At the heart of the Paris Agreement is the requirement for countries to submit nationally determined contributions (NDCs), roadmaps outlining how they intend to reduce emissions and strengthen resilience and adaptation. These NDCs include policies and measures they will adopt for implementation.
This approach has allowed nations to set unambitious targets and delay meaningful action. An analysis of the initial set of NDCs revealed that seven of the eight highest-emitting countries submitted pledges far weaker than needed to meet equitable allocations in keeping warming under 1.5°C.
Worse, most countries are failing to update their commitments. To date, fewer than 10% of signatories have submitted updated NDCs. This demonstrates the growing mitigation gap: the difference between stated commitments and the reductions required to meet scientifically informed targets.
For developing nations, the climate crisis is not limited to emissions reduction; it’s a fight for survival.
Partially in compensation for this recognised hypocrisy, the Paris Agreement included a $100 billion a year climate finance pledge to support developing economies in reducing emissions and adapting to the unavoidable climate impacts. This promise has been broken.
The Paris Agreement’s country-led commitments were meant to foster global cooperation. But the lack of enforcement mechanisms has slowed crucial negotiations and allowed countries to underdeliver on their obligations.
I noticed your comment is based on the title and not on any of the arguments in this article. May I suggest to take a look at the article itself? You might change your mind.
Ok, so this is a little embarassing, but I thought the Lenmy summary text was the whole this and this was like 4 paragraphs with an inflamatory headline. I still think the headline isn’t a good framing, but reading the article know that I know it exists (doh!) It actually makes some clear and well argued points on difficulties enforcing it.
I still stand by my initial point, I think the Paris agreement has driven some of the real progress that European countries have made on climate, and branding it a “delusion” isn’t helpful.