Paris Agreement committee snubbed over missing NDC climate plans – Image for illustrative purposes only (Image credits: Unsplash)
More than a year after the February 2025 deadline, dozens of countries have still not submitted updated climate plans to the United Nations. The Paris Agreement requires every nation to file a new nationally determined contribution, or NDC, every five years with stronger targets for cutting emissions and adapting to rising temperatures. The Implementation and Compliance Committee met in March and recorded 55 countries still without a plan, though two have submitted since then. The shortfall raises questions about how effectively the agreement can track progress toward its global goals.
Why Updated Plans Matter Now
The Paris Agreement depends on successive rounds of national pledges to drive down planet-heating emissions and build resilience against climate impacts. The current round, due in 2025, sets targets through 2035 and must reflect greater ambition than earlier submissions. Without these documents, the United Nations lacks a complete picture of collective efforts and cannot accurately assess whether the world remains on track to limit warming. The committee’s role is to encourage compliance without punishment, yet persistent gaps test that approach.
Most of the remaining countries are smaller or lower-income nations whose total emissions are modest. Larger emitters still missing plans include Egypt, Vietnam, Argentina and the Philippines. The United States and Iran stand outside the agreement entirely, though the US filed a 2035 target before withdrawing. Sudan has cited its civil war as the reason it cannot complete the required emissions tracking and policy consultations.
Committee Notes Lack of Communication
During its March meeting the committee expressed concern that 28 countries had provided no information on either their NDCs or their required biennial transparency reports. The panel had sent multiple reminders yet received no response from these governments. Board members considered naming the countries publicly but decided against it at this session, leaving open the possibility of disclosure at a September meeting.
Instead the committee agreed to send individual letters reminding each government of its obligations and offering to discuss next steps. The rules limit the panel to non-adversarial measures, with public naming as the strongest available step. It has used that measure only once before, in 2023, when it cited the Vatican and Iceland for separate reporting failures.
Lessons From Earlier Agreements
Designers of the Paris Agreement deliberately avoided the stricter enforcement mechanisms of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Under Kyoto, developed countries faced binding targets and potential penalties for shortfalls, which prompted Canada to withdraw rather than accept large financial obligations. Japan and Russia also stepped back from some commitments, and the United States never ratified the treaty. The Paris system instead relies on voluntary targets and dialogue to keep countries inside the framework.
Researchers note that this softer approach has produced steady improvement. In April 2025 roughly 171 countries had not yet filed their latest NDCs; that number has now fallen below 55. The committee continues to initiate contact and issue factual findings, which appears to encourage gradual compliance without driving nations away.
What Matters Now
The committee’s limited powers reflect a deliberate choice made during the Paris negotiations. Stronger sanctions were rejected because governments would not accept them. Yet if even naming remains difficult, the system’s credibility could erode over time.
Historians of the process emphasize that public identification still carries weight in international diplomacy. Governments generally prefer to avoid being singled out for non-compliance. The current pattern of slow but continuing submissions suggests the mechanism is functioning as intended, though further delays could test its effectiveness ahead of future reporting cycles.
