Chapter 9: Environmental Politics, Global Sustainability, and Cute Robots

9.4: International Relations and Sustainability Agreements 

In a world facing escalating environmental challenges, international cooperation is essential for tackling problems that transcend borders, like climate change, deforestation, and biodiversity loss. Political science helps us understand the frameworks, treaties, and governance structures that nations use to address these complex issues. Global sustainability agreements reflect the collective effort of countries to balance economic growth with environmental protection while addressing inequality and development. These agreements aren’t just about reducing emissions or saving species—they’re about creating a vision for a shared future. The animated film Wall-E serves as a warning about what happens when humanity fails to cooperate on these critical challenges. The abandoned Earth depicted in the movie is a stark reminder of the consequences of unchecked environmental degradation, but it also emphasizes the importance of coordinated efforts to reverse such damage. By examining concepts like the carbon footprint, biodiversity conservation, and international treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, we can better understand how political actors work—or fail—to address global sustainability.

When you drive a car, power your home, or even stream your favorite TV show, you are leaving behind an invisible impact. Every action we take, from commuting to work to purchasing goods, contributes to our individual carbon footprint, the measure of greenhouse gases generated by human activities. However, it’s important to recognize that the term “carbon footprint” was popularized by fossil fuel companies as a way to shift responsibility onto individuals rather than corporations, despite the fact that just 100 companies are responsible for over 70% of global emissions. Though to make it even more complicated, that statistic comes from a report that attributes the emissions coming from your car to the fossil fuel companies. Is that…okay? Is it a fair claim? To learn more about the history of “carbon footprint,” check out the video below. While individual actions alone won’t solve the climate crisis, collective efforts can still make a meaningful difference—studies show that widespread adoption of plant-based diets, reduced air travel, and energy-efficient living could cut global emissions by up to 20%! On a global scale, carbon footprints determine how much greenhouse gas is released into the atmosphere annually, making them a critical factor in climate change. High carbon footprints are often tied to energy use in industrialized nations, where transportation, manufacturing, and electricity generation rely heavily on fossil fuels. For example, the United States and China are two of the world’s largest emitters, contributing nearly 40% of global carbon emissions. Addressing carbon footprints requires not only individual actions but systemic changes, such as transitioning to renewable energy, improving energy efficiency, and promoting sustainable practices. Even more, reducing carbon footprints also has cascading benefits, such as preserving biodiversity, which is another critical element of sustainability agreements.

Imagine a planet where forests, oceans, and wildlife no longer thrive, leaving humanity with nothing to depend on. Biodiversity—the variety of life on Earth—is vital for maintaining ecosystems that provide clean air, water, food, and climate regulation. Yet, human activities such as deforestation, pollution, and climate change are driving biodiversity loss at an alarming rate. The Amazon rainforest, often referred to as the “lungs of the Earth,” absorbs billions of tons of carbon dioxide annually, yet it is being destroyed for agriculture and logging. This loss of biodiversity destabilizes ecosystems, making them less resilient to climate change and threatening global food security. Wall-E depicts a world where the complete collapse of ecosystems has left the planet lifeless, illustrating what happens when biodiversity conservation is neglected. The absence of any living species in the film underscores the vital role biodiversity plays in maintaining planetary balance and sustaining human survival. So much so that when Wall-E stumbles upon a lone tiny green plant, it sets into motion a huge series of events, eventually bringing humans back to Earth. But things would have been a lot easier if humans had not destroyed all the flora and fauna on Earth in the first place! International agreements like the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) aim to protect species and habitats through collaborative global efforts called biodiversity conservation, but implementation remains uneven. For example, while some nations have expanded protected areas and restored habitats, others struggle with enforcement due to economic priorities or political instability. Protecting biodiversity requires robust international environmental governance, which provides the framework for collective action.

Protecting biodiversity isn’t just about saving individual species—it’s about managing the shared resources that sustain life itself. This challenge is at the heart of the tragedy of the commons, a concept that explains how individuals, acting in their own short-term self-interest, can collectively deplete or destroy a shared resource, even when it’s clear that long-term harm will affect everyone. Coined by ecologist Garrett Hardin in 1968, the term often applies to environmental systems like fisheries, forests, air, and water—resources that are accessible to all but owned by none. For example, when too many countries overfish international waters, no single party bears the full responsibility, yet all suffer the consequences of ecosystem collapse. In biodiversity conservation, this tragedy plays out when habitats are destroyed for agriculture, logging, or mining—activities that benefit a few in the short term but erode ecosystems needed by all in the long term. At the global level, international relations complicate the issue, as states act in their own national interest and there is no central authority to enforce cooperation or penalize overuse of global commons like the atmosphere or oceans. This lack of enforcement power makes collective action difficult, especially when countries disagree over who should act, how much each should contribute, or who is most responsible. The tragedy of the commons highlights the need for collective governance, international agreements, and enforcement mechanisms that protect shared resources before they reach a tipping point. Without cooperation and regulation, the very environments that sustain human and non-human life alike can be pushed beyond recovery. But how can we get states to work together when their basic setting is often self interest?

