Moving from Climate Commitments to Implementation
International climate governance is entering a more demanding phase. The central question is no longer simply whether countries will make climate commitments, but whether those commitments can be translated into laws, institutions and policies capable of delivering measurable change.
This challenge is particularly important as countries prepare their next generation of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC 3.0) ahead of UNFCCC COP31. These commitments will be judged not only by the ambition of their targets, but also by whether governments can explain how they will be financed, implemented, monitored and enforced.
A new expert recording brings together climate negotiators, lawyers, researchers, business leaders and youth representatives to examine the legal and governance innovations emerging from the Bonn Climate Conference (SB64). Their perspectives explore what governments and other actors must do to strengthen climate ambition, improve transparency and close the continuing gap between international commitments and domestic implementation.
Making NDC 3.0 Credible and Implementable
NDCs are nationally determined, but their effectiveness depends upon the institutional arrangements supporting them. A target may communicate political ambition without establishing which institutions are responsible for delivering it, how implementation will be financed or what happens when progress falls behind schedule.
Credible NDC 3.0 commitments therefore require more than increasingly ambitious emissions-reduction targets. They also require domestic legislation, clearly allocated institutional responsibilities, transparent monitoring systems and processes through which governments can be held accountable for implementation.
Adv Ayman Cherkaoui (Director, Hassan II International Centre for Environmental Training; Lead Counsel, CISDL; Deputy Chair, IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law), Dr Wendy Miles KC (Barrister, Twenty Essex), Adv Lucia Williams (Senior Associate, Clyde & Co), Dr Tejas Rao (Research Coordinator, DemEd Global; Senior Manager, CISDL) and Dr Döne Yalçın (Managing Partner, CMS Türkiye; Head, Global Impact and Resilience Task Force) consider how law and governance can support this transition from ambition to delivery. Their perspectives invite governments to approach NDCs not simply as documents prepared for international submission, but as frameworks capable of guiding national legislation, public investment, regulatory action and cooperation with non-state actors. The strength of an NDC will increasingly depend upon whether it can organise action across ministries, economic sectors and levels of government. Transparency is therefore not only a reporting obligation. It is also a means of identifying institutional gaps, coordinating implementation and building confidence that climate commitments will be carried through.
Governing a Just and Fossil-Fuel-Free Transition
The transition away from fossil fuels presents questions extending well beyond the replacement of one energy source with another. It requires decisions about employment, infrastructure, public revenue, investment, energy access and the distribution of transition costs.
A transition may reduce emissions while still reproducing existing inequalities. Climate policies must therefore be assessed not only by the emissions they avoid, but also by whose livelihoods are affected, who participates in their design and whether vulnerable communities receive meaningful protection and support.
Law has an important role in structuring these choices. Legislation and regulation can establish transition timelines, define institutional responsibilities and create safeguards for workers and affected communities. Contracts, financial rules and corporate transition plans can help align private investment with public climate objectives. Access to information, public participation and review mechanisms can strengthen the accountability of decisions carrying long-term social and environmental consequences.
A just transition is consequently not an additional consideration to be addressed after climate policy has been designed. It is part of the legal and institutional foundation upon which durable climate action must be built.
Climate Litigation, ESG and Expanding Accountability
Climate litigation and ESG obligations are also reshaping the legal environment in which governments and businesses operate. Courts and regulators are increasingly asked to examine whether public authorities and private actors have acted consistently with their stated climate commitments, legal duties and representations to investors and the public.
These developments make the quality of climate governance increasingly important. Governments and businesses require credible transition plans, reliable information and decision-making processes capable of demonstrating how climate risks have been considered. General commitments unsupported by implementation arrangements may face growing legal, regulatory and reputational scrutiny.
Adv Hafij Khan (Bangladesh; Executive Committee, Warsaw International Mechanism; Chair, CLGI), Dr Antoinette Nestor (Manager, CLGI; Affiliated Lecturer, University of Cambridge), Adv Matthew Carvalho (Advanced Research Fellow, Global Governance and Diplomacy, University of Suway; JD Student, Georgetown University) and Dr Monserrat Madariaga (Senior Lawyer, Legal Response International) contribute perspectives on the wider legal and policy implications of these changes. Their interventions situate litigation and ESG governance within a broader movement towards greater transparency and accountability for the consequences of climate-related decisions.
