Who Organized the Paris Agreement
At COP 21 in Paris and on 12 December 2015, the parties again adopted the historic Paris Agreement. The agreement is a blend of the “top-down” approach of Kyoto and the “bottom-up” approach of the Copenhagen and Cancún accords. It establishes common binding procedural obligations for all countries, but leaves it to each country to decide on their non-binding “Nationally Determined Contribution” (NDC). The agreement creates an improved transparency framework to track countries` actions and calls on countries to strengthen their NDCs every five years. Currently, 197 countries – every nation on earth, the last signatory being war-torn Syria – have adopted the Paris Agreement. Of these, 179 have solidified their climate proposals with formal approval – including the US for now. The only major emitting countries that have not yet officially joined the deal are Russia, Turkey and Iran. It is rare that there is consensus among almost all nations on a single issue. But with the Paris Agreement, world leaders agreed that climate change is driven by human behavior, that it poses a threat to the environment and all of humanity, and that global action is needed to stop it. A clear framework has also been put in place for all countries to make commitments to reduce emissions and strengthen these measures over time. Here are some key reasons why the agreement is so important: The Paris Agreement is the first universal and legally binding global climate agreement adopted at the Paris Climate Change Conference (COP21) in December 2015. In fact, research clearly shows that the costs of climate inaction far outweigh the costs of reducing carbon pollution.
A recent study suggests that if the United States fails to meet its Paris climate goals, it could cost the economy up to $6 trillion in the coming decades. A global failure to meet the NDCs currently set out in the agreement could reduce global GDP by more than 25% by the end of the century. At the same time, another study estimates that meeting – or even exceeding – the Paris targets through infrastructure investments in clean energy and energy efficiency could have huge global benefits – around $19 trillion. These transparency and accountability provisions are similar to those of other international agreements. While the system does not involve financial sanctions, the requirements are aimed at easily tracking each nation`s progress and fostering a sense of global peer pressure, thus preventing any hesitation between countries considering doing so. The C2ES statement on U.S. leadership in Paris and a wave of support from mayors, governors and CEOs contributed to the conclusion of this historic agreement. Although the United States and Turkey are not party to the agreement because they have not declared their intention to withdraw from the 1992 UNFCCC, as Annex 1 countries of the UNFCCC, they will continue to be required to produce national communications and an annual greenhouse gas inventory.  In June 2017, President Donald Trump announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement. However, the withdrawal can only be made on the 4th. November 2019 and would not come into force until a year later. The Trump administration, meanwhile, has indicated that it will continue negotiations on the Paris rules and that it may remain in the agreement on revised terms.
While the expanded transparency framework is universal, as is the global stocktake that takes place every 5 years, the framework is designed to provide “built-in flexibility” to distinguish the capacities of developed and developing countries. In this context, the Paris Agreement contains provisions to improve the capacity-building framework.  The Agreement takes into account the different situations of certain countries and notes in particular that the review by technical experts for each country takes into account the specific reporting capacity of that country.  The agreement also develops a transparency capacity building initiative to help developing countries put in place the institutions and procedures necessary to comply with the transparency framework.  This is a historic agreement reached that recognizes that not all countries are the same when it comes to climate change. Participating countries must put their commitments into practice. At COP 1 in 1995, the parties to the UNFCCC decided to accelerate climate efforts by starting negotiations on a first sub-agreement. They agreed that the new agreement, in line with the principle of the CBDRRC, would set binding targets and timelines to reduce emissions from developed countries, but not new commitments for developing countries.
(In the non-binding Byrd Hagel resolution, the U.S. Senate rejected this premise, saying the agreement should also include new greenhouse gas limits for developing countries.) Although the agreement was welcomed by many, including French President François Hollande and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, criticism also surfaced. For example, James Hansen, a former NASA scientist and climate change expert, expressed anger that most of the deal is made up of “promises” or goals, not firm commitments.  He called the Paris talks a fraud with “nothing to do, only to promise” and believes that only a general tax on CO2 emissions, which is not part of the Paris Agreement, would reduce CO2 emissions fast enough to avoid the worst effects of global warming.  At the 2011 UN Climate Change Conference, the Durban Platform (and the ad hoc working group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action) was established with the aim of negotiating a legal instrument for climate action from 2020 onwards. The resulting agreement is expected to be adopted in 2015.  The agreement recognises the role of stakeholders outside the parties in the fight against climate change, including cities, other sub-national authorities, civil society, the private sector and others. Following a campaign promise, Trump – a climate denier who claimed climate change was a “hoax” committed by China – announced in June 2017 his intention to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement. But despite the president`s statement from the rose garden that “we`re going out,” it`s not that easy. The withdrawal process requires the agreement to be in force for three years before a country can formally announce its intention to leave. Then he will have to wait a year before leaving the pact. This means that the United States could officially leave on November 4, 2020 at the earliest, one day after the presidential election.
Even a formal withdrawal would not necessarily be permanent, experts say; A future president could return to the board in just one month. As a contribution to the objectives of the agreement, countries have submitted comprehensive Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). These are not yet sufficient to meet the agreed temperature targets, but the agreement points the way for further action. The level of NDCs set by each country will set that country`s objectives. However, the “contributions” themselves are not binding under international law because they do not have the specificity, normative character [clarification required] or mandatory language required to create binding norms.  In addition, there will be no mechanism that requires a country to set a target in its NDC by a certain date, and no application if a set target is not achieved in an NDC.   There will only be a “Name and Shame” system, or as János Pásztor, UN Under-Secretary-General for Climate Change, told CBS News (USA), a “Name and Encourage” plan.  Given that the agreement does not foresee any consequences if countries do not comply with their obligations, such a consensus is fragile.
A net of nations withdrawing from the deal could trigger the withdrawal of more governments and lead to a total collapse of the deal.  An Introduction to Paris C2ES answers questions about the talks that led to the Paris Climate Agreement, how the agreement works, important legal issues, the status of the agreement and the next steps. The Paris Agreement provides a sustainable framework that will guide global efforts in the coming decades. The aim is to increase countries` climate ambitions over time. To this end, the agreement provides for two review processes, each of which goes through a five-year cycle. On August 4, 2017, the Trump administration sent an official notice to the United Nations stating that the United States intended to withdraw from the Paris Agreement as soon as it was legally allowed to do so.  The formal declaration of withdrawal could only be submitted when the agreement for the United States was in force for 3 years on November 4, 2019.   Am 4.
In November 2019, the U.S. government filed the notification of resignation with the United Nations Secretary-General, the depositary of the agreement, and formally withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement a year later, when the withdrawal entered into force.  After the November 2020 election, President-elect Joe Biden promised to reinstate the United States in the Paris Agreement on his first day in power and to renew America`s commitment to mitigating climate change.   The resulting Kyoto Protocol was adopted at COP 3 in 1997. .