Subnational Implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement

When world leaders adopted the Paris Agreement in December 2015, they created a landmark framework designed to unite nearly every nation on Earth in the fight against climate change. But here’s what makes this agreement unique: while countries negotiate at the international level, much of the real work happens at the subnational level-in states, provinces, cities, and municipalities. This multi-layered approach to climate action recognizes that global challenges require local solutions, and that governments closest to communities often have the most practical tools for reducing emissions and building resilience.

The global climate resilience framework
How nationally determined contributions work
The transparency framework
India’s climate commitments under the Paris Agreement
The path to net-zero by 2070
The role of subnational governments in implementation
Why local action matters
California’s climate leadership amid federal withdrawal
The U.S. Climate Alliance today
The significance of subnational persistence
Building an effective multilevel climate governance system

The global climate resilience framework

The Paris Agreement established a comprehensive framework with a central goal: limiting global temperature rise to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, with efforts to keep warming under 1.5°C. This isn’t just about temperature numbers-it’s about protecting people, ecosystems, and economies from the worst impacts of climate change.

The agreement aims to strengthen the global response to climate threats in three key ways. First, it works to hold temperature increases in check, recognizing that every fraction of a degree matters for reducing risks and impacts. Second, it focuses on increasing adaptive capacity-the ability of communities and ecosystems to cope with climate impacts while fostering low-emission development that doesn’t threaten food production. Third, it seeks to redirect financial flows toward climate-resilient pathways.

A critical aspect of this framework is its recognition that adaptation is both a local and global challenge. The agreement establishes a worldwide goal of enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience, and reducing vulnerability-all while contributing to sustainable development. This means protecting people, livelihoods, food security, and ecosystems from escalating climate threats, with particular attention to developing countries that face the most severe impacts.

How nationally determined contributions work

Rather than imposing top-down mandates, the Paris Agreement operates through a bottom-up system where each country submits its own nationally determined contributions (NDCs). These are essentially each nation’s climate action plan, outlining specific targets for reducing emissions and adapting to climate impacts.

The structure differs fundamentally from earlier climate treaties like the Kyoto Protocol. The strict division between developed and developing nations has been replaced by differentiated individual contributions, creating a more flexible approach to burden-sharing that acknowledges different national circumstances and capabilities.

Under this system, 196 parties to the agreement commit to setting their own targets and updating them every five years with increasingly ambitious goals. A global stocktake every five years assesses collective progress toward the agreement’s objectives, informing countries as they update their commitments. This creates a ratchet mechanism designed to continuously raise ambition over time.

The transparency framework

To ensure accountability, the agreement established an enhanced transparency framework requiring parties to report on their progress. Countries must regularly provide national inventory reports of emissions and information tracking progress toward their NDC targets. This monitoring system helps build trust among nations while identifying where more action is needed.

India’s climate commitments under the Paris Agreement

India, the world’s third-largest emitter, has made significant climate pledges under the Paris framework. The country’s original NDC included targets to reduce emissions intensity of GDP by 33-35% from 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve 40% of cumulative electricity capacity from non-fossil sources.

In August 2022, India submitted an updated NDC strengthening these commitments. The revised targets now call for reducing emissions intensity by 45% by 2030 from 2005 levels and achieving approximately 50% cumulative electric power installed capacity from non-fossil fuel sources by 2030.

Notably, India has already achieved its original targets well ahead of schedule. As of late 2023, cumulative electric power installed capacity from non-fossil sources reached 43.81% of total capacity. The country’s emissions intensity had already decreased by 33% between 2005 and 2019, meeting the original NDC target early.

The path to net-zero by 2070

India’s updated NDC represents an important step toward its long-term goal of reaching net-zero emissions by 2070. The country has also introduced a framework for transitioning to cleaner energy through 2030, focusing on increasing green jobs, boosting manufacturing of low-emission products like electric vehicles, and promoting innovative technologies such as green hydrogen.

The role of subnational governments in implementation

While nations negotiate the Paris Agreement, implementation often falls to lower levels of government. The agreement’s preamble explicitly recognizes the importance of engaging all levels of government and various actors in addressing climate change.

This recognition reflects a practical reality: subnational governments-states, regions, and municipalities-play a key role in public investment, particularly in infrastructure projects essential for climate action. In many countries, most climate-significant expenditure occurs at the subnational level. In seven OECD countries, 70% or more of such spending happens at state and local levels, reaching over 80% in Japan.

