The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Conditional nationally determined contributions in the Paris Agreement: foothold for equity or Achilles heel?
Open accessAbstract
The Paris Agreement’s success depends on parties’ implementation of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) towards the Paris Agreement’s goals. In these climate action plans, most developing countries make their mitigation and adaptation contributions conditional upon receiving international support (finance, technology transfer and/or capacity building). While provision of support for NDC implementation could enhance equity among countries, the feasibility of NDC implementation might be challenged by the large number of conditional NDCs. This paper addresses the implications of this tension based on an analysis of all 168 NDCs. We find that feasibility is challenged because conditions applied to NDCs are often not well defined. Moreover, the costs of implementing all conditional contributions are too high to be covered by existing promises of support from developed countries, even if the entire annual $100 billion of climate finance were earmarked for NDC implementation. Consistent with principles of equity and the prioritization in the Paris Agreement, a higher proportion of Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) have conditional NDCs than do other countries. However, differences between the distribution of countries requesting support and those currently receiving support, in particular among middle-income countries, demonstrates potential tensions between feasibility and equity. The article concludes with recommendations on how cost estimates and updated NDCs can be strengthened to ensure support for NDC implementation is targeted more equitably and cost-effectively.Key policy insights Support requested by developing countries to implement conditional NDCs far exceeds existing funding pledges.Differences between existing patterns of financial assistance, and those implied by requests under conditional NDCs, mean that supporting NDCs may require a significant shift in provider countries’ priorities for allocating climate finance. This may challenge feasibility.The Paris Agreement’s provisions on prioritizing LDCs and SIDS offer valuable guidance in making difficult choices on allocating support.To increase the likelihood of attracting support, developing countries (assisted by capacity building as needed), should include credible cost estimates in future NDCs and formulate investment plans.By outlining plans to mobilize support in their NDCs, developed countries can reassure developing countries that raising the ambition of NDCs is feasible.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Low‐carbon transition risks for finance
Semieniuk, G., Campiglio, E., Mercure, J., Volz, U., & Edwards, N. R. (2021) · WIREs Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.678 · Cited by 441
Greenhouse gas mitigation co-benefits across the global agricultural development programs
Khatri-Chhetri, A., Costa Junior, C., & Wollenberg, E. (2022) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102586 · Cited by 36
Metadata
- Authors
- Pauw, W. P., Castro, P., Pickering, J., & Bhasin, S.
- Venue
- Climate Policy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2019-07-07
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 468-484
- ISSN
- 1469-3062 (ISSN-L)
- 1752-7457
- OpenAlex
- W2954500672
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Conditional nationally determined contributions in the Paris Agreement: foothold for equity or Achilles heel? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/14693062.2019.1635874
- The paper
- Pauw, W. P., Castro, P., Pickering, J., & Bhasin, S. (2020). Conditional nationally determined contributions in the Paris Agreement: foothold for equity or Achilles heel? Climate Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1635874
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.