katosvanidze18851907’s diary

知恵袋、okwaveで質問した回答したものをコピーして載せるだけのブログ。書いた文章は 自分の財産なので。つまりはこのブログは記録する倉庫の役割り。アクセス数やランキングは付録なので興味はない。物事、この世の深淵、本質、真理とは? 全ては知識と文章能力が解決してくれる 知識を付けて盲点を無くしていけば、。ゴールは現状の外に。 現状の外にゴールを作れば未来の記憶が作られるが、現状の内側にゴールを設定すれば、我々は過去にしばれる、過去 の延長線上を生きることに 過去からの脱するに未来に対してイメージ、臨場感を

パリ協定は批准する価値があるのだろうか? パリ協定についての否定的なトランプ大統領と それ以外の認識の違いとは? パリ協定の利点欠点限界盲点とは?

パリ協定は批准する価値があるのだろうか?

パリ協定についての否定的なトランプ大統領と

それ以外の認識の違いとは?


パリ協定の利点欠点限界盲点とは?


環境カテゴリー皆さんの

ご回答のほど、

お待ちしております。


http://www.asahi.com/sp/articles/ASK507HKPK50UHBI03S.html

米大統領「環境規制、雇用創出の重し」 パリ協定離脱か有料記事

ワシントン=五十嵐大介、ベルリン=高野弦 小坪遊


http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/fp/pc/page3_002059.html

G7首脳会合(タオルミーナ,平成29年5月26日~27日)


https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/パリ協定_%28気候変動%29

パリ協定[2][3](パリきょうてい、英: Paris Agreement)は、第21回気候変動枠組条約締約国会議(COP21)が開催されたパリにて、2015年12月12日に採択された、気候変動抑制に関する多国間の国際的な協定(合意)。2016年4月22日のアースデーに署名が始まった。10月5日の欧州連合の法人としての批准によって11月4日に発効することになった。2016年11月現在の批准国、団体数は欧州連合を含めて110である。2020年以降の地球温暖化対策を定めている。

1997年に採択された京都議定書以来、18年ぶりとなる気候変動に関する国際的枠組みであり、気候変動枠組条約に加盟する全196カ国全てが参加する枠組みとしては世界初である。

第21回気候変動枠組条約締約国会議COP21での議長国であるフランスのローラン・ファビウス外相は 、この「野心的でバランスのとれた計画は地球温暖化を低減させるという目標で“歴史的な転換点”である」と述べている。

目次 [非表示] 

1 内容

1.1 締結および署名国

2 脚注・出典

3 関連項目

4 外部リンク

内容[ソースを編集]

[icon] この節の加筆が望まれています。

産業革命前からの世界の平均気温上昇を「2度未満」に抑える。さらに、平均気温上昇「1.5度未満」を目指す。

締結および署名国[ソースを編集]

2016年11月の時点で、192ヶ国と欧州連合(EU)は、本協定を締結した。これらの当事者の111ヶ国は、批准または協定に加盟している、特に締約国のうち111団体が協定を締結しており、特に中国、米国、インドは加盟国全体の約3割の温室効果ガス排出量(約42%)を抱えている。

脚注・出典[ソースを編集]

[ヘルプ]

^ 2016年(平成28年)11月14日外務省告示第437号「パリ協定の日本国による受諾に関する件」

^ COP21、パリ協定を採択…すべての国が削減 - 読売新聞 2015/12/13

^ パリ協定採択 「2度未満」…世界で取り組み合意 - 産経新聞 2015/12/13


The Paris Agreement (French: Accord de Paris) is an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) dealing with greenhouse gas emissions mitigation, adaptation and finance starting in the year 2020. The language of the agreement was negotiated by representatives of 195 countries at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC in Paris and adopted by consensus on 12 December 2015.[3][4] It was opened for signature on 22 April 2016 (Earth Day) at a ceremony in New York.[5] As of May 2017, 195 UNFCCC members have signed the treaty, 147 of which have ratified it.[1] After several European Union states ratified the agreement in October 2016, there were enough countries that had ratified the agreement that produce enough of the world's greenhouse gases for the agreement to enter into force.[6] The agreement went into effect on 4 November 2016.[2]

The head of the Paris Conference, France's foreign minister Laurent Fabius, said this "ambitious and balanced" plan is a "historic turning point" in the goal of reducing global warming.[7]

One year on, the ratification of the Paris Agreement was celebrated by the Mayor of Paris Anne Hidalgo by illuminating the Eiffel Tower and the Arc de Triomphe, Paris' most iconic monuments, in green.[8]

Content[edit]

Aims[edit]

The aim of the convention is described in Article 2, "enhancing the implementation" of the UNFCCC through:[9]

"(a) Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change;
(b) Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production;
(c) Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development."

