Montreal Protocol is an international treaty created to preserve the ozone layer by ending the production of a number of substances that are responsible for the ozone depletion. On the other hand, Kyoto Accord is an international treaty and a very complex agreement where countries over the world correspond to decrease the amount of greenhouse gases.
The Montreal Protocol turned out to be effective despite the amount of costs required to solve the problem. It reduced damage to fisheries, agriculture and materials as well as the cataracts and skin cancers. Also, the potential associated fatalities avoided. On the other hand, despite the efforts put in by the Kyoto Accord from 1997, climate change has worsened and accelerated. This illustrates that it failed to combat global warming that the effort did not get the anticipated results in 2009.
The positive impact of Montreal Protocol is that it turns out to be very helpful to protect the ozone layer from further depletion. This will eventually help humans to prevent from getting skin cancer and protect plants as well. On the other hand, the negative impact is considered as economic impacts, in which the costs calculated for measures taken internationally to protect the ozone layer. Moreover, the positive impact of the Kyoto Accord is that it will ultimately combat global warming and save the earth and the global environment. However, the negative impact is similar to the Montreal Protocol that huge amount of economic costs have been spent.
All countries can join together to make an agreement other than those two that exist in order to save the earth and the environment. However, we should consider both positive and negative impacts as well as failure to meet the change before doing so. I think the only way to solve the problems is for all of us to take a responsibility and show interest to the global environment and the earth overall.