Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, which set legally binding emission reduction targets (as well as penalties for non-compliance) only for industrialized countries, the Paris Agreement requires all countries – rich, poor, developed and developing – to take their share and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. To this end, the Paris Agreement provides for greater flexibility: commitments that countries should make are not included, countries can voluntarily set their emissions targets and countries will not be penalized if they do not meet their proposed targets. But what the Paris agreement requires is to monitor, report and reassess, over time, the objectives of individual and collective countries, in order to bring the world closer to the broader objectives of the agreement. And the agreement stipulates that countries must announce their next round of targets every five years, contrary to the Kyoto Protocol, which was aimed at this target but which contained no specific requirements to achieve this goal. On August 4, 2017, the Trump administration officially announced to the United Nations that the United States intends to withdraw from the Paris Agreement as soon as it is legally entitled to it.  The formal declaration of resignation could not be submitted until after the agreement for the United States came into force on November 4, 2019 for a three-year date.   On November 4, 2019, the U.S. government filed the withdrawal notice with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, custodian of the agreement, and formally withdrew from the Paris Agreement a year later, when the withdrawal came into effect.  After the November 2020 elections, President-elect Joe Biden promised to reinstate the United States in the Paris Agreement for his first day in office and renew the U.S.
commitment to climate change mitigation.   Although the slowdown and adjustment require more climate funding, adjustment has generally received less support and less private sector action.  A 2014 OECD report showed that in 2014, only 16% of the world`s financial resources were devoted to adaptation to climate change.  The Paris Agreement called for a balance between climate finance between adaptation and mitigation, highlighting in particular the need to strengthen support for adaptation from the parties most affected by climate change, including least developed countries and small island developing states. The agreement also reminds the parties of the importance of public subsidies, as adjustment measures receive less public sector investment.  John Kerry, as Secretary of State, announced that the United States would double its grant-based adjustment funding by 2020.  The IPCC SR1.5 also assesses other pathways that lead to higher warming levels, including pathways that keep warming below 2 degrees Celsius and do not return to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The IPCC SR1.5 provides an assessment of these methods for comparing and consistency with attenuation paths compatible with 1.5oC. The IPCC SR1.5 is also very clear about the increase in climate risks between 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius, which refers to the clause of the Paris LTTG Agreement, which recognizes that warming is well below 2 degrees Celsius and is limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius, which greatly reduces the risks and effects of climate change.
These rules of transparency and accountability are similar to those set out in other international agreements. Although the system does not include financial sanctions, the requirements are intended to easily monitor the progress of individual nations and promote a sense of overall group pressure, discouraging any towing of feet among countries that might consider it.