The Paris Agreement at Ten Years

Annex A. OECD Survey on the transformative effects of the Paris Agreement

Part A: Added value of the Paris Agreement

A.1. Climate mitigation as a policy priority

To what extent do you agree with the following statement?

Government experts version: In your country, climate change mitigation:

Non-government experts version: Internationally, climate change mitigation:

 

	Score 1: strongly disagree, 2: disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: somewhat agree, 5: agree, 6: strongly agree
was a policy priority in the beginning of 2000 (non-government experts only).
was a policy priority in the beginning of 2015.
is a policy priority in 2024.
will be a policy priority in 2030.
will be a policy priority in 2040.
would be a policy priority in 2024, in absence of the Paris Agreement.
would be a policy priority in 2030, in absence of the Paris Agreement.
would be a policy priority in 2040, in absence of the Paris Agreement.

A.2. Stringency of mitigation policies

To what extent do you agree with the following statement?

Government experts version: In your country, climate change mitigation policies:

Non-government experts version: Internationally, climate change mitigation policies:

	Score 1: strongly disagree, 2: disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: somewhat agree, 5: agree, 6: strongly agree
were stringent at the beginning of 2000 (non-government experts only).
were stringent at the beginning of 2015.
are stringent in 2024.
will be stringent in 2030.
will be stringent in 2040.
would be stringent in 2024, in absence of the Paris Agreement.
would be stringent in 2030, in absence of the Paris Agreement.
would be stringent in 2040, in absence of the Paris Agreement.

A.3. The shift from the Kyoto Protocol to the Paris Agreement

We now ask you to perform the following thought experiment. Imagine that neither the Paris Agreement nor any other international agreement on climate change under the UNFCCC was reached at any year between 2015 and 2024. ln other words, the Kyoto protocol was still the main reference international agreement. Imagine that all the key events that are not directly related to climate change (e.g. the covid pandemic, the war on Ukraine) occurred the same way they did in the period 2015-2024.

To what extent do you agree with the following statement?

Government experts version: In your country, in 2024, without Paris Agreement and the associated NDCs:

Non-government experts version: Internationally, in 2024, without Paris Agreement and the associated NDCs:

 

	Score 1: strongly disagree, 2: disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: somewhat agree, 5: agree, 6: strongly agree
Emission reduction targets would be weaker than they currently are (i.e. with the Paris agreement and the associated NDCs).
Climate change mitigation policies and laws would be less stringent than they currently are (i.e. with the Paris agreement and the associated NDCs).
Greenhouse gas emissions would be higher than they currently are.
There would be more policy action to tackle other environmental challenges.
There would be less policy action to tackle other environmental challenges.
Climate action would be less mainstreamed by the political system (e.g. political parties).
Climate action would be less mainstreamed by government officials.
Securing public support for climate change mitigation policies would be more difficult.
There would be fewer structured frameworks to guide my country’s responsibility for reducing its greenhouse gas emissions (non-government experts only). There would be fewer structured frameworks to guide responsibility for reducing its greenhouse gas emissions (government experts only).
The government would have fewer benchmarks to measure my country’s progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions (government experts only) National governments would have fewer benchmarks to measure progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions (non-government experts only)
The involvement of local governments (states, regions, cities) in climate action would be lower.

A.4. Characteristics of the Paris Agreement that increase its added value

To what extent do you agree with the following statement?

Both versions: Internationally, the Paris agreement:

 

	Score 1: strongly disagree, 2: disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: somewhat agree, 5: agree, 6: strongly agree
increased the number of countries undertaking substantial climate action.
has made international climate cooperation more solution-oriented.
will create a virtuous cycle of ambition and climate action.
will encourage countries to act because all countries are moving towards GHG mitigation.
offers opportunities for my country to increase the influence it exerts internationally.
has set a new treaty-making approach as a precedent for other cross-border environmental challenges (e.g. plastic pollution).
will help countries address other global challenges more effectively.
has led to greater participation of the private sector in global climate action.
is hindered in its effective implementation because of the geopolitical situation.

