what comes as a convenience to us is a danger to wildlife. The majority of the world’s products are transported by large cargo ships, and unfortunately, they are threatening the lives of marine animals. Ships and other industrial activity produce sound waves known as ocean noise pollution that create a maze of noise and disorient marine animals. Ocean noise pollution can prevent animals like dolphins and whales from communicating, hunting, and finding mates. In some cases, it can even lead to immense stress and death. Another issue facing marine animals is ship strikes and collisions of all sizes. Blunt trauma from propeller strikes and ship collisions can cause internal injury, sliced fluke tails, and a slow death for whales. For the case of the North Atlantic right whale , ship strikes are pushing the species to extinction. 

• Local consumerism is key to minimizing ocean noise and reliance on ships. Instead of purchasing items online which require shipping and plastic packaging, shop at local stores. 
• If you do have to make an online purchase, skip the fast shipment option and choose consolidated packaging if you have more than one item. 
• Reducing ship speeds is also a critical act for protecting marine mammals from ocean noise pollution and ship strikes. When ships operate at slower speeds, ocean noise reduces and the chance of vessel strikes drops drastically.

4. Plastic pollution 

An estimated eight million tons of plastic end up in our oceans every year , threatening the health of ecosystems, marine animals, and humans. Plastic debris can entangle marine animals , causing deep lacerations, starvation, and strangulation. Turtles are known to consume floating plastic bags (mistaking them for jellyfish) and 90% of all seabirds have consumed plastic. When plastics break down into microplastics, they are even more dangerous. Species lower on the food chain like fish, plankton, and oysters consume microplastics when filtering water. Toxins from the microplastics then get passed through the food web, reaching their way to large marine animals and humans. 

• Choose a day to track all of the disposable plastic that you use from morning to night. 
• After you’ve written a list, research and choose sustainable alternatives made out of material like wood, glass, or natural fibers. 
• Replacement items could include reusable produce bags for bulk shopping, travel utensils to keep in your car, or reusable snack baggies - the list is endless. 
• For times when you do purchase plastic, always recycle and do it correctly. Make sure you wash containers before throwing them in the bin and familiarize yourself with local recycling protocols. 

5. Intensive farming of animals   

Intensive farming—also known as factory farming—involves industrialized facilities utilizing confinement systems with high stocking densities. Not only does intensive farming cause immense suffering to millions of animals, but it also has a devastating environmental impact. The Food and Agriculture Organization report, Livestock's Long Shadow, found that 37% of the world's methane emissions come from factory farming. Untreated animal waste full of highly concentrated chemicals and bacteria is stored in giant manure lagoons that emit gases like carbon dioxide, methane, and ammonia. When overflow occurs from broken infrastructure or rain, the waste leaches into soil and causes dangerous threats to environmental and human health. This includes harmful algae blooms, contamination of drinking water, ammonia pollution, and pathogen outbreaks.  

 What you can do:  

• Reduce your meat consumption by incorporating more vegetarian and vegan meals into your diet. Use it as an opportunity to explore new plant-based ingredients and recipes. 
• Buy local produce and support local farms where animal welfare and environmental impact are prioritized. 
• Educate yourself on the meanings of certifications and labeling , and advocate for better protection for farmed animals through new legislation propositions.   

6. Food waste  

Food waste and loss occurs along every step of food production, from farms to factories, to grocery stores and consumers. During production, waste happens when production exceeds demand, manufacturing damages product, and food spoils during transportation. On the consumer end, food waste occurs mainly from over-purchasing and throwing out blemished produce. The United States Department of Agriculture estimates that 30-40% of food in the United States goes to waste . All food has an ecological footprint. When we waste food, we waste the energy and natural resources that went into production, and contribute to landfills that produce greenhouse gases. 

• Vegetables don’t need to be perfect. As long as the food isn't spoiled, blemishes and imperfections are safe to consume. 
• Remember to take what you need and eat what you take. If you have a habit of over-purchasing food, try to actively buy less or donate to local food banks. 
• Learn how to properly store and freeze food to make it last longer and save money. 
• Consider starting a compost bin where leftover food scraps can turn into nutritious soil for your garden. Don’t have a garden of your own? Donate your compost soil to a nearby farm, urban garden, or school. 

IFAW responds to help animals in the wake of Hurricane Beryl

Press releases

New report spotlights Latin America and Caribbean’s role in shark trade

IFAW responds to the largest dolphin mass stranding in IFAW's history

every problem has a solution, every solution needs support.

The problems we face are urgent, complicated, and resistant to change. Real solutions demand creativity, hard work, and involvement from people like you.

Unfortunately, the browser you use is outdated and does not allow you to display the site correctly. Please install any of the modern browsers, for example:

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

An evening of stars, solar flares, and agujeros negros

Construction begins on A.R.T.’s new home in Allston

AI, new technologies, and ‘courage to fail’ mark IT Summit

Eyes on tomorrow, voices of today.

Candice Chen ’22 (left) and Noah Secondo ’22.

Photos by Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photographer

Alvin Powell

Harvard Staff Writer

Harvard students share thoughts, fears, plans to meet environmental challenges

For many, thinking about the world’s environmental future brings concern, even outright alarm.

There have been, after all, decades of increasingly strident warnings by experts and growing, ever-more-obvious signs of the Earth’s shifting climate. Couple this with a perception that past actions to address the problem have been tantamount to baby steps made by a generation of leaders who are still arguing about what to do, and even whether there really is a problem.

It’s no surprise, then, that the next generation of global environmental leaders are preparing for their chance to begin work on the problem in government, business, public health, engineering, and other fields with a real sense of mission and urgency.

The Gazette spoke to students engaged in environmental action in a variety of ways on campus to get their views of the problem today and thoughts on how their activities and work may help us meet the challenge.

Eric Fell and Eliza Spear

Fell is president and Spear is vice president of Harvard Energy Journal Club. Fell is a graduate student at the Harvard John H. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences and Spear is a graduate student in the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology.

FELL:   For the past three centuries, fossil fuels have enabled massive growth of our civilization to where we are today. But it is now time for a new generation of cleaner-energy technologies to fuel the next chapter of humanity’s story. We’re not too late to solve this environmental challenge, but we definitely shouldn’t procrastinate as much as we have been. I don’t worry about if we’ll get it done, it’s the when. Our survival depends on it. At Harvard, I’ve been interested in the energy-storage problem and have been focusing on developing a grid-scale solution utilizing flow batteries based on organic molecules in the lab of Mike Aziz . We’ll need significant deployment of batteries to enable massive penetration of renewables into the electrical grid.

SPEAR: Processes leading to greenhouse-gas emissions are so deeply entrenched in our way of life that change continues to be incredibly slow. We need to be making dramatic structural changes, and we should all be very worried about that. In the Harvard Energy Journal Club, our focus is energy, so we strive to learn as much as we can about the diverse options for clean-energy generation in various sectors. A really important aspect of that is understanding how much of an impact those technologies, like solar, hydro, and wind, can really have on reducing greenhouse-gas emissions. It’s not always as much as you’d like to believe, and there are still a lot of technical and policy challenges to overcome.

I can’t imagine working on anything else, but the question of what I’ll be working on specifically is on my mind a lot. The photovoltaics field is at a really exciting point where a new technology is just starting to break out onto the market, so there are a lot of opportunities for optimization in terms of performance, safety, and environmental impact. That’s what I’m working on now [in Roy Gordon’s lab ] and I’m really enjoying it. I’ll definitely be in the renewable-energy technology realm. The specifics will depend on where I see the greatest opportunity to make an impact.

Photo (left) courtesy of Kritika Kharbanda; photo by Tiera Satchebell.

Kritika Kharbanda ’23 and Laier-Rayshon Smith ’21

Kharbanda is with the Harvard Student Climate Change Conference, Harvard Circular Economy Symposium. Smith is a member of Climate Leaders Program for Professional Students at Harvard. Both are students at Harvard Graduate School of Design.

KHARBANDA: I come from a country where the most pressing issues are, and will be for a long time, poverty, food shortage, and unemployment born out of corruption, illiteracy, and rapid gentrification. India was the seventh-most-affected country by climate change in 2019. With two-thirds of the population living in rural areas with no access to electricity, even the notion of climate change is unimaginable.

I strongly believe that the answer lies in the conjugality of research and industry. In my field, achieving circularity in the building material processes is the burning concern. The building industry currently contributes to 40 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, of which 38 percent is contributed by the embedded or embodied energy used for the manufacturing of materials. A part of the Harvard i-lab, I am a co-founder of Cardinal LCA, an early stage life-cycle assessment tool that helps architects and designers visualize this embedded energy in building materials, saving up to 46 percent of the energy from the current workflow. This venture has a strong foundation as a research project for a seminar class I took at the GSD in fall 2020, instructed by Jonathan Grinham. I am currently working as a sustainability engineer at Henning Larsen architects in Copenhagen while on a leave of absence from GSD. In the decades to come, I aspire to continue working on the embodied carbon aspect of the building industry. Devising an avant garde strategy to record the embedded carbon is the key. In the end, whose carbon is it, anyway?

SMITH: The biggest challenges are areas where the threat of climate change intersects with environmental justice. It is important that we ensure that climate-change mitigation and adaptation strategies are equitable, whether it is sea-level rise or the increase in urban heat islands. We should seek to address the threats faced by the most vulnerable communities — the communities least able to resolve the threat themselves. These often tend to be low-income communities and communities of color that for decades have been burdened with bearing the brunt of environmental health hazards.

During my time at Harvard, I have come to understand how urban planning and design can seek to address this challenge. Planners and designers can develop strategies to prioritize communities that are facing a significant climate-change risk, but because of other structural injustices may not be able to access the resources to mitigate the risk. I also learned about climate gentrification: a phenomenon in which people in wealthier communities move to areas with lower risks of climate-change threats that are/were previously lower-income communities. I expect to work on many of these issues, as many are connected and are threats to communities across the country. From disinvestment and economic extraction to the struggle to find quality affordable housing, these injustices allow for significant disparities in life outcomes and dealing with risk.

Lucy Shaw ’21

Shaw is co-president of the HBS Energy and Environment Club. She is a joint-degree student at Harvard Business School and Harvard Kennedy School.

SHAW: I want to see a world where climate change is averted and the environment preserved, without it being at the expense of the development and prosperity of lower-income countries. We have, or are on the cusp of having, many of the financial and technological tools we need to reduce emissions and environmental damage from a wide array of industries, such as agriculture, energy, and transport. The challenge I am most worried about is how we balance economic growth and opportunity with reducing humanity’s environmental impact and share this burden equitably across countries.

