Public Law Studies Quarterly

Transparency Mechanisms in the Paris Agreement: Legal Dimensions and Implementation Strategies for Iran

Document Type : Article

Authors

Zahra Samaeiyekta 1
Fahimeh Maghsoudi 1
Azam Amini 2

1 Master student of international law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

2 Associate Prof, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22059/jplsq.2025.387430.3657
Abstract
Given the necessity of global cooperation in addressing climate change, the Paris Agreement, as one of the most important international instruments in this field, provides a framework for countries’ voluntary commitments and monitoring their implementation. One of the core pillars of this agreement is the Enhanced Transparency Framework, which plays a crucial role in building trust and evaluating countries’ performance. This paper examines this mechanism and its associated legal obligations. The main objective of the study is to identify the legal and practical capacities of this mechanism and assess its compatibility with the needs and constraints of developing countries, particularly Iran. The results indicate that the Enhanced Transparency Framework enables effective participation of states in global climate processes. By explicitly recognizing the right of countries to protect sensitive information and including facilitative processes, especially for developing countries, the framework strikes a balance between transparency and the preservation of national sovereignty. It is recommended that Iran adopt a gradual approach tailored to domestic conditions when deciding on its participation in the Agreement. By doing so, Iran can benefit from international facilitation while simultaneously strengthening its domestic legal system to fulfill climate-related obligations.

Keywords

flexibility
climate change
transparency
reporting
confidentiality
Subjects

  1. English

    1. A) Books
    2. Bianchi, A., & Peters, A. (Eds.). (2013). Transparency in international law. Cambridge University Press.
    3. Brunnee, J., & Hey, E. (2013). Transparency and International Environmental Institutions. Cambridge University Press, 23-48.
    4. Haas, P, ‘Epistemic Communities’, in Bodansky/Brunne´e/Hey (eds.), Oxford Handbook 2007 (n 10), 791–806, 798–799.
    5. Johnstone, I. (2004). The power of interpretive communities. In M. Barnett, & R. Duvall. Power in Global Governance (pp. 185-204). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    6. Klabbers, J., Peters, A., & Ulfstein, G. (2011). The constitutionalization of international law. OUP Oxford.
    7. B) Articles
    8. Briner, G., & S. Moarif (2017). Enhancing transparency of climate change mitigation under the Paris Agreement: Lessons from experience. OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers, No. 2016/04, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a634dc1f-en.
    9. Duyck, S. (2014). MRV in the 2015 Climate Agreement: Promoting Compliance Through Transparency and the Participation of NGOs. Carbon & Climate Law Review, 175-187.
    10. Fukuda-parr, S. (2014). Global goals as a policy tool: Intended and unintended consequences. Journal of Human Development and, 118-131.
    11. Falduto, C., & S. Wartmann (2021). Towards common GHG inventory reporting tables for Biennial Transparency Reports: Experiences with tools for generating and using reporting tables under the UNFCCC. OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers, No. 2021/01, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/38f54dbf-en.
    12. Falkner, R. (2016). The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics. International Affairs, 92(5), 1107-1125.
    13. Gupta, A., Boas, I., & Oosterveer, P. (2020). Transparency in global sustainability governance: to what effect?. Journal of environmental policy & planning, 22(1), 84-97.
    14. Hanle, L., Gillenwater, M., Pulles, T., & Radunsky, K. (2019). Challenges and Proposed Reforms to the UNFCCC Expert Review Process for the Enhanced Transparency Framework. Seattle, WA, Greenhouse Gas Management Institute, http://capacitybuildingcoalition. org/discussion-paper-series/(last access: 22 September 2022).
    15. Jacquet, J., & Jamieson, D. (2016). Soft but significant power in the Paris Agreement. Nature Climate Change. 6. 643-646. 10.1038/nclimate3006.
    16. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. I., Groff, M., Tamás, P. A., Dahl, A. L., Harder, M., & Hassall, G. (2018). Entry into force and then? The Paris agreement and state accountability. Climate Policy, 18(5), 593-599.
    17. Milkoreit, M., & Haapala, K. (2019). The global stocktake: design lessons for a new review and ambition mechanism in the international climate regime. International Environmental Agreements, 89-106. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-018-9425-x.
    18. Mitchell, B. R. (2011). Transparency for governance: The mechanisms and effectiveness of disclosure-based and education-based transparency policies. Ecological Economics, 70, 1882-1890. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.03.006.
    19. Pulles, T. (2017). Did the UNFCCC review process improve the national GHG inventory submissions?. Carbon Management, 8(1), 19-31.
    20. Rioseco, S. (2023). Conferences of the Parties beyond international environmental law: How COPs influence the content and implementation of their parent treaties. Leiden Journal of International Law, 36(3), 699-719.
    21. Weikmans, R., & Gupta, A. (2021). Assessing state compliance with multilateral climate transparency requirements:‘Transparency Adherence Indices’ and their research and policy implications. Climate Policy, 21(5), 635-651.
    22. Weikmans, R., van Asselt, H., & Roberts, J. T. (2021). Transparency requirements under the Paris Agreement and their (un) likely impact on strengthening the ambition of nationally determined contributions (NDCs). In Making Climate Action More Effective(pp. 107-122). Routledge.
    23. Winkler, H., Mantlana, B., & Letete, T. (2017). Transparency of action and support in the Paris Agreement. Climate Policy, 17(7), 853-872.
    24. Yamineva, Y. (2016). Climate finance in the Paris outcome: why do today what you can put off till tomorrow?. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 25(2), 174-185.