The agreement specifically acknowledges that adapting to climate change is a challenge with local, subnational, national, regional, and international dimensions. Cities and regions often have direct control over land-use planning, building codes, public transportation, waste management, and local energy systems-all critical levers for reducing emissions and building resilience.

Why local action matters

Cities are responsible for over 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions and consume approximately 80% of the world’s energy. Local and regional authorities are closest to citizens, making climate action both visible and credible. They shape conditions for industry and businesses through planning decisions, infrastructure development, and workforce training programs.

Research suggests that cities committed to climate action could achieve up to 40% of the global emissions reduction gap between current NDCs and a 1.5°C pathway by 2030. Networks like ICLEI, C40, and the Global Covenant of Mayors bring together thousands of subnational governments to share best practices and coordinate action.

However, despite their critical role, subnational governments still lack a formal role in global climate negotiations and in Paris Agreement implementation. Local and regional leaders continue advocating for direct funding, technical assistance, and a global system to track their emission reductions.

California’s climate leadership amid federal withdrawal

Perhaps nowhere has subnational climate action been more visible than in California’s response to U.S. federal withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. When the Trump administration first announced withdrawal in June 2017, the governors of California, New York, and Washington founded the United States Climate Alliance, pledging to uphold Paris Agreement goals within their borders.

The alliance quickly expanded. Within days, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Oregon, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia joined. Governor Jerry Brown of California responded forcefully, pledging the state would “resist” the federal decision and build support in other states and provinces worldwide.

The U.S. Climate Alliance today

The alliance has grown to include 24 governors representing nearly 60% of the U.S. economy and 55% of its population. These states have achieved meaningful results: between 2005 and 2022, alliance members reduced collective net greenhouse gas emissions by 19% while increasing GDP by 30%.

The coalition has committed to reducing emissions at least 50-52% by 2030 and 61-66% by 2035, below 2005 levels. Member states are implementing carbon markets, 100% clean energy standards, and methane reduction programs across multiple sectors.

When the U.S. federal government again moved to withdraw from Paris in January 2025, alliance co-chairs from New York and New Mexico wrote directly to the UN Climate Change Executive Secretary, stating that member states would continue America’s work toward Paris Agreement goals. They emphasized that states retain broad constitutional authority to advance climate solutions regardless of federal policy.

The significance of subnational persistence

The U.S. federal withdrawal demonstrated the leadership role that cities and states can play when national governments retreat. Mayors from Pittsburgh to Salt Lake City came forward pledging continued commitment, particularly on energy and transportation initiatives.

States from Maryland to New York to Illinois to California exemplify how subnational policies can drive significant climate impact even without federal leadership, through proactive target-setting, clean energy standards, and direct investment in climate solutions.

California’s experience also shows the limits of subnational action. While states cannot formally join the Paris Agreement (which is reserved for nations), they participate in complementary frameworks like the Under2 Coalition and continue contributing to international climate forums. California has maintained its goal of carbon neutrality by 2045, having 5 million zero-emission vehicles on roads by 2030, and operating pioneering cap-and-trade programs.

Building an effective multilevel climate governance system

The Paris Agreement’s success ultimately depends on effective coordination between international, national, and subnational levels. The bottom-up structure creates flexibility but requires leadership at all scales. When national governments falter, subnational actors can help maintain momentum. When subnational capacity is limited, national governments and international support become essential.

The framework continues evolving. Article 6 of the Paris Agreement encourages a wide range of cooperative efforts, including clubs and coalitions that bring together subnational actors. Portals now document various subnational efforts, though much work remains to quantify the benefits of these smaller-scale initiatives.

Looking ahead, the key challenge is turning high-level commitments into ground-level action. This requires not just ambitious targets but practical implementation-building capacity in local governments, directing climate finance to where it’s needed most, and creating systems that track real-world progress. The Paris Agreement provides the framework; subnational governments provide much of the implementation machinery.

What do you think? Given that subnational governments control many of the policy levers essential for climate action, should they have a formal role in international climate negotiations? How might the relationship between national NDC commitments and subnational implementation be strengthened?

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

References

PDF 📄

Table of Contents

The global climate resilience framework 🔗

How nationally determined contributions work 🔗

The transparency framework 🔗

India’s climate commitments under the Paris Agreement 🔗

The path to net-zero by 2070 🔗

The role of subnational governments in implementation 🔗

Why local action matters 🔗

California’s climate leadership amid federal withdrawal 🔗

The U.S. Climate Alliance today 🔗

The significance of subnational persistence 🔗

Building an effective multilevel climate governance system 🔗