I came to Harvard as a joint degree student at the Kennedy School and Business School to be able to see this challenge from two different angles. In my policy-oriented classes, we learned about the opportunities and challenges of global coordination among national governments — the difficulty in enforcing climate agreements, and in allocating and agreeing on who bears the responsibility and the costs of change, but also the huge potential that an international framework with nationally binding laws on environmental protection and carbon-emission reduction could have on changing the behavior of people and businesses. In my business-oriented classes, we learned about the power of business to create change, if there is a driven leadership. We also learned that people and businesses respond to incentives, and the importance of reducing cost of technologies or increasing the cost of not switching to more sustainable technologies — for example, through a tax. After graduate school, I plan to join a leading private equity investor in their growing infrastructure team, which will equip me with tools to understand what makes a good investment in infrastructure and what are the opportunities for reducing the environmental impact of infrastructure while enhancing its value. I hope to one day be involved in shaping environmental and development policy, whether it is on a national or international level.

Photo (left) by Tabitha Soren.

Quinn Lewis ’23 and Suhaas Bhat ’24

Both are with the Student Climate Change Conference, Harvard College.

LEWIS:   When I was a kid, I imagined being an adult as a future with a stable house, a fun job, and happy kids. That future didn’t include wildfires that obscured the sun for months, global water shortages, or billionaires escaping to terrariums on Mars. The threats are so great and so assured by inaction that it’s very hard for me to justify doing anything else with my time and attention because very little will matter if there’s 1 billion climate refugees and significant portions of the continental United States become uninhabitable for human life.

For whatever reason, I still feel a great deal of hope around giving it a shot. I can’t imagine not working to mitigate the climate crisis. Media and journalism will play a huge role in raising awareness, as they generate public pressure that can sway those in power. Another route for change is to cut directly to those in power and try to convince them of the urgency of the situation. Given that I am 22 years old, it is much easier to raise public awareness or work in media and journalism than it is to sit down with some of the most powerful people on the planet, who tend to be rather busy. At school, I’m on a team that runs the University-wide Student Climate Change Conference at Harvard, which is a platform for speakers from diverse backgrounds to discuss the climate crisis and ways students and educators can take immediate and effective action. Also, I write about and research challenges and solutions to the climate crisis through the lenses of geopolitics and the global economy, both as a student at the College and as a case writer at the Harvard Business School. Outside of Harvard, I have worked in investigative journalism and at Crooked Media, as well as on political campaigns to indirectly and directly drive urgency around the climate crisis.

BHAT:   The failure to act on climate change in the last few decades, despite mountains of scientific evidence, is a consequence of political and institutional cowardice. Fossil fuel companies have obfuscated, misinformed, and lobbied for decades, and governments have failed to act in the best interests of their citizens. Of course, the fight against climate change is complex and multidimensional, requiring scientific, technical, and entrepreneurial expertise, but it will ultimately require systemic change to allow these talents to shine.

At Harvard, my work on climate has been focused on running the Harvard Student Climate Conference, as well as organizing for Fossil Fuel Divest Harvard. My hope for the Climate Conference is to provide students access to speakers who have dedicated their careers to all aspects of the fight against climate change, so that students interested in working on climate have more direction and inspiration for what to do with their careers. We’ve featured Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley, members of the Sunrise Movement, and the CEO of Impossible Foods as some examples of inspiring and impactful people who are working against climate change today.

I organize for FFDH because I believe that serious institutional change is necessary for solving the climate crisis and also because of a sort of patriotism I have for Harvard. I deeply respect and care for this institution, and genuinely believe it is an incredible force for good in the world. At the same time, I believe Harvard has a moral duty to stand against the corporations whose misdeeds and falsification of science have enabled the climate crisis.

Libby Dimenstein ’22

Dimenstein is co-president of Harvard Law School Environmental Law Society.

DIMENSTEIN:   Climate change is the one truly existential threat that my generation has had to face. What’s most scary is that we know it’s happening. We know how bad it will be; we know people are already dying from it; and we still have done so little relative to the magnitude of the problem. I also worry that people don’t see climate change as an “everyone problem,” and more as a problem for people who have the time and money to worry about it, when in reality it will harm people who are already disadvantaged the most.

I want to recognize Professor Wendy Jacobs, who recently passed away. Wendy founded HLS’s fantastic Environmental Law and Policy Clinic, and she also created an interdisciplinary class called the Climate Solutions Living Lab. In the lab, groups of students drawn from throughout the University would conduct real-world projects to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. The class was hard, because actually reducing greenhouse gases is hard, but it taught us about the work that needs to be done. This summer I’m interning with the Environmental Defense Fund’s U.S. Clean Air Team, and I anticipate a lot of my work will revolve around the climate. After graduating, I’m hoping to do environmental litigation, either with a governmental division or a nonprofit, but I also have an interest in policy work: Impact litigation is fascinating and important, but what we need most is sweeping policy change.

Candice Chen ’22 and Noah Secondo ’22

Chen and Secondo are co-directors of the Harvard Environmental Action Committee. Both attend Harvard College.

SECONDO: The environment is fundamental to rural Americans’ identity, but they do not believe — as much as urban Americans — that the government can solve environmental problems. Without the whole country mobilized and enthusiastic, from New Hampshire to Nebraska, we will fail to confront the climate crisis. I have no doubt that we can solve this problem. To rebuild trust between the U.S. government and rural communities, federal departments and agencies need to speak with rural stakeholders, partner with state and local leaders, and foreground rural voices. Through the Harvard College Democrats and the Environmental Action Committee, I have contributed to local advocacy efforts and creative projects, including an environmental art publication.

I hope to work in government to keep the policy development and implementation processes receptive to rural perspectives, including in the environmental arena. At every level of government, if we work with each other in good faith, we will tackle the climate crisis and be better for it.

CHEN: I’m passionate about promoting more sustainable, plant-based diets. As individual consumers, we have very little control over the actions of the largest emitters, massive corporations, but we can all collectively make dietary decisions that can avoid a lot of environmental degradation. Our food system is currently very wasteful, and our overreliance on animal agriculture devastates natural ecosystems, produces lots of potent greenhouse gases, and creates many human health hazards from poor animal-waste disposal. I feel like the climate conversation is often focused around the clean energy transition, and while it is certainly the largest component of how we can avoid the worst effects of global warming, the dietary conversation is too often overlooked. A more sustainable future also requires us to rethink agriculture, and especially what types of agriculture our government subsidizes. In the coming years, I hope that more will consider the outsized environmental impact of animal agriculture and will consider making more plant-based food swaps.

To raise awareness of the environmental benefits of adopting a more plant-based diet, I’ve been involved with running a campaign through the Environmental Action Committee called Veguary. Veguary encourages participants to try going vegetarian or vegan for the month of February, and participants receive estimates for how much their carbon/water/land use footprints have changed based on their pledged dietary changes for the month.

Photo (left) courtesy of Cristina Su Liu.

Cristina Su Liu ’22 and James Healy ’21

More like this.

How Earth Day gave birth to environmental movement

The culture of Earth Day

Spirituality, social justice, and climate change meet at the crossroads

Liu is with Harvard Climate Leaders Program for Professional Students. Healy is with the Harvard Student Climate Change Conference. Both are students at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

HEALY:   As a public health student I see so many environmental challenges, be it the 90 percent of the world who breathe unhealthy air, or the disproportionate effects of extreme heat on communities of color, or the environmental disruptions to the natural world and the zoonotic disease that humans are increasingly being exposed to. But the central commonality at the heart of all these crises is the climate crisis. Climate change, from the greenhouse-gas emissions to the physical heating of the Earth, is worsening all of these environmental crises. That’s why I call the climate crisis the great exacerbator. While we will all feel the effects of climate change, it will not be felt equally. Whether it’s racial inequity or wealth inequality, the climate crisis is widening these already gaping divides.

Solutions may have to be outside of our current road maps for confronting crises. I have seen the success of individual efforts and private innovation in tackling the COVID-19 pandemic, from individuals wearing masks and social distancing to the huge advances in vaccine development. But for climate change, individual efforts and innovation won’t be enough. I would be in favor of policy reform and coalition-building between new actors. As an overseer of the Harvard Student Climate Change Conference and the Harvard Climate Leaders Program, I’ve aimed to help mobilize Harvard’s diverse community to tackle climate change. I am also researching how climate change makes U.S. temperatures more variable, and how that’s reducing the life expectancies of Medicare recipients. The goal of this research, with Professor Joel Schwartz, will be to understand the effects of climate change on vulnerable communities. I certainly hope to expand on these themes in my future work.

SU LIU:  A climate solution will need to be a joint effort from the whole society, not just people inside the environmental or climate circles. In addition to cross-sectoral cooperation, solving climate change will require much stronger international cooperation so that technologies, projects, and resources can be developed and shared globally. As a Chinese-Brazilian student currently studying in the United States, I find it very valuable to learn about the climate challenges and solutions of each of these countries, and how these can or cannot be applied in other settings. China-U.S. relations are tense right now, but I hope that climate talks can still go ahead since we have much to learn from each other.

Personally, as a student in environmental health at [the Harvard Chan School], I feel that my contribution to addressing this challenge until now has been in doing research, learning more about the health impacts of climate change, and most importantly, learning how to communicate climate issues to people outside climate circles. Every week there are several climate-change events at Harvard, where a different perspective on climate change is addressed. It has been very inspiring for me, and I feel that I could learn about climate change in a more holistic way.

Recently, I started an internship at FXB Village, where I am working on developing and integrating climate resilience indicators into their poverty-alleviation program in rural communities in Puebla, Mexico. It has been very rewarding to introduce climate-change and climate-resilience topics to people working on poverty alleviation and see how everything is interconnected. When we address climate resilience, we are also addressing access to basic services, livelihoods, health, equity, and quality of life in general. This is where climate justice is addressed, and that is a very powerful idea.

Share this article

You might like.

Harvard College Observatory hosts inaugural Spanish-language night

David E. and Stacey L. Goel Center for Creativity & Performance to include interconnected, adaptable multiuse spaces 

Tech leaders encourage culture of innovation

When should Harvard speak out?

Institutional Voice Working Group provides a roadmap in new report

Had a bad experience meditating? You're not alone.

