Review Of Paris Agreement

Cluster 6 focuses on the experimental evaluation of PA and its mechanisms. We note that these experiences rarely lead to a positive assessment of the Palestinian Authority, but instead call for mini-nationalism as a means of overcoming the current lack of ambition. The Group 2 documents examine ways to track progress towards the Palestinian Authority`s objectives. This cluster offers a pessimistic outlook on the Palestinian Authority, with much more negative than positive assessments. The literature of the cluster cites technology and transparency as the main driver of efficiency, but also highlights the lack of ambition and problems related to the LRM as the main barriers. It is interesting to note that these two clusters have few common references, although they both focus on how the deposit and verification process works. Clusters 4 and 5 form two strongly related clusters on climate finance, losses and damage. They are closely linked by the general reference to losses and damage, with much of the Group 4 literature on climate finance focusing on the financing of losses and damages. Finally, the two centralized clusters (1-3) focus on the Paris Agreement in general, with Cluster 1 maintaining a legal priority for lessons learned from international policy and Cluster 3. Both offer mixed assessments on the part of the Palestinian Authority with the legal literature, with a particularly high number of positive evaluations. While international political literature emphasizes the importance of national and non-governmental measures, judicial literature is the main driver of transparency and its legal nature. Both, however, point to the current lack of ambition as a major obstacle.

Finally, the Palestinian Authority establishes two subsidiary bodies to assist in the management of the Palestinian Authority through the provision of information and assistance in the evaluation and review of implementation (Article 18, United Nations, 2015, p. 21, 22). Finally, it is important to stress that our approach to research, while ensuring comprehensiveness and transparency, remains a synthesis of existing knowledge. The added value of our results therefore lies in the fact that they provide a truly comprehensive overview of existing peer review research on the Palestinian Authority, which brings together knowledge from a wide range of fields, rather than identifying entirely new mechanisms or assessing the validity of claims made with respect to the existence of specific mechanisms. The Paris Agreement reaffirms the obligations of industrialized countries to the UNFCCC; the COP`s decision attached to the agreement extends the target of $100 billion per year until 2025 and calls for a new target that, in addition, “extends over $100 billion a year.” The agreement also broadens the donor base beyond developed countries by encouraging other countries to provide “voluntary” support. China, for example, pledged $3 billion in 2015 to help other developing countries. Information on these developments and assisting decision-makers in the successful implementation of palestinian Authority mechanisms therefore remain an essential task for academic research. Although there is research that supports and challenges the effectiveness of PA, no attempt has been made to systematically synthesize this area of research, as existing audits do not have systematic methods (Petticrew and Mccartney 2011, Minx et al.2017) or too closely (see page 4 of the protocol in the supplementary documents stacks.iop.org/ERL/15/083006/mmedia for an overview of existing reviews).