This report presents the findings of a new and comprehensive expert survey conducted by the OECD Environment Directorate to mark the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement. More than 250 government officials and climate change experts from more than 60 countries participated in the survey, providing valuable insights into how the Agreement has shaped global climate action over the past decade.
While public opinion surveys on climate change are well-established and existing literature includes descriptions of the Paris Agreement, this study is among the first to focus specifically on perceptions of national policymakers and non-government experts on the impact of the Paris Agreement, and the first to examine the added value of the Paris Agreement. To assess this, the study applies “what-if” scenarios, inviting experts to consider how climate policy and outcomes might have evolved in a world without the Agreement. Subsequently, the experts compare such counterfactual scenarios with actual developments. A set of detailed questions is used to measure the differences experts anticipate between the two scenarios looking at the past (2015-2025), the mid-term future (2025–2030) and the long run (2030-2040).
Through this lens, the report offers both a retrospective and a forward-looking view of international climate co-operation, examining what has been achieved with the Paris Agreement and what might have been different in its absence. The report pays special attention to the added value of the Paris Agreement vis-à-vis its predecessor, the Kyoto Protocol. The study also captures experts’ views on the progress achieved to date, the key barriers to achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement and the policies seen as most effective in accelerating the transition to net zero.
The report is organised as follows:
Chapter 1 presents the key questions, core results and a summary of the study.
Chapter 2 describes the survey design, outlining the main components of the questionnaire and their relevance. It also offers a comprehensive literature review, which covers a small set of expert surveys and a wider set of public opinion surveys focusing on climate change, with a few of them referring directly to the Paris Agreement.
Chapter 3 focuses on the added value of the Paris Agreement vis-à-vis two counterfactual scenarios: one without the Paris Agreement, leaving experts free to assume whatever they consider as a plausible alternative; and one in which the Kyoto Protocol remains the main reference of international climate action. The scenario comparison is used to understand the value of the Paris Agreement in scaling up, prioritising and mainstreaming climate action, reducing emissions, involving non-government actions and combating other environmental challenges.
Chapter 4 focuses on the current situation. It develops upon questionnaire responses regarding the extent of current domestic, economic and institutional barriers, the sufficiency of current pledges, the mutual consistency of mitigation policies and their alignment with economic objectives.
Chapter 5 analyses expert views on potential avenues to achieve net zero. It presents the views of experts on strategies that could bring transformative change, the elements and the specific policy directions of this change.