Altered states of consciousness through yoga, mindfulness more common than thought and mostly beneficial, study finds — though clinicians ill-equipped to help those who struggle

College sees strong yield for students accepted to Class of 2028  

Financial aid was a critical factor, dean says

• Share this page on Facebook
• Share this page on Twitter
• Pin this page on Pinterest
• Send this link in an email message

SOLVE: Problems in Environmental Science

Foreword by Bill McKibben Newly Released "Numbers matter. Incorrect ones cause damage, while realistic ones open doorways to finding solutions to many of the problems that afflict humanity. This environmental problem-solving text will help your students be better equipped to recognize and shun misleading numbers and to calculate better ones.” -John Harte, UC Berkeley SOLVE: Problems in Environmental Science delivers up a robust set of engaging quantitative problems geared toward students in guided problem-solving groups and Environmental Science courses.

ISBN 978-1-940380-10-0, US $69 eISBN 978-1-940380-11-7, US $52 to own, US $39 to lease Publish date: 2022 Soft Cover

Chapter 2 sample

Table of Contents

Part I. Introduction

Chapter 1. Introduction

Part II. Energy and Materials

Chapter 2. Energy Flows and Supplies

Chapter 3. Energy Utilization

Chapter 4. Renewable Energy

Chapter 5. Fossil Fuels

Chapter 6. Nuclear Energy

Part III. Atmosphere

Chapter 7. Climate Change

Chapter 8. Free Radical Chemistry – Nitrogen Oxide, Ozone, and Combusion

Chapter 9. Air Pollution

Chapter 10. Stratospheric Ozone Shield

Part IV. Hydrosphere and Lithosphere

Chapter 11. Water Resources

Chapter 12. Water as Solvents: Acids and Bases

Chapter 13. Water and the Lithosphere

Chapter 14. Oxygen and Life

Chapter 15. Water Pollution and Water Treatment

Part V. Biosphere

Chapter 16. Nitrogen and Food Production

Chapter 17. Pest Control

Chapter 18. Toxicity of Chemicals

Appendix A. Organic Structures

Appendix B. Mathematical Fundamentals

Appendix C. Answers to the Starred Questions

“Numbers matter. Incorrect ones cause damage, while realistic ones open doorways to finding solutions to many of the problems that afflict humanity. This environmental problem-solving text will help your students be better equipped to recognize and shun misleading numbers and to calculate better ones.” -John Harte, UC Berkeley

Kathleen Purvis-Roberts Claremont McKenna, Pitzer and Scripps Colleges

Kathleen Purvis-Roberts is a Professor of Chemistry at the W.M. Keck Science Department of Claremont McKenna, Pitzer, and Scripps Colleges. She earned her B.S. from Westmont College and her Ph.D. from Princeton University, where she worked with Steven Bernasek. From there, she did her postdoctoral work at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. She joined the faculty of Claremont McKenna, Pitzer, and Scripps Colleges in 2001. She is the recipient of the Henry Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar award (2013) and the Jefferson Science Fellowship (2016–2017).

Thomas G. Spiro University of Washington

Thomas G. Spiro is Professor of Chemistry at the University of Washington. He received the B. S. from UCLA and the Ph.D. from MIT, and did postdoctoral work in Copenhagen. He joined the faculty of Princeton University in 1963, and served as chair of the chemistry department from 1980 to 1989, relocating to the University of Washington in 2007. He is the recipient of the ICPP Eraldo Antonini Lifetime Achievment Award (2010), the ACS Award for Distinguished Service in the Advancement of Inorganic Chemistry (2004), Biophysical Society Founders Award (2004), the Wellcome Visiting Professorship in the Basic Medical Sciences, at the University of British Columbia (1999) in1999, and the Bomem-Michelson Award in Molecular Spectroscopy (1986).

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

JavaScript appears to be disabled on this computer. Please click here to see any active alerts .

The Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Cooperative Agreement Program

The Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving (EJCPS) Cooperative Agreement Program provides financial assistance to eligible organizations working to address local environmental or public health issues in their communities.  The program assists recipients in building collaborative partnerships with other stakeholders (e.g., local businesses and industry, local government, medical service providers, academia, etc.) to develop solutions to environmental or public health issue(s) at the community level.

The EJCPS Program requires selected applicants, or recipients, to use the EPA's Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model to address local environmental or public health issues in a collaborative manner with various stakeholders such as communities, industry, academic institutions, and others. The case studies listed in the resources section below highlight some of the successful strategies of previous projects. 

Is My Organization Eligible?

2023 selectees.

• Pre-Application Assistance Calls and Webinars

Eligible entities include: 

• a community-based nonprofit organization (CBO); or  
• a partnership of community-based nonprofit organizations *  

* A partnership must be documented with a signed Letter of Commitment from the community-based nonprofit organization detailing the parameters of the partnership, as well as the role and responsibilities of the partnering community-based organizations. 

EPA has selected 98 EJCPS awardees to receive a total of $43.8 million in Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funding for community-based nonprofit organizations to help underserved and overburdened communities across the country. Awardees will receive up to $500,000 in grant funding. EJCPS grants will fund a variety of projects to serve critical environmental justice communities and issues including wildfires, health impact assessments, air monitoring, indoor/outdoor air quality, food access, community planning, community revitalization, community agriculture, green jobs and infrastructure, emergency preparedness and planning, toxic exposures, water quality, and healthy homes projects, wood burning stove replacement, solar panel installation, assessments, and water sampling and monitoring. Twenty-three projects will take place in rural areas and 60 will address climate change, disaster resiliency, and/or emergency preparedness.

Learn more about the 2023 EJCPS Selectees (pdf) (442.2 KB)

Read the press release announcing the 2023 EJCPS Selectees

This competition was launched in order to meet the goals and objectives of two Executive Orders ( EO 14008 and EO 13985 ) issued by the Biden Administration that demonstrate the EPA’s and Administration’s commitment to achieving environmental justice and embedding environmental justice into Agency programs. 

 The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act created the Environmental and Climate Justice block grant program in section 138 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and provided EPA with $2.8 billion in grant funding for the program for projects to benefit communities with environmental justice concerns.

Review the Amended EJCPS Request for Applications for specific guidance and eligible project examples. (pdf) (1.2 MB)

 For more information, please contact  Jacob Burney .

• Informational Video on the Environmental and Climate Justice Communities Grants Program

Pre-Application Assistance Calls & Webinars

Applicants were invited to participate in conference calls and webinars with EPA to address questions about the CPS Program and this solicitation.

EJCPS Live Webinars

• Passcode:  46598050
• Slides from the February 2, 2023 EJCPS webinar (pdf) (817 KB)
• Passcode:  85564988
• Slides from the January 24, 2023 EJCPS webinar (pdf) (780.1 KB)

If EPA schedules any additional assistance webinars, details will be posted here and sent out by the  EPA-EJ Listserv  and the  EPA Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights X account .

• Frequently Asked Questions for the FY2023 EJCPS opportunity (pdf) (216 KB)
• Review previous project descriptions by state  or  review project descriptions by year .
• Review prior year requests for applications (RFAs).
• EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model Guide (pdf) (1.2 MB) A guide to EPA's EJ Collaborative Problem-Solving program.
• Case Studies from the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Program (pdf) (3.6 MB) In-depth descriptions of five successful CPS awards.
• Fact Sheet on Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Cooperative Agreement Program (pdf) (418.2 KB)
• Environmental Justice Program Funded Projects (2014 to 2020).
• The Power of Partnerships : 45-minute video of EPA's EJ CPS Model at work in Spartanburg, SC featuring interviews of key EJ stakeholders and community members explaining their roles in successfully addressing EJ concerns in the area.
• Environmental Justice (EJ) Home
• Learn About Environmental Justice
• Equity Action Plan
• Grants and Resources
• National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
• White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council
• EJ in Your Community
• EJ and National Environmental Policy Act
• EJ and Title VI
• EJ for Tribes and Indigenous Peoples
• Equitable Development and EJ
• Community Voices on EJ

Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > Environmental Problem-Solving: Balancing Science and Politics Using Consensus Building Tools
• > Ethical Dilemmas In Environmental Problem-Solving

Book contents

• Frontmatter
• Acknowledgments
• Credits and Permissions

Introduction

• Unit I: Influencing The Environmental Policy-Making Process
• Unit II: Ethical Dilemmas In Environmental Problem-Solving
• Unit III: Developments In Policy And Project Analysis
• Unit IV: Collective Action To Solve Environmental Problems
• Conclusions
• Biographies

Unit II: - Ethical Dilemmas In Environmental Problem-Solving

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2020

All environmental problem solvers, whether public officials or not, have to make ethical assumptions. These are usually informed by basic philosophical beliefs about what is right and what is wrong. Discussions of environmental ethics usually lead to a cascade of follow-up inquiries that often dominate environmental policy-making and problem-solving: What is the proper relationship between humans and the environment? Do humans have a moral obligation to protect the environment? How can such an obligation be reconciled with our need to survive and our desire to prosper?

The inherent conflict posed by these questions constitutes what philosophers call an ethical dilemma. Multiple answers are available depending on the lens we rely on. For example, on one side are those who think in purely utilitarian terms (i.e., the instrumental value of the environment). They believe that humans can and should do whatever will enable them to derive the most benefit or satisfaction from the environment. An alternative view is that humans have a responsibility to serve as stewards of the natural environment (i.e., the intrinsic value of environment). This group of thinkers believes we should do whatever we can to protect the environment. We do not presume to know which choices are correct, but we are convinced that all environmental problem-solving needs to confront them.

From our standpoint, three other ethical dilemmas are equally compelling: (1) Should knowledge derived through the application of formal scientific methods outweigh local or indigenous knowledge when it comes to decisions about natural resource management? (2) Should economic concerns outweigh long-term sustainability of depletable natural resources and ecosystem services? And, finally, (3) Should we err on the side of precaution when there is uncertainty about the possible effects of proposed human actions, or should we have confidence that human ingenuity (and technological innovation) will enable us to repair any damage our actions might cause?

This unit illuminates a range of arguments on all sides of these dilemmas, from advocates of “deep ecology,” who believe that “reverence for life determines who we are,” to “pragmatists,” who believe that “the satisfaction of human preferences should be the overriding goal of public policy.”