Countries furthermore aim to reach "global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible". The agreement has been described as an incentive for and driver of fossil fuel divestment.[10][11]

The Paris deal is the world's first comprehensive climate agreement.[12]

Nationally determined contributions and their limits[edit]

The contribution that each individual country should make in order to achieve the worldwide goal are determined by all countries individually and called "nationally determined contributions" (NDCs).[13] Article 3 requires them to be "ambitious", "represent a progression over time" and set "with the view to achieving the purpose of this Agreement". The contributions should be reported every five years and are to be registered by the UNFCCC Secretariat.[14] Each further ambition should be more ambitious than the previous one, known as the principle of 'progression'.[15] Countries can cooperate and pool their nationally determined contributions. The Intended Nationally Determined Contributions pledged during the 2015 Climate Change Conference serve—unless provided otherwise—as the initial Nationally determined contribution.

The level of NDCs set by each country[16] will set that country's targets. However the 'contributions' themselves are not binding as a matter of international law, as they lack the specificity, normative character, or obligatory language necessary to create binding norms.[17] Furthermore, there will be no mechanism to force[18] a country to set a target in their NDC by a specific date and no enforcement if a set target in an NDC is not met.[16][19] There will be only a "name and shame" system[20] or as János Pásztor, the U.N. assistant secretary-general on climate change, told CBS News (US), a "name and encourage" plan.[21] As the agreement provides no consequences if countries do not meet their commitments, consensus of this kind is fragile. A trickle of nations exiting the agreement may trigger the withdrawal of more governments, bringing about a total collapse of the agreement.[22]

The negotiators of the Agreement however stated that the NDCs and the 2 °C reduction target were insufficient, instead, a 1.5 °C target is required, noting "with concern that the estimated aggregate greenhouse gas emission levels in 2025 and 2030 resulting from the intended nationally determined contributions do not fall within least-cost 2 ̊C scenarios but rather lead to a projected level of 55 gigatonnes in 2030", and recognizing furthermore "that much greater emission reduction efforts will be required in order to hold the increase in the global average temperature to below 2 ̊C by reducing emissions to 40 gigatonnes or to 1.5 ̊C".[23]

Although not the sustained temperatures over the long term to which the Agreement addresses, in the first half of 2016 average temperatures were about 1.3 °C (2.3 degrees Fahrenheit) above the average in 1880, when global record-keeping began.[24]

When the agreement achieved enough signatures to cross the threshold on October 5, 2016, US President Barack Obama claimed that "Even if we meet every target, we will only get to part of where we need to go," and that "This agreement will help delay or avoid some of the worse consequences of climate change will help other nations ratchet down their emissions over time."[25]

Global stocktake[edit]

The global stocktake will kick off with a "facilitative dialogue" in 2018. At this convening, parties will evaluate how their NDCs stack up to the nearer-term goal of peaking global emissions and the long-term goal of achieving net zero emissions by the second half of this century.[26]

The implementation of the agreement by all member countries together will be evaluated every 5 years, with the first evaluation in 2023. The outcome is to be used as input for new nationally determined contributions of member states.[27] The stocktake will not be of contributions/achievements of individual countries but a collective analysis of what has been achieved and what more needs to be done.

The stocktake works as part of the Paris Agreement's effort to create a "ratcheting up" of ambition in emissions cuts. Because analysts have agreed that the current NDCs will not limit rising temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius, the global stocktake reconvenes parties to assess how their new NDCs must evolve so that they continually reflect a country's "highest possible ambition".[26]

While ratcheting up the ambition of NDCs is a major aim of the global stocktake, it assesses efforts beyond mitigation. The 5 year reviews will also evaluate adaptation, climate finance provisions, and technology development and transfer.[26]

Structure[edit]

The Paris Agreement has a 'bottom up' structure in contrast to most international environmental law treaties which are 'top down', characterised by standards and targets set internationally, for states to implement.[28] Unlike its predecessor, the Kyoto Protocol, which sets commitment targets that have legal force, the Paris Agreement, with its emphasis on consensus-building, allows for voluntary and nationally determined targets.[29] The specific climate goals are thus politically encouraged, rather than legally bound. Only the processes governing the reporting and review of these goals are mandated under international law. This structure is especially notable for the United States—because there are no legal mitigation or finance targets, the agreement is considered an "executive agreement rather than a treaty". Because the UNFCCC treaty of 1992 received the consent of the Senate, this new agreement does not require further legislation from Congress for it to take effect.[29]

