Making Climate Action More Effective

Lessons Learned from the First Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)

W. Pieter Pauw, Richard J.T. Klein, W. Pieter Pauw, Richard J.T. Klein

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000425352
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Biological Sciences
• Subtopic: Ecology
• Index: Biological Sciences

Almost every country has formulated its Nationally Determined Contribution to the global response to climate change. These national climate action plans were key to the landmark adoption of the 2015 Paris Agreement. They will also be central to its implementation – even if, taken together, current plans are insufficient to meet the aims of the Paris Agreement. Every five years, countries update their NDCs to demonstrate increased ambition. But while essential, ambition alone is not enough. This book shows that to be able to realize their climate ambition, countries also need to enhance the effectiveness of their plans and policies. Enhancing effectiveness involves improving the transparency, coherence and implementability of their NDCs.

To ramp up ambition and effectiveness, future NDCs must build on and learn from experience. Based on a detailed analysis of the first round of NDCs by some of the world's most knowledgeable climate policy experts, this book offers critical insights relevant to mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation. The book also discusses key elements of the Paris Agreement and broader climate policy, including the Enhanced Transparency Framework and the Paris Committee on Capacity Building, as well as considerations of equity and development. It is a must-read for researchers, policymakers, practitioners, and civil-society experts working on climate policy.

The chapters in this book were originally published as a special issue of the Climate Policy.

Beyond ambition: increasing the transparency, coherence and implementability of Nationally Determined Contributions

W. Pieter Pauw

and Richard J.T. Klein

1. Introduction

With almost every country submitting their intended Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) before or shortly after the 2015 Paris Climate Conference, these climate action plans were key to the landmark adoption of the Paris Agreement, and will be central to its implementation (Pauw et al., 2018). Research quickly identified the ‘headline numbers’ of NDCs: full implementation would reduce mean global warming by 2100 from approximately 3.6°C to 2.7°C above pre-industrial levels (Höhne et al., 2016; Rogelj et al., 2016). Research also showed that if ambition is not increased before 2030, global mean temperature increase can no longer be limited to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels (UNEP, 2018). The conclusions of the IPCC Special Report Global Warming of 1.5°C (IPCC, 2018) underscore the urgency of greater ambition. But ambition alone is not enough: to be able to realize their ambitions, countries also need to enhance the effectiveness of the plans and policies underpinning their NDCs. This requires improvements to the transparency, coherence and implementability of NDCs.

Almost all countries have now ratified the Paris Agreement, and many are in the process of updating their NDCs. It is crucial for the success of the Paris Agreement that the updated NDCs build on and learn from the first round of NDCs. This special issue Making Climate Action More Effective: Lessons Learned from the First Nationally Determined Contributions provides insights, and aims to stimulate debate, on how to strengthen NDC effectiveness. The eight papers in the special issue cover mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation, and discuss key elements of the Paris Agreement and broader climate policy, including the Enhanced Transparency Framework and the Paris Committee on Capacity Building, as well as considerations of equity and development.

This editorial first presents a short history of NDCs: their origin, relevance and process for updating. It then introduces a simple framework of NDC effectiveness to illustrate each paper’s respective contribution in terms of transparency, coherence and implementability, and summarizes key insights of the eight papers. The final section recommends the next steps.

2. A short history of NDCs

Although ‘ambition’ was technically not on the agenda of the most recent climate negotiations in Madrid in 2019, many countries and observers emphasized the importance of ramping up ambition in the next generation of NDCs. This section outlines the key steps that have led to these climate action plans becoming such a keystone of the international climate policy process.

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

2.1. The origins of NDCs in Warsaw

One of the long-standing difficulties in the UN climate negotiations has been the differentiation of responsibilities among countries to address climate change. The 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) made a hard distinction between industrialized (Annex I) countries that ‘shall adopt national policies and take corresponding measures on the mitigation of climate change’ (Article 4.2) and demonstrate that they are ‘taking the lead in combatting climate change’ (Article 3.1), and all other (non-Annex I) countries that had no such obligations. This dichotomy underpinned the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which listed quantified emission limitation or reduction commitments for each Annex I country. The distinction between Annex I and non-Annex I countries became problematic because it could not account for the dynamic diversification that has happened among developing countries since 1992, and which has resulted in diverging contributions to global emissions and economic growth patterns (Deleuil, 2012; Dubash, 2009). Depledge and Yamin (2009) referred to the Annex I/non-Annex I dichotomy as ‘dysfunctional’ and ‘the regime’s greatest weakness’.

At the climate negotiations in Durban in 2011 countries decided to launch a process to develop a successor to the Kyoto Protocol that would be ‘applicable to all’ (decision 1/CP.17, paragraph 2). Indeed, two years later in Warsaw, all countries were invited ‘to initiate or intensify domestic preparations for their intended nationally determined contributions’ in the context of this process (decision 1/CP.19, paragraphs 2(b)). However, the issue of how to differentiate countries’ responsibilities to mitigate climate change was not resolved. It also left open whether the scope of the NDCs should be mitigation only or also include, for example, adaptation and climate finance.

2.2. Lack of guidance in Lima

At the climate negotiations in Lima in 2014, countries such as Canada and the United States stressed that intended NDCs relate to mitigation, whereas countries such as Tuvalu (for the Least Developed Countries, LDCs) and Brazil noted that the scope of intended NDCs should go beyond mitigation. Thailand stated that mitigation and adaptation should be treated equally, and Bolivia and others stressed the importance of including means of implementation (IISD, 2015). The Lima Call for Action that resulted from the negotiations included only succinct and general guidance on NDC formulation, giving countries considerable leeway when developing their intended NDCs (Mbeva & Pauw, 2016).

