Bodansky Paris Agreement

Bodansky Paris Agreement

To ensure effective and secure participation, a global agreement on climate change must be considered fair by the countries concerned. The Paris Agreement moved closer to differentiating countries` climate change competences, derogating from the rigid distinction between developed and developing countries by including a «subtle differentiation» of certain subgroups of countries (e.g. B least developed countries) for certain substantive issues (e.g.B. climate finance) and/or for certain procedures (e.g.B. timetables and reports). In this article, we analyze whether the countries of self-differentiation pursued in the formulation of their own climate plans or national contributions (NDCs) correspond to the subtle differentiation of the Paris Agreement. We find that there is coherence for reduction and adaptation, but not for aid (climate finance, technology transfer and capacity building). As DNNs are the most important instrument for achieving the long-term objectives of the Paris Agreement, this inconsistency needs to be addressed in order to make subsequent rounds of DND more ambitious. 10 Fiona Harvey, Paris Climate Change Agreement: The World`s Greatest Diplomatic Success, Guardian (14 December 2015), www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/13/paris-climate-deal-cop-diplomacy-developing-united-nations.

188 Paris Pledge for Action, on www.parispledgeforaction.org/about/ (last visited march 15, 2016). 19 At the United Nations signing ceremony on 22 April 2016, 175 countries signed the Paris Agreement, apparently most of those that have never signed an international treaty in a single day. A list of signatories can be found at www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2016/04/parisagreementsingatures/. Only Nicaragua expressed objections to the agreement, both at the closing plenary session of COP-21 and at the signing ceremony. See the statement by Mr Paul Oquist Kelley, Minister, National Secretary to the President of Nicaragua, at the high-level signing ceremony (22 April 2016) in webtv.un.org/search/paul-oquist-kelley-nicargua-high-level-signature-ceremony-for-the-paris-agreement-national-statements/4858083079001?term=Nicaragua. Rajamani L (2015) Negotiation of the 2015 Climate Agreement: Issues of Legal Form and Nature. Research Paper 28. Mitigation Action Plans & Scenarios, Cape Town, South Africa, p. 26 Bodansky D (2016) The Paris Agreement on Climate Change: A New Hope? Law J Int 110:288-319. doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.110.2.0288 7 David Roberts, The Conceptual Breakthrough Behind the Paris Climate Treaty, VOX (15 December 2015), at www.vox.com/2015/12/15/10172238/paris-climate-treaty-conceptual-breakthrough. 198 Z.B. Paris Agreement marks unprecedented political recognition of climate change risks, Economist (Dec.

12, 2015), at www.economist.com/news/international/21683990-paris-agreement-climate-change-talks (Paris «far from the botched imbroglio of the Copenhagen climate summit»); Harvey, note 10 above (contrast between Paris and Copenhagen «couldn`t have been bigger»); Savaresi, Annalisa, The Paris Agreement: A New Beginning?, 34 J. Energy Nat. Res. L. 16, 18 (2016)Google Scholar (describes Copenhagen as «the lowest point in the history of the climate regime»). The Paris Agreement aims for a golden bell solution to the problem of climate change, which is neither too strong (and therefore unacceptable for key states) nor too weak (and therefore ineffective). In order to protect national decision-making, it adopts a bottom-up approach in which the agreement «reflects and does not motivate national policy». But to foster stronger action, states` «national contributions» (or NDCs) are complemented by international standards, to ensure transparency and accountability and to encourage states to redouble their efforts gradually. .

. .

No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.