Austria is the best student of the 23 richest countries in terms of efforts made to respect the Paris climate agreement, according to a study published Thursday, November 7 by the media 2050NOW, digital media dedicated to environmental issues belonging to the Les Echos-Le Parisien group, which Franceinfo was able to consult.
Four days before the opening of COP29, which will be held in Baku, Azerbaijan, from November 11 to 22, this unprecedented ranking highlights the commitments kept or not kept by States by comparing them to their promises to respect the Paris agreement. This study was carried out jointly by the Hugo Observatory of the University of Liège, Belgium, and Degroof Petercam Asset Management (DPAM), a Belgian management fund belonging to Crédit Agricole.
Signed in December 2015, the Paris agreement set the objective of “keep the increase in global average temperature well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and continue efforts “to limit the increase in temperature to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels”. Thus, countries must not only reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, but also have obligations in terms of adaptation, the means implemented, transcription into law, and even transparency. According to the study, only compliance with each of its criteria will make it possible to win the fight against global warming.
The study, carried out under the direction of researcher François Gemenne, head of the Hugo Observatory, covers the 23 richest countries. And it is Austria which ranks at the top of the ranking, ahead of Germany (2nd) and Switzerland (3rd). France ranks 9th, ahead of the northern European countries of Norway, Denmark and Finland. The United States is dead last.
If Austria appears to be the best student of the Paris agreement, it is because it performs well on almost all the criteria retained by the study. Note that more than three quarters of its electricity comes from renewable energies, a record in the European Union.
Germany is second in the ranking, despite greenhouse gas emissions considered average. But it performs well on other criteria, such as adaptation to climate change, where it displays a maximum score, or support for developing countries.
Switzerland and the Netherlands follow. Spain ranks 5th. If it is less efficient than Iceland and Denmark on its current emissions, its policy centered on renewable energies, which now represent half of its electricity production, allows it to be in the top 5 of the ranking.
France takes 9th place. It obtains a maximum score for the criterion of adaptation to climate change and is even first in terms of financial support for developing countries. But France is failing on the issue of multilateral transparency, which evaluates the quality and timeliness of its climate reports. She is 15th on this criterion. And it ranks 14th on its greenhouse gas emissions.
The study highlights the surprises in this ranking, such as the countries of northern Europe, often considered models of ecological transition. Thus, Finland performs excellently on the “net zero” criterion, which assesses the ambition and comprehensiveness of a country's commitment to achieving this goal, and on adaptation, for which it scores a maximum score. But the country is ranked very poorly on the issue of emissions by 2030 (20th out of 23 countries), and on the support provided to developing countries (18th).
Iceland, the world leader in renewable energies, is number one in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. But its poor performance on the other objectives places the country in 8th position.
23rd and last in the ranking: the United States. Despite the ambitious climate plan announced by American President Joe Biden in April 2022, its effects have not yet been felt. The study notes that the country is last or almost on four of the six criteria retained. “Not only are the climate commitments not up to par, but they are not respected!” analyzes researcher François Gemenne, director of the study, professor at HEC, co-author of the sixth IPCC report. He says he is surprised by “the disparity that appears with regard to the different criteria. Some countries are very good on certain criteria, such as adaptation or the legislative system for example, but turn out to be bad on others.”
Methodology:
The study quantified, for each country, compliance with commitments by reviewing the main promises. The team that carried out the study constructed a global indicator based on the latest available official data certified and harmonized at the international level (until 2022), and six key criteria: current greenhouse gas emissions, projected emissions by 2030, the commitment to achieving net zero emissions, efforts to adapt to climate change, the means implemented, and multilateral transparency which assesses the quality and timeliness of climate reports of a country. In the interest of fairness, the researchers took into account, for each country, historical responsibility (CO2 emissions per capita), the capacity to act, which depends on wealth per capita (GDP per capita), and demographics. (% of world population).
