Publications

COP21: and now, action!

11 February 2016 - Carbon Trends

After an unprecedented political process initiated at COP17 in Durban in 2011, 195 countries adopted at COP21 in Paris in December 2015 the first universal agreement for the fight against climate change. Contrary to expectations of some observers, the role of such a process was not to define the actions that each State must undertake. Rather, its role was to put in place a framework for multilateral coordination accepted by all. Furthermore, both the process leading up to and the resulting agreement marked a paradigm shift from a top-down model – led by internationally-set objectives disseminated at the national and local level – towards a more hybrid approach building on the willingness of all economic actors – state and non-state alike – to take action. Nevertheless, some critics point to a possible lag between political declarations and concrete implementation. So how do we know if we are on the right track?

 

COP21: and now, action! Download
To learn more
  • 11/28/2025 Foreword of the week
    COP30: The missed turn to implementation – and the coalitions moving ahead anyway

    COP30 concluded with an agreement, proving that multilateralism is still alive. However, the results are underwhelming: no push to transition away from fossil fuels, no decision on deforestation, and mixed outcomes on adaptation metrics.  On climate finance, Belém failed to shift from ambition to implementation. Negotiations quickly drifted back to a battle on yet another high-level quantitative target. The decision to triple adaptation funding by 2035 disappointed many, with its distant time horizon, lack of baseline and non-binding wording. COP30 also missed the opportunity to engage with – and build consensus around – concrete measures outlined in the Baku to Belém roadmap to get to $1.3 trillion. Instead, it defaulted to launching new processes – a work programme on climate finance and a ministerial roundtable on the NCQG.  

  • 11/21/2025 Foreword of the week
    How to strengthen climate risk management and supervision to protect financial stability

    Climate change does not conform to business, political or supervisory regime cycles– its adverse long-term impacts lie beyond such horizons. Ten years ago, when Mark Carney highlighted this paradox in his landmark Tragedy of the Horizons speech, climate change was not considered a financial stability risk. Today, European supervisory stress tests estimate up to €638 billion in banking losses over 8 years, while the European Central Bank (ECB) reveals that over 90% of eurozone banks face climate and environmental risks. A key question arises: Is the supervisors’ primary focus on greening the financial system sufficient in the face of rising risks, especially stranded assets? 

  • 11/13/2025
    How solidarity levies can help bridge the climate and development finance gap

    The climate and development finance gap is large and widening, as Official Development Assistance (ODA) declines and needs multiply. With shrinking fiscal space in vulnerable countries, solidarity levies are gaining attention as a predictable source of international finance. Launched at COP28 by Barbados, France, and Kenya, the Global Solidarity Levies Task Force (GSLTF) is the main initiative in this space.

See all publications
Press contact Amélie FRITZ Head of Communication and press relations Email
Subscribe to our mailing list :
I register !
Subscribe to our newsletter
Once a week, receive all the information on climate economics
I register !
Fermer