Presentation
This year marks the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement (PA) on climate. In the run-up to COP30 in Brazil in November 2025, and amid international tensions, mistrust in multilateralism and political backlash against climate action, meaningful reflection on what the PA has made possible—and what it has not—over the past 10 years is needed to document debates on climate action and the PA’s impacts, and to contribute to shaping discussions on the necessary actions within and beyond the UNFCCC for the future of climate cooperation. Grounded in a detailed reading of the PA’s design and its intended functions, drawing on the evidence of progress and limitations, the analysis aims at facilitating the identification of key focus areas to support the achievement of the PA’s overall objective.
This Working Paper is intended to be further developed over the coming weeks through discussions with other observers, particularly other think tanks, in order to achieve its full scientific value.
Key Messages
- Ten years ago, the world came together to forge an unprecedented pact—to limit global warming and build a future grounded in climate resilience and justice. Since then, the Paris Agreement (PA) has become a compass guiding governments, businesses, and citizens toward a net-zero world. The impact is visible: nearly every country has set climate targets, a green economy is emerging, and the temperature trajectory has shifted dramatically— from a dangerous 4°C path to a still-dangerous, but improved, 2.1–2.8°C.
- The Paris Agreement (PA) has enabled unprecedented collective progress, but outcomes are still insufficient. Structural transformation is underway but incomplete and uneven. These transformations remain too slow, and implementation lags behind ambition. We need to assess results against pace, in addition to direction. Without a step change, it will not be possible to keep the 1.5°C goal alive.
- Despite its imperfections and changes in geopolitics since 2015, the PA and its underpinning theory of change remain a viable multilateral framework to address the climate goals—yet needs strengthening within the Agreement and complementary support from the outside. Targeted governance improvements are necessary to enhance orchestration, ensure short-term political liability, and foster the integration of development and equity more centrally into climate strategies. With the map and the tools that the Agreement provides, we need now collective leadership— rooted in science, solidarity, and political courage—to chart the course.
- Universal action is essential—underpins both the science and politics of climate progress—and has broadly worked under the Paris Agreement, securing broad participation and legal follow- through. However, momentum is fragile, with early signs of declining commitment and insufficient follow-through—across mitigation, adaptation or finance.
- The vision of a green economy is materializing—marked by renewable energy growth, electric mobility, and carbon neutrality targets. Yet, this transformation has not addressed inequalities and resistance from vested interests; key socioeconomic and justice aspects remain underdeveloped. The vision of inclusive development and fairness through climate action is being questioned, hindering progress across the world. Unequal benefitting across countries of the opportunities emerging from this new economy and shaky progress on adaptation against mounting climate risks threatens universal engagement going forward.
- The PA has created the legal and political space for coordinated global action as per design. It was never meant to deliver transformation on its own. It was built to guide, to catalyze, to create momentum and political liability, especially within national processes, but also directly across sectors, institutions and citizens. Non-state actors (NSAs) play a growing role, but fragmentation and integrity issues persist. The PA has inspired action by businesses, local governments, and civil society. Still, voluntary efforts often lack robustness, coherence, and accountability— highlighting weak orchestration and governance gaps.
- Net-zero goals set a strong direction of travel for mitigation, even if further precision is required going forward. But adaptation lags behind, and climate finance—essential for developing countries— is stuck in ambiguity and mistrust. Clearly finance alignment is poorly operationalized—limiting impact on the ground.
- Near-universal adoption of commitments has not translated into consistent and effective national implementation. Despite pledges, on the ground, political inertia, institutional bottlenecks, and insufficient support prevent those pledges from becoming reality. This hurdle reinforces the ambition gap.
- Based on this diagnosis, four short-term priorities must be addressed to strengthen the effectiveness of the multilateral climate regime, some of which could be advanced in the context of the PA. First, signal diffusion must be reinforced to ensure that climate signals are strong, consistent, and able to drive sustained action across all actors. Second, the ambition mechanism needs to be enhanced to better translate long-term goals into shortterm, accountable policies and decisions. Third, greater attention must be given to country-level enablers by improving the understanding of national constraints and providing stronger support for domestic transitions. Finally, differentiation of responsibilities should be reinforced to reflect the unique circumstances and potential of some countries to make a difference, particularly within the G20, and to promote greater fairness in accountability.
