Article 2 Para. (1)(C) of the Paris Agreement


Under the Paris Agreement, each country must regularly identify, plan and report on its contribution to the fight against global warming. [6] There is no mechanism that requires a country[7] to set a specific emissions target by a specific date[8], but each target should go beyond the targets set previously. The United States officially withdrew from the agreement the day after the 2020 presidential election,[9] although President-elect Joe Biden said America would join the agreement after his inauguration. [10] The objective of the agreement is to reduce global warming as described in Article 2 by “improving” the implementation of the UNFCCC by:[11] August 4, 2. In August 2017, the Trump administration sent an official notice to the United Nations that Article 28 of the U.S. Convention allows parties to withdraw from the agreement after submitting a notice of withdrawal to the depositary. The notice period may take place no earlier than three years after the entry into force of the Agreement for the country. The revocation shall take effect one year after notification to the depositary. Alternatively, the agreement stipulates that withdrawal from the UNFCCC, under which the Paris Agreement was adopted, would also remove the state from the Paris Agreement. The conditions for exiting the UNFCCC are the same as for the Paris Agreement.

The agreement does not contain any provisions in case of non-compliance. The Paris Agreement is the world`s first comprehensive climate agreement. [15] The Paris Agreement has a “bottom-up” structure unlike most international environmental treaties, which are “top-down” and are characterized by internationally defined standards and objectives to be implemented by states. [32] Unlike its predecessor, the Kyoto Protocol, which sets commitment-related targets with the force of law, the Paris Agreement, which emphasizes consensus-building, achieves voluntary and nationally defined targets. [33] Specific climate goals are therefore promoted politically and are not legally linked. Only the processes that govern the preparation of reports and the consideration of these objectives are prescribed by international law. This structure is particularly noteworthy for the United States – since there are no legal mitigation or funding objectives, the agreement is considered an “executive agreement rather than a treaty.” Since the 1992 UNFCCC treaty received Senate approval, this new agreement does not need new congressional legislation to enter into force. [33] At the 2011 UN Climate Change Conference, the Durban Platform (and the ad hoc working group on the enhanced Durban Platform for Action) was created with the aim of negotiating a legal instrument for climate action from 2020 onwards. The resulting agreement is expected to be adopted in 2015.

[62] The implementation of the Agreement by all Member States will be assessed every 5 years, with the first evaluation taking place in 2023. The result will serve as a contribution to new Nationally Determined Contributions by Member States. [30] The assessment is not a contribution/achievement of individual countries, but a collective analysis of what has been achieved and what still needs to be done. The level of NDCs set by each country[8] 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 or mandatory language necessary to create binding norms. [20] In addition, there will be no mechanism to force a country[7] to set a target in its NDC on a specific date and no application if a target set in an NDC is not met. [8] [21] There will be only one “Name and Shame” system,[22] or as János Pásztor, UN Under-Secretary-General for Climate Change, told CBS News (USA), a “Name and Encouragement” plan. [23] Given that the agreement does not foresee any consequences if countries do not comply with their obligations, such a consensus is fragile […].