The health of the planet often depends on nations working together toward a common goal—something far easier said than done. International environmental governance forms the backbone of global sustainability efforts, bringing together states, international organizations, civil society groups, and non-state actors to address transboundary environmental challenges like climate change, deforestation, and ocean pollution. These governance systems are built through agreements and institutions, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which provides a platform for climate negotiations and oversees key treaties like the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. At their core, these agreements rely on cooperation and consensus, but that process is complicated by differing national interests, economic capacities, and levels of responsibility for environmental degradation. Wealthier, industrialized countries typically focus on emissions reduction and technological innovation, while many developing nations emphasize the need for adaptation funding, climate resilience, and historical accountability, arguing that they suffer the worst effects of a crisis they contributed to the least.

This is where studying international relations (IR) becomes essential. IR helps us understand why environmental governance is so difficult: it requires cooperation in a world defined by sovereignty, power asymmetries, and competing priorities. States act based on national interests, which can conflict with global environmental goals. For instance, fossil fuel-exporting countries may resist emission cuts, while vulnerable island nations demand urgent action. Even when agreements are reached, as with the Kyoto Protocol or the Paris Agreement, enforcement mechanisms are often weak or non-binding, relying on trust, diplomacy, and soft pressure rather than hard penalties. Yet despite these obstacles, international governance has achieved important milestones. The Kyoto Protocol marked the first binding agreement on emission reductions, setting a precedent for future action, while the Paris Agreement built on that legacy with a more inclusive, flexible framework focused on voluntary national targets and climate finance. Understanding these efforts through the lens of IR allows us to see not just what’s being negotiated, but why negotiations unfold the way they do—and what it takes to make global cooperation possible in an unequal, fragmented world.

Sometimes, the first step toward solving a crisis is acknowledging who bears the greatest responsibility. The Kyoto Protocol, adopted in 1997, was a groundbreaking treaty that set binding emission reduction targets for developed countries. It was based on the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities,” recognizing that industrialized nations had contributed most to historical greenhouse gas emissions and therefore should take the lead in reducing them. While the protocol represented a critical step forward, it also exposed challenges in global climate governance. For example, the United States refused to ratify the treaty, citing concerns that it unfairly excluded developing nations like India and China from binding targets. This lack of participation from major emitters weakened the protocol’s overall impact, and its rigid framework left little room for adapting to changing circumstances. The absence of accountability mechanisms in the film reflects real-world struggles to enforce ambitious climate goals, emphasizing the need for frameworks like the Paris Agreement to foster broader participation. However, the Kyoto Protocol laid the foundation for the Paris Agreement, which introduced a more flexible and inclusive approach to international climate policy.

Hope often lies in collaboration, and the Paris Agreement stands as a testament to what nations can accomplish when they work together. Adopted in 2015, the Paris Agreement marked a turning point in international efforts to combat climate change. Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, it requires participation from all nations, developed and developing alike, to submit NDCs detailing how they will reduce emissions and adapt to climate impacts. Its goal is to limit global warming to below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, with an aspirational target of 1.5°C. This flexibility allows countries to tailor their commitments to their unique circumstances, but it also introduces challenges related to enforcement and accountability, as there are no penalties for failing to meet targets. In Wall-E, the lack of accountability and systemic follow-through mirrors these real-world challenges, where ambitious agreements often struggle with implementation. The disorganized abandonment of Earth depicted in the film highlights the importance of ensuring that nations follow through on their commitments to prevent environmental collapse. Despite these hurdles, the Paris Agreement represents a significant step forward, as it emphasizes global cooperation and recognizes the interconnectedness of environmental, social, and economic issues. This holistic approach aligns with the broader framework of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which address sustainability across multiple dimensions.

Building a better future requires more than good intentions—it demands a comprehensive plan. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), adopted by the United Nations in 2015, provide a comprehensive framework for addressing global challenges by 2030. These 17 goals cover a wide range of issues, from ending poverty (SDG 1) and promoting quality education (SDG 4) to addressing climate action (SDG 13) and conserving life on land (SDG 15). Unlike previous frameworks, the SDGs emphasize the interdependence of these issues, recognizing that sustainable development requires balancing environmental, social, and economic priorities. For example, addressing climate change (SDG 13) also contributes to reducing inequalities (SDG 10) by protecting vulnerable communities disproportionately affected by rising sea levels and extreme weather events. In Wall-E, the dystopian vision of Earth’s collapse serves as a cautionary tale about what happens when these interconnected goals are ignored, highlighting the need for integrated, forward-thinking policies. The film’s depiction of human survival on the Axiom reflects the consequences of neglecting long-term sustainable planning and the importance of addressing environmental and social issues together. Real-world initiatives like the European Green Deal exemplify how nations can align their policies with the SDGs by pursuing carbon neutrality, promoting social equity, and protecting natural resources. However, achieving these ambitious goals requires unprecedented levels of global cooperation and political will, illustrating the complexity of international sustainability agreements.

Through the interconnected concepts of carbon footprints, biodiversity conservation, international environmental governance, and landmark agreements like the Kyoto Protocol, Paris Agreement, and SDGs, it becomes clear that tackling environmental challenges demands coordinated global action. Wall-E serves as a powerful reminder of the stakes, illustrating the catastrophic consequences of inaction while also inspiring hope for change. These agreements represent humanity’s efforts to bridge political divides and address the shared responsibility of safeguarding the planet. By examining their successes and shortcomings, we can better understand how international relations shape the future of sustainability and the collective choices that will define generations to come.