 |
| Laurent Fabius, chair of the 2015 UNFCCC and Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UNFCCC celebrating the adoption of the Paris agreement. Source: (BBC,2015). |
Review mechanism
A key component of the agreement, and a vital one to ensure that the 1.5 degree target is met is a reviewing mechanism. There will be a review of what countries are proposing by 2019 and followed by a global stocktake (review) in 2023 and every five years after used to enhance and update nationally determined contributions.
Progression over time:
The first thing to note is that although the original aim of the agreement (Paris, 2015) was to reach, for the first time, a universal, legally binding agreement, the Paris agreement is in fact part legally binding and partly voluntary.
The aspects of the agreement that are legal include the obligation for countries to set nationally determined contributions (emissions targets) and the review mechanism. Furthermore, each "successive nationally determined contribution will represent a progression". This is a vital component for reaching the 1.5C target as the current INDCs submitted, at best have the capability of limiting temperature rises to 2.7C by 2100 (see INDCs blog).
However, under the Paris agreement the targets themselves will not be legally binding. Instead the UN is banking on peer pressure to ensure that the INDCs achieve what they have been designed to do. That said, as Matt McGrath highlights, peer pressure has been successful thus far in ensuring 187 countries lodged INDCs in the run up to COP21 (BBC, 2015)
Equity and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities:
The Paris agreement marks a significant change from the Kyoto protocol which excluded developing countries and marks a positive shift from Copenhagen where developed/developing debates raged surrounding historical responsibility. The Paris agreement is designed to get around differentiation, recognising equity and the principle of common responsibilities (we are all in this together) and respective capabilities, in light of different national circumstances (levels of development). Over time developing countries will do more and more with assistance provided from developed countries.
Climate finance:
Climate finance and the $100 billion climate fund pledged in Copenhagen to help with adaption were predicted to be one of the biggest areas of contention going into COP21, and 'grey areas' such as where the money is coming from still remain. That said the agreement does include new legally binding financial commitments. The agreement requires rich nations to maintain a $100bn a year funding pledge beyond 2020, and to use that figure as a "floor" for further support agreed by 2025.
My thought so far:
There s no doubt that COP21 and the Paris Agreement have surpassed expectations (just look at my pre-COP predictions blog). No wonder they were cheering in the video - a spine tingling moment.
The Kyoto protocol set emission cutting targets for only a small group of developed countries and the US did not even ratify. The Paris agreement breaks down differentiation, uniting all nations regardless of development in a single (partially) legally binding agreement to tackle climate change for the first time in history.
However the Paris agreement and the nationally determined contributions must be stepped up and we can but hope that the legally binding review mechanisms will ensure this.
Although significant, the aspiration of a 1.5C target is meaningless unless the mechanism of the Paris Agreement and individual nations, through the nationally determined contributions really create rapid change. If not, 1.5C and maybe 2C+ will become out of reach before we know it. Only time will tell if the Paris agreement is enough. A long time and too long to have a second chance. The Paris agreement is the best chance we have got.
Hi Alex, great review of the key outcomes so far. COP21 has indeed surpassed many expectations. An international recognition of climate change and an agreement to target a +1.5C is huge, especially when you consider Kyoto like you said. However do you think that it is concerning that it seems to rely heavily on carbon negative technologies, namely BECCS, that haven't really been put into full application yet. I understand the possible need for geoengineering, not critquing that. But the seemingly heavy reliance on them may mean this euphoria from politicians may be naive, with the possibilities of unexpected disappointments. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteHi Hiro, I think you raise a really interesting point here. Hitting the 1.5C target is completely reliant on their being zero net emissions within the second half of the century and this presumes as you say the use of negative carbon technologies and geoengineering. We could do a whole blog on their relative merits and drawbacks, however, I am hopeful that the outcomes of COP21 will send a strong signal to governments and other sources of investment capital that they are vital if the outcomes of COP21 are to be met.
DeleteHi Alex, really interesting summary of such a massive topic. I was thinking about the 'global stocktake', what will happen if a country starts to fall behind and doesn't progress rapidly enough on its goals?
ReplyDeleteHi Holy, that's a really good question. I don't think the UNFCCC really know the answer to this either. As I mentioned in my blog the only legally binding elements of the process are actually having to take part in the stocktake and presenting progressive nationally determined contributions. Actually sticking to what they promise is not legally binding. Countries will inevitably fall behind. However, as the growing signs and costs of climate change continue to grow, with strong leadership from the worlds larger economies, I am sure peer pressure will pay a significant role in staying on track.
DeleteContrastingly, I don't think that the results were that fantastic. It's great that decisions have been made and aims to kerb global temperature rise to 1.5C are great steps, there are very few legally binding aspects to the whole process, which I was rather disappointed with. Many of the targets will not be met because there are no internationally binding laws attached.
ReplyDeleteI think more needs to be done sooner.
Hi Louis! Thanks for your comment. Your completely right, not enough of COP21 is legally binding. However, in todays political and economic climate I honestly do not think a global, completely legally binding agreement was a realistic outcome of COP21. You just have to look at the outcomes of previous agreements and COP meetings. I personally think that the agreement includes some pivotal developments e.g the break down in differentiation is a massive improvement and a very positive one. I also think that the review mechanism, with some tweaking moving forward has the ability to promote the necessary change. As my blog concluded, only time will tell. But I think considering the unfortunate realities of global politics it is the best chance we have of tackling climate.
DeleteThis is a great overview (as well as Part 1) of the COP21 outcomes - really helpful! Do you truly believe the outcome has been entirely positive? And will peer pressure be enough to convince some of the larger emitting countries (e.g. China) to commit to the INDCs?
ReplyDeletePersonally, I can see the merits of COP21, it has been a fantastic outcome in the sense that governments around the world have come to some sort of agreement and recognised climate change. However, I agree with Louis in that more needs to be done and it needs to happen sooner rather than later before we let things spiral out of control.
Hi Alex!
ReplyDeleteDo you really feel an aim of 1.5C is really possible? Especially after the sobering experience of our COP21 workshop, I feel even 2C is quickly becoming a target we cannot hope to hit. Do you feel COP21 is enough of a step in the right direction, or that really more needs to be done on top of present agreements to meet these targets?
Hi Joe, What a tough question! Your right, the outcomes of COP21 are no way significant enough to hold warming to 1.5 degrees. However, I do believe the mechanisms that the Paris agreement include do have the potential to bring about the change required. That said the years up to and including the first set of global stock takes appear to be pivotal, and more surely must be done within this time to guarantee success.
DeleteI was about to write the same thing as Joe! I feel despite the positive of setting such a target it is perhaps a meaningless number, one that surely will be surpassed?! However, aiming to cut emissions by so much will at least provide the catalyst for immediate change, whether the target will be reached or not it does stimulate people to act! Emissions surely would have to be cut on a massive scale almost immediately for such a reduction to be made - especially if developing countries will only assist in the future when they have a greater economic base, it seems an incredible task for the developed countries to achieve! Thanks for your posts!
ReplyDeleteHi Laurence! What a balanced conclusion! Thank you
DeleteI agree with Alex that COP21 is an important milestone in the world's response to climate change. The 1.5C above pre-industrial levels stretch target is particularly welcome as is the planned IPCC special report on the of global warming of 1.5C. There now needs to be a rapid and effective implementation of the agreement. As Alex says, the true success of COP21 can only be judged in the long term and by then it could be too late.
ReplyDelete