Malin Øren Aldal

Delays in nationally determined contributions often reflect credibility efforts and not weakening ambition

Fashionably or fatally late? exploring NDC procrastination in the UNFCCC

The current global climate change mitigation regime established by the Paris Agreement rests on a “pledge-and-review“ mechanism with the cyclical submission of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to progressively increase climate ambition. Following the 2023 collective review, the so-called Global Stocktake (GST), Parties were required to submit updated NDCs by February 2025. Yet compliance has been strikingly low: only 16 of 198 Parties met the deadline, and even after an extended September cutoff, just 64 submissions were recorded, covering roughly 30% of global emissions. We examine the phenomenon of NDC procrastination – the widespread delay in meeting procedural obligations – and its implications for the climate regime. Drawing on 23 country case studies, compliance reports, and fieldwork at the climate summit in Bonn, we identify four clusters of factors behind delayed submissions. Financial and institutional capacity challenges include resource constraints, reliance on external technical assistance, and complex whole-of-government coordination requirements. Technical and data-related challenges stem from gaps in emissions inventories, modelling expertise, and recalibration needs when baselines shift. Political and governance challenges range from domestic uncertainty (elections, coalition changes) to geopolitical shocks, armed conflict, and instances of ‘green backlash,’ where governments actively obstruct climate policy. Finally, procedural and strategic dynamics encourage states to delay pledges for performative or tactical reasons. While these factors can explain why many parties were late with their submissions, the question of what NDC procrastination means for the future of global climate action is more complex. While NDCs are visibly treated more seriously by many, and considerable resources are channeled into the work on pledges, the scale of non-compliance underscores the fragility of procedural norms. Furthermore, the post-GST round of delayed pledges highlights the tension between detailed, economy-wide pledges aligned with domestic policies and ratcheting up mitigation ambition at a pace needed to tackle dangerous climate change.

The uneven influence of the Global Stocktake on national climate policy and the NDCs

The Global Stocktake (GST), concluded at the 28th Conference of the Parties (COP) in Dubai in 2023, is seen as a central component of the Paris Agreement’s ambition cycle, as it is meant to assess collective global progress, which should inform future Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Many commentators and Parties put significant hope in the Stocktake’s ability to ratchet up ambition in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process. Following the Dubai COP, which resulted in the impressive “Outcome of the global stocktake” (Decision -/CMA.5) spanning almost 200 detailed paragraphs, some Parties expected the GST to become a new impulse for collective efforts to combat climate change. More critical voices, however, expressed unease and concern about “replacing the Paris Agreement with the Global Stocktake” – which meant departing from the nationally determined and diversified approach that was agreed in 2015. This policy brief takes a closer look of the influence on national climate policy and the NDCs.

Does ASEAN climate policy pay sufficient attention to public transportation?

Expansion of public transportation is a climate mitigation measure with many potential co-benefits and positive externalities: reduced congestion, lower air and noise pollution, improved road safety, and poverty alleviation. Most of the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) face serious challenges in all these areas. This paper therefore investigates how much emphasis the ten ASEAN member states are putting on public transportation compared to other areas in their climate policies. As the empirical basis for the analysis, a dataset was compiled of all targets and measures in the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) of the ASEAN countries. The analysis shows that only 2.2% of the sectoral mitigation targets and measures in the ASEAN NDCs relate to public transportation, and six of the ten NDCs have no public transportation targets or measures. These numbers are surprisingly low considering the challenges related to transportation in the ASEAN megacities and the numerous co-benefits of resolving them. Using the Avoid-Shift-Improve framework for sustainable transportation, the study finds that almost three fourths of the transportation targets and measures in the NDCs belong to the “Improve” category. This indicates that there is potential to further develop policies to “Shift” travel to public transportation and integrate them into the next round of NDC updates.

Trump 2.0 og internasjonal politikk

I denne spesialrapporten har Senter for geopolitikk samlet en rekke bidrag fra forskere tilknyttet senteret, fra Fridtjof Nansen Institutt, Institutt for Forsvarsstudier, Universitetet i Oslo, UiT – Norges Arktiske Universitet og Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt. Bidragene setter søkelys på noen konkrete temaer som inntak til å forstå et USA i endring og hva det vil kunne bety for andre stater, og for utviklingen på konkrete politikkfelt. Rapporten har særlig fokus på hva disse endringene, hver for seg og samlet, betyr for Europa og Norge. En oppdatert versjon ble publisert 12.06.25, klokken 12.40.