Parliaments are a crucial part of any international framework. After all, it is parliaments that not only ratify international agreements but also translate them into domestic law, ensuring that commitments are delivered on the ground. This process is fundamental to making sure that international promises can be implemented in practice and that ambition is turned into delivery.
At times, the legislative process runs in the opposite direction, with domestic action inspiring global ambition. The UK’s Climate Change Act of 2008 – and its 2019 update, which set a legally binding target for net zero emissions by 2050 – are prime examples.
The original act required at least an 80 per cent greenhouse gas reduction from 1990 levels; its revision raised that ambition and helped drive greater momentum and urgency within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process. These milestones in UK law have both shaped and reflected an upscaling of international ambition through the Cop process.
The UK is not alone in this. France’s Energy Transition for Green Growth law of 2015 legislated to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40 per cent on 1990 levels by 2030, and by 75 per cent by 2050. This gave France strong domestic impetus for that year’s Paris Cop, which produced the landmark agreement that still underpins international climate policy today.
The Paris Agreement, adopted by 195 parties, committed nations to keeping global temperature rises “well below” 2°C above pre-industrial levels, while pursuing efforts to limit the increase to 1.5°C. France also legislated in 2019 for net zero by 2050, continuing the link between national and international progress.
Parliamentarians typically have limited opportunities to engage directly in Cop proceedings themselves. Access to the “Blue Zone” is controlled by national governments, and accreditation has been inconsistent from year to year. That said, I have been fortunate to attend each Cop during my time as an MP, and have again been accredited for Belém as the UK parliament’s representative at the official Cop parliamentary event – the meeting jointly organised by the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the Brazilian parliament on 14 November.
When the UK hosted Cop26, I served as global parliamentary rapporteur, producing an outcomes document in collaboration with hundreds of parliamentarians and presenting it to the Cop presidency and secretariat. Other forums, such as the Rio parliamentary green investment summit organised by the Climate Parliament, and the work of GLOBE legislators – acting both as the UNFCCC’s focal point for parliamentary engagement and as an Ecosoc-accredited observer – also help strengthen parliamentary input and connect legislators to the wider process.
Significant work remains in transposing Cop decisions into national law, particularly regarding Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which deals with inter-country cooperation over carbon reduction. Following its adoption at Cop26 and operationalisation at Cop29, parliaments must now establish domestic frameworks for participation, whether through market-based mechanisms under Articles 6.2 and 6.4 or through the regulation of Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes. These frameworks will be vital in authorising and accounting for how private actors engage with the system, helping to safeguard natural environments and support indigenous communities. These measures are essential to mobilising private finance for nature restoration and the protection of habitats.
The failure to scale climate finance has long been one of Cop’s weaknesses, and it is clear that this cannot continue.
This article first appeared in Spotlight on Energy and Climate Change, November 2025
Content from our partners
Related