Another key difference between Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol is its scope. While the Kyoto Protocol differentiated between Annex-1 and non-Annex-1 countries, this bifurcation is blurred in the Paris Agreement, as all parties will be required to submit emissions reductions plans.[30]While the Paris Agreement still emphasizes the principle of "Common but Differentiated Responsibility and Respective Capabilities"—the acknowledgement that different nations have different capacities and duties to climate action—it does not provide a specific division between developed and developing nations.[30]

Mitigation provisions and carbon markets[edit]

Article 6 has been flagged as containing some of the key provisions of the Paris Agreement.[31] Broadly, it outlines the cooperative approaches that parties can take in achieving their nationally determined carbon emissions reductions. In doing so, it helps establish the Paris Agreement as a framework for a global carbon market.[32]

Linkages and ITMOs[edit]

Paragraphs 6.2 and 6.3 establish a framework to govern the international transfer of mitigation outcomes (ITMOs). The Agreement recognizes the rights of Parties to use emissions reductions outside of their own jurisdiction toward their NDC, in a system of carbon accounting and trading.[32]

This provision requires the "linkage" of various carbon emissions trading systems—because measured emissions reductions must avoid "double counting", transferred mitigation outcomes must be recorded as a gain of emission units for one party and a reduction of emission units for the other.[31] Because the NDCs, and domestic carbon trading schemes, are heterogeneous, the ITMOs will provide a format for global linkage under the auspices of the UNFCCC.[33] The provision thus also creates a pressure for countries to adopt emissions management systems—if a country wants to use more cost-effective cooperative approaches to achieve their NDCs, they will need to monitor carbon units for their economies.[34]

The Sustainable Development Mechanism[edit]

Paragraphs 6.4-6.7 establish a mechanism "to contribute to the mitigation of greenhouse gases and support sustainable development".[35] Though there is no specific name for the mechanism as yet, many Parties and observers have informally coalesced around the name "Sustainable Development Mechanism" or "SDM".[36][37] The SDM is considered to be the successor to the Clean Development Mechanism, a flexible mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol, by which parties could collaboratively pursue emissions reductions for their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions. The Sustainable Development Mechanism lays the framework for the future of the Clean Development Mechanism post-Kyoto (in 2020).

In its basic aim, the SDM will largely resemble the Clean Development Mechanism, with the dual mission to 1. contribute to global GHG emissions reductions and 2. support sustainable development.[38] The structure and the processes governing the SDM are not yet determined, certain similarities and differences from the Clean Development Mechanism can already be seen. Notably, the SDM, unlike the Clean Development Mechanism, will be available to all parties as opposed to only Annex-1 parties, making it much wider in scope.[39]

Since the Kyoto Protocol went into force, the Clean Development Mechanism has been criticized for failing to produce either meaningful emissions reductions or sustainable development benefits in most instances.[40] It has also suffered from the low price of Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs), creating less demand for projects. These criticisms have motivated the recommendations of various stakeholders, who have provided through working groups and reports, new elements they hope to see in SDM that will bolster its success.[33] The specifics of the governance structure, project proposal modalities, and overall design are expected to come during the next[when?] Conference of the Parties in Marrakesh.

Adaptation provisions[edit]

Adaptation issues garnered more focus in the formation of the Paris Agreement. Collective, long-term adaptation goals are included in the Agreement, and countries must report on their adaptation actions, making adaptation a parallel component of the agreement with mitigation.[41] The adaptation goals focus on enhancing adaptive capacity, increasing resilience, and limiting vulnerability.[42]

Ensuring finance[edit]

In the Paris Agreement, the developed countries reaffirmed the committed to mobilize $100 billion a year in climate finance by 2020, and agreed to continue mobilizing finance at the level of $100 billion a year until 2025.[43] The commitment refers to the pre-existing plan to provide US$100 billion a year in aid to developing countries for actions on climate change adaptation and mitigation.[44]

Though both mitigation and adaptation require increased climate financing, adaptation has typically received lower levels of support and has mobilised less action from the private sector.[41] A 2014 report by the OECD found that just 16 percent of global finance was directed toward climate adaptation in 2014.[45] The Paris Agreement called for a balance of climate finance between adaptation and mitigation, and specifically underscoring the need to increase adaptation support for parties most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, including Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States. The agreement also reminds parties of the importance of public grants, because adaptation measures receive less investment from the public sector.[41] John Kerry, as Secretary of State, announced that grant-based adaptation finance would double by 2020.[29]