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Ethical Dilemmas In Environmental Problem-Solving
• Lawrence Susskind , Bruno Verdini , Jessica Gordon , Yasmin Zaerpoor
• Book: Environmental Problem-Solving: Balancing Science and Politics Using Consensus Building Tools
• Online publication: 15 December 2020

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

Why is it hard to solve environmental problems? The perils of institutional reductionism and institutional overload

• Original Paper
• Open access
• Published: 27 January 2020
• Volume 20 , pages 5–19, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Oran R. Young 1 &
• Olav Schram Stokke   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7083-3882 2  

23k Accesses

10 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Many efforts to solve environmental problems arising at the international or transnational level meet with limited success or even end in outright failure. But some efforts of this sort succeed. We construct an analytical model of such efforts leading to the conclusion that an ability to steer a course that avoids the twin perils of institutional reductionism and institutional overload is necessary to achieve success in this realm. We examine a range of risk factors or conditions likely to push processes of regime formation and implementation into one or the other of these pitfalls. We then analyze response strategies or procedures that negotiators and administrators can adopt to steer a course between the two perils, taking into account distinctive features of specific problems. We turn to marine issues to illustrate our reasoning. But the argument is applicable to the entire range of efforts to create and implement international environmental regimes.

Similar content being viewed by others

Governance and Good Governance: A New Framework for Political Analysis

Reimagining public policy formulation and analysis: a comprehensive theoretical framework for public policy

“Words” and “actions” of environmental policy and their effects on regional green development: an empirical research based on China’s 88 cities

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Sources of institutional success and failure

Efforts to create governance systems or, as we often say, regimes to address international or transboundary environmental problems often produce results whose contributions to problem solving are limited or that even end in outright failure. Yet some regimes (e.g., the regime dealing with ozone-depleting substances) are widely regarded as successes. The evidence supporting these propositions about success or effectiveness (Young 2011 ) includes both qualitative accounts (Speth 2004 ; Park et al. 2008 ; Hale et al. 2013 ) and quantitative analyses (Miles et al. 2002 ; Breitmeier et al. 2006 , 2011 ). What makes it so hard to achieve success in this realm? How can we make progress in identifying major causes of failure and pinpointing conditions required to achieve success in solving (or at least alleviating) a variety of environmental problems?

In this article, we develop an analytical model to address these questions. Starting with a discussion of the meaning of success and failure, we proceed to construct an integrated account dealing with some key factors that can undermine efforts to create successful governance systems. Our core argument is that finding ways to overcome the pitfalls associated with the twin perils of institutional reductionism and institutional overload is necessary for the achievement of success. We do not have quantitative data that would allow for systematic empirical testing of the implications of this model. But we provide examples to illustrate our principal arguments, and we cast our main conclusions as hypotheses regarding necessary conditions for success that future research can test empirically through the development of in-depth case studies and quantitative analyses drawing on larger numbers of cases.

We treat success as a matter of solving (or at least alleviating substantially) the problems leading to the creation of environmental governance systems (Young and Levy 1999 ). Are severely depleted fish stocks recovering? Are we phasing out the production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances? Can we avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference in the Earth’s climate system? Approached in this way, failure can take several distinct forms. In the extreme, negotiators are simply unable to reach closure on the terms of any agreement addressing the relevant problem that is acceptable to all the parties. Short of this, failure can take the forms of stillborn regimes, defective agreements, dead letters, or regimes lacking in adaptive capacity. Stillborn regimes are arrangements that fail to enter into force or do not make a transition from paper to practice, even if they enter into force formally (Mitchell 1994 ). Regardless of how attractive they may look on paper, such regimes cannot solve the problem(s) leading to their creation. Defective agreements fail to include provisions needed to tackle the core issues involved or are afflicted with debilitating internal contradictions, even though they are cast in the form of legally binding instruments or formal agreements. Situations of this kind are frequent outcomes of hard bargaining resulting in debilitating compromises regarding the terms of agreements dealing with international or transboundary environmental issues (Young 1994 ). Dead letters are regimes that fail to make a significant difference in terms of problem solving, despite the fact that they do make an initial transition from paper to practice. Gradually, they fade into the background, remaining in place formally but failing to produce significant results in terms of influencing the behavior of those whose actions have given rise to the relevant problem(s). Finally, regimes lacking in adaptive capacity are apt to fail as means of addressing problems that are dynamic in character. In effect, they become obsolete as the character of the problem(s) evolves over time without triggering the necessary institutional adjustments (Young 2017a ).

Success and failure do not constitute a sharp dichotomy. They involve a continuum, ranging from resounding success to outright failure. Governance systems may make some difference even in cases where the problem does not go away (Breitmeier et al. 2011 ). Though it is hard to construct convincing counterfactuals, there are certainly cases where the problem would have gotten worse in the absence of a regime created to address the problem. Nevertheless, success in creating regimes to address international or transboundary environmental problems is elusive. Arrangements that produce disappointing results are common.

Institutional reductionism arises from efforts to strip away much of the complexity of real-world situations, simplifying the agenda and highlighting key issues as a means of improving the prospects of concluding negotiations successfully. If carried too far, reductionism produces agreement on arrangements that do not take into account important aspects of the problem at hand. As a result, they fail to deliver on one or more of the core tasks of environmental governance relating to knowledge production, regulation, and behavioral adaptation (Stokke 2012 ). Institutional overload, by contrast, arises from enlarging the group of players or expanding the range and complexity of the issues included in the negotiations in order to take into account the full range of concerns involved. If carried too far, overload results in complex arrangements that may seem attractive in principle but are too convoluted to serve as effective steering mechanisms under real-world conditions. Reductionism and overload are opposing pitfalls, occupying opposite ends of a single continuum. Going to extremes to avoid one peril will cause negotiators and administrators to fall prey to the other. Creating environmental governance systems that can solve (or substantially alleviate) problems requires the ability to find a middle way, steering a course that avoids falling into one or the other of these traps.

In the substantive sections of this article, we begin with an analysis of the twin perils, first probing the nature of institutional reductionism and then examining institutional overload. This provides a basis for the analysis of what we call risk factors or conditions that tend to push efforts to create or implement governance systems toward reductionism or overload, even in cases where there are experienced participants familiar with the processes involved in negotiating international environmental agreements. We examine risk factors relating to the character of the problem, institutional design, and the broader setting within which negotiations take place and regimes operate. In each case, we look for forces that, despite the best intentions of the participants, can push efforts to create and operate governance systems toward the pitfalls of reductionism or overload. We then consider response strategies treated as measures designed to steer a course between the twin perils. In each case, devising a response strategy that works constitutes a necessary condition for success; regimes that fail to meet this test cannot succeed in solving the problem(s) leading to their creation. Space limitations make it necessary to limit our analysis to a few risk factors and response strategies relevant to institutional success and failure. Still, we believe the factors and responses we do consider are among those most relevant to institutional success or failure.

2 Twin perils: reductionism and overload

Both institutional bargaining and the implementation of the resultant regimes feature dynamics that individual participants are unable to manage or control on their own (Young 1994 ). Those negotiating the terms of new or restructured regimes must walk a fine line between the pursuit of divergent interests centered on maximizing their individual gains and respect for common interests in achieving Pareto optimal outcomes—outcomes that all participants prefer to an outcome of no agreement. They must learn the art of navigating in the realm of “mixed-motive interactions” (Schelling 1960 ), producing coherent results rather than contradictory provisions or vague formulas designed to paper over serious disagreements (Brennan and Buchanan 1985 ). Much the same is true of the efforts of those responsible for operating governance systems once they are put in place. Common pitfalls in such processes, which can trap even the most experienced negotiators, take the forms of reductionism and overload .

2.1 The peril of reductionism

Institutional reductionism refers to processes in which (1) actors strip away potentially relevant features of a problem generating a need for governance by making ceteris paribus assumptions or using similar procedures designed to abstract away or hold constant various factors for purposes of regime formation; and (2) negotiators design regimes that seem appropriate for addressing the simplified problems remaining, but that commonly produce disappointing results when applied to real-world situations (Young 2008 ; Young et al. 2018 ).

From the perspective of problem solving, the peril of institutional reductionism amounts to simplification that is taken too far. Reduction may range from extreme simplification to more limited efforts to abstract away a few seemingly peripheral matters in order to highlight the central features of the problem producing a need for governance. Consider some examples relating to fisheries management. In the extreme, actors focus on the management of a single fish stock located in a stable ecosystem lying wholly within a single jurisdiction and with a single objective (e.g., maximum sustainable yield or MSY) to be met. Even here, there is room for lively debate. Differences in the assessments of analysts like Hilborn ( 2012 ) and Pauly ( 2010 ) regarding the extent to which a fish stock can be reduced without jeopardizing sustainable yields are well-known examples, and fishers employing different gear types may hold competing positions on how to allocate the allowable harvest level. But once agreement is reached on the operational meaning of MSY for the stock and how to divide it among vessel groups, governance becomes a matter of establishing mechanisms to adjust allowable harvest levels, limit fishing effort accordingly, and monitor the status of the stock, occasionally making suitable adjustments.

The simplification or narrowness inherent in such practices becomes apparent whenever one or more of the following considerations acquire political saliency:

Environmental connectedness: interactions between two or more species introduce new management challenges, especially when different vessel groups value these species differently.

Broader objectives: there are compelling reasons to shift from pursuit of MSY, which is a biophysical criterion, to maximum economic yield (MEY) or even optimum sustainable yield, as required in the US Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which stipulates that optimum sustainable yield is MSY “as modified by any relevant economic, social, or ecological factor” (FCMA 1976 ).

More actors: jurisdictional complexity is compounded as a fish stock expands into yet another Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) or straddles a boundary that separates an EEZ from the high seas.

A wider range of issues: harvesting operations have severe unintended consequences in such forms as by-catches of other fish species or marine mammals or impacts on other marine systems (e.g., coral reefs) or other human activities (e.g., shipping, oil or gas extraction, recreational activities) within the same space/time coordinates.

Dealing with each of these concerns requires institutional arrangements that go well beyond the simple problem of achieving MSY from a single stock. In the case of a fish stock straddling jurisdictional boundaries, for instance, an existing intergovernmental arrangement (e.g., a regional fisheries management organization) may need to expand to include new members. In situations involving multiple uses, it may be necessary to create procedures for resolving interactions among two or more regimes dealing with distinct human activities (Oberthür and Stokke 2011 ). In cases where ecosystem services are important (MEA 2005 ; IPBES 2019 ), it may make sense to establish marine protected areas.

Relaxing our simplifying assumptions further, we can acknowledge that most fish stocks of interest are embedded in larger ecosystems, and begin to think in terms of ecosystem-based management or EBM (McLeod et al. 2009 ). This raises important biophysical questions, such as whether other forces in the ecosystem affect the population dynamics of a targeted fish stock or whether changes in the abundance of a targeted stock will have knock-on effects on the ecosystem. This is where the current debate about the connections between the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs) and the management of commercial fisheries enters the picture. Moving to EBM also introduces new evaluation criteria for ecosystem services that go well beyond the value of commercial harvests of the targeted species. This is especially challenging when some of these criteria involve services or other human activities (e.g., sport and recreational fishing, scuba diving, sightseeing) whose value is difficult to calculate in conventional utilitarian terms.

