Example collocations logo

Environmental in sentence

2713 examples of Environmental in a sentence

Rather than focusing solely on income, sustainable development encourages cities, countries, and the world to focus simultaneously on three goals: economic prosperity, social inclusion, and environmental sustainability.
And environmental sustainability means that we must reorient our economies and technologies to provide basic services like safe water and sanitation, combat human-induced climate change, and protect biodiversity.
But, early in the process, mechanization brought negative consequences, like unemployment, child labor, and environmental degradation.
But building that future demands a new digital zeitgeist, whereby social, cultural, environmental, and ethical values become part of the design process.
This means that we can preserve acreage for watersheds, parks, or other environmental or historical sites, but allow property owners to sell and transfer their building rights elsewhere.
In exchange, they have to contribute to a public fund for housing, environmental, and infrastructure improvements.
Achieving more aggressive environmental goals, particularly limiting warming to 1.5ºC, or zero greenhouse-gas emissions in the second half of the century, would of course be desirable in terms of minimizing the risk of disaster scenarios.
Moreover, all aspects of food, water, and energy production have environmental and health implications.
But the outcomes that the world needs – viable financing options and frameworks to support economic transformation, as well as integrated environmental and sustainable-development governance – cannot be achieved without political will.
The UN has shown its value in global environmental management, international trade, state building and reconstruction, and humanitarian assistance.
Cancer epidemiologist Geoffrey Kabat identifies several factors, including “the success of the environmental movement; a deep-seated distrust of industry; the public’s insatiable appetite for stories related to health, which the media duly cater to; and – not least – the striking expansion of the fields of epidemiology and environmental health sciences and their burgeoning literature.”
All of this is not only possible, but also necessary, because the transition to a low-carbon, climate-resilient economy makes economic, social, and environmental sense.
Water Management Is Health ManagementLONDON – With climate change accelerating and its effects exacerbating other geopolitical and development crises, the role of environmental protection in preserving and improving human wellbeing has become starkly apparent.
The question is whether there is an optimal mix of environmental protection and direct health interventions on which policymakers can rely to maximize investment returns for both.
With a growing share of the world’s population – including many of the same people – feeling the effects of environmental degradation and climate change firsthand, finding solutions that simultaneously advance environmental protection, water provision, and health could not be more important.
The United Nations focuses on three categories of development: social, economic, and environmental.
There is a similar trend in many other environmental development statistics.
Numerous coalitions emerge to take on the challenges of economic development, energy security, and environmental pollution through cross-border cooperation.
National governments introduce efficiency standards, taxes, and other policy instruments to improve the environmental performance of buildings, vehicles, and transport fuels.
The net environmental effects of growing reliance on shale gas appear beneficial as well.
High-quality environmental and safety regulation – and vigorous enforcement – are essential.
In the run-up to that meeting, governments worldwide should note one critical, but often overlooked, fact: the single biggest driver of environmental degradation and resource stress today is our changing diet – a diet that is not particularly conducive to a healthy life, either.
If the rest of the world caught up to the United States – where meat consumption averages 125.4 kilograms per person annually, compared with a measly 3.2 kilograms in India – the environmental consequences would be catastrophic.
Though the environmental and health costs of our changing diets have been widely documented, the message has gone largely unheard.
To be sure, each time there were extenuating circumstances – a jobs summit, the final vote on the US health-care bill, and the environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.
As graduation nears for the first class to complete their Master of Business Administration since the onset of the global financial crisis, students are circulating an oath that commits them to pursue their work “in an ethical manner”; “to strive to create sustainable economic, social, and environmental prosperity worldwide”; and to manage their enterprises “in good faith, guarding against decisions and behavior that advance my own narrow ambitions but harm the enterprise and the societies it serves.”
As for the ultimate objectives of the managerial profession, they are, as we have seen, nothing less than “to create sustainable economic, social, and environmental prosperity worldwide.”
While major religions retain some value-based authority, most have remained largely silent on the real political, economic, environmental, and security challenges that the world faces.
So biodiversity can act as a natural “insurance policy” against sudden environmental changes and a buffer against losses caused by them (as well as by pests and diseases).
The famines in Ireland in the nineteenth century and in Ethiopia in the late twentieth century provide clear evidence of the vulnerability of undiversified crops to environmental changes, and the dramatic consequences of such vulnerability for the population.
BackNext