The Paris Agreement reaffirms the obligations of industrialized countries to the UNFCCC; the COP`s decision attached to the agreement extends the target of $100 billion per year until 2025 and calls for a new target that, in addition, „extends over $100 billion a year.“ The agreement also broadens the donor base beyond developed countries by encouraging other countries to provide „voluntary“ support. China, for example, pledged $3 billion in 2015 to help other developing countries. From 30 November to 11 December 2015, France hosted representatives from 196 countries at the end of the Un Climate Change Conference (UN), one of the largest and most ambitious global meetings ever held. The goal was nothing less than a binding and universal agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions to levels that would prevent global temperatures from rising more than 2oC above the lower temperature levels set before the start of the industrial revolution. Another key difference between the Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol is its scope. While the Kyoto Protocol distinguishes between Schedule 1 countries and those not annexed to Schedule 1, this branch is scrambled in the Paris Agreement, as all parties must submit emission reduction plans.  While the Paris Agreement continues to emphasize the principle of „common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities“ – the recognition that different nations have different capacities and duties to combat climate change – it does not offer a specific separation between developed and developing countries.  It therefore appears that negotiators will have to continue to address this issue in future rounds of negotiations, although the debate on differentiation could take on a new dynamic.  „I don`t think anyone will follow Mr Trump from Paris,“ said Peter Betts, a former negotiator for Britain and the EU in global climate negotiations and now a fellow at Chatham House. A possible procedural solution would be the suspension, not the conclusion of the first meeting of the Paris Agreement, so that the parties have the time necessary to negotiate the multiple modalities, guidelines and procedures necessary and ensure compliance with the Paris Agreement. This would also allow all parties to join the agreement before making final decisions (see previous question for more details). Negotiators of the agreement stated that the INDCs presented at the time of the Paris conference were insufficient and found that „the estimates of aggregate greenhouse gas emissions in 2025 and 2030 resulting from the planned contributions at the national level are not covered by the least expensive scenarios of 2oC, but lead to a projected level of 55 gigatons in 2030.“ and acknowledges that „much greater efforts to reduce emissions will be required to keep the increase in the global average temperature below 2 degrees Celsius, by reducing emissions to 40 gigatonnes or 1.5 degrees Celsius.“  [Clarification needed] The level of the NDC set by each country will determine the country`s targets. However, the „contributions“ themselves are not binding under international law because of the lack of specificity, normative nature or language necessary to establish binding standards.
 In addition, there will be no mechanism to compel a country to set a target in its NDC on a specified date and not for an application if a defined target is not achieved in an NDC.   There will be only one „Name and Shame“ system or as „I`m Our Pesztor,“ the United States.