Taylor and Buttel agree that environmental issues should not be caught in the net of globalization. Doing so condemns these issues to the same sociological interpretations which do not lend itself to an accurate interpretation of scientific fact. This failure leads to discord surrounding around issues like climate change and natural resource control. Still, as the authors recognize, the interpretation of science has changed, as it should, but in a responsible fashion. As we are, for the first time, facing environmental issues that require complete cooperation among all people, this presents a challenge. Science therefore needs to transcend cultural differences and be universally understood, not only conceptually but a standard valuation of the facts. As we are seeing in many nations, the connection of environmental conservation to other issues has not been done so effectively. This results in a rejection of environmental net-positive actions. Taylor and Buttel’s arguement begs the question, who has the most power. With the Paris Climate Accord, every country has signed on except for the US and Syria. Can the combined force of almost every UN-recognized country force its will or is it subject to the will of the dissenters. More broadly, the authors suggest that the West could learn from the Third World’s mass consensus on climate change. This consensus is likely powered by a general animosity towards the West: the main culprits of climate change, and a realization that they will be disproportionately more affected by a changing climate. Cities, like New York City which has a population larger than many countries, are finding out that they carry their own weight and have emerged as actors on the global environmental politics stage.