Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C

This article has been updated


The Paris climate agreement aims at holding global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius and to “pursue efforts” to limit it to 1.5 degrees Celsius. To accomplish this, countries have submitted Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) outlining their post-2020 climate action. Here we assess the effect of current INDCs on reducing aggregate greenhouse gas emissions, its implications for achieving the temperature objective of the Paris climate agreement, and potential options for overachievement. The INDCs collectively lower greenhouse gas emissions compared to where current policies stand, but still imply a median warming of 2.6–3.1 degrees Celsius by 2100. More can be achieved, because the agreement stipulates that targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions are strengthened over time, both in ambition and scope. Substantial enhancement or over-delivery on current INDCs by additional national, sub-national and non-state actions is required to maintain a reasonable chance of meeting the target of keeping warming well below 2 degrees Celsius.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Global greenhouse gas emissions as implied by INDCs compared to no-policy baseline, current-policy and 2 °C scenarios.
Figure 2: Temperature implications of current INDCs.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 05 July 2016

    The Reviewer Information section was included.


  1. UNFCCC. Adoption of the Paris Agreement. Report No. FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1, (UNFCCC, 2015)

  2. UNFCCC. INDCs as communicated by Parties. (2015)

  3. UNFCCC. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Report No. FCCC/INFORMAL/84, (UNFCCC, 1992)

  4. Knutti, R., Rogelj, J., Sedlácˇek, J. & Fischer, E. M. A scientific critique of the two-degree climate change target. Nat. Geosci. 9, 13–18 (2016)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Randalls, S. History of the 2°C climate target. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 1, 598–605 (2010).An introduction to the roots of the 2 °C climate target and its development over the past decades

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Collins, M. et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Stocker T. F. et al.) 1029–1136 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013)

  7. Matthews, H. D. & Caldeira, K. Stabilizing climate requires near-zero emissions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L04705 (2008)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Knutti, R. & Rogelj, J. The legacy of our CO2 emissions: a clash of scientific facts, politics and ethics. Clim. Change 133, 361–373 (2015)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2014).The most recent intergovernmental report synthesizing our current understanding of the physical science and impacts of, and possible solutions to avoid, climate change.

  10. Meinshausen, M. et al. Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458, 1158–1162 (2009)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Rogelj, J. et al. Differences between carbon budget estimates unravelled. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 245–252 (2016)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Friedlingstein, P. et al. Persistent growth of CO2 emissions and implications for reaching climate targets. Nat. Geosci. 7, 709–715 (2014)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rogelj, J., McCollum, D. L., Reisinger, A., Meinshausen, M. & Riahi, K. Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation. Nature 493, 79–83 (2013)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. Luderer, G. et al. Economic mitigation challenges: how further delay closes the door for achieving climate targets. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 034033 (2013)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rogelj, J. et al. Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5 °C. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 519–527 (2015)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. Clarke, L. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Edenhofer O. et al.) 413–510 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014)

  17. Rogelj, J. et al. Zero emission targets as long-term global goals for climate protection. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 105007 (2015). Study providing insights about the consistency between Article 2 and Article 4 of the UNFCCC Paris Agreement.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. UNEP. The Emissions Gap Report 2015 (UNEP, 2015). An annual assessment tracking climate policy action over the past six years, which provided the basis for the analysis presented in this Perspective

  19. Climate Analytics, Ecofys, NewClimate Institute & PIK. Climate pledges will bring 2.7°C of warming, potential for more action. Climate Action Tracker (2015)

  20. Admiraal, A. et al. Assessing Intended Nationally Determined Contributions to the Paris Climate Agreement – What are the Projected Global and National Emission Levels for 2025–2030? Report No. PBL 1879, (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2015)

  21. IEA. World Energy Outlook 2015. International Energy Agency (2015)

  22. Boyd, R., Cranston Turner, J. & Ward, B. Intended Nationally Determined Contributions: What are the Implications for Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2030? (Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, and Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, 2015)

  23. Meinshausen, M. INDC Factsheets. Australian-German Climate and Energy College (2015)

  24. DEA. Analyzing the 2030 emissions gap. Danish Energy Agency (2015)

  25. Climate Interactive. Climate Scoreboard. Climate Interactive (2015)

  26. Fawcett, A. A. et al. Can Paris pledges avert severe climate change? Science 350, 1168–1169 (2015)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. UNFCCC. Synthesis Report on the Aggregate Effect of the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions. Report No. FCCC/CP/2015/7, (UNFCCC, 2015)

  28. Kitous A. & Keramidas K. Analysis of Scenarios Integrating the INDCs (Joint Research Centre, 2015)

  29. den Elzen, M. et al. Enhancing Mitigation Ambitions in the Major Emitting Countries: Analysis of Current and Potential Climate Policies. Report No. PBL 1631, (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2015)