Some specific outcomes of the elevated attention to adaptation financing in Paris include the G7 countries' announcement to provide US $420 million for Climate Risk Insurance, and the launching of a Climate Risk and Early Warning Systems (CREWS) Initiative.[46] In early March 2016, the Obama administration gave a $500 million grant to the "Green Climate Fund" as "the first chunk of a $3 billion commitment made at the Paris climate talks."[47][48][52]So far, the Green Climate Fund has now received over $10 billion in pledges. Notably, the pledges come from developed nations like France, the US, and Japan, but also from developing countries such as Mexico, Indonesia, and Vietnam.[29]

Loss and damage[edit]

A new issue that emerged as a focal point in the Paris negotiations rose from the fact that many of the worst effects of climate change will be too severe or come too quickly to be avoided by adaptation measures.[49] The Paris Agreement specifically acknowledges the need to address loss and damage of this kind, and aims to find appropriate responses.[49] It specifies that loss and damage can take various forms—both as immediate impacts from extreme weather events, and slow onset impacts, such as the loss of land to sea-level rise for low-lying islands.[29]

The push to address loss and damage as a distinct issue in the Paris Agreement came from the Alliance of Small Island States and the Least Developed Countries, whose economies and livelihoods are most vulnerable to the negative impacts of climate change.[29] Developed countries, however, worried that classifying the issue as one separate and beyond adaptation measures would create yet another climate finance provision, or might imply legal liability for catastrophic climate events.

In the end, all parties acknowledged the need for "averting, minimizing, and addressing loss and damage" but notably excludes any mention of compensation or liability.[9] The agreement also adopts the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage, an institution that will attempt to address questions about how to classify, address, and share responsibility for loss and damage.[49]

Enhanced transparency framework[edit]

While each Party's NDC is not legally binding, the Parties are legally bound to have their progress tracked by technical expert review to assess achievement toward the NDC, and to determine ways to strengthen ambition.[50] Article 13 of the Paris Agreement articulates an "enhanced transparency framework for action and support" that establishes harmonized monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) requirements. Thus, both developed and developing nations must report every two years on their mitigation efforts, and all parties will be subject to both technical and peer review.[50]

Flexibility mechanisms[edit]

While the enhanced transparency framework is universal, along with the global stocktaking to occur every 5 years, the framework is meant to provide "built-in flexibility" to distinguish between developed and developing countries' capacities. In conjunction with this, the Paris Agreement has provisions for an enhanced framework for capacity building.[51] The agreement recognizes the varying circumstances of some countries, and specifically notes that the technical expert review for each country consider that country's specific capacity for reporting.[51]The agreement also develops a Capacity-Building Initiative for Transparency to assist developing countries in building the necessary institutions and processes for complying with the transparency framework.[51]

There are several ways in which flexibility mechanisms can be incorporated into the enhanced transparency framework. The scope, level of detail, or frequency of reporting may all be adjusted and tiered based on a country's capacity. The requirement for in-country technical reviews could be lifted for some less developed or small island developing countries. Ways to assess capacity include financial and human resources in a country necessary for NDC review.[51]

Adoption[edit]

Negotiations[edit]

Within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, legal instruments may be adopted to reach the goals of the convention. For the period from 2008 to 2012, greenhouse gas reduction measures were agreed in the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. The scope of the protocol was extended until 2020 with the Doha Amendment to that protocol in 2012.[52]

During the 2011 United Nations Climate Change Conference, the Durban Platform (and the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action) was established with the aim to negotiate a legal instrument governing climate change mitigation measures from 2020. The resulting agreement was to be adopted in 2015.[53]

Adoption[edit]

Heads of delegations at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris.

At the conclusion of COP 21 (the 21st meeting of the Conference of the Parties, which guides the Conference), on 12 December 2015, the final wording of the Paris Agreement was adopted by consensus by all of the 195 UNFCCC participating member states and the European Union[3] to reduce emissions as part of the method for reducing greenhouse gas. In the 12 page Agreement,[54] the members promised to reduce their carbon output "as soon as possible" and to do their best to keep global warming "to well below 2 degrees C" [3.6 degrees F].[55]

Signature and entry into force[edit]

Signing by John Kerry in United Nations General Assembly Hall for the United States

The Paris Agreement was open for signature by States and regional economic integration organizations that are Parties to the UNFCCC (the Convention) from 22 April 2016 to 21 April 2017 at the UN Headquarters in New York.[56]

The agreement stated that it would enter into force (and thus become fully effective) only if 55 countries that produce at least 55% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions (according to a list produced in 2015)[57] ratify, accept, approve or accede to the agreement.[58][59] On 1 April 2016, the United States and China, which together represent almost 40% of global emissions, issued a joint statement confirming that both countries would sign the Paris Climate Agreement.[60][61] 175 Parties (174 states and the European Union) signed the treaty on the first date it was open for signature.[5][62]On the same day, more than 20 countries issued a statement of their intent to join as soon as possible with a view to joining in 2016. With ratification by the European Union, the Agreement obtained enough parties to enter into effect as of 4 November 2016.

