@article{StreckvonUngerGreiner2020,
  author    = {Streck, Charlotte and von Unger, Moritz and Greiner, Sandra},
  title     = {COP 25},
  series = {Journal for European environmental \& planning law},
  volume    = {17},
  journal   = {Journal for European environmental \& planning law},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Brill},
  address   = {Leiden},
  issn      = {1613-7272},
  doi       = {10.1163/18760104-01702003},
  pages     = {136 -- 160},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {The 25th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP-25) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) became the longest COP on record - but yielded few results. It appears that four years after the adoption of the Paris Agreement, enthusiasm has waned and political bargaining and bean-counting have taken over. Countries, for even the slightest chance to keep temperatures 'well below' 2 degrees Celsius, must do much more than they have previously committed to and accelerate the shift towards a zero-carbon economy. However, the conference largely failed to heed the rallying cry of the Chilean presidency. The flagship decisions (grouped under the banner "Chile-Madrid Time for Action") neither produced new commitments - enhancing ambition or finance for developing countries - nor new rules that would nudge countries closer to the climate action targets needed. The leftover pieces from last year's negotiations of the "Paris Rulebook" were also not resolved, in particular the unfinished decisions on Article 6 on market- and non-market mechanisms. The procrastination shows that the new architecture of the Paris Agreement, while addressing several of the shortcomings of the Kyoto Protocol, suffers from its own weaknesses. The meager results of Madrid give reason to pause and reflect on the conditions that may hold countries back from fully embracing the Paris Agreement, but also to consider the future and nature of carbon markets and what is making the issue so difficult to resolve.},
  language  = {en}
}