Are G20 Nations Delivering on Climate & Paris Agreement Goals?

REPORT

Are G20 Countries Delivering on Climate Goals?

Tracking Progress on Commitments to Strengthen the Paris Agreement

12 November, 2024 | International Cooperation

Simran Sukhija, Jhalak Aggarwal, Sumit Prasad, Mohana Bharathi Manimaran, Ushashi Datta

Suggested citation: Sukhija, Simran, Jhalak Aggarwal, Sumit Prasad, Mohana Bharathi Manimaran, Ushashi Datta. 2024. Are G20 Countries Delivering on Climate Goals? Tracking Progress on Commitments to Strengthen the Paris Agreement. New Delhi: Council on Energy, Environment and Water.

Download Study

Access Climate Accountability Matrix Dashboard

Overview

The world is in a state of climate crisis, with science providing an ever-clearer view of the dire consequences of climate change. 2023 was the warmest year on record (WMO 2024). The incidence of natural disasters has increased fivefold over the last five decades (WMO 2021), and economic damages in the first half of 2024 alone have already reached nearly USD 128 billion (Atlas Magazine 2024). Underlining the gravity of the situation, the UN Secretary-General warned that we may be nearing critical planetary tipping points, beyond which recovery could be impossible (UNSG 2023).

Despite the urgency of the climate crisis, global action has been limited. According to the latest UN report, without an increase in ambition in the new NDCs and immediate action, global temperatures could rise by 2.6 to 3.1°C over the course of this century (UNEP, 2024). Notably, research also suggests that developed countries are not on track to meet their 2030 targets and, more importantly, that even if they were to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, they would still consume 40–50 per cent of the carbon budget available to keep temperature rise below 1.5°C (CEEW 2023). Ironically, given these projections, the current situation is no different from that in the pre-2020 era, 1 where progress was limited due to the non-participation of major developed economies, inflated base year emissions, and accounting loopholes (CEEW 2021). While this reiterates that climate actions are and have been insufficient, there is an even more pressing underlying issue – the limited power of international climate agreements to hold countries accountable for their immediate actions. As a testament to this, climate debates have been ridden with ambiguity, with crucial facets of climate action remaining unresolved and contentious, such as equity in the carbon budget, climate finance and its goals, and adaptation funding.

Therefore, it is now more important than ever to hold countries accountable, not just for their actions on mitigation, but also for other facets that are critical to climate action. To this end, few institutions from the Global North have made notable efforts to bridge the accountability gap by showcasing countries’ actual progress more transparently.

International cooperation: Assess engagement in key climate agreements and adherence to Obligations.
National measures: Evaluate a country’s ambition, emission footprint, and domestic climate frameworks.
Sectoral robustness: Assess the operational efficiency and actions of key sectors (such as energy, industry, transport, waste, agriculture, forestry, and water) towards realising a sustainable transition.
Enablers: Analyse the means of implementation (finance, technology, and capacity-building) at national and international levels.
Climate adaptation efforts: Assess the country's readiness and recovery capacity to adapt to current and changing climate impacts.

Each of these themes was meticulously broken down into categories that capture their specific aspects. Within these categories, indicators (a mix of both quantitative and qualitative), were identified as the measurable variables, to assess the performance of the actions undertaken.

We hope that outcomes of the CAM will help provide critical inputs and recommendations for upcoming climate summits, inform the next round of nationally determined contributions (NDCs) in 2025 and the subsequent Global Stocktake (GST) where countries and non-party stakeholders will deliberate on the implementation and ambitions of global climate efforts.

Key highlights

The analysis shows that none of the G20 members currently qualify as leaders. The countries are broadly distributed among reasonable and limited efforts.
Among developed G20, France, the United Kingdom, Japan, and Germany have made notable efforts, particularly through international cooperation and the establishment of comprehensive climate governance frameworks.
While the US and Canada have made efforts to adapt to climate change, concerns about their inconsistent engagement in key climate agreements, and weak ambitions remain.
In the Global South, India and South Africa have made significant efforts in climate action, by actively participating in key agreements, undertaking reasonable efforts domestically and adhering to their obligations.
However, even the countries making reasonable progress are not on track—they need to improve sectoral robustness and create an enabling environment for ambitious climate actions.

