International climate cooperation is changing. Alongside formal UN negotiations, countries are increasingly working through voluntary partnerships and coalitions to advance climate goals.
As consensus becomes harder to achieve amidst a combative geopolitical outlook and stretched UN budgets, climate governance is evolving into a “two-tier multilateralism.” One tier is focused on consensus-based negotiated outcomes, and the other on coalition-driven action to support implementation. Voluntary initiatives involving countries (Parties to the Paris Agreement) and non-Party stakeholders (NPS) are becoming increasingly important under this second tier. However, their growing importance raises a critical question: how should these initiatives be held accountable for delivering results?
Country-led voluntary initiatives that are initiated by the Presidency for UNFCCC climate negotiations often receive the most visibility. However, as media attention fades and new initiatives are announced, delivery depends on strong accountability arrangements. Without this, it becomes difficult to distinguish durable cooperation from political commitments that fail to deliver.
The Brazil COP31 Presidency led reforms of the Global Climate Action Agenda (GCAA) to strengthen the relationship between voluntary initiatives and the Paris Agreement’s Global Stocktake (GST)—the process used to assess collective progress toward global climate goals. The reforms also established stronger expectations around transparency, reporting, and accountability. These initiatives bring together countries, businesses, cities and other actors through thematic “activation groups” focused on key GST-aligned objectives. But important questions remain regarding how country-led initiatives are recognized and monitored within the broader UNFCCC accountability architecture.
Accountability for Country-led Voluntary Initiatives Remains Uneven
While the GCAA has traditionally focused on catalyzing NPS action, an increasing number of country-led pledges and coalitions are emerging without clear or consistent expectations for accountability. Many country-led initiatives do not fit neatly within existing categories used by the UNFCCC, which would make them subject to reporting requirements. These requirements were primarily developed for multi-stakeholder initiatives involving both countries and civil society organizations. Similarly, the Paris Agreement’s Enhanced Transparency Framework does not provide clear guidance for countries to report how their participation in voluntary initiatives contribute to their respective nationally determined contributions (NDCs).
The result is uneven accountability. Some initiatives develop governance structures, maintain regular reporting, and continue engagement after political attention fades. Others struggle to demonstrate progress, maintain participation, or communicate how they contribute to global climate goals.
For example, the Powering Past Coal Alliance, launched by UK and Canada has an active secretariat and updated online presence, continues to report its progress to the GCAA through its activation group on transitioning away from fossil fuels, and is registered on the Non-State Actor Zone for Climate Action (NAZCA) platform. In contrast, many other initiatives fall short of this standard.
Regional Cooperation through Voluntary Initiatives can Strengthen Accountability Toward GST Goals
Monitoring and reporting mechanisms cannot guarantee delivery, but they can strengthen accountability and provide greater transparency regarding how countries are contributing to GST outcomes. Delivery largely depends on participating countries translating commitments into domestic policies and measures that create the enabling environment for NPS to effectively engage in implementation. Regional initiatives can support the translation of global targets into national action, driving implementation by helping countries establish shared targets, governance arrangements, and systems for tracking progress.
Energy efficiency illustrates both the opportunities and challenges associated with country-led cooperation. Despite the first GST calling for a doubling of the global rate of energy efficiency improvement by 2030, implementation requires coordination across multiple ministries, regulators, utilities, businesses and consumers, making accountability difficult. Regional, country-led initiatives can help bridge this gap by providing shared targets, coordination mechanisms and progress tracking. The emerging Latin American and Caribbean Energy Organization regional energy efficiency initiative illustrates how countries are cooperating at the regional level to translate a GST-aligned objective into implementation.
Existing UNFCCC Processes Could Better Support Accountability for Country-led Initiatives
COP Presidents, countries, and the UNFCCC could improve accountability by:
- encouraging country-led announcements to move from political endorsement to robust voluntary initiatives that meet the GCAA accountability expectations, including through disclosure of governance arrangements, public reporting, and periodic progress updates.
- encouraging participation of countries in the GCAA to share learnings and address challenges toward GST-aligned objectives through enhanced international cooperation.
- considering whether existing participation in the GCAA and registration criteria in the NAZCA portal adequately accommodate initiatives led primarily by countries, so that these can also be made accountable to progress reporting.
For more information on how voluntary initiatives can strengthen regional and national accountability of GST-aligned targets, see C2ES’s recent paper: Improving Accountability Toward Energy Efficiency Goals: A Latin America & Caribbean Perspective.
