Abstract

As the global climate became more and more unpredictable and devastating in the past few decades, the discussion on the avoidance and remediation of climate-related activities was attracted exclusive attention both in the international and national level. As a result, environmental laws and policies were enacted to urge the public as well as governmental officials to both restrict greenhouse gas emission and reduce exploitation and deforestation. This article focuses on identifying the gaps between the environmental laws in United States and international environmental laws or policies, and propose innovative or alternative solutions that the government could adopt in within a pragmatic scenario. More specifically, this article emphasizes on three approaches: climate funds, insurance, and healthcare. The three approaches altogether examine the potential improvements of U.S. environmental laws in the perspectives of economics as well as social security. Therefore, it is determined that the eventual influence on the entire society, if the nation emended the law, would be considered cross-sectionally beneficial.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call