  30. JRC/PBL. EDGAR version 4.2FT2012 (Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2014)

  31. Damassa, T. et al. Interpreting INDCs: Assessing Transparency of Post-2020 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets for 8 Top-Emitting Economies (Working Paper) (World Resources Institute, 2015)

  32. World Resources Institute. Paris Contributions Map. CAIT Climate Data Explorer (2015)

  33. ICAO. Assembly Resolutions in Force (as of 4 October 2013). Report No. 10022, (ICAO, 2014)

  34. den Elzen, M. G. J. et al. Greenhouse gas emissions from current and enhanced policies of China until 2030: can emissions peak before 2030? Energy Policy 89, 224–236 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sha, F., Ji, Z. & Linwei, L. An Analysis of China’s INDC (China National Center for Climate Change Strategy and International Cooperation (NCSC), 2015)

  36. Grassi G. & Dentener F. Quantifying the Contribution of the Land Use Sector to the Paris Climate Agreement. Report No. EUR 27561, (European Union, JRC Science Hub, 2015)

  37. Blanco, G. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Edenhofer O. et al.) 351–411 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014)

  38. Rogelj, J., Hare, W., Chen, C. & Meinshausen, M. Discrepancies in historical emissions point to a wider 2020 gap between 2 °C benchmarks and aggregated national mitigation pledges. Environ. Res. Lett. 6, 024002 (2011)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  39. Smith, P. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Edenhofer O. et al.) 811–922 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014)

  40. Riahi, K. et al. Locked into Copenhagen pledges — implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals. Technolog. Forecast. Soc. Change 90, 8–23 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Rogelj, J., McCollum, D. L., O’Neill, B. C. & Riahi, K. 2020 emissions levels required to limit warming to below 2 °C. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 405–412 (2013)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Kriegler, E. et al. Making or breaking climate targets: The AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy. Technolog. Forecast. Soc. Change 90, 24–44 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Iyer, G. C. et al. Improved representation of investment decisions in assessments of CO2 mitigation. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 436–440 (2015)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Roehrl, R. A. & Riahi, K. Technology dynamics and greenhouse gas emissions mitigation: a cost assessment. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 63, 231–261 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Eom, J. et al. The impact of near-term climate policy choices on technology and emission transition pathways. Technolog. Forecast. Soc. Change 90, 73–88 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Stocker, T. F. et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Stocker T. F. et al.) 33–115 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013)

  47. UNFCCC. Establishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action. Draft decision -/CP.17, (UNFCCC, 2011)

  48. Obersteiner, M. et al. Managing climate risk. Science 294, 786–787 (2001)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Scott, V., Haszeldine, R. S., Tett, S. F. B. & Oschlies, A. Fossil fuels in a trillion tonne world. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 419–423 (2015)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. IPCC. IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. Prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Metz, B. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005)

  51. Global Wind Energy Council. Global Statistics [accessed 15 October 2015] (2015)

  52. SolarPower Europe. Global Market Outlook For Solar Power / 2015 - 2019 (SolarPower Europe, 2015)

  53. Upham, P. & Roberts, T. Public perceptions of CCS: emergent themes in pan-European focus groups and implications for communications. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 5, 1359–1367 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Smith, P. et al. Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 42–50 (2016)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Creutzig, F. et al. Bioenergy and climate change mitigation: an assessment. GCB Bioenergy 7, 916–944 (2015)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Coelho, S. T. et al. in Global Energy Assessment: Toward a Sustainable Future (eds Johannsson, T. B. et al.) Ch. 20, 1459–1525 (Cambridge Univ. Press, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, 2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. IPCC. Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (eds Edenhofer, O. et al. ) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011)

  58. Rogelj, J. & Knutti, R. Geosciences after Paris. Nat. Geosci. 9, 187–189 (2016)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Iyer, G. C. et al. The contribution of Paris to limit global warming to 2 °C. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 125002 (2015)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  60. Cronin C. et al. Faster and Cleaner: Decarbonization in the Power and Transport Sectors is Surpassing Predictions and Offering Hope for Limiting Warming to 2°C (ClimateWorks, NewClimate Institute, Ecofys, Climate Analytics, 2015)

  61. Day, T., Röser, F., Tewari, R., Kurdziel, M. & Höhne, N. Preparation of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) as a Catalyst for National Climate Action (NewClimate Institute, 2015)

  62. Weischer, L., Morgan, J. & Patel, M. Climate clubs: can small groups of countries make a big difference in addressing climate change? Rev. Eur. Community Int. Environ. Law 21, 177–192 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Blok, K., Höhne, N., van der Leun, K. & Harrison, N. Bridging the greenhouse-gas emissions gap. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 471–474 (2012)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Hsu, A., Moffat, A. S., Weinfurter, A. J. & Schwartz, J. D. Towards a new climate diplomacy. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 501–503 (2015)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  65. UNEP. Climate Commitments of Subnational Actors and Business: A Quantitative Assessment of their Emission Reduction Impact. Report No. DEW/1917/NA, (United Nations Environment Programme, 2015)

