From 30 November to 11 December 2015, France hosted representatives from 196 countries at the United Nations Climate Change Conference, one of the largest and most ambitious global climate meetings ever held. The goal was nothing less than a binding, universal agreement that would limit greenhouse gas emissions to levels that would prevent global temperatures from rising more than 2°C (3.6°F) above the temperature scale set before the start of the Industrial Revolution. While these measures are important for raising awareness and reducing some emissions, “everything is quite small compared to governments around the world pursuing strong climate policies,” Michael Greenstone, a professor of economics at the University of Chicago, told CFR`s Why It Matters podcast. In fact, research clearly shows that the costs of climate inaction far outweigh the costs of reducing carbon pollution. A recent study suggests that if the United States fails to meet its Paris climate goals, it could cost the economy up to $6 trillion in the coming decades. A global failure to meet the NDCs currently set out in the agreement could reduce global GDP by more than 25% by the end of the century. At the same time, another study estimates that meeting – or even exceeding – the Paris targets through infrastructure investments in clean energy and energy efficiency could have huge global benefits – around $19 trillion. The agreement contains commitments from all countries to reduce their emissions and work together to adapt to the effects of climate change and calls on countries to strengthen their commitments over time. The agreement provides a way for developed countries to assist developing countries in their mitigation and adaptation efforts, while providing a framework for transparent monitoring and reporting on countries` climate goals. The Paris Agreement is the first universal and legally binding global climate agreement adopted at the Paris Climate Change Conference (COP21) in December 2015. The desire for a more ambitious goal was maintained in the agreement – with the promise to make an effort to further limit global temperatures to 1.5°C.

The United States, the world`s second-largest emitter, is the only country to withdraw from the deal, a move by President Donald J. Trump, which went into effect in November 2020. Other countries that have not officially accepted the deal include Angola, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Libya, South Sudan, Turkey and Yemen. Yes, there is a broad consensus in the scientific community, although some deny that climate change is a problem, including politicians in the United States. When negotiating teams come together for international climate negotiations, there is “less skepticism about science and more disagreement about how to set priorities,” says David Victor, a professor of international relations at the University of California, San Diego. The basic science is this: the Paris Agreement is a historic environmental agreement adopted by almost all countries in 2015 to combat climate change and its negative impacts. The agreement aims to significantly reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in order to limit the increase in global temperature this century to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, while looking for ways to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees. The agreement contains commitments from all major emitting countries to reduce their pollution from climate change and to strengthen these commitments over time.

The Compact provides a means for developed countries to support developing countries in their mitigation and adaptation efforts, and provides a framework for transparent monitoring, reporting and tightening of countries` individual and collective climate goals. In the almost 5 years since the Paris Climate Agreement was forged during the UN COP21 climate negotiations in Paris, there has been some progress, but also a lot of broken promises. Earlier this week, the United States announced that it would formally withdraw from the agreement in November 2020, making the future of this historic agreement even more fragile. President Trump is pulling us out of the Paris Climate Agreement. The urgent agenda set out in the agreement is particularly important for humanitarian work. If we look at what the Paris Climate Agreement is, we can see how much of an impact it can have on the world`s most vulnerable communities. If we look at the progress made since 2015, we can see how much work we still have to do. And if we look at the current impact of the climate crisis on the most affected countries, we can see why it is important not to abandon this agreement. Following a campaign promise, Trump – a climate denier who claimed climate change was a “hoax” committed by China – announced in June 2017 his intention to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement. But despite the president`s statement from the rose garden that “we`re going out,” it`s not that easy.

The withdrawal procedure requires the agreement to be in place for three years before a country can officially announce its intention to leave. Then he will have to wait a year before leaving the pact. This means that the United States could officially leave on November 4, 2020 at the earliest, one day after the presidential election. Even a formal withdrawal would not necessarily be permanent, experts say; a future president could join him in a month. For the first time in history, the agreement brings all the nations of the world together in a single agreement to fight climate change. The agreement requires rich countries to meet a funding commitment of $100 billion per year beyond 2020 and use that number as a “lower limit” for additional support agreed until 2025. The Kyoto Protocol, a landmark environmental treaty adopted at COP3 in Japan in 1997, represents the first time that countries have agreed on country-specific emission reduction targets that are legally mandated. The protocol, which only entered into force in 2005, set binding emission reduction targets only for developed countries, based on the assumption that they were responsible for most of the Earth`s high greenhouse gas emissions. The United States first signed the agreement, but never ratified it; President George W. Bush argued that the deal would hurt the United States.

The economy, as developing countries such as China and India were not included. Without the participation of these three countries, the effectiveness of the treaty has proven to be limited, as its objectives cover only a small fraction of total global emissions. Professor John Shepherd of the National Centre for Oceanography at the University of Southampton says the deal contains welcome aspirations, but few people know how difficult it will be to achieve the goals. .