Prompt: Scientists believe that the world is in danger due to environmental changes .Some people say that personal lifestyle should be made to reduce the damage to environment, while others think that the government should do something to help. Discuss both the views and give your opinion.

With the world suffering greatly from the destruction of nature, some say changes must be implemented at an individual level whereas others think states have a greater role to play in obliterating the conundrum. This essay discusses both viewpoints with my opinion outlined in the conclusion. Ċ First, the general populace can do so much to limit environmental damage and their efforts cannot be overlooked. Things like leaving the car at home or using electricity instead of firewood clearly help to reduce challenges like pollution. For example, Germans are very particular about the products they buy in shops; they only purchase organic products since these are supportive of the greater plea by the United Nations for people to protect the environment. However, such efforts are only small and usually isolated. Ċ On the other hand, it is believed governments stand a better chance to produce sustainable impact. Their roles as legislators, adjudicators or enforcers and their financial clout can come in handy in saving the world's natural ecosystem. For instance, most states globally use the popular "polluters must pay principle" when dealing with offenders. Secondly, governing bodies have proved to be more effective in dealing with more serious crimes such as poaching in places like Africa after dedicating enough funding to police and military activities. This shows the magnitude of their role. Ċ In conclusion, therefore, I argue that while individuals are important stakeholders in finding lasting solutions to environmental problems, the state can do so much more to help as I indicated in the second paragraph. These issues have been discussed in this essay.