The limited guidance might explain in part why Switzerland and the European Union submitted their intended NDCs already within three months of the Lima Climate Conference, and why another 157 countries followed before the UN climate negotiations in Paris in December 2015.¹ These included major greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters such as China and the USA, as well as many LDCs and Small Island Developing States (SIDS). However, the limited guidance also caused great diversity in terms of the targets, scopes, contents and time frames of intended NDCs (see Pauw et al., 2016, 2018).

2.3. The NDC model of the Paris Agreement

The NDC model as laid out during the climate negotiations in Paris marks a significant departure from existing policies: NDCs are near-universal, medium-term, country-driven climate action plans under the Paris Agreement, formulated within the context of bounded self-differentiation. They signify ‘contributions’ instead of the harder ‘commitments’ traditionally used in international treaties (Rajamani, 2015). The self-differentiation is bounded because it is conducted with the purpose of keeping the increase in global temperature to well below 2°C and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels (as per Article 2.1(a) of the Paris Agreement) so as to prevent dangerous climate change (as per Article 2 of the UNFCCC). In addition, it is bounded by the parameters of ‘progression’, ‘highest possible ambition’ and ‘common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances’ (Article 4.3 of the Paris Agreement) in an agreement that is legally binding (Rajamani, 2016; Voigt & Ferreira, 2016). Developed countries ‘should continue taking the lead by undertaking economy-wide absolute emission reduction targets’, with developing countries being ‘encouraged’ to move over time towards such targets (Article 4.4, Rajamani, 2016; Voigt & Ferreira, 2016). Countries ‘shall’ communicate successive NDCs every five years (Article 4.9, Rajamani, 2016; Voigt & Ferreira, 2016).

These five-year cycles are crucial to increasing global ambition to address climate change, together with five-yearly global stock-takes (see Weikmans et al., 2019, this issue). However, the rapid ratification of the Paris Agreement, combined with ambiguous language in decision 1/CP.21, created confusion about when countries are supposed to update their NDCs. The Paris Agreement had been assumed to come into effect and be implemented from 2020 onwards (decision 1/CP.19, paragraph 4). But due to the swift ratification of 55 countries accounting collectively for at least 55% of global emissions, it entered into force already on 4 November 2016. When a country ratifies the Paris Agreement, its intended NDC automatically becomes its NDC unless the country decides otherwise (decision 1/CP.21, paragraph 22). By December 2019, only 15 countries had chosen otherwise and updated their intended NDC before resubmitting upon ratification (see Pauw et al., 2016).² Palestine, Nicaragua and Syria submitted their NDC without first submitting an intended NDC.³

Those countries whose intended NDCs contain a time frame up to 2025 are ‘requested’ to communicate a new NDC in 2020 (decision 1/CP.21, paragraph 23). These include the United States and Uruguay, and their early ratification (3 September and 19 October 2016, respectively) suggests that a new NDC is due by 2020. Those countries with intended NDCs with time frames up to 2030 and beyond, which is the majority of countries, are requested to communicate or update these contributions by 2020, and to do so every five years thereafter (Article 4.9 of the Paris Agreement). ‘Communicating’ and ‘updating’ are not clearly defined. The former is interpreted by many countries as submitting a whole new NDC, whereas updating implies less extensive changes to the existing NDC, which could vary from updating the submission date to updating targets, for example, to reflect developments following the submission of the first NDC.

Finally, decision 1/CP.21 states that countries submitting a new NDC ‘shall’ do so at least 9–12 months before the relevant conference, in order to ‘facilitate clarity, transparency and understanding’ (paragraph 25). The 2020 climate conference will take place in Glasgow, UK, 9–19 November 2020, suggesting the deadline is 9 February 2020.⁴

2.4. More clarity in Katowice

Countries were divided on the scope of future NDCs, which was one of the reasons why the negotiations on the Paris Agreement’s rulebook at the 2018 Katowice Climate Conference were long and difficult. The Katowice Climate Package was eventually agreed with two days’ delay (IISD, 2018a, 2018b; Lehr & Schalatek, 2019). It elaborates the brief guidance for NDC formulation concerning the information to facilitate clarity, transparency and understanding. Countries may include, as applicable, quantifiable information on reference points, time frames, scope and coverage (in terms of sectors and gases), planning processes (both NDC preparation and implementation), and assumptions and methodological approaches (including for accounting GHG emissions and removals) (decision 4/CMA.1, paragraphs 6–10). In addition, in line with the guidance provided at the 2014 Lima Climate Conference (decision 1/CP.20, paragraph 14), countries may provide, as applicable, information on how they consider their NDCs to be fair and ambitious in the light of their national circumstances. Finally, countries may indicate how their NDCs contribute towards achieving the objective of the UNFCCC as set out in its Article 2 (to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system), and Article 2.1(a) of the Paris Agreement (to limit global w...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Citation Information
• Notes on Contributors
• 1 Beyond ambition: increasing the transparency, coherence and implementability of Nationally Determined Contributions
• 2 Ambition in the making: analysing the preparation and implementation process of the Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement
• 3 The 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement: voluntary contributions towards thematic policy coherence
• 4 Exploring links between national climate strategies and non-state and subnational climate action in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)
• 5 What are the implications of the Paris Agreement for inequality?
• 6 Conditional Nationally Determined Contributions in the Paris Agreement: foothold for equity or Achilles heel?
• 7 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) as instruments for promoting national development agendas? An analysis of small island developing states (SIDS)
• 8 Capacity building for implementation of Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement
• 9 Transparency requirements under the Paris Agreement and their (un)likely impact on strengthening the ambition of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)
• Index