The Paris Agreement@10: Has it made a difference?
The world has in its hands a framework that works. The question is whether leaders will use it to its full potential
At 10, the Paris Agreement is like a child entering adolescence — full of potential, but also facing tests that will shape its future. (Credit: Pixabay) By Ravi Shankar Prasad and Arunabha Ghosh
In December 2015, the world’s leaders gathered in Paris and signed a historic accord that many hailed as humanity’s best chance to confront climate change. For the first time, every country — rich and poor, large and small — pledged to take action to curb greenhouse gas emissions, adapt to rising risks, and support one another in building resilience.
A decade on, as we assess the Paris Agreement, the question isn’t whether it was a breakthrough — it certainly was — but whether its framework and implementation have fulfilled its promise. The honest answer: The Paris Agreement has proven resilient, its actors less so.
The Agreement is often described as the most comprehensive climate compact ever negotiated — and for good reason. It introduced several innovations that have made it a blueprint for multilateral cooperation.
Universal participation: Unlike its predecessors, Paris obliged all countries to act. Through Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), each party committed to submit a climate plan, with the expectation that every subsequent plan would be more ambitious than the previous one. This principle of no backsliding marked a radical departure from earlier regimes, where only developed countries had hard targets.
The global stocktake: Built into the Agreement was a mechanism of collective reflection. Every five years, countries assess progress on mitigation, adaptation, and means of implementation support, identify gaps, and course-correct. This was a rare example of a policy that planned for its own evolution.
Recognising that developing countries cannot simultaneously lift millions out of poverty and invest in expensive low-carbon transitions, Paris put finance, technology transfer, and capacity-building at the centre of action. This was grounded in the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) and respective capabilities — a recognition that those who contributed most to the problem bear the greatest responsibility for enabling solutions.
Harnessing markets and cooperation: Article 6 opened the door for carbon trading and non-market approaches, giving countries more flexibility to meet their targets. In parallel, initiatives such as REDD+ and the growing agenda on Loss and Damage found a home under the Paris umbrella.
Paris was not only a treaty; it was an architecture built to survive political headwinds and adapt to new realities. So, has Paris made a difference? Absolutely.
Without it, the world was on track for a catastrophic 4–5°C of warming by 2100. Thanks to the pledges made under NDCs, the projected rise has been cut to 2.1–2.8-degree Celsius. Paris bent the emissions curve, even if it did not bend it far enough.
The Agreement has also provided long-term certainty. Most countries have now adopted long-term low-emissions development strategies (LT-LEDS) and committed to net-zero targets, often decades in advance. This has created a stable policy horizon for governments and businesses to plan green transitions and mobilise trillions in investment.
Concrete achievements have flowed from Paris. The establishment of a Loss and Damage Fund, the agreement to negotiate a New Collective Quantified Goal for climate finance, and the increasing mobilisation of cities, businesses, and civil society are direct or indirect products of its framework. Paris has, remarkably, also withstood political shocks. Even the US’s withdrawal under President Donald Trump didn’t halt global momentum — a testament to its resilience.
India, too, has been an active driver of this momentum. A new study by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) finds that over the past decade, India has led eight global climate initiatives, mobilising, on average, 47 countries in each, at par with COP presidencies. From co-founding the International Solar Alliance with France, to launching the Global Biofuels Alliance and the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, India has built coalitions that now count more than 120 member countries and institutions. The country is also on track to exceed its 2030 NDC target of cutting emissions intensity by 45 per cent, with new analysis projecting a 48–57 per cent reduction by 2030.
Yet, a decade on, the global gaps are glaring.
Conflicts and pushback have exposed how fragile political will can be. But the starkest failure lies in developed countries’ lack of ambition. Instead of deep decarbonisation, some have expanded fossil fuel production. Science is unambiguous: Advanced economies should reach net zero around 2040 if the world is to hold temperature rise close to 1.5-degrees C. Their 2050 pledges are too little, too late.
Finance remains the sharpest fault line. Despite pledges, actual flows have lagged far behind. The delay in delivery of $100 billion a year has eroded trust. Now, with estimates suggesting the need for $1.3 trillion annually, the gap looks even more daunting. Finally, clean technology transfer is still more promise than practice.
The Paris Agreement has achieved what the Kyoto Protocol could not: Broad participation, durable mechanisms, and a shared long-term vision. But ambition and equity — always the hardest nuts to crack — remain unresolved. A Climate Accountability Matrix showed that most G20 countries are lagging, with developed economies projected to take nearly twice as long as developing ones to reach net zero, and major emitters like the US, Australia, and Canada showing weak ambition.
Developed countries must lead by example: Phasing out fossil fuels faster, hitting net zero sooner, and scaling up finance dramatically. Meanwhile, emerging economies must showcase their climate actions — and their unique pathways — without hesitation. These economies must seize the opportunity to leapfrog to cleaner pathways, with the right support. Above all, we need to shift from incrementalism to transformation. Climate change is not a problem to be managed at the margins; it is an existential threat demanding systemic change.
At 10, the Paris Agreement is like a child entering adolescence — full of potential, but also facing tests that will shape its future. The world has in its hands a framework that works. The question is whether leaders will use it to its full potential. Paris was never the finish line, it was the starting point. The coming decades will decide whether it becomes a true turning point or a missed opportunity.
Prasad is a distinguished fellow, Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) and ex-chief negotiator for climate change, India (2013-2021). Ghosh is founder-CEO, CEEW and COP30 special envoy for South Asia. Views are personal
Share
