Proceedings

into new territories, destruction caused by floods, forced migration of populations
caused by land desertification, and rising levels of seas and oceans are only a few
effects of climate change that all countries must recognize.
While studies are underway on the main cause of global warming (Le Treut et al.,
2007; Solomon et al., 2009), there is a scientific consensus that the greenhouse effect
is the main item in the hierarchy of causal factors. Although it is a natural
phenomenon consisting of a partial retention of the Earth’s radiation in the
atmosphere, the greenhouse effect is caused by greenhouse gases, which reflect
radiation. Greenhouse gases are the effect of human activities, currently supported by
objects, equipment, machinery, etc., all generating major environmental impact.
The lack of complex tools to address this issue, as well as linear-thinking trained to
operate without a complex understanding of the dynamics and the evolutive structure
of the environment, are problems which may jeopardize humanity in the future.
Despite warnings from climatologists, economists and other specialists, the world is
not yet sufficiently aware of the dangers of climate change. Wright and Erickson
(2003) are concerned about the incorporation of possible catastrophic consequences in
the integrated models developed to assess global climate changes. Studies by
Rokityanskiy (2007) discuss the regulatory aspects concerning greenhouse gases
(carbon and methane) which have a potential to destroy the Earth’s energetic balance
and trigger a catastrophic event. Le Kama et al. (2010) agree that environmental
destruction caused by economic activities may be irreversible and that the level when
environmental degradation becomes irreversible is unknown. There is no perception
of complexity, dynamics, exponential growth, or the momentum of changes in climate
change. This leads to the preservation of traditional social structures, and a slow
response to current problems, that are still assessed using a quantitative approach,
with similarly low efficiency, precision and adequacy. Although catastrophic and very
uncertain, variations in climate changes may generate a butterfly effect starting from
insignificant quantitative data, with qualitative changes in information, relationships,
direction, data structure etc. (Olmstead, 2011).
The perception of ecological crises is directly correlated with social and cultural
values. The currently enforced “polluter pays” principle is bound to the culture of
using financial values as an assessment tool for any product, although the amount paid
does not often compensate the damages done to biodiversity. Additionally, the ethical
approach in regard to the environment is the total prohibition of pollution. Otherwise,
it becomes obvious that manufacturers are allowed to pollute, provided they pay ecotaxes.
The tendency of the political and economic environment to approach
environmental problems in economic terms is clear. The issue of externalities is
broader than the assessment and measurement for the prevention of pollution. It is
bound to the environmental impact of a corporate activity, and where regulations are
consistent with sustainability principles, the company’s ability to generate profits is
severely affected. The mechanisms of taxes that will ultimately benefit stakeholders
through specific policies fail to simultaneously cover the social and sustainability
needs. Therefore, there is a pressing need for an initial assessment of the complex
relationships between the environment and humanity, as well as the relationships
between the economic and financial mechanisms, before designing political decisions
and fund allocations.
~ 1007 ~