Abstract
What is Paris Agreement – what led to its formation – the major goals undersigned by the agreement – its deficits and loopholes in mitigating climate change – critical evaluation – contemporary challenges circumscribing climate adaptation and mitigation – what needs to be done for enhanced measures towards climate emergency – concluding remarks.
The Paris Agreement is a landmark climate accord that has international ramifications. It was adopted transnationally to address climate change and its detrimental impacts. The agreement aims to substantially reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to limit the global temperature increase in this century to 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, while simultaneously pursuing the means to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees. To fulfil this, the agreement includes commitments from nearly all major emitting countries to reduce their climate emission and to strengthen those commitments over time. The pact additionally provides a pathway for developed nations to assist developing nations in their climate mitigation and adaptation efforts, and it has established a framework for the transparent monitoring, reporting, and ratcheting up of countries’ individual and collective climate goals – such as the yearly Conference of Parties (COP). It encourages nations to participate in a “global stocktake” to measure collective efforts toward meeting the Paris Agreement’s long-term goals as well. It examines the achievements and limitations of the Agreement in fostering meaningful climate action, assessing the impacts of its mechanisms, compliance frameworks, and voluntary contributions of signatory nations. By comparing carbon emissions, adaptation efforts, and financial support across the years, this article provides an updated analysis of the Agreement’s ability to meet its intended goals and offers suggestions for future improvement.
INTRODUCTION
The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, marked a historic milestone in global climate negotiations, with 196 countries committing to mitigate climate change through nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Unlike previous frameworks, it introduced a bottom-up approach that allows each country to set its own targets, aiming to limit global temperature rise to well below 2°C, with an aspiration to achieve 1.5°C. However, as the climate crisis intensifies, the effectiveness of the Agreement remains under scrutiny. This paper examines whether the Paris Agreement has succeeded in establishing a cohesive and impactful international climate strategy, highlighting its strengths, challenges, and areas needing enhancement.
It has been recognised that developing countries and small island nations who have contributed minimally to climate change could bear its brunt. Consequently, the Paris Agreement includes a plan for developed countries – to provide financial grants to help developing countries mitigate and increase their resilience to climate change. For example, India’s pledge includes the need to eradicate poverty along with decreasing emissions and increasing renewable energy – PM KUSUM Yojana. With timely and adequate technological and financial help from developed countries, it was envisioned that climate mitigation and adaptation efforts would find its pinnacle. However, this has not quite resulted in a positive precedence.
The Paris Agreement was originally built on the financial commitments of the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, which aimed at scaling up public and private climate finances for developing nations to $100 billion by the end of 2020.[1] The pact also created the Green Climate Fund to mobilize private finance using targeted public kitty. The Paris agreement helped build on its scale and membership. Unfortunately, it has not been able to fully provide the finances with occasional uncertainties in its mechanism – for example US’s withdrawal in 2017. Moreover, the collective contributions continue to fall short, reaching approximately $79 billion by 2020.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change notes that climate change will be limited only by “substantial and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”
EXTENT OF EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PARIS AGREEMENT IN MITIGATION
A fundamental measure of the Paris Agreement’s success is the degree of GHG reduction achieved. Although countries like the EU have made substantial strides in reducing emissions, others lag due to economic or political constraints. The global trend since the Agreement shows progress in policy adoption but insufficient overall emission reduction. Major emitters, including the United States and China, have faced challenges in aligning national policies with the 1.5°C target, as high fossil fuel dependency remains. Financial contributions to developing countries for climate adaptation and mitigation form a core pillar of the Agreement. However, while developed countries pledged $100 billion annually by 2020, actual disbursements fall short. This financial gap has hindered climate resilience in the most vulnerable regions, demonstrating a critical area where the Agreement’s impact has been limited by insufficient compliance with financial commitments. The Paris Agreement has stimulated green technology development and fostered numerous clean energy initiatives. From carbon capture technology to renewable energy projects, the Agreement has encouraged public and private investments in sustainable innovation. However, the rate of innovation and adoption varies widely, with wealthy nations far outpacing developing ones due to resource constraints. The Agreement’s non-binding nature has led to inconsistent enforcement of NDCs. For example, some nations have updated their commitments with more ambitious targets, while others have relaxed theirs. This inconsistency raises concerns about collective accountability. Additionally, the disparity in climate finance continues to undermine global efforts, as developing countries rely heavily on international support to implement adaptation strategies effectively. The Paris Agreement has catalysed a shift in global climate governance, inspiring initiatives like the European Green Deal, China’s carbon neutrality goal by 2060, and similar commitments from over 100 countries. These shifts suggest that the Agreement has laid a valuable foundation for national and regional policy adaptations. However, as climate risks escalate, more stringent, binding commitments may be necessary to ensure that these efforts remain aligned with global targets. To enhance the effectiveness of the Paris Agreement, future frameworks might incorporate more binding commitments and increase penalties for non-compliance. Additional financial mechanisms are crucial, particularly for under-resourced nations. These could include debt-for-climate swaps and innovative financing through green bonds. Strengthening international cooperation on technology transfer would also enable more uniform climate action.