European Union and its member states[edit]

Both the EU and its member states are individually responsible for ratifying the Paris Agreement. A strong preference was reported that the EU and its 28 member states deposit their instruments of ratification at the same time to ensure that neither the EU nor its member states engage themselves to fulfilling obligations that strictly belong to the other,[63] and there were fears that disagreement over each individual member state's share of the EU-wide reduction target, as well as Britain's vote to leave the EU might delay the Paris pact.[64] However, the European Parliament approved ratification of the Paris Agreement on 4 October 2016,[6] and the EU deposited its instruments of ratification on 5 October 2016, along with several individual EU member states.[64]

Parties and signatories[edit]

As of December 2016, 192 states and the European Union have signed the Agreement. 147 of those parties have ratified or acceded to the Agreement, most notably China, the United States and India, the countries with three of the four largest greenhouse gas emissions of the signatories' total (about 42% together).[1][65][66]

Party or signatory[1]Percentage of greenhouse
gases for ratification[57]
Date of signatureDate of deposit of instruments
of ratification or accession
Date when agreement
enters into force
 Afghanistan0.05%22 April 201615 February 201717 March 2017
 Albania0.02%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Algeria0.30%22 April 201620 October 201619 November 2016
 Andorra0.00%22 April 201624 March 201723 April 2017
 Angola0.17%22 April 2016
 Antigua and Barbuda0.00%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Argentina0.89%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Armenia0.02%20 September 201623 March 201722 April 2017
 Australia1.46%22 April 20169 November 20169 December 2016
 Austria0.21%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Azerbaijan0.13%22 April 20169 January 20178 February 2017
 Bahamas, The0.00%22 April 201622 August 20164 November 2016
 Bahrain0.06%22 April 201623 December 201622 January 2017
 Bangladesh0.27%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Barbados0.01%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Belarus0.24%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Belgium0.32%22 April 20166 April 20176 May 2017
 Belize0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Benin0.02%22 April 201631 October 201630 November 2016
 Bhutan0.00%22 April 2016
 Bolivia0.12%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Bosnia and Herzegovina0.08%22 April 201616 March 201715 April 2017
 Botswana0.02%22 April 201611 November 201611 December 2016
 Brazil2.48%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Brunei[a]22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Bulgaria0.15%22 April 201629 November 201629 December 2016
 Burkina Faso0.06%22 April 201611 November 201611 December 2016
 Burundi0.07%22 April 2016
 Cambodia0.03%22 April 20166 February 20178 March 2017
 Cameroon0.45%22 April 201629 July 20164 November 2016
 Canada1.95%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Cape Verde0.00%22 April 2016
 Central African Republic0.01%22 April 201611 October 201610 November 2016
 Chad0.06%22 April 201612 January 201711 February 2017
 Chile[67]0.25%20 September 201610 February 201712 March 2017
 China20.09%22 April 20163 September 2016[65][68]4 November 2016
 Colombia0.41%22 April 2016
 Comoros0.00%22 April 201623 November 201623 December 2016
 Congo, Democratic Republic of the0.06%22 April 2016
 Congo, Republic of the0.01%22 April 201621 April 201721 May 2017
 Cook Islands0.00%24 June 20161 September 20164 November 2016
 Costa Rica0.03%22 April 201613 October 201612 November 2016
 Côte d'Ivoire0.73%22 April 201625 October 201624 November 2016
 Croatia0.07%22 April 201624 May 201723 June 2017
 Cuba0.10%22 April 201628 December 201627 January 2017
 Cyprus0.02%22 April 20164 January 20173 February 2017
 Czech Republic0.34%22 April 2016
 Denmark[69]0.15%22 April 20161 November 20161 December 2016
 Djibouti0.00%22 April 201611 November 201611 December 2016
 Dominica0.00%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Dominican Republic0.07%22 April 2016
 East Timor0.00%22 April 2016
 Ecuador0.67%26 July 2016
 Egypt0.52%22 April 2016
 El Salvador0.03%22 April 201627 March 201726 April 2017
 Equatorial Guinea[a]22 April 2016
 Eritrea0.01%22 April 2016
 Estonia0.06%22 April 20164 November 20164 December 2016
 Ethiopia0.13%22 April 20169 March 20178 April 2017
 European Union[b]22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Fiji0.01%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Finland0.17%22 April 201614 November 201614 December 2016
 France1.34%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Gabon0.02%22 April 20162 November 20162 December 2016
 Gambia, The0.05%26 April 20167 November 20167 December 2016
 Georgia0.03%22 April 20168 May 20177 June 2017
 Germany2.56%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Ghana0.09%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Greece0.28%22 April 201614 October 201613 November 2016
 Grenada0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Guatemala0.04%22 April 201625 January 201724 February 2017
 Guinea0.01%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Guinea-Bissau0.02%22 April 2016
 Guyana0.01%22 April 201620 May 20164 November 2016
 Haiti0.02%22 April 2016
 Honduras0.03%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Hungary0.15%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Iceland0.01%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 India4.10%22 April 20162 October 20164 November 2016
 Indonesia1.49%22 April 201631 October 201630 November 2016
 Iran1.30%22 April 2016
 Iraq0.20%8 December 2016
 Ireland0.16%22 April 20164 November 20164 December 2016