Part B: Current efforts and barriers

B.1 Mitigation policies

To what extent do you agree with the following statement?

Government experts version: In your country, in 2024:

Non-government experts version: Internationally, in 2025:

	Score 1: strongly disagree, 2: disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: somewhat agree, 5: agree, 6: strongly agree
Current climate change mitigation policies are well-aligned with each other.
Current climate change mitigation policies are compatible with economic objectives.
The current progress on climate change mitigation is in line with ambition.
Current climate change mitigation policies are on track to meet NDC targets on time.

Parts B.2, B.3 and B.4

Each of the following questions examines the relative importance of different factors.

Please allocate a total of 100 points to the various available factors presented in the question, using higher numbers for factors that you consider to be more important. Use 0 points on a factor that you consider as unimportant or false. Use the total of 100 points on a factor only if you believe that all the rest of the factors in the question should receive 0 points (i.e. they are totally unimportant). Make sure that the scores you provided in the question sum up to 100.

B.2 Policy challenges

The main domestic* policy challenges to be addressed to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement are:

 

	Score
a) To increase awareness of climate change issues
b) To increase acceptability to citizens of climate change mitigation policies
c) To induce businesses to scale up the use of clean technologies
d) To render climate friendly technologies and products more affordable for households
e) To provide the infrastructure necessary for the transition to net zero
f) Other If the sum of provided scores is less than 100, please indicate a domestic policy challenge that is considerably different from the above and explain briefly:

* The word “domestic” is omitted in the questionnaire for non-government experts

B.3 Economic barriers

The main economic challenges that may interact with the goals of the Paris Agreement are:

 

	Score
a) Inflation reduces the willingness-to-pay for climate friendly consumer options.
b) The transition requires public funds, while these are limited.
c) The economic conditions hamper the mobilisation of private investment in green technologies.
d) The transition could harm overall economic performance (i.e. GDP and GDP growth rate).
e) The transition could render export goods less competitive.
f) Climate-change mitigation policies may affect employment in key sectors of the economy.
g) Climate-change mitigation policies may have substantial distributional impacts.
h) Other If the sum of provided scores is less than 100, please indicate an economic challenge that is considerably different from the above and explain briefly:

B.4 Institutional issues

The main domestic* institutional barriers to be addressed to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement are:

 

	Score
a) Climate action is not well co-ordinated vertically, i.e. across different levels of jurisdiction (e.g. national, regional, local).
b) Climate action is not well co-ordinated horizontally, i.e. across government branches (e.g. across different ministries and agencies).
c) Mechanisms to ensure the continuity of climate change mitigation policies beyond electoral cycles need to be enhanced.
d) Government agencies need more resources to scale up their technical capacity to develop effective climate strategies.
e) The mechanisms to monitor the compliance with (already established) climate strategies need to be improved.
f) Stakeholders negatively affected by the green transition maintain substantial influence on climate policy design and public perception.
g) Domestic financial institutions to mobilise green investment are not adequately developed.
h) Research and innovation by public institutions are not well aligned with mitigation objectives.
i) Other If the sum of provided scores is less than 100, please indicate a domestic institutional barrier that is considerably different from the above and explain briefly:

* The word “domestic” is omitted in the questionnaire for non-government experts

Part C: Enabling factors

Each of the following questions examines the relative importance of different factors.

Please allocate a total of 100 points to the various available factors presented in the question, using higher numbers for factors that you consider to be more important. Use 0 points on a factor that you consider as unimportant or false. Use the total of 100 points on a factor only if you believe that all the rest of the factors in the question should receive 0 points (i.e. they are totally unimportant). Make sure that the scores you provided in the question sum up to 100.

