The paris agreement on climate change: a historical landmark or an empty box?

The Paris Agreement on Climate Change has been heralded as a monumental succes, but others have also already expressed strong criticism.

I agree that it does seem appropriate to call the Paris Agreement historical: the global context of power and economic inequalities notwithstanding, the countries around the globe have succeeded in reaching a unanimous, legally binding, and substantial agreement about the future of the planet. 

Nonetheless, the success of the agreement will depend on its translation into practical action and policy, and especially on the following additional factors

• Ambition: the pledges of the individual countries have to become much more ambitious in order to be in line with the primary objective of keeping global warming below 2 degrees Celsius (and preferably below 1.5 degrees Celsius)
• Long-term goals: the EU and most countries have mainly specified targets for 2030 and 2050. However, the lower emissions become, the more difficult further reductions will become. Therefore, I advocate that intermediate reductions should be much more substantial than current pledges. We can already do a lot with existing technologies, and the sooner and deeper emissions cuts can be made, the larger the benefits, and the more time we will have to do the harder reductions in the future. 
• Financially assisting developing countries: people in developing countries are entitled to increasing their quality of life, but if global warming is to be reduced, they will have to do so in a sustainable way. Fairness therefore demands that developed countries increase their financial assistance to developing countries to develop in a sustainable way.

The framework set out by the Paris Agreement remains to be translated in effective action and policy measures, and I really hope that it does not remain an empty box...

Please read the original blog post on Justice Everywhere.