Comparative Legal Mechanisms for Enforcing NDCs under the Paris Agreement: Lessons for Strengthened Climate Governance

Abstract

The Paris Agreement (2015) relies on Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) as its cornerstone for global climate action, yet enforcement and accountability mechanisms remain underdeveloped. Although 94% of Parties have quantified mitigation targets, current NDCs collectively achieve only a 5.9% reduction in emissions by 2030 relative to 2019 levels insufficient to limit warming to 1.5 °C (UNFCCC, 2024). Concurrently, climate litigation has matured into a prominent compliance tool: 226 new strategic cases were filed in 2024 alone, bringing the global tally to 2,967 across 59 jurisdictions (Setzer & Higham, 2025). This paper presents a comparative legal analysis of NDC enforcement frameworks in the European Union, India, and Brazil. By using doctrinal review and the study of individual cases, it criticizes statutory schemes of penalties, administrative penalties and judicial-review measures. The results indicate that jurisdictions reporting high rates of compliance are those with well-defined schedules of sanctions, strong standing rules, and high-quality litigation mechanisms with strong public interest. The research suggests the enforcement of models with such provisions as fines and mandatory transparency to improve domestic accountability and strengthen transnational trust in transnational NDC processes. These recommendations are supposed to address SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) by providing solutions to policymakers and jurists on designing laws to improve climate management in the global arena.