The following is an example:  [ Example question ]. To reduce emissions from urban passenger transport, the policy priorities are:    (i) Promoting the use of public transport modes:                                            35 (ii) Promoting active modes of transport, i.e. walking and cycling:                 20 (iii) Supporting the development of on-demand, ridesharing services:           0 (iv) Curbing urban sprawl, so that travel distances are shorter:                       15 (vi) Promoting the proliferation of electric and hydrogen vehicles:                 25 (vii) Other :                                                                                                         5 Sum:                                                                                                                100 

Please note that some of the questions allow you to add a factor that you think is important but was omitted.  For example: Please enumerate here the other policy priorities:  [Example response: “Promoting micro-mobility modes, such as scooters and skateboards”]

C.1 Implementation gap

Government experts version: Bridging the gap between current emissions and the target inscribed in your country's NDC will materialize via:

Non-government experts version: Bridging the gap between current emissions and the targets inscribed in NDCs will materialize via:

	Score
a) Market driven technological progress without policy support
b) Policy measures to boost green innovation (e.g. R&D subsidies, patent policy)
c) Market-based instruments (e.g. carbon tax, cap and trade schemes)
d) Regulations (e.g. banning fossil-fuel intensive consumer options)
e) Behavioural interventions (e.g. environmental awareness campaigns, green labels)
f) Voluntary individual behavioural change
g) Voluntary corporate action

C.2 Ambition gap

Government experts version: Bridging the gap between your country's NDC target and 1.5°C-aligned emissions reductions will materialize via:

Non-government experts version: Bridging the gap between emission targets in current NDCs and 1.5°C-aligned emissions levels will materialize via:

	Score
a) Market driven technological progress without policy support
b) Policy measures to boost green innovation (e.g. R&D subsidies, patent policy)
c) Market-based instruments (e.g. fossil-fuel taxes, cap and trade schemes)
d) Regulations (e.g. banning fossil-fuel intensive consumer options)
e) Behavioural interventions (e.g. environmental awareness campaigns, green labels)
f) Voluntary individual behavioural change
g) Voluntary corporate action

C.3 Policy directions

Government experts version: When it comes to achieving the goals of Paris Agreement, to what extent should policy makers in your country focus on the following elements that can contribute to transformative change?

Non-government experts version: When it comes to achieving the goals of Paris Agreement, to what extent should policy makers focus on the following elements that can contribute to transformative change?

 

	Score
a) Reducing the carbon intensity of the energy used in various sectors (e.g. transport, buildings, industry)
b) Electrifying various sectors of the economy (e.g. transport, buildings, industry) and decarbonising the electricity used in them
c) Enabling deployment of green hydrogen in various sectors of the economy (e.g. transport, buildings, industry)
d) Improving energy efficiency, i.e. reducing the energy needed to produce the same amount of goods and services consumed today
e) Inducing a change towards consumption patterns that favour less energy-demanding products and services (e.g. a switch from private car to public transport)
f) Reducing total demand for products (e.g. reducing primary production of consumption goods via promoting circular economy)
g) Reducing carbon concentrations in the atmosphere ex-post via carbon capture and storage technologies
h) Targeting greenhouse gas emissions that are not related to energy use, i.e. those from Agriculture, Forestry, Land Use, Industrial Processes and Waste management
i) Other If the sum of provided scores is less than 100, please indicate an element that is considerably different from the above and explain briefly below:

Part D: Transformative change

In the list below, please indicate:

D.1 Transformative potential of mitigation policy directions

… the degree to which each policy direction has a transformative potential to drastically reduce emissions, using one of the following responses: 

1: No transformative potential at all 2: Minimum transformative potential, weak complement to other effective policy directions 3: Significant transformative potential, important complement to other effective policy directions 4: Strong transformative potential, among the most important policy directions 5: Very strong transformative potential, essential component in the policy package

D.2 Progress in different mitigation policy directions

Government experts version: …the degree to which each policy direction has advanced in your country after 2015, using one of the following responses:

Non-government experts version: …the degree to which each policy direction has advanced internationally after 2015, using one of the following responses:

1: Has not advanced at all 2: Few sporadic policy initiatives were taken 3: Some policy initiatives are taken 4: Observable policy efforts have been made 5: Very significant policy efforts have been made

Like all previous sections, this section does not require the gathering of information or data to support the provided responses.

