Convergence and Divergence of UNFCCC Nationally Determined Contributions

The Paris Agreement and Climate Justice: Inequitable Impacts of Sea Level Rise Associated With Temperature Targets

“…As of 2021, 6 years post-Paris, NDCs are insufficient to stay below a 2°C GMT rise (Climate Action Tracker, 2021; UNFCCC, 2021) and 1.5°C will no longer be achievable without substantially strengthened mitigation efforts that would around halve global emission by 2030 (Schleussner et al, 2016;Warszawski et al, 2021;Zhou et al, 2021). Content analysis of NDCs show a continuation of the "divergent climate priorities that have existed within the UNFCCC for decades" (Stephenson et al, 2019(Stephenson et al, , p. 1258. NDCs from AOSIS nations emphasize vulnerability and equity, while those of historic high-emitters including the US and EU nations demonstrate a lack of ambition on mitigation and a deprioritization of climate action in favor of economic priorities (Mills-Novoa & Liverman, 2019;Stephenson et al, 2019).…”

“…Content analysis of NDCs show a continuation of the "divergent climate priorities that have existed within the UNFCCC for decades" (Stephenson et al, 2019(Stephenson et al, , p. 1258. NDCs from AOSIS nations emphasize vulnerability and equity, while those of historic high-emitters including the US and EU nations demonstrate a lack of ambition on mitigation and a deprioritization of climate action in favor of economic priorities (Mills-Novoa & Liverman, 2019;Stephenson et al, 2019). The gap between rhetoric on climate and action specified in the NDCs reveals the dichotomy between justice and economic and political power (Okereke & Coventry, 2016).…”

The Paris Agreement and climate justice: inequitable impacts of sea level rise associated with temperature targets

“…As of 2021, six years post-Paris, NDCs are insufficient to stay below a 2℃ GMST rise (Climate Action Tracker, 2021; UNFCCC, 2021) and 1.5°C may no longer be achievable (Schleussner et al, 2016;Warszawski et al, 2021;Zhou et al, 2021). Content analysis of NDCs show a continuation of the "divergent climate priorities that have existed within the UNFCCC for decades" (Stephenson et al, 2019. NDCs from AOSIS nations emphasize vulnerability and equity, while those of the US and EU nations demonstrate a lack of ambition on mitigation and a deprioritization of climate action in favor of economic priorities (Mills-Novoa & Liverman, 2019;Stephenson et al, 2019).…”

Understanding policy and institutional strategies to support the participation of women and women organisations within UNFCCC-led climate change governance

“…The existing studies are mostly focused on fragments of the UNFCCC, e.g. its Financial Mechanisms (Worlen, Altevvogt, and Keppler 2020; Hall, Granat, and Daniel 2019) or work of individual UNFCCC bodies (Schalatek and Nakhooda 2014) or national UNFCCC-led policy planning (Stephenson et al 2019;Pauw and Klein 2020;Jernnäs et al 2019). Furthermore, the studies on climate finance, which is the key means of implementation of the UNFCCC, are scarce and there is very limited knowledge on the UNFCCC-led climate finance architecture, key agents and their functions (Pickering et al 2013;Clapp et al 2012).…”

“…In the literature, the UNFCCC structure is described as 'polycentric', as it accommodates multi-actor interactions at different levels and policy fields. These levels are decision making by the Conference of the Parties (COP) (Manga 2018;Morgan and Waskow 2014;Blaxekjaer and Nielsen 2015;Brunnée and Streck 2013;Okereke and Coventry 2016), the financial mechanisms of the UNFCCC (Gomez-Echeverri and Muller 2010;Mizuno 2011;Antimiani et al 2017;Harmeling et al 2013), and national level decision making (Stephenson et al 2019;McKenzie 2021;Jernnäs et al 2019). Scholars have been interested in understanding the role and agency of various stakeholders, for example, indigenous people (Belfer et al 2019), youth (Thew, Middlemiss, and Paavola 2021), women (Allan 2021), and broader civil society (Phillips 2018) within these three UNFCCC layers.…”