Evaluating Paris Agreement through Anthropology, Psychology, and Economics

Abstract

The Paris Agreement is the latest collective declaration of ambition to keep global warming below two degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. In theory, Parties to the Agreement should collectively decarbonize the carbon-emitting human activities to reach carbon neutrality; however, the greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise, and the leading global banks continue to invest billions of dollars into fossil fuels. Literature on the Paris Agreement gives very mixed reviews about effectiveness of its provisions. There is an ongoing heated debate whether the agreement will actually live up to expectations; whether it will be successful at preventing the temperature rise. This publication aims to contribute to the ongoing debate by conducting an interdisciplinary research on strengths and weaknesses of the document (discussing ambiguousness in metrics; national pledges; capacity-building; and the concepts of undue burden, sovereignty, non-punitive approach). It aims to analyze Paris Agreement in multi-disciplinary manner, by putting a human being at the center of attention: linking economics, psychology, and behavior to natural sciences. A failure to recognize the fundamental interconnectivity of these fields of studies might lead to failure of Paris Agreement, and failure to contain the global rising temperatures.This publication closely and critically evaluates provisions of Paris Agreement and insists that under the current circumstances, the objectives it sets will not be met. Only by first discussing anthropogenic traits and human socio-economic orders it is ultimately possible to address the origins of the current ineffectiveness and maladaptation. Understanding the drivers behind the human behavior (like the anthropogenic tendency to plan short-term instead of long-term, a direct outcome of hunter-gatherer mentality) is a prerequisite to coming up with ways to insure success of the Paris Agreement. The economic activity is an intrinsic part of human social interaction, and the rising temperatures are a byproduct of the intensified and the increased human activity; the challenge is to let human activity continue, but mitigate excessive emissions by conducting systemic changes and reforms in politics, technology, and cultures. Recognizing the non-punitive and non-interventional nature of the Agreement, to increase our chances of survival it is necessary to focus on overcoming the information gap about the climate problems, by bringing together policy making and science; by openly admitting that the world is currently not on track.