Why The Paris Agreement Failed

The group has finally committed to making a global promise to reduce CO2 emissions, invest in sustainable energy and minimize further environmental damage. The agreement was signed by 195 countries and was quickly hailed as a historic achievement. The climate crisis was averted, people thought at the time. Therefore, if mitigation plans are not good enough, is there a good mechanism to increase these plans in the near future and regularly, in order to be as precise as possible with the necessary efforts? Not really, and one of the biggest risks of this agreement is that we assume it exists. There are too many flaws in operationalization, too much room for interpretation of how these efforts should be made and shared. For all these reasons, we can confirm that this agreement will bring about changes and solutions to the climate crisis for several decades to go. Finally, the agreement contains a section on financial, technical and capacity-building assistance and cooperation, which includes a two-year cycle to verify that commitments made and commitments are being met. Since financial assistance is often directed to mitigation projects, the agreement corrects this asymmetry by ensuring that aid is put in place in a balanced manner between mitigation and adaptation. In addition, adjustment funding should be based on the public sector and subsidies, and the contribution of rich countries should be increased over time. The 2015 Paris Agreement required participating countries to limit and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in order to keep global temperature rise “well below” 2 degrees Celsius since pre-industrial times. What can also be very worrying and a real danger to the environment is the inclusion of vague elements and concepts such as sinks to absorb carbon into the atmosphere, so that the door remains open to geoengineering and other technological approaches.

This belief in unlimited technological progress pushes us in the opposite direction of this agreement, especially when Co2 capture projects do not work or are halted due to inefficiency. It creates the illusion that we can continue to pollute the environment, because one day we will find solutions and delay concrete action. This situation is doubly ill-advised if lower renewable energy costs cost less to switch to renewable and decentralized energy production. The “Adaptation” section is perhaps one of the best results with the creation of a qualitative objective to examine the measures taken and the needs to improve the resilience of the poorest and weakest countries, in combination with the 5-year mitigation cycle.

Comments are closed.