  66. IPCC in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 1–33 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014)

  67. UN General Assembly. Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Report No. A/RES/70/1, (United Nations, 2015)

  68. Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M., Sedlácˇek, J. & Knutti, R. Implications of potentially lower climate sensitivity on climate projections and policy. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 031003 (2014)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  69. Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M. & Knutti, R. Global warming under old and new scenarios using IPCC climate sensitivity range estimates. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 248–253 (2012)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  70. Meinshausen, M., Raper, S. C. B. & Wigley, T. M. L. Emulating coupled atmosphere-ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6 – part 1: model description and calibration. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 11, 1417–1456 (2011)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Cames, M., Graichen, J., Siemons, A. & Cook, V. Emission Reduction Targets for International Aviation and Shipping. Report No. IP/A/ENVI/2015-11, (European Parliament’s Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, 2015)

  72. Fekete, H. et al. The Impact of Good Practice Policies on Regional and Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions (NewClimate Institute, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, 2015)

  73. Roelfsema, M., Harmsen, M., Olivier, J. & Hof, A. F. Climate Action Outside the UNFCCC. Report No. PBL 1188, (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2015)

  74. Boden, T. A., Marland, G. & Andres, R. J. Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO 2 Emissions (Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, 2013)

  75. Le Quéré, C. et al. Global Carbon Budget 2015. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 7, 349–396 (2015). A yearly authoritative update of global anthropogenic carbon emissions, and natural and anthropogenic sinks

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  76. Armstrong, J. S. & Green, K. C. Forecasting dictionary [accessed 13 July 2012] (2012)

  77. Nakic´enovic´, N. & Swart, R. IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000)

  78. IEA. World Energy Outlook 2014 (International Energy Agency, 2014)

  79. Meinshausen, M. et al. National post-2020 greenhouse gas targets and diversity-aware leadership. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 1098–1106 (2015)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  80. UNFCCC. Review of the Implementation of Commitments and Other Provisions of the Convention. Report No. FCCC/CP/2002/8,, 7 (UNFCCC, 2002)

Download references


We thank all involved in the UNEP Emissions Gap Report, in particular J. McGlade, J. Alcamo and B. Metz, the members of the steering committee, all its authors, and the secretariat at UNEP-DTU, in particular A. Olhoff and J. Christensen. We acknowledge and are grateful for the data contributions of, and discussion with, all the global and national modelling groups, in particular M. Rocha, B. Hare, M. Schaeffer (Climate Analytics, Germany, Climate Action Tracker), L. Jeffery (PIK, Germany, Climate Action Tracker), P. van Breevoort (Ecofys, The Netherlands, Climate Action Tracker), A. Admiraal, M. Roelfsema, H. van Soest (PBL, The Netherlands), N. Forsell (IIASA, Austria), L. Cozzi, F. Kesicke (IEA, France), J. Cranston Turner, R. Boyd (LSE, UK), S. Dockweiler (DEA, Denmark), L. Siegel, E. Sawin (Climate Interactive, USA), A. Kitous, K. Keramidas, G. Grassi (JRC, European Commission), G. Iyer (PNNL, USA), and the UNFCCC Secretariat. Without their contributions, this Perspective would have had a much more limited data basis. We thank S. Sterl (NewClimate Institute, Germany) and M. Roelfsema (PBL, The Netherlands) for assistance with data analysis, M. Strubegger (IIASA, Austria) for providing load factor estimates, V. Krey and O. Fricko (IIASA, Austria) for providing capture efficiencies for negative emissions technologies, and J. Cook for critical feedback on the manuscript and figures. We acknowledge and thank the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) for hosting and maintaining the IPCC AR5 Scenario Database. J.R., N.H. and K.R. received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 642147 (CD-LINKS). M.M. is the recipient of an Australian Research Council (ARC) Future Fellowship (grant number FT130100809).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



The paper was initiated during discussions between M.d.E., N.H., H.W., J.R. and other members of the UNEP Gap Emissions Gap Report author team; all authors were involved in designing the research; the quantitative INDC analysis was coordinated by M.d.E., N.H. and H.F. with substantial contributions from T.F., H.W., R.S., F.S. and M.M.; the analysis of post-2030 implications was performed by J.R., with substantial contributions from K.R.; J.R. created all figures and was responsible for the overall coordination of the paper. J.R. and N.H. led the writing of the paper, with substantial contributions from all authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Michel den Elzen or Niklas Höhne.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Reviewer Information Nature thanks O. Geden and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Text, Supplementary Figures 1-4, Supplementary Tables 1-6 and Supplementary References. (PDF 1609 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rogelj, J., den Elzen, M., Höhne, N. et al. Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C. Nature 534, 631–639 (2016).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing