The EU is at the forefront of international efforts to combat climate change. He was instrumental in negotiating the Paris Agreement and continues to demonstrate global leadership. Another key difference between the Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol is their scope. Although the Kyoto Protocol distinguishes between Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries, this division is unclear in the Paris Agreement, as all parties must submit emission reduction plans. [34] While the Paris Agreement still emphasizes the principle of « shared but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities » – the recognition that different countries have different capacities and obligations for climate action – it does not provide for a specific separation between developed and developing countries. [34] It therefore seems that negotiators will have to continue to address this issue in future rounds of negotiations, even if the discussion on differentiation could take on a new dynamic. [35] The EU`s Initial Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement was a commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels by 2030 as part of its broader climate and energy policy framework. All key EU legislation to achieve this goal has been adopted by the end of 2018. 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. The EU and its Member States are the world`s largest provider of public funding for the fight against climate change. Its total contributions of €23.2 billion in 2019 have been successfully channelled towards climate change mitigation and adaptation initiatives in developing countries.
A new issue that emerged at the centre of the Paris negotiations[55] arose from the fact that many of the worst impacts of climate change will be too severe or too rapid to be avoided by adaptation measures. The Paris Agreement explicitly recognizes the need to remedy these losses and damages and aims to find appropriate responses. [56] It clarifies that loss and damage can take various forms, both as immediate effects of extreme weather events and as slow effects, such as. B land loss at sea level rise for low-lying islands. [33] The CFR`s World101 Library explains everything you need to know about climate change. The results show that if no additional measures are taken beyond the currently implemented national climate policies, greenhouse gas emissions are expected to increase significantly between 2015 and 2030, although by 5.3% less than the hypothetical situation if these measures had not been implemented. Together, current national policies leave an average total global emissions gap of 22.4 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2eq) by 2030 with an optimal cost-related emission trajectory of 2°C and 28.2 CcCO2eq with a trajectory of 1.5°C. The global emissions gap of 2°C can be reduced by a third if conditional NDCs were fully implemented, which would close the global implementation gap but still leave a significant gap in ambition. For seven major countries (China, the United States, India, the European Union, Japan, Brazil and the Russian Federation), the implementation of the policy is expected to reduce emissions at the national level by 0-9% (median estimates) compared to the hypothetical situation if no policy is implemented. This leaves a small implementation gap for China, India, Japan and the Russian Federation, as they are on the verge of reaching their NDC, while this is not the case for the European Union, the United States and Brazil, but their ambition gap is smaller as the NDCs are close to the optimal cost trajectories of 2°C. van Vuuren, D. P.
et al. Common socio-economic pathways: trajectories for human development and global environmental change. Glob. Surround. Change 42, 148-152 (2017). den Elzen, M. et al. Contribution of G20 economies to the global impact of the Climate Proposals of the Paris Agreement. Amendment 137, 655-665 (2016).
The assessment of the impact of national climate policies on greenhouse gas emissions is based on the model exercise carried out in the framework of the CD-LINKS project, for which guidelines have been described in the global and national model protocols32,33. Among other things, this project aimed to develop global development pathways at the global level and for G20 economies, including an explicit presentation of short-term political trends. For this article, we selected seven major G20 economies in terms of greenhouse gas emissions (Brazil, China, EU, India, Japan, Russian Federation, USA), for which national climate and energy models were also available in the project. Montreal Protocol, 1987. Although the Montreal Protocol [PDF] was not designed to combat climate change, it was a historic environmental agreement that has become a model for future diplomacy on the issue. All countries in the world eventually ratified the treaty, which required them to stop producing substances that damage the ozone layer, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). The Protocol has succeeded in eliminating almost 99 per cent of these ozone-depleting substances. In 2016, the parties agreed on the Kigali Amendment to also reduce their production of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), powerful greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change. The Council adopted conclusions on EU climate and energy diplomacy as part of the implementation of the EU Global Strategy.
The Presidency represents the EU in these international forums known as the « United Nations Conferences on Climate Change » (or COP Conferences of the Parties). Tavoni, M. et al. Post-2020 climate agreements assessed in major economies in light of global models. .