Assessment of the Non-Compliance Mechanism in the Paris Agreement

The 2015 Paris Agreement stands as a monumental achievement in the realm of international environmental law, embodying the collective will of the global community to confront the challenges of climate change. Central to the success of this accord is the effectiveness of its NonCompliance Mechanism (NCM), which is designed to ensure that parties adhere to their commitments in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This thesis examines the CM within the Paris Agreement, evaluating its design, operational procedures, and practical effectiveness. It further contextualizes this mechanism by comparing it to those established under other Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), such as the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and, within the climate change regime, the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. This research identifies both strengths and weaknesses in the NCM's ability to ensure compliance among parties, focusing on its facilitative, non-punitive approach. This approach is contrasted with more stringent enforcement mechanisms found in other agreements, highlighting the balance between support and accountability. The thesis also examines case studies and operational procedures of NCMs under other environmental and international treaties to assess their real-world application to provide insights into their successes and limitations. This thesis contributes to the ongoing debate on international environmental governance by assessing the adequacy of the Paris Agreement's NCM and identifying aspects for improvement within the mechanism. It underscores the importance of balancing facilitation with accountability to achieve the goals of the agreement.
The research reveals that the Paris Agreement's NCM is unique in its strictly non-punitive, facilitative approach, which distinguishes it from the more punitive enforcement mechanisms seen for examples under the Montreal and Kyoto Protocols. While the Paris Agreement's emphasis on support, transparency, and capacity-building fosters greater inclusivity and cooperation, the lack of enforcement measures raises concerns about its ability to handle persistent non-compliance.
Additionally, the study finds that engagement with stakeholders and transparency measures are critical for building trust among parties, but further refinements, such as broader peer review processes similar to the mechanisms under Trade law and Human Rights law, could strengthen the mechanism's overall impact.