A bullseye but with a leave in the centre (Dall-e)

The remaining plans due by September are unlikely to deliver the deep emission cuts needed for course correction (Dall-e)

Climate pledge delays: The world can’t afford more hot air

Last-minute extension stretches deadline for national climate plans to later this year, raising hopes for stronger pledges

Georgia Hammersley

7 March 20254 min read

Global temperature records are being shattered with unsettling frequency. Last year, 2024, was the hottest year on record, according to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, reaching 1.6°C above pre-industrial levels, and narrowly overtaking record-hot 2023.

Global temperatures have – for the first time – exceeded the 1.5°C target set by the 2015 Paris Agreement. This troubling milestone underscores the reality that the world is heading in the wrong direction, even if an official breach requires sustained levels over a 20-year period.

To avert runaway climate change, the Paris Agreement requires that all 195 signatory countries submit national climate plans, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). These include voluntary pledges to reduce planet-warming emissions from fossil fuels.

February was marked as the deadline for the third update to these plans, covering emission reductions through to 2035. But in a last-minute move, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) extended the deadline to September. The delay appears to be driven by major players – including the European Union, China, and India – failing to submit updated plans on time. Australia is also among the guilty.

A dramatic step up in ambition is needed.

The hesitancy and delay are hardly surprising amid an increasingly volatile geopolitical landscape. But a lack of resolve from key emitters leaves multilateral climate progress on shaky ground.

In fact, only a handful of countries accounting for 16% of global greenhouse gas emissions met the original deadline. This included Brazil, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. The United States’ pledge under the Biden administration is also part of this figure, though it has been effectively nullified by President Donald Trump’s executive order to once again withdraw from the Paris Agreement.

Despite the setbacks, UNFCCC Executive Secretary Simon Stiell remained sanguine in a recent speech to the Instituto Rio Branco in Brasília. He noted that most countries still intend to submit their plans this year and argued that the extension offers an opportunity to refine their commitments and ensure high-quality submissions.

Above all, a dramatic step up in ambition is needed. The 2023 Global Stocktake projected that the previous round of commitments put the world on track for a global temperature rise of between 2.1 to 2.8°C this century. To keep “1.5 alive”, the new ones must collectively achieve emission cuts of 42% by 2030 and 57% by 2035 compared with 2019 levels. This represents a considerable political and technical task.

Early indications from the few plans submitted on time have offered little cause for optimism. New Zealand’s submission, for instance, has been slammed for offering almost no additional progress compared to its previous plan.

Brazil’s new target lacks clarity, promising a possible reduction range of 59-67% below its 2005 baseline – falling short even at its upper limit of Paris-aligned ambition. It also sidesteps the core issue of halting emissions from deforestation. As one of the world’s largest annual and historical emitters – and host of this year’s UN climate conference (COP30), where updated NDCs will take centre stage – Brazil was expected to lead by example and urge other major polluters to act.

The United Kingdom stands out as the only submission close to being “Paris aligned” so far, pledging to slash emissions 81% by 2035 compared to 1990 levels, up from its previous 68% target for 2030. This matches expert recommendations and keeps the United Kingdom on track for net-zero by 2050. It also proves that bold action is possible, though delivering on these promises could be challenging.

The remaining plans due by September are unlikely to deliver the deep emission cuts needed for course correction. The absence of the United States will also have ripple effects – at best, dampening the ambition of other countries; at worst, triggering a domino effect of countries abandoning their commitments altogether, dismantling the legitimacy of global climate agreements.

Indonesia is already weighing this option, arguing that developing nations shouldn’t be held to their pledges while the world’s largest historical emitter walks away. But with funding for climate action implicitly tied to their participation in the global response to the climate crisis, a full withdrawal may be less likely – especially if it compromises major deals such as Indonesia’s Just Energy Transition Partnership, where Germany has now replaced the United States as co-lead of the initiative.

The big test now is keeping the climate pact intact. After Trump’s first withdrawal in 2017, the European Union played an important role in sustaining global efforts by increasing climate finance commitments. This time, Europe is mired in political turmoil, yet has signalled it will stay on course. Australia faces its own pressures with climate debates expected to be a key battleground ahead of the election this year.

Failing to set bold targets and keep global momentum alive would be a serious misstep. While far from perfect, the Paris Agreement has already steered the world away from a 4.8°C warming scenario, though not enough to forestall already increasing tropical cyclones, heatwaves, and other climatic extremes. Every additional pledge helps close the gap to the Paris temperature goal and prevent the most severe climate impacts.

Current global circumstances may appear dire, but in moments like these we must double efforts, not give up.