 Israel0.20%22 April 201622 November 201622 December 2016
 Italy1.18%22 April 201611 November 201611 December 2016
 Jamaica0.04%22 April 201610 April 201710 May 2017
 Japan3.79%22 April 20168 November 20168 December 2016
 Jordan0.07%22 April 20164 November 20164 December 2016
 Kazakhstan0.84%2 August 20166 December 20165 January 2017
 Kenya0.06%22 April 201628 December 201627 January 2017
 Kiribati0.00%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Korea, North0.23%22 April 20161 August 20164 November 2016
 Korea, South1.85%22 April 20163 November 20163 December 2016
 Kuwait0.09%22 April 2016
 Kyrgyzstan0.03%21 September 2016
 Laos0.02%22 April 20167 September 20164 November 2016
 Latvia0.03%22 April 201616 March 201715 April 2017
 Lebanon0.07%22 April 2016
 Lesotho0.01%22 April 201620 January 201719 February 2017
 Liberia0.02%22 April 2016
 Libya[a]22 April 2016
 Liechtenstein0.00%22 April 2016
 Lithuania0.05%22 April 20162 February 20174 March 2017
 Luxembourg0.03%22 April 20164 November 20164 December 2016
 Macedonia, Republic of0.03%22 April 2016
 Madagascar0.08%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Malawi0.07%20 September 2016
 Malaysia0.52%22 April 201616 November 201616 December 2016
 Maldives0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Mali0.03%22 April 201623 September 20164 November 2016
 Malta0.01%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Marshall Islands0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Mauritania0.02%22 April 201627 February 201729 March 2017
 Mauritius0.01%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Mexico1.70%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Micronesia0.00%22 April 201615 September 20164 November 2016
 Moldova0.04%21 September 2016
 Monaco0.00%22 April 201624 October 201623 November 2016
 Mongolia0.05%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Montenegro0.01%22 April 2016
 Morocco0.16%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Mozambique0.02%22 April 2016
 Myanmar0.10%22 April 2016
 Namibia0.01%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Nauru0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
   Nepal0.07%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Netherlands0.53%22 April 2016
 New Zealand[70]0.22%22 April 20164 October 20164 November 2016
 Niger0.04%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Nigeria0.57%22 September 201616 May 201715 June 2017
 Niue0.01%28 October 201628 October 201627 November 2016
 Norway0.14%22 April 201620 June 20164 November 2016
 Oman0.06%22 April 2016
 Pakistan0.43%22 April 201610 November 201610 December 2016
 Palau0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Palestine[c]22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Panama0.03%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Papua New Guinea0.01%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Paraguay0.06%22 April 201614 October 201613 November 2016
 Peru0.22%22 April 201625 July 20164 November 2016
 Philippines0.34%22 April 201623 March 201722 April 2017
 Poland1.06%22 April 20167 October 20166 November 2016
 Portugal0.18%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Qatar0.17%22 April 2016
 Romania0.30%22 April 2016
 Russia7.53%22 April 2016
 Rwanda0.02%22 April 20166 October 20165 November 2016
 Saint Kitts and Nevis0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Saint Lucia0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines0.00%22 April 201629 June 20164 November 2016
 Samoa0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 San Marino0.00%22 April 2016
 São Tomé and Príncipe0.00%22 April 20162 November 20162 December 2016
 Saudi Arabia0.80%3 November 20163 November 20163 December 2016
 Senegal0.05%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Serbia0.18%22 April 2016
 Seychelles0.00%25 April 201629 April 20164 November 2016
 Sierra Leone0.98%†22 September 20161 November 20161 December 2016
 Singapore0.13%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Slovakia0.12%22 April 20165 October 20164 November 2016
 Slovenia0.05%22 April 201616 December 201615 January 2017
 Solomon Islands0.00%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Somalia[a]22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 South Africa1.46%22 April 20161 November 20161 December 2016
 South Sudan[a]22 April 2016
 Spain0.87%22 April 201612 January 201711 February 2017
 Sri Lanka0.05%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Sudan0.18%22 April 2016
 Suriname0.01%22 April 2016
 Swaziland0.05%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Sweden0.15%22 April 201613 October 201612 November 2016
  Switzerland0.14%22 April 2016
 Tajikistan0.02%22 April 201622 March 201721 April 2017
 Tanzania0.11%22 April 2016
 Thailand0.64%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Togo0.02%19 September 2016
 Tonga0.00%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Trinidad and Tobago0.04%22 April 2016
 Tunisia0.11%22 April 201610 February 201712 March 2017
 Turkey1.24%22 April 2016
 Turkmenistan0.20%23 September 201620 October 201619 November 2016
 Tuvalu0.00%22 April 201622 April 20164 November 2016
 Uganda0.07%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Ukraine1.04%22 April 201619 September 20164 November 2016
 United Arab Emirates0.53%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 United Kingdom1.55%22 April 201618 November 201618 December 2016
 United States17.89%22 April 20163 September 2016[65]4 November 2016
 Uruguay0.05%22 April 201619 October 201618 November 2016
 Uzbekistan0.54%19 April 2017
 Vanuatu0.00%22 April 201621 September 20164 November 2016
 Venezuela0.52%22 April 2016
 Vietnam0.72%22 April 20163 November 20163 December 2016
 Yemen0.07%23 September 2016
 Zambia0.04%20 September 20169 December 20168 January 2017
 Zimbabwe0.18%22 April 2016
Total99.75%195147[1] (83.59% of global emissions[57])