     

    1. C) Documents
    2. International Law Commission. (2018). Draft conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties, with commentaries’. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2.
    3. IPCC 2006, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara T. and Tanabe K. (eds). Published: IGES, Japan.
    4. UNFCCC (1992), United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, United Nations.
    5. (2004, september 3). Guidelines for the preparation of national communications by Parties included in Annex I to the Convention, Part I: UNFCCC reporting guidelines on annual inventories (following incorporation of the provisions of decision 13/CP.9). Note by the secretariat. Retrieved from UNFCCC: https://unfccc.int/documents/3689.
    6. (2016). Retrieved from United Nations Climate Change: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/
    7. (2018, December 14). Modalities, procedures and guidelines for the transparency framework for action and support referred to in Article 13 of the Paris Agreement. Retrieved from UNFCCC: https://unfccc.int/documents/184700.
    8. (2022, november 15). Revision of the UNFCCC reporting guidelines on annual inventories for Parties included in Annex I to the Convention. Retrieved from UNFCCC: https://unfccc.int/documents/623664.
    9. (2024, May 6). Code of Practice and Procedures for handling of confidential information in BTR reviews. Retrieved from UNFCCC: https://unfccc.int/documents/638346.
    10. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change . (2015, 12 12). Retrieved from United Nations Climate Change: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement.

     

    1. D) Electronic resources and websites
    2. Can International. (2009, june 8). COP Decisions: Binding or Not? Retrieved from Climate Action Network: https://climatenetwork.org/wp content/uploads/2021/02/COP_Decisions_CAN_legal_group_June_8_09.pdf
    3. (n.d.). Shall vs. Should. Retrieved from Langeek: https://langeek.co/en/grammar/course/692/shall-vs-should.
    4. Wartmann, S., Salas, R., & Blank, D. (2018, January). Publication and Tools. Retrieved from Partnership on Transparency in the paris agreement: https://transparency-partnership.net/publications-tools/deciphering-mrv-accounting-and-transparency-post-paris-era.

     

    References In Persian:

    1. Amini, A., & Daryadel, E. (2019). Mechanisms for monitoring compliance with commitments and implementation in the Paris Agreement. International Law Journal, (60), 105-133. (In Persian), 10.22066/cilamag.2019.35079.
    2. Poorhashemi, A., Sobhaninia, M., & Ziadkhani, S. (2018). Analyzing the Nature of States Obligations in the Paris agreement 2015 on climate change. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 85-98.
Public Law Studies Quarterly
Volume 55, Issue 4 - Serial Number 44
Winter 2026
Winter 2026
Pages 2587-2612

  • Receive Date 28 December 2024
  • Revise Date 03 February 2025
  • Accept Date 03 February 2025

Home

Journal Process Ethics

Peer Review Process

Submission

Indexing and Abstracting

Contact Us