 

	D.1 transformative potential to drastically reduce emissions: Score 1-5	D.2 progress: Score 1-5
Phase out of fossil-fuel use in final consumption (e.g. banning of internal combustion engine private cars, banning of fossil-fuels in residential space and water heating, phase out of natural gas use in buildings).
Phase out of fossil-fuel use in production (e.g. phasing out the use of natural gas used in by the manufacturing sector, excluding electricity generation).
Phase out or ban fossil-fuels used in power generation (e.g. ban of coal-fired power plants).
Remove subsidies and support measures that encourage the production and use of fossil fuels.
Tax the carbon footprint of generated electricity (e.g. electricity prices contain a distinct CO2 tax expressed in USD per ton CO2).
Subsidise energy generated by renewables (e.g. feed-in tariffs, direct subsidies).
Tax the carbon footprint of consumption goods and services (e.g. CO2 tax on air tickets, CO2 based VAT adjustments).
Tax the greenhouse gas footprint of consumption goods (e.g. CH4 tax on meat, N2O tax on rice).
Tax the carbon content of fossil fuels at source (i.e. CO2 taxes on all energy products derived directly from hydrocarbons, such as gasoline, diesel, kerosene).
Cap and trade CO2 emissions (e.g. Emissions Trading Schemes).
Impose a minimum energy efficiency standard in industry (e.g. mandatory energy performance standards, mandatory energy audits).
Impose a minimum energy efficiency standard in energy-consuming durable goods (e.g. fuel economy standards on cars, minimum energy efficiency in buildings).
Subsidise consumers to upgrade the energy efficiency of energy-consuming durable goods (e.g. subsidies for heat pump installation, energy efficient appliances, and retrofitting of residential buildings).
Subsidise the installation of renewable energy technologies at home (e.g. subsidies on solar panels, battery storage).
Subsidise the use of existing carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) technologies (i.e. incentives to deploy CCUS in sectors where it is currently operational, e.g. natural gas processing, ammonia and ethanol production).
Subsidise the R&D of carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) technologies (e.g. incentives to develop competitive CCUS technologies in sectors where it is currently not easy to deploy).
Subsidise the deployment of existing alternative fuels in the economy (e.g. hydrogen for vehicles, sustainable aviation fuels, ammonia for shipping).
Subsidise the R&D on new alternative fuels.
Scale up power generation by nuclear power plants.
Scale up power generation from various renewables (excluding nuclear).
Extend responsibility to manage the waste of products containing carbon-intensive components (i.e. policies that increase the generalised cost (pecuniary, time etc.) of product use by transferring a waste management responsibility to the consumer or the producer).
Scale-up behavioural interventions to promote less carbon-intensive consumption patterns (e.g. information campaigns, CO2 labelling, nudging in favour of greener commodities).
Regulate land use to protect existing carbon sinks (e.g. caps on land use conversion, creation of protected areas).
Invest in green infrastructure (e.g. investment in hydrogen distribution networks, expansion of public transport systems and soft mobility infrastructure, investment in EV recharging infrastructure).
Invest in the restoration and expansion of carbon sinks (e.g. public investment in afforestation, reforestation and restoration of wetlands, peatlands etc).
Subsidise low-emission agricultural practices (e.g. eco-schemes in the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy).
Regulate the use of agricultural practices (e.g. banning agricultural practices with a high CH4, CO2 and N2O footprint, for example crop burning, use of synthetic fertilisers).
Scale up the use of carbon-offsetting mechanisms of high environmental integrity (e.g. voluntary carbon markets).