Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position

The policy that is being stated, is to preserve the wilderness areas in their current state even if there could be economic gain be developing the area. While the policy suggests some economic gain on developing the area it doesn't go in depth on explaining how much the gain would be and what kind of development we are talking about.

In my view the policy is too general to be applicable for all the nations and all the regions it might have an impact on. When speaking about the gain, there should be discussion on how much the gain would be. Will this gain result in more jobs? As well, one shouldn't forget the price that has to be paid in the form of development. What kind of development are we talking about here? Does it involve harming the nature now and feeling bad on what we did in future? When speaking about preserving it in the current state, one should study and understand on how preserving it outways the economic gains on it's development. If preserving has to be done how much money and resources needs to be spent has to be analyzed.

Having discussed on what are the things we need to know before putting the policy in to practice, let us discuss on how these would impact the policy advocates. If the economic gain is really good and the required devlopment doesn't harm the nature in anyway there is no point implementing the policy. If the development needed consumes a good amount of natural resources and has a bad impact on the environment then its better to preserve the area according to the policy. Also, one should answer the questions like, is preserving actually needed? has the area started to deface as it wasn't preserved? If preserving the area involves spending good amount of money and resources while the area is good the way it has been, there is no point in preserving it as per the policy.

From this, it can be understood that the policy should be implemented based on the area that is being under consideration. Every single area is not the same, and the decision finally made should be based on the comparison between different benefits gained from implementing the policy and not implementing it. As by itself if the policy is implemented as such, it will have it consequences.