The world is in a climate crisis, and the current global climate architecture is simply not fit for purpose. Despite decades of negotiations, agreements, and promises, the climate emergency has only deepened.
The Paris Agreement, while a significant step in uniting the world around a common goal, is proving inadequate in the face of rapidly accelerating global warming.
The ongoing rise in carbon emissions, the intensification of climate impacts, and the stark disparities in climate vulnerabilities across regions make it painfully clear that the global climate governance system needs a radical overhaul.
The time for incremental changes is over. The time has come to completely reshape the global climate architecture to match the scale, urgency, and complexity of the crisis we face.
At the heart of the current climate framework lies the Paris Agreement—a landmark accord that sought to limit global temperature rise to well below 2°C and pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C.
A new global climate architecture must prioritize equity, ensuring that the countries and communities most vulnerable to climate impacts are compensated and also supported in their efforts to adapt. This includes a significant increase in climate finance, specifically tailored to meet the unique needs of developing nations.
While the Agreement marked an unprecedented collective acknowledgment of the climate crisis, its voluntary, non-binding nature has failed to drive the urgent, transformative action required to avert catastrophe.
One of the fundamental flaws of the Paris Agreement is the reliance on voluntary Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). While nations committed to specific targets, these commitments are not legally binding and are often insufficient to meet the collective global goal of net-zero emissions by mid-century.
Countries, especially the largest emitters, continue to set vague targets that allow for slippage, delay, and loopholes. Despite the promises made in Paris, the world remains on track for a devastating 3-4°C of warming—a far cry from the 1.5°C target.
Moreover, the financial commitments promised to developing nations—$100 billion annually for climate mitigation and adaptation—remain unmet, exacerbating the climate divide between the Global North and South. While some progress has been made, it is insufficient to meet the needs of the most vulnerable countries that are already grappling with the worst impacts of climate change.
This mismatch between ambition and action is compounded by the absence of clear enforcement mechanisms. Countries are free to set their own targets, and while there is a system for monitoring progress, there are no hard consequences for non-compliance.
This lack of accountability means that political will, rather than binding commitments or penalties, continues to drive global climate action.
In short, the current global climate system is fragmented, slow, and insufficiently rigorous to tackle the scale of the crisis we face. It is high time that we take a hard look at our existing governance structures and radically transform them if we are to have any chance of mitigating the worst effects of climate change.
The first urgent need is for a legally binding global treaty with stronger accountability mechanisms. The Paris Agreement may have created a consensus on the importance of climate action, but it lacks the enforcement power to ensure that countries follow through on their promises.
What we need now is a legally binding framework that requires nations to reduce their emissions within a set timeframe, with clear consequences for those who fail to meet their obligations.
This could take the form of a global climate contract, where the collective targets for emissions reductions are non-negotiable, and nations are legally compelled to meet them. In this new structure, countries that fall short of their commitments could face economic penalties, trade restrictions, or loss of access to climate finance.
This would shift the incentives away from political calculations and toward real, measurable reductions in emissions.
Accountability must be a cornerstone of this reformed climate governance. An independent global body could monitor countries’ emissions data and hold them accountable.
Such a body would have the authority to track progress, assess compliance, and enforce penalties. The system should be transparent, open to public scrutiny, and flexible enough to respond to new developments in science, technology, and policy.
One of the most glaring shortcomings of the current climate architecture is its failure to adequately address climate justice.
The impacts of climate change are disproportionately felt by the Global South—countries that have contributed the least to global emissions but are suffering the most from rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and sea-level rise.
Developing countries, particularly small island nations, have long demanded more robust climate financing to help them adapt to the changing environment and transition to low-carbon economies.
The $100 billion annually promised by wealthy nations has not materialized in full, and the loss and damage mechanisms—intended to compensate nations for irreversible climate impacts—remain underfunded and poorly implemented.
We need an urgent, radical rethinking of how the world tackles climate change—one that demands accountability, prioritizes equity, and empowers local actors while fostering innovation and technology transfer.
A new global climate architecture must prioritize equity, ensuring that the countries and communities most vulnerable to climate impacts are compensated and also supported in their efforts to adapt. This includes a significant increase in climate finance, specifically tailored to meet the unique needs of developing nations.
It also means committing to technology transfers, allowing poorer countries to leapfrog polluting industrial practices and adopt clean technologies at scale.
But climate justice extends beyond financial support. It requires a fundamental shift in the way climate negotiations are conducted.
The voices of vulnerable nations and marginalized communities must be at the forefront of decision-making, not just as observers or recipients of aid. Countries that are most at risk should have a central role in shaping the policies that will determine their future.
While global agreements are essential, effective climate action will also require strong local and regional initiatives. The reality is that many countries, cities, and businesses are already leading the way on climate action, often outpacing national governments.
Many local governments are setting ambitious climate targets and implementing policies to reduce emissions, invest in green infrastructure, and build resilience to climate impacts.
This decentralized, bottom-up approach needs to be more systematically integrated into the global framework. By empowering local governments, businesses, and civil society to take bold action, we can accelerate the pace of change and create a dynamic, multi-level governance system that complements international negotiations.
Cities are responsible for a large share of global emissions, and by making urban centers hubs of innovation, sustainability, and climate resilience, we can drive systemic change.
Moreover, we must integrate climate action across all sectors—energy, transportation, agriculture, finance, and industry. This calls for a new kind of economic thinking that sees climate action not as a cost but as an opportunity for innovation, job creation, and sustainable growth.
The transition to renewable energy, the development of circular economies, and the creation of green jobs must be embedded in every national and regional climate strategy.
Climate action will not succeed unless we accelerate the pace of innovation, particularly in the areas of clean energy, carbon capture, and climate-resilient agriculture. A new global climate architecture should focus on creating an open, accessible platform for sharing knowledge, technologies, and best practices.
The world must unite and act—boldly, decisively, and collectively—in creating a new global climate architecture that matches the urgency of the crisis and ensures a just, sustainable future for all.
Rich countries, with their technological capacity, should lead the way in making clean technologies available to developing nations.
This requires both public and private sector cooperation, ensuring that global markets are incentivized to invest in sustainable solutions. A framework for technology transfer—backed by the necessary financial mechanisms—would allow developing countries to adopt green technologies quickly and affordably, leapfrogging polluting industries in the process.
In conclusion, the window for limiting the worst impacts of climate change is rapidly closing. The current global climate architecture is insufficient to meet the scale of the challenge.
We need an urgent, radical rethinking of how the world tackles climate change—one that demands accountability, prioritizes equity, and empowers local actors while fostering innovation and technology transfer.
To survive and thrive in a warming world, we must reshape the global climate system to be more ambitious, more inclusive, and more effective.
The world must unite and act—boldly, decisively, and collectively—in creating a new global climate architecture that matches the urgency of the crisis and ensures a just, sustainable future for all.
(Manmohan Parkash is a former Senior Advisor, Office of the President, and Deputy Director General, South Asia, Asian Development Bank. The views expressed are personal. He can be reached at [email protected])
Comment