Litigation cannot substitute for comprehensive climate policy. It can, however, clarify legal responsibilities, expose implementation gaps and provide remedies where institutions fail to protect those facing foreseeable harm. Its growth reflects a wider expectation that climate commitments should carry practical consequences rather than remain exclusively political aspirations.
Youth Participation and the Future of Climate Diplomacy
Climate governance must also respond to a fundamental question of representation: who is able to participate in decisions whose consequences will extend across generations?
Young people have become increasingly active within climate negotiations, national delegations and civil society campaigns. Meaningful participation, however, requires more than physical presence. Youth representatives need access to technical knowledge, negotiating experience and institutional channels through which their contributions can influence outcomes.
Perspectives from Marie-Claire Graf (Co-Founder, Youth Negotiators Academy) and Veena Balakrishnan (Co-Founder and Director of Institutional Relations, Youth Negotiators Academy) bring attention to the importance of developing the next generation of climate negotiators. Strengthening youth participation can expand the range of knowledge and experience available to the negotiations while reinforcing the intergenerational legitimacy of climate decision-making.
The question is not simply whether youth voices are heard, but whether negotiating and governance structures allow those voices to shape priorities, proposals and implementation strategies.
Connecting Climate, Biodiversity and Sustainable Development
Climate change cannot be governed in isolation from biodiversity loss, environmental degradation and wider sustainable development priorities. Decisions concerning energy, land use, infrastructure and natural resources frequently affect several environmental and social objectives at the same time.
Fragmented governance can produce conflicting policies or shift environmental harm from one sector or community to another. Climate action may become more effective when legal frameworks recognise these interconnections and coordinate responsibilities across institutions.
Prof Markus Gehring (Professor, University of Cambridge; Lead Counsel, CISDL) and Prof Alessandra Lehmen (President, Environmental Law Commission, OAB/RS; Member, Brazilian Bar Federal Climate Change Commission) provide perspectives from beyond the Bonn negotiations, connecting international developments with wider questions of domestic implementation and sustainable development law. Their contributions encourage closer attention to how international climate commitments interact with national legal systems and how experience across jurisdictions can support more coherent governance.
The relationship between climate and biodiversity also reinforces the importance of partnerships. Governments cannot deliver this transformation alone. Lawyers, businesses, researchers, civil society organisations and youth networks each possess different forms of expertise and implementation capacity. The challenge is to connect these actors through governance arrangements that distribute responsibilities clearly while preserving transparency and public accountability.
Building the Legal Foundations for COP31
What connects these discussions is a common implementation challenge. Climate ambition cannot be sustained without legal frameworks capable of organising action, resolving competing interests and holding institutions accountable.
NDC 3.0 offers an opportunity to bring international ambition and domestic governance closer together. Whether that opportunity is realised will depend upon the credibility of national implementation arrangements, the fairness of transition pathways and the ability of governments and non-state actors to cooperate without weakening responsibility or transparency.
The road from Bonn to COP31 is therefore not only a diplomatic process. It is also a legal and institutional project. Its success will depend upon whether climate commitments are supported by durable rules, adequately resourced institutions and inclusive processes capable of turning shared objectives into action.
The full expert recording is available here:
Thanks are due to the hosts, chairs, speakers, intervenors and moderators of Live from Bonn 2026, convened in hybrid format on 15 June 2026 with participants joining from Bonn, Cambridge, Manila and online. The exchange was chaired by Dr Tejas Rao, Dr Jellie Molino and Adv Railla Puno; moderated by Calum Steer, Niklas Todt and Alexia Vassiliou; and opened with welcomes from Prof Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Joanna Watterson. The recording is now available as a resource for policymakers, practitioners, researchers, students, civil society organisations, businesses and youth leaders working to advance ambitious, transparent and equitable climate action ahead of UNFCCC COP31.NDCs are nationally determined, but their effectiveness depends upon the institutional arrangements supporting them. A target may communicate political ambition without establishing which institutions are responsible for delivering it, how implementation will be financed or what happens when progress falls behind schedule.