The recently released IPCC’s 6th assessment report 2023 findings are definitive determinants of the inability of collective nations to tackle climate change. The report finds that it is likely that warming will exceed 1.5°C during the 21st century, despite progress in climate mitigation policies and legislation – which is largely catering to loopholes and deficiencies in implementation and absence of legally binding frameworks. It highlights the insufficient climate finances to deal with adaptation and mitigation frameworks. While, financial resources under Paris Agreement are still lacking, the report notes, public and private finance flows for fossil fuels are still greater than those for climate adaptation and mitigation. This has been by far the largest determinant of our inability to meet our targets. Fossil fuel debate has been on the centre stage since decades – while they are absolutely necessary for countries such as India to boost its economic prowess, they exacerbate global warming. This has seen a recent culmination in the Phase out Versus Phase down debate at COP 28. However, like other mechanisms, the demand of developing countries to switch to “phase down” has not been addressed, and was merely declared to “transition away from the fossil fuels.”
However, a landmark decision was taken – which was operationalising the “Loss and Damage Fund” which will be overlooked by the World Bank in the interim. All developing countries are eligible to apply, and every country is “invited” to contribute voluntarily. A specific percentage is earmarked for Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States.[2] This re-establishes the trust in global fraternity to deal with climate change. It would also help the least developing states in enhances availability of resources to handle climate change – both adaptation as well as mitigation.
Paris Agreement has been seen as a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. But unlike the Kyoto Protocol, which established a top-down legally binding emissions reduction targets along with penalties for noncompliance for developed nations, the Paris Agreement requires that all countries whether – rich, poor, developed, or developing to do their part for slashing down greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, greater flexibility and national ownership is built into the Paris Agreement – as – No prescription is included about the commitments countries should make – nations can set their own emissions targets (INDCs), [3]which are consistent with their level of development and technological advancement. This successfully recognizes the CBDR RC principle – Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities which enhances climate equity and also simultaneously reduces north south divide in global geopolitics providing equal opportunities to member nations to be the part of economic revolution thus, fostering equity.
While the Paris Agreement doesn’t have harsh penalties for countries not meeting their targets, it does have a robust system of reporting, monitoring and reassessing individual and collective country targets over time in order to proceed towards the world closer to the broader objectives of the deal. And the agreement sets forth a requirement for countries to announce their next round of targets every five years—unlike the Kyoto Protocol, which aimed for that objective but didn’t include a specific requirement to achieve it. Thus, Paris Agreement though lacks implementation and suffers from consistent blockages – it is by far the most reliable, equitable and inclusive climate change deal. Moreover, it possesses the ability to foster international cooperation towards handing the “climate emergency” and is also responsive and adaptive to contemporary social, economic and political realities.
CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGES
While we address the effectiveness of the Paris Agreement, It Is important to also look at the transformed geopolitical and economic scenario at the global level – since 2015. There has been a major pandemic – which took lives of millions and along with heavy economic costs, research shows that it has reversed the mitigation measures undertaken by the countries worldwide. World Meteorological Organisation highlights the rapid declining of glaciers which has resulted in rising sea level, ocean acidification and arctic amplification – all of which has contributed immensely to the challenges posed by climate change. To top it up, major powers – Russia, USA, Israel – have been engrossed in large scale conflicts who’s environmental costs are not hidden from anyone.
There have also not been enough steps taken to foster universalisation of the agreement – as it leaves out major weapon producing countries such as Iran. This creates a loophole in addressing the issue of climate change in totality. Further, differential policy measures undertaken by the countries, such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism by the European Union – questions the ability of existing protocols to garner climate inequality and inclusivity – as measures like these hamper the developing and least developing nations disproportionately.
WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE
The Global Stocktake (GST) is a periodic review mechanism established under the Paris Agreement in 2015. The fifth iteration of the Global Stocktake (GST) text was released at COP28 and was adopted with no objection – which shows political will and consensus to handle climate change – one of the greatest achievements of Paris Agreement. The text has proposed eight steps to keep the global temperature rise within the ambit of 1.5 degrees such as – Tripling renewable energy capacity globally and doubling the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030; Accelerating efforts towards the phase-down of unabated coal power etc.
In 2018, the IPCC’s Special Report: Global Warming at 1.5 Degrees Celsius concluded the difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius could mean substantially more poverty, extreme heat, sea level rise, habitat loss, and drought. Delays in accelerating climate change measures underestimated advances in energy efficiency and clean energy technologies, and outright ignored the huge health and economic costs of climate change itself. For example, A 2018 study titled – “Large Potential Reduction in Economic [5]Damages Under U.N. Mitigation Targets”, which was published in the journal Nature, suggests that if the United States failed to meet its Paris climate goals, it could cost the economy as much as $6 trillion in the coming decades. Thus, there awaits a close revamp of the Paris agreement along with instilling legal mechanism for enforcement.[6]
CONCLUDING REMARKS
As the Paris Agreement matures, nations must firmly commit to phasing out fossil fuel investment and investing in Nature Based Solutions. Often, the communities who contribute least to global emissions are the ones already showing wealthier nations the way by committing to rapid emissions reductions, renewable energy expansion, protecting their forests, and putting economies on low-carbon pathways. Nations must uplift these communities as well as those who are faced with the brunt of climate impacts. This includes formally protecting Indigenous knowledge and rights, which are critical to fighting the climate crisis. Indigenous peoples—comprising 5 percent of the global population—protect 80 percent of the planet’s biodiversity. Even without stronger recognition within the Paris Agreement, Indigenous and frontline communities are building a global movement and successfully fighting back against extractive, climate-damaging industries, including fossil fuel pipelines, dams and mining. It’s time to integrate local solutions with global challenges i.e., going GLOCAL to cater to climate change!
While the Paris Agreement has undeniably advanced climate action, its overall effectiveness in achieving significant, long-term climate mitigation remains limited by financial shortfalls and inconsistent enforcement. To address the accelerating climate crisis, the international community may need to adopt more robust, legally binding measures and commit to substantial financial and technological support for vulnerable nations. This study emphasizes that the Paris Agreement, although a crucial first step, must evolve to meet the growing demands of climate action and set a more effective pathway for the future.
[1] https://www.nrdc.org/bio/jennifer-skene/indigenous-led-land-protection-key-canadas-future
[2] Large potential reduction in economic damages under UN mitigation target – Marshall Burke, Matthew Davis & Noah S. Diffenbaugh
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0071-9#auth-Marshall-Burke-Aff1-Aff2-Aff3
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0071-9#auth-W__Matthew-Davis-Aff2
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0071-9#auth-Noah_S_-Diffenbaugh-Aff1-Aff4
[3] https://wgms.ch/
[4] https://unfccc.int/cop29
[5] https://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol
[6] https://wmo.int
Author Bio
