Ten Years of the Paris Agreement

Rituraj Phukan

This year marks the tenth anniversary of the Paris Agreement. Established during the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) COP21 in 2015, the Agreement introduced a framework for international climate collaboration by enabling countries to set their own targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The Paris Agreement represents a key turning point in international efforts to address climate change. Like the earlier Kyoto Protocol, it is a binding treaty designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, the Paris Agreement goes further by setting a global objective to keep temperature increases well under 2°C (later revised to 1.5 C) compared to pre-industrial levels and includes goals for adapting to climate change and funding climate initiatives. Although both treaties aim to mitigate climate change, they take distinctly different approaches.

The Kyoto Protocol established binding, top-down targets for developed nations, emphasizing their historical responsibility in climate action. Conversely, the Paris Agreement utilizes a bottom-up framework in which all nations submit voluntary, nationally determined commitments. This approach is complemented by processes designed to enhance ambition over time and periodically evaluate progress.

Implementation of the Paris Agreement requires economic and social transformation, based on the best available science. The Paris Agreement works on a five-year cycle of increasingly ambitious climate actionor, ratcheting up emission targets, by countries. Since 2020, countries have been submitting their national climate action plans, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Each successive NDC is meant to reflect an increasingly higher degree of ambition compared to the previous version.

A decade after its inception, the Paris Agreement faces a critical juncture as its credibility is challenged by complex geopolitical circumstances. The long-term effectiveness of the Paris Agreement depends on continued assurance that it delivers results efficiently and rapidly compared to any alternatives.

This assurance is necessary to drive a constructive cycle of increasing ambition and action. Within this framework, a rigorous, evidence-based assessment of the Agreement’s impact during its first decade (2015–2025), alongside the expectations established for the future, may play a vital role in maintaining momentum and preventing regression.

A recent report,“The Paris Agreement at Ten Years-Expert Views on Progress and Challenges for Climate Change Mitigation” by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) assessed the added value of the Paris Agreement. While reviewing the current situation and the report also identified avenues for its successful implementation. To assess the Agreement’s added value, it compared what has been achieved with it to what might have happened without it. To that end, it used both retrospective and forward-looking analysis. The retrospective part contrasts actual progress between 2015 and 2025 with a scenario in which the Agreement has not been adopted. The prospective part examined expectations for 2025-2040, with and without the Paris Agreement.

These comparisons are based on hypothetical scenarios that cannot be directly observed; therefore, the analysis utilizes an expert survey. Policymakers and climate change specialists were invited to evaluate a scenario where the Paris Agreement does not exist. The survey assesses the perceived impact of the Agreement on climate progress over the past decade. At the national level, questions address how climate issues are prioritized in policy agendas, the rigor of targets and mitigation strategies, actual emission levels, the integration of climate action into politics and society, and the engagement of private sector actors, local authorities, and civil organizations. Comparable metrics are employed to evaluate the influence of the Agreement at the international level.

The survey results demonstrate a prevailing view that the Paris Agreement has effectively accelerated climate action both domestically and internationally, with expectations that this momentum will persist. Among experts, there is considerable consensus regarding the extent to which climate change mitigation is considered a domestic policy priority. In 2024, more than 83% of government respondents and 64% of other climate change experts agreed that climate change mitigation was a priority at the national level. Similarly, nearly 70% of government representatives and 52% of other experts concurred that current mitigation policies are stringent.

Perceptions are notably different in counterfactual scenarios where the Paris Agreement is not in effect. For instance, the proportion of respondents agreeing that climate change mitigation policies would be stringent in 2024 without the Paris Agreement ranges from 32% to 41%. These pronounced differences also appear in forward-looking assessments. The overall agreement on the stringency of such policies in 2040 without the Paris Agreement is between 45% and 51%, whereas this figure increases to 70-83% in scenarios where the Paris Agreement is in place.

Most of the respondents agree that the Paris Agreement contributed to the strengthening of GHG mitigation targets; however, there is less certainty regarding its impact on actual GHG emissions. Between 76% and 79% agree that national GHG emissions targets are more robust than they would have been absent the Paris Agreement. In comparison, 68–76% concur that current GHG emissions are lower than they would be without the Agreement.

The respondents also agree that the Paris Agreement set a precedent for future international agreements dealing with cross-border environmental issues. Importantly, policymakers are equally confident that the architecture and mechanisms of the Paris Agreement could be used to effectively address global challenges calling for multilateral cooperation.

Respondents also identified four key challenges to achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement andfor effective climate policy implementation. These primarily include the provision of necessary infrastructure for the transition to net zero, but also the public acceptability of mitigation measures. The affordability of clean alternatives and the effective adoption of cleaner technologies by firms are also among the top policy challenges.

On the economic front, limited public funding stands out as the most important constraint. Other barriers, including the mobilisation of private finance and concerns about the distributional fairness of climate policies, are seen as significant but less important hurdles. Worries about the competitiveness of the export sector and concerns about the overall economic performance are considered less critical. Both climate experts and policymakers consistently point to vested interests and the lack of policy continuity across electoral cycles as significant institutional barriers.

The results demonstrate substantial confidence in the principal avenues of change as effective means to attain the 1.5 °C objective of the Agreement. Experts and policymakers identify market-based instruments, regulatory frameworks, and policies that incentivize green innovation as primary drivers, collectively responsible for 61–67% of the required progress. Technological advancement, while beneficial, is deemed secondary without supportive policy measures and contributes an estimated 11–12%. Voluntary initiatives (13–16%) and behavioural adjustments (8–11%) are also acknowledged as relevant factors, though they are infrequently prioritized.

Policies focused on the decarbonisation of the energy sector and the management of carbon sinks are considered to offer the most significant potential for substantial emission reductions. These measures encompass the expansion of renewable energy, the gradual elimination of fossil fuels from power generation, the conservation and enhancement of carbon sinks, and increased investment in green infrastructure. In contrast, policies concerning nuclear energy, carbon capture, and alternative fuels were assessed as having the lowest average scores for transformative impact.

In summary, the study demonstrates that experts recognise the significant impact of the Paris Agreement. While some obstacles to implementation remain, the Paris Agreement has facilitated the expansion of climate action efforts. With the world entering a new cycle of NDC updates, the insights from this study contribute to continuing the momentum of the Paris Agreement and to informing the next phase of climate action.

Rituraj Phukan: Founder, Indigenous People’s Climate Justice Forum; Co-Founder, Smily Academy ;National Coordinator for Biodiversity, The Climate Reality Project India; Member, IUCN Wilderness Specialist Group; Commission Member – IUCN WCPA Climate Change, IUCN WCPA Connectivity Conservation, IUCN WCPA Indigenous People and Protected Areas Specialist Groups, IUCN WCPA South Asia Region and IUCN WCPA-SSC Invasive Alien Species Task Force; Member, International Antarctic Expedition 2013; Climate Force Arctic 2019 ; Ambassador, Marine Arctic Peace Sanctuary. Rituraj Phukan is the Climate Editor, Mahabahu and Convenor, Mahabahu Climate Forum.

Mahabahu.com is an Online Magazine with collection of premium Assamese and English articles and posts with cultural base and modern thinking. You can send your articles to editor@mahabahu.com / editor@mahabahoo.com (For Assamese article, Unicode font is necessary) Images from different sources.