2016 Paris Agreement

2016 Paris Agreement
Name	Paris Agreement
Date signed	2016
Location signed	Paris
Parties	197
Type	Environmental treaty

2016 Paris Agreement The 2016 Paris Agreement is an international environmental treaty negotiated under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris, designed to strengthen global response to climate change by limiting global temperature rise. It builds on the Kyoto Protocol and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change architecture, replacing earlier binding targets with nationally determined contributions following negotiations involving states represented at the Conference of the Parties and officials from United Nations specialized agencies. The instrument influences policy across national and transnational institutions including the European Union, G77, and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development members.

Background

Negotiations arose from a lineage of multilateral diplomacy traceable to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development and successive Conference of the Parties sessions, including the COP21 process hosted in Paris and facilitated by presidencies from France and coalitions such as the Least Developed Countries group and the Alliance of Small Island States. Preceding instruments such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Cancún Agreements shaped expectations about mitigation, adaptation, and finance mediated by bodies like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and funding mechanisms associated with the Global Environment Facility. Key state actors including United States, China, India, Brazil, European Union, South Africa, and Russia influenced text on differentiation, ambition, and transparency.

Negotiation and Adoption

The negotiating bloc framework combined parties from the Umbrella Group, the African Group, and the Like-Minded Developing Countries to reconcile demands from industrialized parties such as United States and Japan with developing parties including China, India, and the G77. Diplomatic efforts drew on intermediaries including the UNFCCC Executive Secretary and facilitators from France and civil society actors such as Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund, and 350.org. The agreement text was finalized after marathon sessions at COP21 and was opened for signature during a ceremony attended by heads of state from United States, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, European Union representatives, and delegations from Small Island Developing States. Formal adoption followed deposit of instruments by parties, mirroring procedures used for the Kyoto Protocol and other multilateral environmental agreements.

Key Provisions

Core provisions include a long-term goal to keep global average temperature rise well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts toward 1.5 °C, a commitment framework for nationally determined contributions (NDCs), and mechanisms for adaptation and loss and damage referencing discussions from the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage. The agreement establishes a five-year global stocktake process, an enhanced transparency framework inspired by rules under the Cancún Agreements, and invokes cooperative approaches including market mechanisms akin to mechanisms discussed under the Kyoto Protocol. Institutional linkages connect the agreement to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessments and to finance commitments under initiatives such as the Green Climate Fund.

Implementation and National Commitments

Implementation relies on parties submitting and updating NDCs, domestic legislation, and policy instruments as seen in examples from European Union member states, United States federal and subnational actions, and national plans from China, India, Brazil, and South Africa. National implementation interacts with regional entities like the African Union and trade blocs such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations where policy harmonization influences emissions trajectories. Judicial and legislative review in jurisdictions including United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia has shaped domestic compliance, while non-state actors including corporations, C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, and philanthropic organizations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation contribute to mitigation and adaptation efforts.

Finance, Technology and Capacity-Building

The agreement references mobilization of climate finance, building on pledges like the $100 billion goal announced by United States and European Union members and operationalized through channels such as the Green Climate Fund, the Global Environment Facility, and multilateral development banks including the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. Technology transfer and capacity-building draw on mechanisms developed under the UNFCCC Technology Mechanism and partnerships involving the World Intellectual Property Organization and research consortia originating from universities and institutes like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Donor coalitions such as the International Climate Initiative and bilateral programs from Germany and Japan supplement multilateral financing.

Monitoring, Reporting and Transparency

The enhanced transparency framework requires periodic reporting, technical expert review, and a global stocktake, aligning with methodologies developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies. National communications and greenhouse gas inventories use guidelines from the IPCC and are subject to scrutiny by peer review processes similar to those employed in other multilateral environmental agreements. Compliance facilitation mechanisms involve the UNFCCC Secretariat and cooperative measures coordinated with entities such as the Green Climate Fund.

Criticisms and Challenges

Critiques highlight the non-binding nature of NDCs compared with obligations under the Kyoto Protocol, concerns about adequacy relative to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scenarios, and disputes over differentiation echoed by groups like the G77 and the Like-Minded Developing Countries. Implementation gaps relate to finance shortfalls involving the Green Climate Fund and contested accounting practices debated among European Union members, United States administrations, and China. Political shifts in parties such as United States domestic policy changes and regional policy reversals in countries including Brazil and Australia illustrate challenges to sustained ambition, while legal scholars and litigants have pursued climate litigation drawing on precedents from national constitutional cases and international human rights claims.

Category:Climate change treaties