A dichotomous interpretation of the CBDR-RC led to an international agreement on the Convention and its Kyoto Protocol. Industrialised countries (Annex I) committed to absolute emission reduction or limit targets, while all other countries (excluding Appendix I) did not have such commitments. However, this rigid distinction does not reflect the dynamic diversification between developing countries since 1992, as evidenced by the diversity of contributions to global emissions and economic growth models (Deleuil, 2012). Dubash, 2009). This led Depledge and Yamin (2009, 443) to refer to UnFCCC Schedule I/non-Annex I as the dichotomy and „greatest weakness of the regime.“ The last part of our analysis uses scientific methods to highlight the main Epistemian communities that are conducting research on the Paris Agreement. Each document contains a list of references; We use this information to generate a bibliographic coupling network in which general reference models are identified throughout the document. In a bibliographical coupling network, two documents are coupled if they contain at least two common references. We use the igraph Python package to display the network (with the ForceAtlas2 layout) and analyze clusters (Csardi and Nepusz 2006, Jacomy et al 2014) to identify groups of documents that tend to cite similar literatures. By combining these clusters with the categories we have encoded, we describe the mechanisms studied by each cluster, as well as the main drivers and barriers to effectiveness identified by each epistemic group. Since not all documents contain common references, our network is smaller than the total size of the entire document (292 articles); we therefore make a careful distinction between this analysis and the broader literature in our results. Although the United States played an important role in the development of the climate agreement, it will be the only one of the 200 parties to withdraw from the pact. We reviewed peer review articles, but with a few exceptions: first, we wanted to be lenient with southern world magazines, where we could not always find relevant information about peer review practices in order to remain geographically more diverse.
Second, we include comments, editorials and information functions from magazines such as Nature, because, although not always reviewed by experts, they are tasked by publishers to discuss relevant topics and provide information and arguments to improve the debate in the context of the literature evaluated by experts. That`s why we thought these pieces were relevant. Our starting point for this study is to identify the relevant literature that the AP is studying and to justify our selection. Section 2 provided an overview of the Palestinian Authority`s mechanisms as described in the Palestinian Authority`s text, its accompanying decisions and the rules negotiated at COP24 in Katowice last December. We use this list of mechanisms to iteratively develop a research consultation on the web platforms of science and scopus and to identify each document in the complete databases referring to the Paris Agreement (or an associated synonym) or to one of the mechanisms identified (or an acronym for this mechanism) (see the audit minutes published in the additional documents for the boole search chain used). We use a list of reference articles compiled by expert advice to verify the completeness of our search strategy. Bodansky D (2016) The Paris Agreement on Climate Change: A New Hope? Law J Int 110:288-319. doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.110.2.0288 Whoever wins the U.S.
presidential election, the United States officially withdraws from the Paris Climate Agreement on November 4. This measure is a blow to international efforts to stop global warming. We limit the publication date to 2016 and from 2016. Given that the Palestinian Authority was closed in December 2015, this ensures that the identified documents are relevant to the Palestinian Authority and not to previous climate agreements.