Environment v poverty
Environment against poverty - paragraph completion
3 paragraphs argue one side. You write the rebuttal and the interim judgement.
How this works. Each pre-written opening argues one side of the theme. Your job is the rebuttal: answer it with the named cases, then end on an interim judgement. Your writing saves on this device.
Paragraph 1 · theme: Binding enforcement
Evaluate the view that global governance has dealt with the environment better than with poverty.
The opening (given) - rebut this
Binding enforcement is often used to argue the view. Paris Agreement (2015): Voluntary NDCs - no enforcement if a state misses its own target. COPs + Loss and Damage: Summit declarations bind nobody. Read alone, these make the case look one-sided.
Your task - write the rebuttal
Answer back using the cases that point the other way: IMF (Conditionality - the strongest enforcement in global governance.); Trade-led growth (Trade rules are enforced because access is the prize.); Montreal Protocol (1987) (Binding phase-out schedules - and they held.). Finish with an interim judgement that backs your line of argument.
Paragraph 2 · theme: States comply
Evaluate the view that global governance has dealt with the environment better than with poverty.
The opening (given) - rebut this
States comply is often used to argue the view. Paris Agreement (2015): States set weak targets and still miss them - free-riding as predicted. COPs + Loss and Damage: Pledges outrun delivery year after year. Read alone, these make the case look one-sided.
Your task - write the rebuttal
Answer back using the cases that point the other way: World Bank (Borrowers comply - access to finance depends on it.); Trade-led growth (States queue to join the system, not to leave it.); IMF (States in crisis have little choice.). Finish with an interim judgement that backs your line of argument.
Paragraph 3 · theme: Measurable progress
Evaluate the view that global governance has dealt with the environment better than with poverty.
The opening (given) - rebut this
Measurable progress is often used to argue the view. IMF: Austerity conditions harmed the poor in the structural adjustment era - softened since. Paris Agreement (2015): Emissions still rising; 2024 was the first calendar year above the 1.5C threshold. COPs + Loss and Damage: The gap between agreed ambition and emissions keeps widening. Read alone, these make the case look one-sided.
Your task - write the rebuttal
Answer back using the cases that point the other way: Trade-led growth (Extreme poverty has fallen dramatically since 1990 - the headline fact.); Montreal Protocol (1987) (The ozone hole is closing - the measurable win of the field.); World Bank (Decades of funded infrastructure and poverty programmes.). Finish with an interim judgement that backs your line of argument.