Over the past decades, the world became a village through the discourse on climate change, its consequences and remedial measures which pose some kind of uncertainty in addressing climate change.
The world is undoubtedly overshadowed with concerns of the climate change, yet, it is faced with the daunting task on how to develop effective remedies, policies and frameworks for disaster management.
Judging by the number of political resolutions, scientific research, conferences and awareness campaigns in the mass media, it is evident that the discussions have elicited widespread concerns, considerable resource allocation, rigorous scientific work and numerous exercises in tackling the changes brought forth by climate change.
The climate change crisis is making headlines in various platforms and has become a crucial topic for society, business, government and other concerned bodies globally. One would allude that perhaps the fear of the known and the unknown on climate change has been a ticking bomb waiting to explode. The latter has, therefore, led to the 21st century universal global climate agreement adopted at the United Nations Paris Convention on Climate Change, which produced the Paris Agreement in 2015.
It should be noted that the conference negotiated the Paris Agreement, a global agreement on the reduction of climate change, the text of which represented a consensus of the representatives of the 196 parties attending it.
The implication of these numbers is that; these Paris Agreement ratifying countries are to implement in their nations, policies that encourages reduction in the use of fossil fuels since these are the basis for greenhouse pollution.
The implication of this provision is that state parties to the agreement are to ensure that their industrial concerns and industrialisation policies must be geared towards the significant reduction in greenhouse
effect.
This global responsibility for environmental protection squarely rests on industry operators as led by industrial administrators who are under an international duty to implement public and corporate policy for the mitigation of the effects of climate change.
In view of the foregoing, the industrial administrator must understand that climate change status quo presents a crisis syndrome where predicated global change scenarios combine the risk adverse nature of decision makers to concrete actions on the table of climate impact administrators.
Consequently, the Paris Agreement has received much attention in the media, as well as in research than the previous treaties and conferences, which mostly catered for the developed world.
The ongoing debate on abating climate change is of no doubt yielding fruitful results but one cannot ignore the fact that most of the remedies, resolutions and climate change policies and frameworks are yet to be practical. This is due to the fact that the processes of vulnerability analysis have not been adequately performed by signatory nations to the Paris Agreement.
The advent of climate change has necessitated the need to harmonise various approaches and models of management of climate change by way of articulating the relevance of clear-cut administrative procedures that have direct bearing to perceived solutions.
This implies that there is a need to integrate various research efforts within the borders of a nation state with the view to creating a central administrative framework that has the adequate capacity to guide the implementation of the provisions of the climate change protocol.
It is an open secret that ongoing debate on climate change, its consequences and remedial measures, reflects some kind of global crisis.
The latter implies that the problems abating climate change is persistent yet the policies, strategies and remedies to develop effective measures to combat global warming that leads to climate change are complex. The lack of commitment in tackling global warming issues could be reflected in the open or concealed indifference of policy makers and the ever-continuous perceptions from the developed and the developing nations.
This goes further to show that while the developed nations succeed by industrial production or service practices that have negative impacts and consequences on the climate, the developing nations do not see much reason not to embark on such practices that elevate them to the status of developed nations.
In this regard, the competition continues to rage on with national and international policy makers taking sides by initiating and developing policies that seemingly strikes an in-between balance in line with natural dictates and anticipations of acceptable policy benchmarks.
However, this approach has failed over the years to reduce the impact of the climate change challenges due largely to the surreptitious exclusion of the industrial administrators in the various policy planning and implementation stages of the programmes.
So, when these important groups of operators are not on the discussion table, who supplies the relevant information that guide the policy initiators and decision makers? This article thus sustains the averments that the role of the industrial administrators in climate change policy initiatives is crucial, inimitable and should not be undermined.
Although the policies and frameworks regarding mitigation and adaptation towards climate change are in place, they are altered by the perceived future uncertainties of climatic conditions.
The future uncertainty influences policy and decision makers to designing the best adaptation frameworks.
It is high time that experienced industrial administrators and environmental technical think-tanks are engaged to work together with other allied services professionals such as members of the academia and civil society organisations to produce workable policy directions that would significantly impact on the global community with respect to management of greenhouse gasses and adaptation strategies where mitigation has failed.
*Elizabeth Queen Namundjebo is a Master of Business Administration (Public Sector Management) student at Unam.