Beyond this lies the domain of broader systemic forces that may have profound consequences for the status of the individual fish stock in question. Prominent among these forces are (1) climate change, including shifts in water temperatures, salinity, prevailing currents, the presence of sea ice, and ocean acidification, (2) the diffusion of pollutants (like plastics) that affect the health of marine systems, and (3) the growth of hypoxic or dead zones arising from uses of fertilizers and pesticides in remote agricultural operations. Broadening the scope of the analysis to consider these dimensions obviously complicates efforts to address the governance challenges associated with fisheries management. However, governance systems that fail to recognize such concerns are likely to experience major surprises that are generally unpredictable but often nasty from the perspective of problem solving.

Some measure of institutional simplification, or narrowness in terms of issues considered and actors involved, is unavoidable. It would be unrealistic, for example, to expect those negotiating the terms of a regional fisheries management organization to take responsibility for tackling problems like climate change or the spread of plastic debris in the world’s oceans. On the other hand, it is not unreasonable to expect negotiators to be aware of such matters and to create institutional arrangements that can operate effectively in the face of such broader concerns, or at least include mechanisms for adjusting their provisions in a manner responsive to changes in broader conditions. The key challenge is to determine what degree of institutional simplification is appropriate in specific cases. Dealing with reductionism involves determining when the benefits of expanding the scope of the issues and actors covered are offset by the costs of doing so, measured in terms of reduced probability of reaching agreement on the terms of a coherent and effective regime to address the problem at hand. There is no simple algorithm for making such calculations. Decisions about such matters necessarily involve judgments on the part of those responsible for handling specific cases. There is much to be said for encouraging cooperation between analysts who understand the dynamics of the systems involved and practitioners with expertise in framing issues to maximize the prospects of completing negotiations successfully. Despite the best efforts of analysts and practitioners, judgments about such matters made in specific cases may prove faulty. But we should strive to make decisions based on the best available knowledge and to be open to revising these decisions as new evidence becomes available.

2.2 The peril of overload

Institutional overload, the twin peril, occurs when negotiators expand the scope or complexity of institutional bargaining to the point where it is difficult or impossible to reach agreement on the provisions of a coherent regime, much less a governance system that can steer the actions of relevant players effectively once the regime makes the transition from paper to practice (Birch 1984 ). Like reductionism, overload is a variable: Increases in scope and complexity may range from limited adjustments needed to circumvent the peril of reductionism to expansions in processes of institutional bargaining that make it impossible for negotiators to achieve institutional success or to the creation of arrangements that are too complex to administer successfully.

In our example relating to fisheries management, the dangers of overload become apparent whenever one or more of the following conditions shapes the course of institutional bargaining:

Environmental connectedness: incorporation of multiple-species considerations increases the level of uncertainty and the potential for politicization of scientific understanding regarding how any given level of harvesting will affect the ability of stocks to replenish themselves.

Broader objectives: attention to a wider set of societal objectives produces regimes that seek to maximize two or more distinct goals (e.g., efficiency, employment in coastal communities, and distributive justice) in situations where there is no straightforward way to arrive at trade-offs between or among them.

More actors: inclusion of additional actors undermines arrangements for allocating benefits or introduces new jurisdictional complications.

A wider range of issues: expansion of the agenda to address side-effects and multiple-use tensions introduces additional issues that are only loosely connected to the harvesting activity.

Taking steps to increase the scope of negotiations is not always a bad idea. Some analysts have introduced the idea of negotiation arithmetic in thinking about such matters (Sebenius 1984 ). They observe that adding or subtracting issues or actors can help to make institutional bargaining tractable in some contexts. In legislative situations, this gives rise to processes of “log-rolling” in which differences in the intensity of the interests of key players across issues allow participants to build effective coalitions by trading votes on different issues to mutual advantage. In negotiations focused on the establishment or reform of environmental regimes, analogous processes feature the emergence of negotiating groups or blocs that are able to make mutually advantageous trades using the currency of language to be included in the articles of a convention, treaty, or other legally binding instrument.

To illustrate the deliberate expansion of the scope of issues for purposes of promoting cooperation, consider UN General Assembly Resolution 72/249, which launched an Intergovernmental Conference on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) and instructed the conference to begin work on crafting the provisions of an international legally binding instrument dealing with a specific set of issues relating to BBNJ (UNGA 2017 ). Expected to take the form of an implementation agreement nested within the framework of UNCLOS, the BBNJ agreement would cover four distinct sets of topics: (1) marine genetic resources, (2) area-based management tools, (3) environmental impact assessment procedures, and (4) capacity building and technology transfer. There is much to indicate that inclusion of the fourth topic was important in order to gain support from a set of developing countries that had voiced concerns about the costs of meeting their commitment under a BBNJ agreement. But the real question is whether it is realistic to expect negotiators to produce a coherent outcome addressing this whole suite of issues.

With respect to actor inclusiveness, the recent negotiations relating to fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean provide a striking example. The five coastal states initially sought to limit the negotiations to themselves, but soon found that this grouping was not sufficient to address the problem effectively (Stokke 2016 ). The second round of negotiations was expanded to include China, Iceland, Japan, Korea, and the European Union. The negotiators made a point of excluding others, expecting the 5 + 5 formula to prove tractable in terms of institutional bargaining and sufficient in terms of inclusiveness to address the problem effectively.

It is difficult to arrive at any simple formula regarding the treatment of these matters in specific cases of institutional bargaining. Nevertheless, institutional overload looms as an increasingly dangerous peril as those responsible for creating or implementing a regime move toward expanded scope or increased complexity in terms of each of the key dimensions. As in the case of institutional reductionism, the consequences of overload may range from situations in which greater scope or increased complexity facilitates coalition building to situations in which the parties are unable to arrive at any agreement acceptable to all. While stalemate may reflect unwillingness on the part of key players to compromise on a single divisive issue, it commonly occurs in situations where the scope of the negotiations becomes too broad and complex to allow for coherent outcomes. Defined in this way, the peril of overload becomes increasingly severe when negotiators take matters of scope and complexity too far, impeding efforts to address needs for governance effectively instead of promoting efforts to solve specific problems.

Each of these steps, deriving from the inclusion of expanded sets of issues and actors in an institutional arrangement, the broadening of the spatial coverage of new institutions, or the adoption of provisions that seem attractive on paper but are difficult to implement, adds to the challenge of producing governance systems that can solve environmental problems. It is not easy to devise principles to allow negotiators to optimize in terms of these dimensions, and there is no shortage of cases in which negotiations have ended in stalemate (e.g., the 2009 Conference of the Parties to the Climate Convention), produced outcomes that failed to enter into force (e.g., the 1988 Antarctic Minerals Convention), or yielded results whose performance is disappointing in terms of problem solving (e.g., the 2001 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants). Overload, like its reductionist twin, constitutes a peril that can push unwary negotiators or administrators into situations resulting in institutional failure.

3 Risk factors and response strategies

The perils of institutional reductionism and institutional overload can wreak havoc with efforts to create regimes capable of solving environmental problems, even in cases where negotiators and administrators are aware of and understand the dangers associated with these perils in general terms. This makes it important to identify factors—we call them risk factors—likely to propel governance systems toward one or the other of the perils and to consider response strategies that can help negotiators and administrators to avoid the consequences of reductionism and overload in specific cases. How is it that negotiations can slide into extreme simplification or fall prey to excessive complexity, without anyone sounding the alarm or taking effective steps to prevent movement along the slippery slopes of reductionism or overload? Are there forces endemic to institutional bargaining or to the implementation of regimes that push participants in one direction or the other in a way that is difficult to anticipate, challenging to monitor, or hard to counter effectively in a world of actors motivated primarily by self-interest? Are there procedures—we call them response strategies—that can help participants in such processes to find middle ways that are helpful in avoiding these perils, without compromising their bargaining strength or administrative capacity in ways that limit their ability to maximize individual gains?

Risk factors of this sort are abundant. We are not able to offer a formal taxonomy identifying these factors in a mutually exclusive and exhaustive fashion. But for purposes of analysis, we find it helpful to group risk factors into three familiar categories: conditions relating to the character of the problem (e.g., malignancy, complexity, dynamism, uncertainty), matters of institutional design (e.g., decision rules, substantive provisions, liability rules), and features of the broader setting (e.g., political context, socioeconomic environment, cognitive setting).

In this short paper, we cannot analyze the full range of risk factors. Instead, we select one risk factor relating to each of the three categories, exploring the nature of the risk and the mechanisms through which it can lead to results that run afoul of the peril of reductionism or the peril of overload. We also offer a preliminary assessment of response strategies in each of the three cases that can prove helpful to those seeking to steer a course that minimizes the dangers of falling into the pitfalls associated with the twin perils. Our conclusion is that further research should focus on identifying risk factors in greater detail and testing the hypothesis that in each case the development of an effective response strategy constitutes a necessary condition for success in solving environmental problems. For those interested in applications, a focus on the development of response strategies will become a priority.

3.1 Complexity

Complexity is a measure of the extent to which a problem is linked to an array of issues extending beyond the core concern (Underdal 2010 ). In the case of fisheries, for example, there are questions regarding whether the relevant fish stocks are affected by developments such as increases in the temperature of the water column or runoffs of nutrients or other land-based marine pollutants causing the spread of dead zones. Fishing operations can themselves be a significant driver of certain environmental problems, such as the destruction of benthic communities or coral reefs. In biophysical terms, problems may be more or less self-contained with regard to their links to broader systems, and those broader systems may be more or less complex in terms of factors like hyperconnectivity, nonlinearity, directional change, and the prevalence of unexpected developments arising as emergent properties (Young 2017a , b ). Highly complex biophysical systems place special demands on international governance arrangements when the activities relevant to problem solving fall under the jurisdiction of different sectors of government.

