As a reminder, Turkey signed the agreement on 22 April 2016, but did not ratify the agreement, which came into force in November 2016 and is expected to be implemented by the end of 2020. To date, 186 out of 195 states have ratified and acceded to the agreement. Turkey, Russia, Iran and Iraq are among the countries that have signed the agreement but have not yet ratified it. On November 4, 2019, the United States informed the custodian of its withdrawal from the agreement, which will take effect exactly one year after that date. Finally, I would like to address a new theme of global climate policy, which concerns the long-term goal of the Paris agreement on temperature. The agreement commits the parties to keep the global temperature increase at “a level well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels” and has set a goal of continuing efforts to maintain the increase at 1.5 degrees Celsius, which is considered essential for some deep island states. Although this is an important achievement from the point of view of climate justice, the target of 1.5oC will be difficult to achieve without collective measures to drastically reduce emissions. Given that countries` current emissions reduction commitments, even if fully implemented, would force the world to a warmer world of 2.6 to 3.7 degrees Celsius, 1.5 degrees Celsius seems politically unbelievable, if not technically unworkable. Footnote 16 Climate modelling studies predict that even a target of 2oC can only be achieved through the full use of “negative emission technologies,” which refers to the widespread use of carbon dioxide reduction technologies.

Footnote 17 Some studies even estimate that maintaining it at 1.5 degrees Celsius would require the use of science fiction-type geoengineering technologies, particularly solar geoengineering. Given the inadequacy of the existing overall policy to achieve the paris agreement objective, the introduction and management of negative emissions options has attracted the attention of scientists. While some authors argue that the Paris Agreement itself provoked this debate thanks to its ambitious target of 1.5oC, footprint 18 remains very uncertain as to these largely unproven, risky and controversial technologies. The use of such technologies to the extent necessary to achieve the objective of the Paris Agreement would inevitably involve ethical and political issues. For example, BECCS technologies (carbon capture and storage bioenergy) need large amounts of land to grow industrial tree plantations, which would lead to competition with terrestrial and aquatic food production, further reinforcing inequalities for the poor. Footnote 19 In the end, it is likely that a new debate on climate diplomacy will arise in the context of these issues.