Marine Plastic Pollution in the Gulf of Carpentaria, Australia

It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that the goal of the government is to maintain proper living conditions for the citizens. This also includes environmental protection since nature affects a life of a person profoundly. Nevertheless, there is no single approach to the way in which the protection needs to be structured. While some advocate the need to let the government manage all the procedures, others believe that the opposite approach will be more effective. Top-down approach is more suitable for the protection of the environment because of the advantages that are associated with it.

The Benefits of Top-Down Approach

To begin with, it is important to point out that top-down approach feature an undisputed advantage that its counterpart cannot boast: a large pool of resources that are available. Indeed, every progressive government features an agency the sole goal of which is to ensure the protection of the environment and coordinate the money. That is why it is clear that top-down approach is more beneficial since it potentially can allocate more money and direct it to the issue.

Another benefit that needs to be mentioned is the scope that this approach provides. There is no doubt that if the government manages all the procedures, it will be able to cover a bigger scope of activities because it will engage more people and it will make sure that they reach the desired goal. One might recall various examples of how oil spilled were managed by the government. This is a good example which shows that top-down approach can be rather helpful when it comes to protecting the environment.

The next benefit that needs to be mentioned is the quality of coordination. It is worth keeping in mind that there are various protocols that make the public official report to each other (Broniewicz, 2011). As a result, they will be able to get various information across faster and more effectively. This leads to the situation when the actions of the public officials will be coordinated effectively. Given the benefit which was stated above, namely the big scope of operations, this will be particularly helpful.

Furthermore, one should also note that if the government is involved in the protection of the environment, it will have to follow specific standards that were designed to ensure the effectiveness of its actions. Indeed, everything that is done within top-down framework must comply with the standards. This leads to the situation that there is a reasonable level of quality that will be achieved if the government is involved. Given the fact that environmental protection is the area where the quality makes a significant difference, it would be logical to assume that benefit will be quite helpful.

Finally, the last advantage of top-down approach that needs to be mentioned is that with the help of it, it will be possible to engage the best professionals in the field with outstanding experience and skills. Indeed, the governmental agencies often employ those professionals who are rather experienced in saving the environment. Since this is a great opportunity for them to apply their skills and be compensated for it generously, there is no wonder in the fact that a good professional will seek to join a governmental agency rather than a small organisation. All this shows that top-down approach features numerous advantages.

The Benefits of Bottom-Up Approach

Nevertheless, some might point out that bottom-up approach also features a considerable number of benefits and, therefore, should be seen as more suitable when it comes to the protection of the environment. The first argument that those who support this approach would make focuses on the fact that bottom-up approach allows people to adjust their activities to the concrete conditions (Healy, 2013). In other words, it does not use one size fits all approach, just like its counterpart that was mentioned before.

All this leads to the second advantage that should be mentioned specifically: bottom-up approach can be more effective than top-down. This is explained by the fact that it will be focused on achieving a concrete result that will bring a meaningful change in a specific community. For example, while it is next to impossible to resolve the issue of marine plastic pollution in all Australia, it may be useful to focus on a specific location such as the Gulf of Carpentaria.

Another important aspect that needs to be mentioned is that bottom-up approach often involves relatively small groups of people that, therefore, can be easily coordinated. It is true that sometimes this approach is able to mobilize a considerable number of people, on average this number is not high and can be managed easily (Coenen, 2013). That is why such projects have a faster response and, therefore, are more effective.

The primary advantage of bottom-up approach is that it lacks bureaucracy that can limit the effectiveness of the actions. Indeed, the local people have no need to cut through all the red tapes in order to have something done: as long as they stay within the boundaries of law, they will be able to go whatever they want to and do it fast. Given the fact that in many cases the environmental protection needs fast response, this makes this approach the ideal option.

Finally, one might also keep in mind that the fact that people who are engaged in bottom-up projects are generally more motivated to accomplish the goals that were set previously. While public officials have no close relation to the location that they will protect, the local volunteers are motivated to keep their local environment clean and well-protected. That is why it would be logical to assume that the motivation will contribute to the quality of performance of the people. As a result, this approach seems to be also quite useful for protecting the environment.

Refutation of the Benefits of Bottom-Up Approach

In spite of the fact that the previous section may have been quite convincing, it is important to recognize that there are certain flaws in the line of reasoning that advocated the need to use bottom-up approach to protect the environment. First and most of all, it is essential to keep in mind that when it comes to introducing changes to the environment, it may be useful to keep in mind a bigger picture since elements of various ecosystems are closely linked to each other (Maser, 2013). Therefore, a change in one might trigger a change in another. Top-down approach ensures that no unexpected changes occur because of the broad perspective that is taken into account.

The second point that needs to be mentioned is the limited effectiveness of bottom-up approach. Indeed, it can protect the environment in a given location, but it will not be able to introduce any meaningful change in the region, let alone protect the environment there. As a result, there is no need to employ this approach because of its limited effectiveness.

While some consider the small size of groups to be an advantage, this is a disadvantage in many ways. When there is a need to protect the environment, the higher the coverage is the better (Broniewicz, 2011). A small group will not be able to accomplish what a large group that is coordinated by the government can. Therefore, it all comes down to understanding the potential consequences of involvement. Top-down approach features much better consequences if compared to its counterpart.

One should not forget about the fact that bottom-up approach does not feature a clear hierarchy and a chain of command. Therefore, if something goes wrong or the original goals were not achieved, there will be no one who will take the responsibility. This undermines the effectiveness of the protection activities since people will know that they will not be held responsible in case of a failure. This leads to the understanding that top-down approach always provides a responsible person who will be held accountable for possible failure.

Finally, one of the negative aspects of bottom-up approach that needs to be mentioned is that this approach is primarily oriented at achieving short-term advantages. Indeed, in many cases, the local efforts to protect the environment are not able to bring any meaningful change because those who are in charge large the broad vision of the problem. Top-down approach relies on long-term thinking and takes into consideration the broad perspective. As one can easily see, all the advantages that were mentioned before with regard to bottom-up approach were refuted successfully.

Conclusion

Having examined all the points that were mentioned in the paragraphs above, one is able to come to the following conclusion: top-down approach is more suitable for the protection of the environment for a number of reasons. First of all, it will be able to ensure that a considerable amount of resources will be allocated to the project. Secondly, it features a bigger scope. Thirdly, the coordination between the people involved is better. Next, it will adhere to the high standards. Finally, it will involve good professionals.

References

Broniewicz, E. (2011). Environmental management in practice. Rijeka: InTech.

Coenen, F. (2013). Participation and the Quality of Environmental Decision Making. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

Healy, H. (2013). Ecological economics from the ground up. London: Routledge.

Maser, C. (2013). Decision making for a sustainable environment: A systemic approach. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

The terms offer and acceptance. (2016, May 17). Retrieved from

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016.

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

freeessays.club (2016) The terms offer and acceptance [Online].
Available at:

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]
close
Haven't found the right essay?
Get an expert to write you the one you need!
print

Professional writers and researchers

quotes

Sources and citation are provided

clock

3 hour delivery

person