Of course, countries can hold each other to account if they feel that a signatory is not complying with the agreements. At the international level, however, there is considerable reluctance to formally criticize each other and States do not welcome the sanctions imposed on participants who do not comply with their agreements. A first way to ensure that countries comply with the Paris agreement depends on whether compliance with the climate agreement becomes the norm. Countries do not want to lose face or be abandoned, and they will work harder to do their best if others who respect them do the same. Only a limited number of countries will ignore the internationally appointed and shameful, and still others will want to show moral leadership. The Paris Agreement marks a turning point in the management of the climate problem. Everyone agrees on that. However, international agreements alone will not solve the climate problem; All signatories must set sound targets for reducing CO2 emissions and deliver on their promises. Finally, a country can form an independent body to be answered by the government and controlled by the government. Sweden, for example, is taking its first steps in this direction in its climate policy framework. The creation of such a body can also help ensure that political changes and changes in public opinion undermine compliance with international climate agreements. Respect is indeed a problem. As soon as the agreement was signed, doubts were raised about the possibility of keeping countries in the Paris agreement.
In general, international treaties are difficult to enforce. There are not enough formal means to compel countries to keep the promise they made by signing. A recent UN report on the eve of the Bonn Climate Change Conference (COP23) shows that every effort should be made to promote compliance. The report concludes that there is an urgent need for governments and businesses to increase their ambitions to ensure that the goals of the Paris Agreement continue to be achieved. At the end of October, following the analysis of the new ministerial agreement (website in Dutch), the Dutch Environment Agency (PBL) concluded that the Netherlands also needed to do much more. The PBL advises the Dutch government on all environmental and climate issues. Apparently, the 2030 target has not only fallen by a quarter of a percentage point, but, as a result of climate actions in the Von Rutte III coalition agreement, only half of the new greenhouse gas emission reduction target has been met. An interesting example of this freedom is the lawsuit brought by the Urgenda Foundation against the Dutch state (website in Dutch). The Urgenda Foundation launched the legal process in 2013 for finding that the state had not done enough to prevent the threat of climate change.