Humans are accustomed to thinking in terms of systems that are relatively simple. The reductionist inclination is to seek to encapsulate each of these problems in the interests of making negotiations and administrative procedures tractable. Pressure toward reductionism is likely to be reinforced if existing institutions place regulatory authority over ecosystem components in separate arrangements involving different sectors of government. Such separation is common in ocean management because many international fisheries institutions were established well before regimes for marine environmental protection arose. For instance, the fact that the pre-existing North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) already possessed management authority over high-seas harvesting operations goes a long way toward explaining why the mandate of the OSPAR Commission for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic excludes “questions relating to the management of fisheries” (OSPAR Convention, Preamble and Article 4). Such savings clauses, protecting commitments already entered into in previous agreements, are common in international environmental diplomacy (van Asselt 2011 ) and often promote institutional reductionism. Another example is the provision in UNGA Resolution 72/249 setting forth the mandate of the BBNJ negotiations stating that the “process and its results should not undermine existing relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional and sectoral bodies” (UNGA 2017 ). Yet it is apparent that any new arrangement capable of making a difference with respect to biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction will have significant implications for existing regimes dealing with marine fisheries, commercial shipping, deep seabed mining, and (potentially) certain aspects of oil and gas development.

Illustrating the peril of reductionism, NEAFC’s response when alerted by the OSPAR Commission to the need to protect rare and threatened cold-water coral reefs from the effects of bottom trawling was to point out that international measures constraining fisheries operations were an exclusive NEAFC competence and that aggregation with environmental-protection interests should be dealt with at the national level (Kvalvik 2012 ). This defensive approach increased the risk that measures taken under the two regimes, involving largely the same set of states, would be incoherent with respect to area protection. It also implied that the regional institution with greatest expertise in defining and applying criteria for area protection would not be able to influence the economic activity generating the greatest risk of damaging the coral reefs.

That said, taking the opposite approach, seeking to endow the environmental institution with regulatory powers over fisheries could easily produce an important form of institutional overload: unwillingness among important member states to cede authority to the international body due to uncertainty about its priorities among the relevant concerns. In the fisheries sector, states have typically granted regional management organizations access to their national fisheries research capabilities, wide regulatory authority regarding the conduct of harvesting operations, and (frequently) the use of reporting, monitoring, and inspection procedures that enhance transparency with respect to harvesting in national and high-seas areas (Stokke 2019 ). Generally, the potential advantages of expanding the functional scope of an international body must be weighed against the risk that states will be less prepared to cede regulatory and enforcement authority to an international body operated or significantly influenced by sectors of government inclined to prioritize preservation over resource use.

Under such circumstances, one response strategy designed to steer a course between the reductionist peril of narrowly constrained regulation and the overload peril of a functionally broad body that lacks regulatory clout features setting up procedures in support of interplay management, allowing those who operate distinct institutions to improve the interaction among them (Stokke 2020 ). Such procedures may include coordinated decision making. More frequently, they feature reciprocal or one-sided adaptation (Oberthür and Stokke 2011 ). The NEAFC–OSPAR case exemplifies the latter option: The fisheries body decided to adapt its regulations closing certain high-seas areas for bottom trawling to the spatial boundaries defined in the environmental body's emerging network of marine protected areas (Kvalvik 2012 ). This regulatory alignment did not derive from joint decision making, which remained unacceptable to the resource management regime. Even when the national-level competence for different parts of a complex biophysical system resides with institutions with competing priorities, interplay management either by coordination or by the less ambitious means of one-sided adaptation may offer an adequate vehicle for achieving regulatory coherence.

3.2 Bindingness/level of ambition

Governance systems vary considerably in terms of bindingness and level of ambition or, in other words, in the extent to which substantive provisions constrain state behavior. Regarding bindingness, the provisions of a regime may vary from hard to soft, depending on whether they take the form of hard law set forth in a legally binding instrument, soft law under the terms of a ministerial declaration or similar document, or informal practices with no legal status in the ordinary sense of the term. Level of ambition refers to the breadth of the topics covered by a regime and the depth of commitments or the extent to which those commitments go beyond what the parties would do in the absence of an agreement. We can envisage a spectrum of situations with regard to bindingness and level of ambition, ranging from highly ambitious arrangements articulated in the form of hard law at one extreme to much more limited arrangements with no legal status at the other. Many of those who think about international environmental agreements take it for granted that the goal in every case is to create ambitious arrangements that are as “hard” as possible. But this assumption seems questionable. If we start with the premise that form should follow function regarding the character of governance systems, the proper approach is to address these matters case-by-case, developing arrangements likely to contribute to solving the problem(s) at hand.

Reductionism here takes the form of insisting that all the provisions of a regime should be cast as hard law, especially if coupled with an assumption that there is no need for explicit compliance mechanisms to ensure that the parties fulfill their commitments. Two major problems can lead to institutional failure in such cases. One arises from a trade-off between hardness and level of ambition. When asked to make hard-law commitments, parties to environmental agreements frequently limit both the breadth and the depth of the commitments they are willing to accept (Barrett 2007 ). Experience also indicates that ambitious commitments not accompanied by suitable compliance mechanisms tend to get watered down or fall by the wayside when it comes to implementation. Overload, by contrast, occurs when the agreements that establish regimes include ambitious provisions covering a wide range of issues, without any central thread to lend focus or coherence to the parties’ efforts to implement individual provisions. This is a source of considerable concern in the current negotiations regarding biodiversity beyond national jurisdictions. In such cases, institutional failure often results from desultory efforts to implement specific provisions of a regime with varying degrees of success, leading to outcomes that do not add up to a coherent strategy for addressing the concern that led to the creation of the regime in the first place.

What strategies are available to avoid the perils of reductionism and overload with regard to issues concerning the form and strength of substantive provisions? Experience in the realm of international environmental governance suggests several possibilities. One strategy involves differentiating among the provisions of a regime, making some legally binding, while allowing others to take the form of much softer commitments or even voluntary pledges. An example is the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, structured generally as a legally binding arrangement in which the Nationally Determined Contributions of the individual parties are treated as voluntary pledges (Cherry et al. 2014 ). Another strategy features opting for modest breadth and depth of commitments at the outset, coupled with procedures for raising the regime’s level of participation and ambition over time. Examples here include adding protocols to a framework convention to expand the range of issues covered, as with the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution, or expanding the list of controlled substances, as in the case of the global 2001 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. A third strategy involves providing assistance to parties willing to participate but lacking the capacity needed to implement ambitious substantive provisions. Such assistance may involve technology transfer, training programs, or financial assistance. In every case, the challenge is to tailor the strategy so as to avoid the perils of reductionism and overload with regard to bindingness and level of ambition.

3.3 Political context

Efforts to craft the provisions of regimes are themselves political processes. But they occur within broader political settings that may influence the course of negotiations considerably. Relevant factors concern the extent to which the issues at hand are linked to deep-seated disputes or conflicts of interest and the extent to which the political setting includes well-developed practices for cooperatively addressing needs for governance. Intense disputes and the absence of cooperative practices are likely to lead to a reductionist approach. Conversely, in examining policy arenas that deal with numerous issues, analysts often ask: Are there opportunities to make progress by broadening the agenda, adding issues and actors in efforts to address specific needs for governance? In such cases, the challenge is to avoid overload arising from outcomes of the kind referred to in domestic legislation as “Christmas tree bills” due to the convoluted nature of the deals made to build the coalitions needed to reach agreement. Often, the results are governance systems that are excessively complex and ultimately prove ineffective.

The international regime for managing the world’s biggest cod stock, Northeast Arctic cod, emerged in the midst of the cold war with the dominant regime members—Norway and the Soviet Union—squarely placed on opposite sides of the East–West divide (Stokke 2012 ). Observers agree that the effectiveness of this regime for fisheries management derives in considerable part from the ability of those who negotiated it to avoid the reductionist trap of ignoring the larger and often conflict-ridden geopolitical context (Stokke et al. 1999 ; Hønneland 2012 ). Key components of this regime served to insulate the practical governance tasks of knowledge-building, agreed regulation, and rule enforcement at sea from contested sovereignty issues that would otherwise complicate efficient deployment of fishing capacity and responsible management measures. For instance, the elaborate procedures of the Mutual Access Agreement, allowing fishers to operate in each other’s waters to optimize harvesting practices, were deliberately aimed at avoiding fisheries incidents that might escalate into diplomatic conflicts (Stokke et al. 1999 ). Similarly, the parties developed the Grey Zone Agreement in the 1970s, allowing parallel inspection in an area that included a disputed segment of the Barents Sea to reduce the negative effect that acceptance of fisheries enforcement by the other party would otherwise have had on each party’s claim to sovereignty (Stokke and Hoel 1991 ). A reductionist approach to these negotiations, one that attended to the needs of fisheries management but ignored the complications arising from the East–West rivalry and competing sovereignty claims, would have had little chance of succeeding.

The opposite peril, institutional overload, looms whenever those responsible for administering an issue-specific regime assume responsibility for broader and deeper political problems that the institution is incapable of addressing effectively. Consider, for instance, proposals to boycott Arctic Council meetings held in Russia in order to make a firm diplomatic statement on the inadmissibility of Russia’s annexation of the Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. A similar weighing of concerns was relevant when Norway considered whether its post-Crimea sanctions against Russia, which included a freeze on military cooperation, should also extend to the coast guard cooperation on fisheries inspection as well as search-and-rescue operations in the Barents Sea. Had the more extensive sanctions been chosen in these cases, they would have generated institutional overload. Relatively low-key institutions well-equipped for encouraging coordination in specific issue areas of common interest would have been burdened with a problem they were not equipped to solve. There is no basis for believing that reduced cooperation in Arctic Council activities, in the work of the Joint Norwegian–Russian Fisheries Commission, or in collaborative search-and-rescue missions in remote Arctic locations would be perceived by Russia as costly enough to induce reconsideration of its geopolitical decision regarding Crimea. Efforts to use those specialized institutions for pursuing broader security objectives would have produced overload, leading to a loss of problem-solving capacity in the issue areas involved with no significant effect on Russian behavior regarding Ukraine.

Common denominators among these efforts to find a path between reductionism and overload include the insulation of issue-specific practical cooperation of mutual interest from oscillations in the intensity of contextual disputes or conflicts and a willingness on the part of those implementing the arrangements to refrain from burdening them with broader political objectives they are ill-equipped to serve.

4 Conclusions

It is easy to summarize our contribution to understanding why solving environmental problems is difficult. The perils of reductionism and overload constitute pitfalls that negotiators and administrators often fall into in specific situations, even when they are aware of these dangers in general terms. Numerous risk factors can propel efforts to solve problems toward one or the other of these perils. A necessary (though not sufficient) condition to achieve success in this realm is to identify the risk factors pertinent to specific problems and to devise response strategies that provide a basis for steering a course between reductionism and overload.

