Through the progression of society, countries around the world have witnessed changes affecting the climate through the causation of global warming. In the article, “The Paris Agreement: Destined to Succeed or Doomed to Fail?”, discusses a mechanism for change, nation states have come together most notably; the Paris Agreement aims to reduce their carbon emissions and overall polluting habits. In this notion, the non-binding nature of the Paris agreement makes it very difficult for countries to apply and honor the process. This is heavily evident when looking at developing nations who must sacrifice their own economic growth for greater society. Therefore, the pledges conducted in such agreements are not effective enough reach the two-degree goal.
Paris Agreement: Success or Failure?
The Paris Agreement came about because of the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference, attended by 196 representatives from around the world who got together in Paris with an objective to keep the average warming of the earth beneath 2 degrees Celsius. The agreement not only establishes this two- degree upper limit, but also notes a focus on shielding it from rising even one- and- a- half degrees Celsius1. On the off chance that every nation neglects to restrict the temperature to rise to 2 degrees, there would be a huge threat, thus the consequences for many people and countries on earth will simply become, unacceptable and eventually irreversible. The countries altogether determined how rapidly the Earth needs to stop emitting greenhouse gases to meet the 2-degree goal. 2 At that point, based on how developed each country is, how many people they have, and how much they are currently emitting, they divvied up that responsibility.
However, the issue is that everyone needs to agree to make improvements or nobody benefits and the agreement is futile. This means that every country had a goal, every country agreed to their own path forward, and every country was responsible for figuring out how to meet their goals whether it is through energy efficiency, subsidizing renewables or regulating businesses. This is a problem because it is up to the countries to ratify the agreements; otherwise, it will not be easy to monitor the actual progress of individual countries.3 Worse, the poor nations that have admitted fundamentally zero greenhouse gases will be the ones that are the most negatively affected by this CO2 that has been released by the wealthy countries since they have more food and water insecurity, less access to good medication, and less infrastructure. In the article, the United States has promised to reduce emissions by 26–28% relative to the base year of 2005 by 2025. 4 However, the United States has recently pulled out from the Paris agreement, which will do great harm for their allies around the world, and secondly, it would condemn the U.S, and the world, to a world unacceptable level of climate change.
UNEP on the Paris agreement:
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) helps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 5 They demonstrate how a shift to sustainable power sources makes better paying jobs. The Paris Agreement is based on scientific clear evidence, which will tackle the common goal of the inversion of harm to the ozone layer demonstrating a worldwide exertion that can succeed.6
In conclusion, the Paris Agreement influenced all nations to reduce their carbon emissions and do their best to keep global warming well below two degrees Celsius. The issue is that it is not legally binding: it does not create rigid timelines for countries to meet their pledges- especially for the nations that are still developing and understandably wary of sacrificing their own economic growth for the greater planetary good. Thus, the pledges that are made in this agreement are not anywhere near enough to meet the two-degree goal. Notwithstanding, getting every country to commit to at least some kind of carbon reduction represents huge advancement, thus we are better off incentivizing these changes now, globally.