† Though corresponding with the source the provided number for Sierra Leone's emissions is incorrect. According to World Bank data, the correct 2000 emissions for Sierra Leone is 14,763 kt CO2-equivalents (not 365,107 kt), or 0.04% of the world total (not 0.98%).[72]

Non-signatories

The following UNFCCC member states are entitled to sign the Paris Agreement but have not done so.

The following country is not a UNFCCC member, instead having observer status, and has not signed the Paris Agreement.

Critical reception[edit]

UNEP[edit]

According to UNEP the emission cut targets in November 2016 will result in temperature rise by 3 °C above preindustrial levels, far above the 2 °C of the Paris climate agreement.[73]

Perfectible accord[edit]

Al Gore stated that "no agreement is perfect, and this one must be strengthened over time, but groups across every sector of society will now begin to reduce dangerous carbon pollution through the framework of this agreement."[74]

According to a study published in Nature in June 2016, current country pledges are too low to lead to a temperature rise below the Paris Agreement temperature limit of "well below 2 °C".[75][76]

Lack of binding enforcement mechanism[edit]

Although the agreement was lauded by many, including French President François Hollande and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon,[59] criticism has also surfaced. For example, James Hansen, a former NASA scientist and a climate change expert, voiced anger that most of the agreement consists of "promises" or aims and not firm commitments.[77]

Institutional asset owners associations and think-tanks such as the World Pensions Council (WPC) have also observed that the stated objectives of the Paris Agreement are implicitly "predicated upon an assumption – that member states of the United Nations, including high polluters such as China, the US, India, Brazil, Canada, Russia, Indonesia and Australia, which generate more than half the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, will somehow drive down their carbon pollution voluntarily and assiduously without any binding enforcement mechanism to measure and control CO2emissions at any level from factory to state, and without any specific penalty gradation or fiscal pressure (for example a carbon tax) to discourage bad behaviour. A shining example of what Roman lawyers called circular logic: an agreement (or argument) presupposing in advance what it wants to achieve."[78]


https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Парижское_соглашение_(2015)

Парижское соглашение — соглашение в рамках Рамочной конвенции ООН об изменении климата, регулирующее меры по снижению углекислого газа в атмосфере с 2020 года. Соглашение было подготовлено взамен Киотскому протоколу в ходе Конференции по климату в Париже и принято консенсусом 12 декабря 2015 года, а подписано 22 апреля 2016 года.[1][2][3]Ведущий конференции Лоран Фабиус, министр иностранных дел Франции, заявил, что этот «амбициозный и сбалансированный» план стал «историческим поворотным пунктом» на пути снижения темпов глобального потепления.[4]

Целью соглашения (согласно статье 2) является «активизировать осуществление» Рамочной конвенции ООН по изменению климата, в частности, удержать рост глобальной средней температуры «намного ниже» 2 °C и «приложить усилия» для ограничения роста температуры величиной 1,5 °C.

