The first car appeared on British roads in 1888. By the year 2022 there may be as many as 40 million vehicles on British roads. Alternative forms of transport should be encouraged and international laws introduced to control car ownership and use. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The car has always been the most important means of transport in most economies since its advent in the 19th or the 20th century. Unlike other forms of transport, such as the plane or the train, cars can be owned by ordinary people, thus allowing them to live where they otherwise could not access and contributing to the development and urbanization of rural areas. Cars also play a key role in transporting goods and materials to almost anywhere on the globe people engage in economic activities. Such is the convenience of the car that it would be impossible to realize a car-free society. However, we must bear in mind that our planet has been getting warmer over the past decades due in part to the greenhouse gases emitted by cars. We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to this inconvenient truth; we must tackle this imperative issue collectively, immediately, and successfully for the sake of the well-being of future generations. Needless to say, it is major economic powers that should take the responsibility for having caused global warming, and developing countries should be given consideration. Also, the fact that millions of people are killed in car accidents every year should be taken into account, though different countries have different rates of casualties and different degrees of dependency on cars. Therefore, it is imperative that we find common ground as to what country should do what in order to effectively make international effort to mitigate the detrimental effects cars have on the globe and each economy.
No one would be able to envision a modern world without cars. Most families living in rural areas have one or more cars as necessities. They couldn’t go to the supermarket or even convenience stores because quite often such shops are located a long way from their homes. Such areas have developed into towns or cities on the premise that residents own vehicles. Moreover, the supply chain heavily depends on cars for carrying materials to factories and goods to shops. Without cars, the efficiency of the economy would greatly suffer.
That said, we all know that cars are not an environmentally-friendly means of transport. Not only do they give off poisonous gases to breathe in, but also carbon dioxide and other gases that contribute to global warming. This phenomenon, putting the lives of many of us in crisis, is undoubtedly related to economic activities since the Industrial Revolution. Therefore, it is natural that countries that modernized themselves relatively early (in the 19th century or in the early 20th century) should be far more responsible than their newly-developed or still developing counterparts. As to the extent to which developed countries and developing countries respectively should commit themselves to addressing the issue, we need to reach agreement to take swift action, not only ourselves but also those unborn. Industrialized countries should use their initiative to minimize the adverse effects global warming might have on the rest of the world as well as themselves, while developing economies should be allowed to pursue their economic benefits in principle. For example, wealthy countries should encourage people to refrain from commuting to work in their cars and to take trains or buses instead, especially by incentivizing them financially, as poor countries claim their right to develop their economies using cars. However, there are a lot of people who cannot do without their cars, even in rich countries, as I mentioned above. Thus, controlling car ownership to reduce the greenhouse effects of cars would be an impossible policy to implement even in a domestic context, let alone on a global scale.
Fatal car accidents are another challenge, resulting in millions of deaths annually. In my opinion, car accidents are a problem that should be dealt with by each country rather than internationally, based on its unique societal, economic, and legal contexts. Again, international laws would not function, though every society wants to reduce the number of car accidents, because different solutions would be required in different societies. For example, Country A might find it most effective to invest in artificial intelligence to make the roads safer, while Country B might think that the best way to do so is to establish a better railroad or bus system.
In conclusion, it is unrealistic to try to eradicate cars from the roads, since they have always played a key role in economic activities, and they will. However, no one would deny their negative effects on our lives: global warming and car accidents. As for the former, industrialized nations should play bigger roles than developing nations in finding common ground and coping with it. As for the latter, each society should handle it. In either case, international laws would not work.
