Question 1
It is not a prudent idea to have companies being required to take back their products for recycling and disposal. The cost of the practice may be too high to the extent of discouraging the business between the two countries entirely or have the costs transferred to the final consumer and the tax payers of the associated nations. A particular inefficiency is introduced in shipping back products, which strains the facilities that can be used for more productive activities such as the transport of high-value products.
The practice would also have a negative impact on the profits of the companies in the sense that they will have to foot the bill for transportation and invest in facilities that can be used for efficient disposal of the materials (Pagell, et. al., 133). A better option is for cooperation around disposal practices by the two countries.
Question 2
Environmental degradation is a consequence of the sub total effects of the activities of all individuals together. Logically, therefore, it should be the responsibility of the same individuals to work to end up with a sustainable environment that they all live in. The fact that some student lack in the knowledge that is required to achieve sustainable environment is a source for worry noting that they are expected to champion environmental sustainability.
There should be conduction of proper campaign that sensitizes all people on their role in environmental degradation and subsequently, their role in the conservation of the same (Barr and Stewart 227). The importance of a clean environment, as well as the dangers of an unsustainable environment, are all too important to have a section of the society abandon their role in the promotion of the same.
Works cited
Pagell, Mark, Zhaohui Wu, and Nagesh N. Murthy. "The supply chain implications of recycling." Business Horizons 50.2 (2007): 133-143.
Barr, Stewart. "Strategies for sustainability: citizens and responsible environmental behaviour." Area 35.3 (2003): 227-240.