Участники соглашения объявили, что пик эмиссии СО2 должен быть достигнут «настолько скоро, насколько это окажется возможным».

Страны-участники определяют свои вклады в достижение декларированной общей цели в индивидуальном порядке, пересматривают их раз в пять лет. В соглашении говорится о недостаточности предложенных в настоящее время национальных вкладов, а также об «амбициозности» и «прогрессе» по мере их пересмотра. Не предусматривается никакого механизма принуждения, как в отношении декларирования национальных целей, так и в обеспечении обязательности их достижения.

Реализуемость пределов потепления 2 °C и 1,5 °C[править | править вики-текст]

Сроки исчерпания эмиссионного бюджета СО2при сохранении нынешнего уровня эмиссии. [5]

Согласно современным научным представлениям, заданный предел потепления в сочетании с вероятностью его непревышения определяет величину доступного эмиссионного бюджета, то есть будущих совокупных выбросов СО2. Моделирование климата показывает, что для XXI века хотя бы 50 % вероятность 2 °C находится на грани достижимого, а эмиссионный бюджет для 80 % вероятности 1,5 °C равен нулю.[6][7]

Критика[править | править вики-текст]

В тексте соглашении не предусматривается каких-либо санкций в случае недостижения сторонами декларированных ими целей, а в международно-правовом смысле какие-либо сокращения эмиссии вообще не являются для них обязательными. В связи с этим известный климатолог Джеймс Хансен назвал соглашение «мошенническим» [8], другие критики говорят о «соглашении об увеличении эмиссии»[9].

Эксперты Всемирного пенсионного и инвестиционного форума считают, что ситуация, когда не связанные никакими количественно определёнными обязательствами участники, тем не менее, придут к согласованной общей цели, является одновременно и условием успеха Парижского соглашения и, собственно говоря, тем, чего хотят достичь с его помощью — то есть, с точки зрения формальной логики, это соглашение основано на принципе порочного круга.[10]

Некоторые считают примечательным тот факт, что в тексте соглашения вообще не встречается словосочетание «ископаемое топливо»[11].

«Принцип Торонто»[править | править вики-текст]

Парижское соглашение используется активистами экологических групп как формальное основание для требований, направленных на снижение эмиссии СО2. Впервые в этом качестве соглашение было использовано в ходе кампании за бойкот инвестиций в ископаемое топливо в университете Торонто. Студенты требовали прекращения сотрудничества с компаниями, которые «нагло игнорируют международные усилия по ограничению роста средней глобальной температуры к 2050 году величиной не более 1,5 °C по сравнению с доиндустриальным уровнем. Это компании, добывающие ископаемое топливо, их действия являются несовместимыми с согласованными на международном уровне целями».[12] Все общественные институты несут ответственность за претворение в жизнь Парижского соглашения и обязаны использовать свой статус и власть для осмысленного реагирования на вызов изменения климата. По мнению экологических активистов, такой подход сводит воедино риторику и практическое действие.[13]

Россия[править | править вики-текст]

Соглашение подписано Российской Федерацией[14], но еще не ратифицировано. Летом 2016 года бизнес-сообщество призвало президента Владимира Путина не утверждать документ. В РСППзаявили, что реализация соглашения негативно отразится на темпах экономического роста, а обязательство довести выбросы в атмосферу ниже уровня 1990 года Россия уже перевыполнила[15].

В ноябре 2016 года специальный представитель Президента России по вопросам климата Александр Бедрицкий заявил[16]:

… мы не рассматриваем отказ от углеводородов в качестве способа снижения выбросов парниковых газов в рамках выполнения взятых на себя обязательств в среднесрочной перспективе. Необходимо искать новые рецепты с учётом текущей и прогнозируемой экономической ситуации, планов социально-экономического развития, учитывать национальные особенности и интересы страны.

К тому времени Парижское соглашение по климату было подписано 192 странами, 113 из которых ратифицировали его. Россия, занимая третью строчку по выбросам парниковых газов среди участников Парижского соглашения (по данным ООН), была единственной, кто не ратифицировал документ из 15 ведущих по выбросам стран[17].

См. также[править | править вики-текст]