Key recommendations

Developed countries must consistently participate and adhere to UNFCCC obligations: To advance action on international climate commitments, it is essential that developed countries consistently engage in climate agreements. The analysis reveals that 6 out of 11 developed countries show inconsistent participation, signalling the need for more reliable engagement. Such inconsistent participation not only weakens collective momentum but also undermines trust and credibility. In addition, countries must also adhere to reporting deadlines, reinforce transparency and strengthen the credibility of commitments.
Developed countries should accelerate the pace of the transition to net-zero: Many developed countries are taking more years for net-zero transition (51 years on average compared to 33 years by developing countries) and are not in line to meet the 43 per cent emission reduction of 2019 levels by 2030, a global average goal needed to limit warming to 1.5°C. The developed world needs to accelerate emissions reductions by setting ambitious targets, bridging the implementation gap, and expediting its transition to net-zero.
Ensure a fair transition for developed and developing countries: Developed countries should phase out their fossil fuel consumption (oil and gas). This also aligns with CBDR-RC, where the mandate is shifted to developed countries with more historical responsibility. In the future there should be an equal focus on coal, oil, and gas to ensure a fair transition away from fossil fuels, keeping in mind the capacity to transition and minimise economic harm for emerging economies.
Developed countries should improve both the quantity and quality of climate finance to address critical gaps in delivery and fairness: Developed countries must enhance both the flow and accessibility of climate finance according to the needs of developing countries. The contributions must extend beyond mitigation to encompass robust efforts in adaptation and loss and damage. As COP29 approaches, discussions on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) should be reinforced and anchored in qualitative and quantitative needs, with a target and structure that responds to the lessons learned from the annual USD 100 billion goal.
While enhanced adaptation is the mandate across the board, developing countries must be adequately supported: Developing countries need greater support in building adequate resources, infrastructural capacity, and policy support to build sustainable physical, financial, and technical infrastructure through increased investment and financing.

HAVE A QUERY?

Simran Sukhija

Research Analyst

[email protected]

"Scientific reports warn that without immediate and significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, the world is on track for a dangerous 3.1°C temperature rise. Despite the urgency, climate debates remain clouded by unresolved and contentious issues. The failure to translate commitments into effective action is not only undermining progress but also amplifying the risks we are facing. Thus, now, more than ever, accountability is essential—not just for mitigation, but for every facet of meaningful climate action. In this regard, the Climate Accountability Matrix (CAM) serves as a critical step to ensure accountability across critical dimensions of climate action."

Executive summary

Despite the urgency of the climate crisis, global action has been limited. According to the latest UN report, without an increase in ambition in the new NDCs and immediate action, global temperatures could rise by 2.6 to 3.1°C over the course of this century (UNEP 2024). Notably, research also suggests that developed countries are not on track to meet their 2030 targets and, more importantly, that even if they were to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, they would still consume 40–50 per cent of the carbon budget available to keep temperature rise below 1.5°C (CEEW 2023). Ironically, given these projections, the current situation is no different from that in the pre-2020 era where progress was limited due to the non-participation of major developed economies, inflated base year emissions, and accounting loopholes (CEEW 2021). While this reiterates that climate actions are and have been insufficient, there is an even more pressing underlying issue – the limited power of international climate agreements to hold countries accountable for their immediate actions. As a testament to this, climate debates have been ridden with ambiguity, with crucial facets of climate action remaining unresolved and contentious, such as equity in the carbon budget, climate finance and its goals, and adaptation funding.

FAQs

How is the selection of countries made?

The Council selected G20 countries due to their significant global impact—they account for 76 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions, over 80 per cent of global GDP, 75 per cent of international trade, and about 60 per cent of the world’s population. As primary contributors, these countries are positioned to lead the green transition essential for meeting the 1.5°C climate target. The African Union, a recent G20 member, is not included due to a lack of available data.
How is equity ensured throughout the matrix?

The CAM, as a principle, is guided by equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC), aiming to hold countries accountable for their immediate actions rather than solely their promises. To reflect this principle, developed and developing countries are assessed separately. For the quantitative indicators in the framework, they are assessed based on the relative performance in their groups, while for the qualitative indicators judgement criteria differ between the developing and developed countries.
What approach is used for assessment under the Climate Accountability Matrix (CAM)?

Each indicator is equally weighted and scored from 0 to 1, with the scores then aggregated to arrive at the thematic and overall outcomes for each country. The overall outcomes are ultimately grouped into four performance categories that elucidate countries’ willingness and preparedness to translate their climate commitments into measurable progress – leaders, reasonable efforts, limited efforts and needs improvement.
What happens to a country's overall score if a specific indicator is not assessed?

If an indicator is not assessed for a country due to limited data availability or other reasons, that indicator is excluded from the total score calculation. The normalisation process ensures that the weights for the remaining indicators remain consistent and fair across all countries.
What data sources have been used?

CAM consists of qualitative and quantitative data sourced from the latest country submissions such as the Biennial Update Reports (BURs), Biennial Reports (BRs), Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), International Energy Agency (IEA), Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Additionally, we used other sources like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and other individual national repositories and official press releases, among other authentic and credible data sources. We have considered emissions data for 2020 as this was the year where data was available for most countries. Additionally, LULUCF emissions were not considered.