There are two ways to think about the significance of this argument, one positive and the other normative. The positive perspective emphasizes the goal of explaining observed patterns of success and failure in efforts to solve international and transnational environmental problems. Many initiatives fail, but some succeed. This we explain in terms of the effects of risk factors that push negotiations toward the perils of reductionism and overload. Sometimes it is possible to steer a course that allows for safe passage between these perils. But this can occur only when the negotiators are cognizant of the pitfalls and are prepared to work together to avoid them, even while making concerted efforts to pursue their individual interests.

The normative perspective, by contrast, is a matter of offering advice to those responsible for negotiating and implementing the terms of environmental agreements. What does our analysis have to say that may be of interest to those engaged in institutional bargaining or responsible for implementing the resultant regimes? We advise these actors to develop expertise regarding the identification of risk factors and the development of response strategies. While every case is unique in some respects, it is always important to consider the relevance of risk factors and, we argue, to formulate response strategies that help to steer clear of the associated pitfalls of reductionism and overload.

Regime formation and implementation involve mixed-motive interactions. There is a natural tendency to approach the bargaining process as a matter of driving a hard bargain that maximizes payoffs to the individual participant. But success requires willingness and ability to cooperate to avoid the perils of reductionism and overload. The result is a delicate balancing act involving the simultaneous pursuit of common interests and conflicting interests. It is not surprising that many efforts of this sort fail, a fact that makes those that succeed all the more worthy of sustained interest.

Barrett, S. (2007). Why cooperate?: The incentive to supply global public goods . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Birch, A. H. (1984). Overload, ungovernability and delegitimization. British Journal of Political Science, 14, 135–160.

Article   Google Scholar  

Breitmeier, H., Underdal, A., & Young, O. R. (2011). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Comparing and contrasting findings from quantitative research. International Studies Review, 13 (4), 579–605.

Breitmeier, H., Young, O. R., & Zürn, M. (2006). Analyzing international environmental regimes: From case study to database . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Brennan, G., & Buchanan, J. M. (1985). The reason of rules: Constitutional political economy . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Google Scholar  

Cherry, T. L., Hovi, J., & McEvoy, M. D. (Eds.). (2014). Toward a new climate agreement: Conflict, resolution and governance . London: Routledge.

FCMA. (1976). Fishery Conservation and Management Act. PL 94-265; 90 Stat. 331; 16 USC 1801 et seq.

Hale, T., Held, D., & Young, K. (2013). Gridlock: Why global cooperation is failing when we need it most . Cambridge: Polity Press.

Hilborn, R. (2012). Overfishing: What everyone needs to know . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hønneland, G. (2012). Making international fisheries agreements work: Post-agreement bargaining in the Barents Sea . Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

IPBES, Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. (2019). Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services . Retrieved January 24, 2020 from https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/ipbes_7_10_add.1_en_1.pdf .

Kvalvik, I. (2012). Managing institutional overlap in the protection of marine ecosystems on the high seas. The case of the North East Atlantic. Ocean and Coastal Management, 56, 35–43.

McLeod, K., Leslie, H., et al. (2009). Ecosystem-based management for the oceans . Washington, DC: Island Press.

MEA. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis . Washington, DC: Island Press.

Miles, E. L., et al. (2002). Environmental regime effectiveness: Confronting theory with evidence . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Mitchell, R. (1994). International oil pollution at sea: Environmental policy and treaty compliance . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Oberthür, S., & Stokke, O. S. (Eds.). (2011). Managing institutional complexity: regime interplay and global environmental change . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

OSPAR. (2007). Convention for the protection of the marine environment of the North-East Atlantic. Adopted in Paris, 22 September 1992. Latest amendment (annexes) in 2007. Retrieved January 24, 2020 from https://www.ospar.org/convention/text .

Park, J., Conca, K., & Finger, M. (2008). The crisis of global environmental governance . London: Routledge.

Pauly, D. (2010). 5 easy pieces: The impact of fisheries on marine ecosystems . Washington, DC: Island Press.

Schelling, T. C. (1960). The strategy of conflict . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Sebenius, J. K. (1984). Negotiating the law of the sea . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Speth, J. G. (2004). Red sky at morning: America and the crisis of global governance . New York: Oxford University Press.

Stokke, O. S. (2012). Disaggregating international regimes: A new approach to evaluation and comparison . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Stokke, O. S. (2016). Geopolitics, governance, and arctic fisheries politics. In E. Conde & S. S. Iglesias (Eds.), Global challenges in the Arctic region: Sovereignty, environment and geopolitical balance (pp. 170–195). London: Routledge.

Stokke, O. S. (2019). Management options for high seas fisheries: Making regime complexes more effective. In J. Caddell & E. J. Molenaar (Eds.), Strengthening international fisheries law in an era of changing oceans (pp. 51–79). London: Hart Publishers.

Stokke, O. S. (2020). Interplay management. In F. Biermann & R. Kim (Eds.), Architectures of earth system governance: Institutional complexity and structural transformation (pp. 165–185). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stokke, O. S., Anderson, L. G., & Mirovitskaya, N. (1999). The Barents Sea fisheries. In O. R. Young (Ed.), The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Causal connections and behavioral mechanisms . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Stokke, O. S., & Hoel, A. H. (1991). Splitting the gains: Political economy of the Barents Sea fisheries. Cooperation and Conflict, 26, 49–65.

Underdal, A. (2010). Complexity and challenges of long-term environmental governance. Global Environmental Change, 20, 386–393.

UNGA, United Nations General Assembly. (2017). Resolution 72/249. International legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction . A/RES/72/249. Retrieved January 24, 2020 from https://undocs.org/en/a/res/72/249 .

van Asselt, H. (2011). Legal and political approaches in interplay management: Dealing with the fragmentation of global climate governance. In S. Oberthür & O. S. Stokke (Eds.), Managing institutional complexity: Regime interplay and global environmental change (pp. 59–85). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Young, O. R. (1994). International cooperation: Protecting the environment in a stateless society . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Young, O. R. (2008). Building regimes for socioecological systems: Institutional diagnostics. In O. R. Young, L. King, & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and environmental change (pp. 115–144). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Young, O. R. (2011). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Existing knowledge, cutting-edge themes, and research strategies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 108, 19853–19860.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Young, O. R. (2017a). Governing complex systems: Social capital for the anthropocene . Cambridge: MIT Press.

Young, O. R. (2017b). Beyond regulation: Innovative strategies for governing large complex systems. Sustainability, 9 (6), 938.

Young, O. R., & Levy, M. (1999). The effectiveness of international environmental agreements. In O. R. Young (Ed.), The effectiveness of international environmental regimes (pp. 1–32). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Young, O. R., Webster, D. G., et al. (2018). Moving beyond panaceas in fisheries governance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115, 9065–9073.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Open Access funding provided by Oslo University & Oslo University Hospital. The work has been funded by the Research Council of Norway through POLARPROG Project No. 257614: Spatial Shifts of Marine Stocks and the Resilience of Polar Resource Management (STOCKSHIFT).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Bren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, 93106-5131, USA

Oran R. Young

Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Olav Schram Stokke

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oran R. Young .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Young, O.R., Stokke, O.S. Why is it hard to solve environmental problems? The perils of institutional reductionism and institutional overload. Int Environ Agreements 20 , 5–19 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-020-09468-6

Download citation

Accepted : 16 January 2020

Published : 27 January 2020

Issue Date : March 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-020-09468-6

Sorry, there was a problem.

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Follow the author

Environmental Problem Solving: A How-To Guide 1st Edition

• ISBN-10 1584655925
• ISBN-13 978-1584655923
• Edition 1st
• Publisher University Press of New England
• Publication date April 30, 2007
• Language English
• Dimensions 6 x 0.7 x 9 inches
• Print length 240 pages
• See all details

Editorial Reviews

About the author, product details.

• Publisher ‏ : ‎ University Press of New England; 1st edition (April 30, 2007)
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• Paperback ‏ : ‎ 240 pages
• ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 1584655925
• ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1584655923
• Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 12.8 ounces
• Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 6 x 0.7 x 9 inches
• #442 in Ecology (Books)
• #3,053 in Social Services & Welfare (Books)

About the author

Jeffrey w. hughes.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Customer reviews

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

• Sort reviews by Top reviews Most recent Top reviews

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. please try again later..

• About Amazon
• Investor Relations
• Amazon Devices
• Amazon Science
• Sell products on Amazon
• Sell on Amazon Business
• Sell apps on Amazon
• Become an Affiliate
• Advertise Your Products
• Self-Publish with Us
• Host an Amazon Hub
• › See More Make Money with Us
• Amazon Business Card
• Shop with Points
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Amazon and COVID-19
• Your Account
• Your Orders
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Returns & Replacements
• Manage Your Content and Devices

• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Consumer Health Data Privacy Disclosure
• Your Ads Privacy Choices

More From Forbes

Stumped five ways to hone your problem-solving skills.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Respect the worth of other people's insights

Problems continuously arise in organizational life, making problem-solving an essential skill for leaders. Leaders who are good at tackling conundrums are likely to be more effective at overcoming obstacles and guiding their teams to achieve their goals. So, what’s the secret to better problem-solving skills?

1. Understand the root cause of the problem

“Too often, people fail because they haven’t correctly defined what the problem is,” says David Ross, an international strategist, founder of consultancy Phoenix Strategic Management and author of Confronting the Storm: Regenerating Leadership and Hope in the Age of Uncertainty .

Ross explains that as teams grapple with “wicked” problems – those where there can be several root causes for why a problem exists – there can often be disagreement on the initial assumptions made. As a result, their chances of successfully solving the problem are low.

“Before commencing the process of solving the problem, it is worthwhile identifying who your key stakeholders are and talking to them about the issue,” Ross recommends. “Who could be affected by the issue? What is the problem – and why? How are people affected?”

He argues that if leaders treat people with dignity, respecting the worth of their insights, they are more likely to successfully solve problems.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024, 2. unfocus the mind.

“To solve problems, we need to commit to making time to face a problem in its full complexity, which also requires that we take back control of our thinking,” says Chris Griffiths, an expert on creativity and innovative thinking skills, founder and CEO of software provider OpenGenius, and co-author of The Focus Fix: Finding Clarity, Creativity and Resilience in an Overwhelming World .

To do this, it’s necessary to harness the power of the unfocused mind, according to Griffiths. “It might sound oxymoronic, but just like our devices, our brain needs time to recharge,” he says. “ A plethora of research has shown that daydreaming allows us to make creative connections and see abstract solutions that are not obvious when we’re engaged in direct work.”

To make use of the unfocused mind in problem solving, you must begin by getting to know the problem from all angles. “At this stage, don’t worry about actually solving the problem,” says Griffiths. “You’re simply giving your subconscious mind the information it needs to get creative with when you zone out. From here, pick a monotonous or rhythmic activity that will help you to activate the daydreaming state – that might be a walk, some doodling, or even some chores.”

Do this regularly, argues Griffiths, and you’ll soon find that flashes of inspiration and novel solutions naturally present themselves while you’re ostensibly thinking of other things. He says: “By allowing you to access the fullest creative potential of your own brain, daydreaming acts as a skeleton key for a wide range of problems.”

3. Be comfortable making judgment calls

“Admitting to not knowing the future takes courage,” says Professor Stephen Wyatt, founder and lead consultant at consultancy Corporate Rebirth and author of Antidote to the Crisis of Leadership: Opportunity in Complexity . “Leaders are worried our teams won’t respect us and our boards will lose faith in us, but what doesn’t work is drawing up plans and forecasts and holding yourself or others rigidly to them.”

Wyatt advises leaders to heighten their situational awareness – to look broadly, integrate more perspectives and be able to connect the dots. “We need to be comfortable in making judgment calls as the future is unknown,” he says. “There is no data on it. But equally, very few initiatives cannot be adjusted, refined or reviewed while in motion.”

Leaders need to stay vigilant, according to Wyatt, create the capacity of the enterprise to adapt and maintain the support of stakeholders. “The concept of the infallible leader needs to be updated,” he concludes.

4. Be prepared to fail and learn

“Organisations, and arguably society more widely, are obsessed with problems and the notion of problems,” says Steve Hearsum, founder of organizational change consultancy Edge + Stretch and author of No Silver Bullet: Bursting the Bubble of the Organisational Quick Fix .

Hearsum argues that this tendency is complicated by the myth of fixability, namely the idea that all problems, however complex, have a solution. “Our need for certainty, to minimize and dampen the anxiety of ‘not knowing,’ leads us to oversimplify and ignore or filter out anything that challenges the idea that there is a solution,” he says.

Leaders need to shift their mindset to cultivate their comfort with not knowing and couple that with being OK with being wrong, sometimes, notes Hearsum. He adds: “That means developing reflexivity to understand your own beliefs and judgments, and what influences these, asking questions and experimenting.”

5. Unleash the power of empathy

Leaders must be able to communicate problems in order to find solutions to them. But they should avoid bombarding their teams with complex, technical details since these can overwhelm their people’s cognitive load, says Dr Jessica Barker MBE , author of Hacked: The Secrets Behind Cyber Attacks .

Instead, she recommends that leaders frame their messages in ways that cut through jargon and ensure that their advice is relevant, accessible and actionable. “An essential leadership skill for this is empathy,” Barker explains. “When you’re trying to build a positive culture, it is crucial to understand why people are not practicing the behaviors you want rather than trying to force that behavioral change with fear, uncertainty and doubt.”

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

Analytical Instruments & Supplies

• Chromatography
• Mass Spectrometry
• Certified Pre-Owned Instruments
• Spectroscopy
• Capillary Electrophoresis
• Chromatography & Spectroscopy Lab Supplies
• Instrument Repair
• Sample Preparation
• Chemical Standards

Life Science

• Cell Analysis
• Automated Electrophoresis
• Microarray Solutions
• Mutagenesis & Cloning
• Next Generation Sequencing
• Research Flow Cytometry
• PCR/Real-Time PCR (qPCR)
• CRISPR/Cas9
• Microscopes and Microplate Instrumentation
• Oligo Pools & Oligo GMP Manufacturing

Clinical & Diagnostic Testing

• Immunohistochemistry
• Companion Diagnostics
• Hematoxylin & Eosin
• Special Stains
• In Situ Hybridization
• Clinical Flow Cytometry
• Specific Proteins
• Clinical Microplate Instrumentation

Lab Management & Consulting

• Lab Management
• Lab Consulting

Lab Software

• Software & Informatics
• Genomics Informatics

Lab Supplies

• Microplates

Dissolution Testing

• Dissolution

Lab Automation

• Automated Liquid Handling

Vacuum & Leak Detection

• Vacuum Technologies
• Leak Detection
• Applications & Industries
• Biopharma/Pharma
• Cancer Research
• Cannabis & Hemp Testing
• Clinical Diagnostics
• Clinical Research
• Infectious Disease
• Energy & Chemicals
• Environmental
• Food & Beverage Testing
• Materials Testing & Research
• Security, Defense & First Response
• Vacuum Solutions
• Lithium-Ion Battery Testing
• Oligonucleotide Therapeutics
• PFAS Testing in Water
• Training & Events

Mass spectrometry, chromatography, spectroscopy, software, dissolution, sample handling and vacuum technologies courses

On-demand continuing education

Instrument training and workshops

Live or on-demand webinars on product introductions, applications and software enhancements

Worldwide trade shows, conferences, local seminars and user group meetings

Lab Management Services

Service Plans, On Demand Repair, Preventive Maintenance, and Service Center Repair

Software to manage instrument access, sample processing, inventories, and more

Instrument/software qualifications, consulting, and data integrity validations

Learn essential lab skills and enhance your workflows

Instrument & equipment deinstallation, transportation, and reinstallation

Other Services Header1

CrossLab Connect services use laboratory data to improve control and decision-making

Advance lab operations with lab-wide services, asset management, relocation

Shorten the time it takes to start seeing the full value of your instrument investment

Other Services Header2

• Agilent Community
• Financial Solutions
• Agilent University
• Instrument Trade-In & BuyBack

Pathology Services

• Lab Solution Deployment Services
• Instrument & Solution Services
• Training & Application Services
• Workflow & Connectivity Services

Nucleic Acid Therapeutics

• Oligonucleotide GMP Manufacturing

Vacuum Product & Leak Detector Services

• Advance Exchange Service
• Repair Support Services & Spare Parts
• Support Services, Agreements & Training
• Technology Refresh & Upgrade
• Leak Detector Services
• Support & Resources

Technical Support

• Instrument Support Resources
• Columns, Supplies, & Standards
• Contact Support
• See All Technical Support

Purchase & Order Support

• Instrument Subscriptions
• Flexible Spend Plan
• eProcurement
• eCommerce Guides

Literature & Videos

• Application Notes
• Technical Overviews
• User Manuals
• Life Sciences Publication Database
• Electronic Instructions for Use (eIFU)
• Safety Data Sheets
• Technical Data Sheets
• Site Prep Checklist

E-Newsletters

• Solution Insights
• ICP-MS Journal

Certificates

• Certificate of Analysis
• Certificate of Conformance
• Certificate of Performance
• ISO Certificates

More Resources

• iOS & Android Apps
• QuikChange Primer Design Tools
• GC Calculators & Method Translation Software
• BioCalculators / Nucleic Acid Calculators
• Order Center
• Quick Order
• Request a Quote
• My Favorites
• Where to Buy
• Flex Spend Portal
• Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS)
• LC/MS Instruments
• Quadrupole Time of Flight LC/MS

Revident LC/Q-TOF

Revident LC/Q-TOF and 1290 Infinity II HPLC

The Revident LC/Q-TOF embodies the next generation of quadrupole time-of-flight instruments featuring truly innovative (electronic) instrument architecture together with instrument intelligence, a novel, ultrafast detector, and an updated, robust calibrant delivery system. Excelling in routine screening, high resolution, accurate-mass quantitation, identification of unknowns, and high-throughput testing, the Revident Q-TOF LC/MS system is ideal for small molecule applications in food safety and environmental analysis, as well as metabolomics, pharmaceutical, and forensic analyses. Innovative technologies that will increase productivity include intelligent reflex for maximized instrument uptime, scheduled tunes and calibration for optimal performance when you need it, and new acquisition software tailored to different user roles. All new features combined result in higher throughput, which increases the bottom-line financials for your lab.

Product Details

• High resolution (Hi-Res) mass spectrometry screening can be used to increase measurement capabilities dramatically for analyses of samples with large numbers of suspects, including retrospective analysis using full mass spectra information
• Simultaneous routine screening and quantitation using data-independent acquisition modes enable sensitive detection and identification of contaminants that maintain performance at high acquisition rates
• Optimal instrument performance via scheduled tunes and calibration, early maintenance feedback, and instrument diagnostics increases your lab productivity
• Intelligent reflex workflows include automatic reinjection for carryover, saturation, fast screening, suspect screening confirmation, and iterative MS/MS that allow the instrument to continuously acquire data while you focus on the results
• New and intuitive mass spectrometry acquisition software is aligned with the LC/TQ UI, and it is simplified and tailored to different lab roles from technician to lab manager and auditor
• Identification of unknowns is enhanced by a new software workflow for seamless batch processing and statistical analysis with subsequent identification of compounds derived from the significance analysis
• Innovative modular design including readbacks represents highly sophisticated and complete instrument diagnostics, with all relevant information constantly monitored, allowing for fast and reliable detection of the individual component’s status
• A completely new detector based on analog-to-digital conversion (ADC) generates mass peaks with high resolution and isotope fidelity, with the obtained peak symmetry maintaining high mass accuracy through different abundance levels
• New delivery system for calibrant and reference masses is pump-based and flow-controlled, permitting constant and reliable flow rates

Pesticide Screening in Food Matrices Using Agilent Revident LC/Q-TOF

This application note details a method for pesticide screening in complex food matrices using the Agilent Revident LC/Q-TOF with MassHunter Quantitative Analysis.

• 13 May 2024

Additional technology and software capabilities for LC/Q-TOF

Agilent partners with innovators who provide technologies and software that expand the core capabilities of the LC/Q-TOF portfolio. Learn more about additional capabilities and visit the compatibility matrix to see which ones are offered for your LC/Q-TOF.

MassHunter Workstation and Networked Workstation for LC/TOF and LC/QTOF Systems Software Site Preparation Checklist

This site preparation checklist applies to MassHunter Acquisition for TOF/QTOF 11.0 and higher, MassHunter Quantitative analysis 11.0 and higher, MassHunter BioConfirm 11.0 and higher, and MassHunter Qualitative Analysis 10.0 and higher running in Workstation and Networked Workstation configurations.

• Site Preparation Checklists
• 28 Nov 2023

Revident LC/QTOF Site Preparation Checklist

Site preparation information for the Revident LC/QTOF system

• 06 Nov 2023

The PFAS legacy in our urban environment

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (pfas) are emerging contaminants attracting global scientific and regulatory attention due to their environmental persistence and bioaccumulative properties., customers also viewed these products.

0 part selected.