Maximizing the potential of the Paris Agreement: Effective review in a hybrid regime

This discussion brief examines the review processes of the Paris Agreement, describing it as a hybrid system that combines bottom-up nationally determined contributions (NDCs) with top-down mandatory reporting and review. The authors argue that because NDCs are not legally binding, effective review systems are the primary tools for ensuring countries meet their commitments and for increasing collective ambition to keep global warming well below 2°C.

• The Paris Agreement utilizes a hybrid model that replaces the previous top-down system of legally binding targets with a combination of non-legally binding NDCs submitted every five years and mandatory reporting and review processes.
• The Agreement establishes three distinct but functionally linked review systems: an enhanced transparency framework for individual NDCs (Article 13), a five-yearly global stocktake for collective progress (Article 14), and a non-punitive mechanism to facilitate implementation and promote compliance (Article 15).
• The Article 13 transparency framework's effectiveness depends on unresolved details regarding flexibility for developing countries, the frequency of reviews, and the scope of in-country reviews.
• The global stocktake (Article 14) and the 2018 facilitative dialogue are intended to assess collective progress and inform the preparation of future NDCs, though the specific formats and formal outputs of these processes remain undetermined.
• The Article 15 implementation and compliance mechanism is designed to be facilitative and non-punitive, but its exact mandate—whether limited to legally binding obligations or extending to the achievement of NDCs—is not explicitly clear.
• Non-state actors, including cities and the private sector, could contribute to the review processes by serving as expert reviewers, providing input into the global stocktake, or having their actions submitted for consideration within national reviews.

APA

van Asselt, H., Hale, T., Abbott, K., Dagnet, Y., Doelle, M., Abeysinghe, A., Milkoreit, M., Prolo, C. D., & Rudyk, B. (2016). Maximizing the potential of the Paris Agreement: Effective review in a hybrid regime. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-DB-2016-Maximizing-potential-Paris-Agreement.pdf

Chicago

van Asselt, Harro, Thomas Hale, Kenneth Abbott, Yamide Dagnet, Meinhard Doelle, Achala Abeysinghe, Manjana Milkoreit, Caroline Dihl Prolo, and Bryce Rudyk. Maximizing the potential of the Paris Agreement: Effective review in a hybrid regime. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2016. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-DB-2016-Maximizing-potential-Paris-Agreement.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=van Asselt |first1=Harro |last2=Hale |first2=Thomas |last3=Abbott |first3=Kenneth |last4=Dagnet |first4=Yamide |last5=Doelle |first5=Meinhard |last6=Abeysinghe |first6=Achala |last7=Milkoreit |first7=Manjana |last8=Prolo |first8=Caroline Dihl |last9=Rudyk |first9=Bryce |title=Maximizing the potential of the Paris Agreement: Effective review in a hybrid regime |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=2016 |url=https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-DB-2016-Maximizing-potential-Paris-Agreement.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{vanasselt2016maximizing, author = {van Asselt, Harro and Hale, Thomas and Abbott, Kenneth and Dagnet, Yamide and Doelle, Meinhard and Abeysinghe, Achala and Milkoreit, Manjana and Prolo, Caroline Dihl and Rudyk, Bryce}, title = {{Maximizing the potential of the Paris Agreement: Effective review in a hybrid regime}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2016}, url = {https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-DB-2016-Maximizing-potential-Paris-Agreement.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }