Commits to reduce emissions by 29% for agriculture, 31% for energy and 21% for forests and land use by 2030, compared to a business as usual scenario. That`s an average drop of 27%. This is linked to international aid, although about 40% of them can be filled unconditionally. Contains a section on adaptation, but only for the period 2015-2020. Each country is autonomous in determining its contribution and national implementation. The Climate Action Tracker (CAT) offers a seamless opportunity to compare NDCs [1] with the many interpretations of what is “fair.” We hope this will help governments, the media and observers interpret the commitments made by countries under the Paris Agreement. The acronym INDC was created at COP 19 in Warsaw. Countries were asked to independently determine how they could contribute to global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The initiative was welcomed by the fact that, shortly before the start of the Paris conference, more than 180 nations representing more than 90% of global emissions presented their contributions, detailing greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, action plans (on mitigation and adaptation) and funding measures.

The effort-involved studies in the CAT database include more than 40 studies used by the IPCC (Chapter 6 of WG III and Huhne et al. (2013) as well as additional analyses carried out by the CTU to complete the data set. They cover very different views of what might be right, including considerations of justice such as historical responsibility, capacity and equality. We take into account the results of studies consistent with the previous target of 2oC, as well as the 1.5oC limit in the Paris Agreement, in order to cover the full range of historical perspectives and developments in long-term temperature targets. Figure 2. Example of credit ratings (example Singapore) with the “Fair Share” zones for 2020, 2025, 2030 and 2050 in coloured bars that represent the cat rating categories, as well as the country`s emissions forecasts and NDC commitment, which are presented in comparison. There is not a single agreed framework for a fair contribution to global efforts. The assessment of the just depends on the views and interests of governments. Many believe it is right that those who have made a greater contribution to the problem – or who have a greater capacity to act – should do more. Others argue that purely economic indicators should be applied when emission reductions should be made where they are cheapest.

To find out exactly what an INDC is and why it`s important, check out our intDC filer. The INDCs include emission reduction measures and also aim to take into account the measures taken to adapt to the effects of climate change and the assistance the country needs or will provide to deal with climate change. The first INDC presentation in March 2015 was followed by an evaluation phase to verify the impact of INDC presented ahead of the 2015 UN climate change conference. [3] An unconditional reduction in emissions of 20% by 2030 compared to business as usual. A 30% reduction is conditional on the provision of international funds. This would represent a 22% increase over 2010 emissions. Contains the adjustment section. Peru`s position on the Paris agreement is also set out. The INDC of Peru. India presented its INDC to the UNFCCC in October 2015 and committed to reducing the intensity of GDP emissions by 33-35% by 2030 from 2005 levels. [9] India stated in its opinion that it needed a “minimum of $2.5 trillion” to meet its 2015-2030 targets and that its “international need for climate finance” would be the difference between “what can be provided by national sources.” [10] On the other hand, when it results in emission levels below the entire “fair share” range of a country, a NPB is classified as a “roller model” (dark green). A te