Phoenix from the ashes : an analysis of the Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ; part 1

Abstract

After 25 years of United Nations (UN) climate diplomacy, the world's governments have for the first time in history negotiated a treaty that envisages climate action by all countries.Despite all shortcomings, the Paris Agreement may therefore be labelled a success.It also demonstrates that environmental multilateralism is not dead.The Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) were able to conclude a treaty under international law, with an innovative legal approach in order to satisfy the constitutional peculiarities of the United States of America (US).The successful outcome of Paris has thus restored some of the confidence in international diplomacy lost over the last decade.The Agreement's ambition of limiting global warming to 'well below 2C and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels' represents a quantitative increase compared with the previous wording and a reinterpretation of the Convention's ultimate purpose: the Convention's objective is to avoid dangerous climate change; the Paris Agreement now posits that any global warming is dangerous.Furthermore, countries agreed that the temperature limit is to be reached by, first, a peaking of greenhouse gas emissions 'as soon as possible' and, secondly, 'a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century'.This is therefore the main message from Paris: the age of fossil fuels is over.Shortcomings include the lack of legal bindingness as far as national contributions relating to mitigation, adaptation and finance are concerned.Indeed, contributions that countries have submitted fall far short of the stipulated global ambition: even if fully implemented, global mean temperature would most likely still increase in the range of 2.7C to 3.5C.This is a serious shortfall and action to strengthen those contributions, especially by large emitters, must start by 2018 in order to keep the world on a path that is considered safe for humanity.However, international negotiations can rarely take decisions that have not previously been prepared nationally.The role the international climate process can play at the moment is to serve as a catalyst for national developments by keeping the issue on the agenda and forcing national policy-makers to revisit it continuously.The question is therefore not whether the Paris Agreement will deliver the emission reductions necessary, but whether the Agreement has the potential to catalyse further changes, whether it becomes a pacemaker for policy processes -at the international level and in the capitals of the world.From this perspective, the Paris Agreement is much stronger than many had expected.Instead of legal sanctions, the Paris Agreement relies on a mechanism of 'naming and shaming' to ensure implementation: it creates a reputational risk through the establishment of mandatory transparency and review provisions.This innovative review mechanism ('ratchet') aims for the Parties to enhance their contributions every five years.Starting in 2018, these 'stocktakes' will create moments of concentrated political attention every five years that may be used for fostering the dynamic of the process.While there is no legal obligation to strengthen the first round of contributions, they are thus not necessarily the last word, given the growing awareness of climate change impacts and the growing dynamics in renewable energy, battery technologies and other solutions, which may quickly render previous goals obsolete.To date, the climate regime has had no mechanism to confront governments with such developments -and to take up these dynamics.It will be crucial for the success of the regular stocktakings that countries transparently report the implementation of their contributions and subject their efforts to review.In this regard, the Agreement defines a 'transparency framework', which has yet to be fleshed out.Apart from increasing the level of ambition, the details of the transparency framework will be the most relevant field of work in the coming years.One reason the Paris Agreement won the support of developing countries was its recognition of two decade-long demands: first, it elevates the standing of adaptation in the international climate regime.Crucially, action on adaptation is to be reviewed and accelerated every five years in parallel to the contribution cycles for mitigation.However, while the need