Cbdr Paris Agreement

[5] At the COP meeting held in Lima in 2014, where the CBDR-RC was also highly contested, the parties committed to conclude an ambitious agreement in Paris reflecting the principle of cbdr-RC, given the diversity of national situations. This was the “landing zone” reached with regard to the CBDR principle, after the joint statement between China and the United States on emissions found its way into the Paris Agreement. This hard-won performance came at a price when an agreement was reached behind closed doors in the final hours prior to the publication of the draft agreement, namely the clause in Article 51 of the COP decision, which states that the parties agree that “Article 8 of the agreement does not imply any liability, compensation or basis”. Bodansky D (2016) The Paris Agreement on Climate Change: A New Hope? Law J Int 110:288-319. doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.110.2.0288 CBDR was not the first difference in treatment between countries in international agreements. There were other protocols, agreements that provided for the principle of different treatment. The Paris Agreement moved closer to differentiating countries` climate change competences, derogating from the rigid distinction between developed and developing countries by including a “subtle differentiation” of certain subgroups of countries (e.g. B least developed countries) for certain substantive issues (e.g.B. climate finance) and/or for certain procedures (e.g.B. timetables and reports). In this article, we analyze whether the countries of self-differentiation pursued in the formulation of their own climate plans or national contributions (NDCs) correspond to the subtle differentiation of the Paris Agreement.