CHAPTER V: THE GREENHOUSE GASES EMISSION MITIGATION
5.3. The COP 21 forum
5.3.1. Objective
The COP21 was convened from 29 November to 13 December 2015 in Paris, France.
195 country parties to the UNFCCC were gathered to complete the task they had set for themselves under the Durban platform for enhanced action, in 2011, to adopt a “protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention which applied to all parties.”653
The Paris forum was the culmination of a quarter century of climate change discussions to reach an equitable and universal regime.654 It benefited from the experience of two decades of interactions.655 For Bodansky,656 negotiating countries in Paris were more prepared than in Rio in 1992, and states knew better which direction to take. As it was also the case in 1992 at the adoption of the UNFCCC, attendance by the heads of states and governments was important in Paris.657 Such involvement of heads of states, along with a broad range of other stakeholders658 is an indication that the message about the urgency to take measures to curb climate change is being heard.659
653 See section 3.1.7.2 above, Regarding the Durban platform for enhanced action on climate change
654 Reflections available at:
https://conferences.asucollegeoflaw.com/workshoponparis/files/2012/08/AJIL-Paris-Agreement-Draft- 2016-03-26.pdf. (Accessed: 17 August 2016).
655 Ibid.
656 Bodansky (f) (note 574 above; 1).
657 Year Heads of States and Government attendance 1 1992 154 + 1 International organization.
2 2015 Over 150
Information available at: http://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ha/ccc/ccc_ph_f.pdf. (Accessed: 10 August 2016);
See also http://www.iisd.ca/download/pdf/enb12663e.pdf. (Accessed: 10 October 2016).
658 Year Participants in the COP 21 1 2015 36.000 in total
23.100 government officials
9400 Representatives from the UN bodies, the Intergovernmental organizations and civil society
3700 members of the media
Information available at http://www.iisd.ca/download/pdf/enb12663e.pdf. (Accessed: 10 October 2016).
659 R. Bodle et al (a) The Paris Agreement: Rebooting Climate Cooperation. The Paris Agreement:
Analysis, Assessment and Outlook.’ (2016) C&CLR 10 (1) 5 at 26.
Countries in Paris were already familiar with the 2009 Copenhagen climate change architecture which was introducing a new regime that would be applicable to all, adopted thereafter by the Cancun Agreements, as discussed above.660 Besides this, the Copenhagen approach was largely reflected in all the COP decisions leading up to Paris Agreement. Therefore, the view of what the Paris Agreement was going to look like was already clear for countries, to the extent that they already foresaw the outline of what they were going to get after adopting the Paris Agreement.661
5.3.2. Outcomes
The Paris Agreement produced two outcomes: the decision 1/CP.21 that adopted the Paris Agreement, and the Paris Agreement itself.662 The current research focuses on the Paris Agreement, and specifically on the GHG emissions reduction regime it institutes for developing countries.663
However, even in Paris, parties were not unanimous on the legal bindingness of the new regime to be adopted. Parties such as the EU and some developing countries were known to be favourable to a universal legally binding outcome, whereas the USA, China and India were not.664 China and India especially, rejected any binding outcome that would be equally applicable to developing countries.665 After the adoption of the Paris Agreement, analysts now diversely look at the treaty: for some, it is a success, an evolution in the climate change governance, and a revolution in the UNFCCC COP process.666 For others, it is a good compromise with huge achievement, yet an imperfect solution to the global problem of climate change.667 More of them see the treaty only as
660 See section 3.1.5 on the COP 15 at Copenhagen for more details.
661 Bodansky (f) (note 574 above, 1).
662 IISD (g) ‘Summary of the Paris Climate Change Conference: 29 November – 13 December 2015’
(2015) 12(663) ENB at 42. Available at: http://www.iisd.ca/download/pdf/enb12663e.pdf (Accessed: 20 August 2016)
663 Refer to chapter one for more details.
664 W. Sterk et al ‘On the Road Again. Progressive Countries Score a Real politik Victory in Durban While the Real Climate Continues to Heat Up.’ (2011) WICEE at 5-8. Available at:
http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/COP17-report.pdf (Accessed: 10 June 2016).
665 Ibid.
666 IISD (g) (note 662 above; 43).
667 Ibid; R. Bailey & S. Tomlinson ‘Post-Paris: Taking Forward the Global Climate Change Deal’ (April 2016). EE and R briefing notes at 2. Available at:
https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/publications/research/2016-04-21-post-paris- bailey-tomlinson.pdf (Accessed: 20 august 2016).
a text that provides a political direction for climate change matters.668 However, it remains that with the Paris Agreement, the world have had its first global climate treaty under which developed and developing countries alike are bound.669 The adoption of a universal regime was exciting to such an extent that Francois Holland, 670 the French president whose country hosted the event qualified the Paris Agreement as “the most beautiful and peaceful revolution that have ever occurred in his country”.
However, the Paris Agreement provides a strong framework for the present and future climate change response. It also provides the necessary mandate for domestic policymakers to undertake its implementation, and sets a universal framework of climate change co-operation and solidarity among countries to which it addresses positive signals towards a decarbonised world in a near future.671 However, on the view of some, one of the most telling failures of the Paris Agreement is that it lacks ambition with respect to the scientific requirements for effectively dealing with the urgency of the climate change challenge.672
Having failed to produce a universal legally-binding agreement accounting for a new climate change regime in Copenhagen in 2009, parties in Paris in 2015 could not afford to fail as well.673 Therefore, parties not only redoubted the worst pessimistic scenario of a failure, they were now concerned about the probability of adopting a meaningless outcome.674 In the end, however, the outcome of the COP 21 exceeded expectations.675 Negotiations ended up producing an Agreement that, while perhaps not a revolution as such, as praised by the French President Francois Holland, was undoubtedly an important step in the evolution of climate change governance and a reaffirmation of the environmental multilateralism.676
668 Ibid.
669 Bailey (note 667 above, 3).
670 IISD (g) (note 662 above, 42).
671 Analysis available at: https://www.fne.asso.fr/dossiers/cop-21-notre-analyse-de-laccord; (Accessed:
20 August 2016); See also: IISD (g) (note 662 above; 45).
672 Analysis available at: http://theconversation.com/paris-agreement-on-climate-change-the-good-the- bad-and-the-ugly-52242. (Accessed: 25 October 2016).
673 For more details on the COP 15 and the Copenhagen Accord, refer to section 3.1.5 above.
674 IISD (g) (note 662 above; 42).
675 Ibid.
676 “Multilateralism” refers to the quality of being multilateral; in other words, the principle or practice of forming agreements or treaties on a multilateral basis. Definition available at: