Institutional challenges to the implementation of nationally determined contributions in Latin America and Caribbean countries: Institutional architecture requirements, issues arising from the examination of NDC updates and lessons learned from capacity development interventions

Simple item page
cg.authorship.typesConsultanten_US
cg.contributor.donorUnited States Agency for International Developmenten_US
cg.coverage.regionLatin America and the Caribbeanen_US
cg.howPublishedGrey Literatureen_US
cg.identifier.projectIFPRI - Latin American and Caribbean Programen_US
cg.identifier.projectIFPRI - Markets, Trade, and Institutions Uniten_US
cg.identifier.publicationRankNot rankeden_US
cg.number32en_US
cg.placeWashington, DCen_US
cg.reviewStatusInternal Reviewen_US
cg.subject.actionAreaSystems Transformationen_US
cg.subject.impactAreaClimate adaptation and mitigationen_US
cg.subject.impactAreaEnvironmental health and biodiversityen_US
cg.subject.sdgSDG 13 - Climate actionen_US
dc.contributor.authorEchebarria, Koldoen_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-20T14:29:26Zen_US
dc.date.available2024-05-20T14:29:26Zen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/141936en_US
dc.titleInstitutional challenges to the implementation of nationally determined contributions in Latin America and Caribbean countries: Institutional architecture requirements, issues arising from the examination of NDC updates and lessons learned from capacity development interventionsen_US
dcterms.abstractThe nations that signed the Paris Agreement periodically submit Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) with climate mitigation and adaptation goals. Complementarily, countries should also formulate and implement National Adaptation Plans (NAP) and periodically update them. This means that every country is required by law to outline a course of action in response to global warming and submit a pledge with specific objectives it is committed to achieving. These pledges are then reviewed and renewed every five years. Every round of pledges is meant to intensify the level of commitment and is negotiable, meaning that other parties can offer concessions or support in return for a more robust pledge. The pledge and review method were introduced first in 1991; however, in 1997, the international community chose to adopt legally binding emission reduction targets in the Kyoto Protocol. The pledge and review methods were reintroduced in the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, following its limited success and the inability to reach an agreement on new targets. The NDC wording took the place of the pledge-and-review expression in the negotiations that resulted in the Paris Agreement. The fact that NDCs rely on voluntary commitments from signatory nations—many of whom lack the financial, technological, or institutional means to effectively combat climate change—has drawn criticism. Setting top-down targets, however, results in a distributional problem among nations that has proven unsolvable. Furthermore, targets are by no means a good solution in the absence of efficient review and compliance procedures. Since pledges—both in terms of the degree of commitment and the methods used—are subject to review and are not legally binding, NDCs offer a more practical strategy for international collaboration on mitigating climate change.1 The "naming and shaming" process—a form of peer and reputational pressure—is the foundation of the NDC method. Climate change politics have gradually changed because of the rise of bottom-up society initiatives and transnational networks of non-govern-mental actors, placing increased pressure on national governments and international organizations.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsOpen Accessen_US
dcterms.audienceAcademicsen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationEchebarria, Koldo. 2024. Institutional challenges to the implementation of nationally determined contributions in Latin America and Caribbean countries: Institutional architecture requirements, issues arising from the examination of NDC updates and lessons learned from capacity development interventions. LAC Working Paper 32. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/141936en_US
dcterms.extent24 p.en_US
dcterms.isPartOfLAC Working Paperen_US
dcterms.issued2024-05-17en_US
dcterms.languageenen_US
dcterms.licenseCopyrighted; all rights reserveden_US
dcterms.publisherInternational Food Policy Research Instituteen_US
dcterms.subjectcapacity developmenten_US
dcterms.subjectclimate change mitigationen_US
dcterms.subjectglobal warmingen_US
dcterms.subjectSustainable Development Goalsen_US
dcterms.typeWorking Paperen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Thumbnail Image
Name:
06.2024 Institutional Challenges to NDC Implementation in LAC (final).pdf
Size:
307.42 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Working Paper v.2
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
05.2024 Institutional Challenges to NDC Implementation in LAC (Final).pdf
Size:
307.38 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Working Paper
Download

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.75 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

IFPRI Project Papers