The Paris Agreement shifts the global concern away from the sole focus of the Climate Convention on emissions reductions, which is really the symptom of the problem, to dealing with its causes, that is, human activities inthe urban transition.The Purpose of the Agreement, or the new global climate policy, puts adaptation at par with mitigation, and finance nowalso linked to technology development and transfer have a more significant role than under the Convention.A static Convention has evolved into a dynamic Agreementgiving hope for optimism.
The essential condition for success will be to recognise the equal emphasis given to ‘fairness’ and ‘ambition’, and “fairness” can only be operationalised on the basis of agreed criteria. Assessments of the Agreement, largely from analysts in the industrialised countries, have focused only on early peaking of emissions in developing countries ignoring the timeframe for industrialised countries rapidly reaching zero emission levels. As Norway’s Prime Minister, Erna Solberg, addressing the 'The New Climate and Development Imperative' session at The World Economic Forum's Annual Meeting, at Davos in January 2016, stated “we will never manage to reach climate targets if we don't create social fairness in the world”. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change also noted that fairness leads to greater international cooperation.
Implementation will depend on three related but distinct factors as goals become more specific over time. First, how soon the United States, European Union and other countries whose emissions have peaked, but per-capita emissions continue to be well above those of the others, achieve zero-emission levels. Second, how China, India and other developing countries define their urban middle class future and are supported by the lead taken by countries where three-quarter of the population had moved to cities in the 1970’s. Third, stocktaking of the trajectory of global emissions of carbon dioxide informing the policy debate how the world's carbon budget is being expended in the context of sustainable development, whether technological changes alone will suffice and how innovative technologies can spread quickly enough to meet the world's huge and growing need for energy, transportation, food, buildings and goods within a re-framed urban transition.Policy relevant research will inform the political debate more directly than in the past as countries aim to modify some longer term trends without affecting urban middle class levels of wellbeing.
Cities are already home to half the world’s population, and account for more than 80% of global economic output and 75% of global energy use and energy-related greenhouse gas emissions; by 2050 two-thirds of the global population will be urban. Responding to this mega-trend the vision of international cooperation has moved away from reliance on environmental law, national obligations and dispute settlement arrangements regulating production patterns;growth in global carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generated from fossil fuels and from industry has ceased in the past two years.
A common understanding is now to be achieved in the Global Stocktake to influence public opinion and modify consumption patterns which, along with services, constitute the major component of GDP and increasing emissions; transport emissions continue to grow in all countries and energy efficiency, also in cities, has the greatest potential in reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. That is why the Agreement requires all countries to provide by 2020low emission development strategies.
Negotiations continue on the common understanding
It is already clear that countries will interpret the compromise formulations according to the impact on per capita incomes of their citizens. As the new principles are still evolving, there is lack of specificity about what is to be reported, guidelinesfor reviews of national contributions and modalities of their aggregate assessment in the global stocktaking. These are the three legally binding elements that will toge