Extending short-term commitments in the Paris Agreement will be crucial. In addition to the global and legally binding limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius or 2 degrees Celsius, the Paris governments have presented non-binding national plans to reduce their emissions or control the expected increase in emissions for small developing countries. However, the first round of these national plans – so-called national contributions – in 2015 was insufficient and would lead to catastrophic warming of 3oC. Under the Paris Agreement, each country must define, plan and report regularly on its contribution to the fight against global warming.  There is no mechanism for a country to set an emission target for a specified date, but any target should go beyond the previous targets. The United States formally withdrew from the agreement the day after the 2020 presidential election, although President-elect Joe Biden said America would return to the agreement after his inauguration.  Johnson began preparations for last Friday`s meeting with the announcement of the British NDC, which presented a 68% reduction in emissions from 1990 to 2030 levels. This would bring the UK ahead of other developed economies and reduce emissions even more and faster than any G20 country has committed to so far. “The exit from the Paris agreement is cruel for future generations,” said Andrew Steer, president and CEO of the World Resources Institute, about the Trump administration`s decision to formally withdraw the United States from the agreement. The U.S. will lose much stronger jobs and economy that will bring a low-carbon future, Steer said in a statement. Countries have total freedom in their objective and how to achieve it.
CNN will be reviewed every five years, initially in 2020, and will need to be increasingly ambitious over time. The idea is that the international community can review the goals based on global performance and goals. Good practices can be shared and poor performance available. Laurence Tubiana, France`s top diplomat in the talks, said another important innovation was what she called “360-degree diplomacy.” This means working not only through the usual government channels, with ministerial meetings and discussions between officials, but far beyond, and making businesses, local authorities and mayors, civil society, academics and citizens a part of the discussion.