In 2006, Spash was appointed Chief Executive Officers` Science Leader at CSIRO, the Australian Scientific Research Authority. Following a critical document on the Emissions Trading System – which had already been peer-reviewed – the Agency intervened and insisted on substantial changes. [5] The behaviour of the CSIRO has given rise to controversial debates within the scientific community and Nature has reported in detail on the conflict. [6] [7] Following the controversy, Spash left the Agency at the end of 2009. [8] We limit the publication date to 2016 and from 2016. Given that the Palestinian Authority was closed in December 2015, this ensures that the identified documents are relevant to the Palestinian Authority and not to previous climate agreements. RedD . This mechanism was in place long before the Palestinian Authority was negotiated. We found that most redD studies focused on projects that excluded PA and were not relevant to our analysis of Dad`s effectiveness.

Finally, we are aware that limiting the web of Science and Scopus platforms limits the completeness of our research by excluding grey literature. Our knowledge of research gaps must therefore be qualified by limiting us to peer research2 for this study. Nevertheless, we affirm that the discovery of a gap in the literature evaluated by the experts remains an important and valid finding. The Palestinian Authority remains the main means of international coordination of climate policy. In light of our results, the Palestinian Authority`s chances of achieving its objectives are slim. However, the Palestinian Authority enshrines the role of national, regional and local climate change and leaves it to governments, businesses and citizens to implement the policies and behavioural changes needed to combat climate change. Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, it does not define who should do what, but rather provides a platform for all these actors to communicate, cooperate and learn from each other. It may therefore be unwise to assess the Palestinian Authority primarily on the basis of efficiency criteria; Especially since the counterfeiter could have been a legally binding solution, with drastically reduced participation.

It is perhaps more important that the Palestinian Authority (and the UNFCCC in general) provide a multilateral and multi-level forum for exchange in which all countries have a voice, and the fight against climate change remains the main concern. At the 21st meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in Paris from 30 November to 11 December 2015, an agreement was reached by the international community, which included 195 countries. The agreement was touted by participants and the media as an important turning point for policy in the fight against man-made climate change. Below is a brief critical commentary in which I would like to briefly explain why the Paris Agreement does not change anything. I would like to underline the way in which the agreement was reached by eliminating almost all the key issues related to the causes of human-caused climate change and by not containing firm action plans. Instead of a substantial reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, the parties` intentions promise an escalation of the damage and treat the most pessimistic scenarios as an acceptable 50:50 chance. The Paris Agreement is synonymous with sustainable industrial growth, risk management in relation to disaster preparedness and future inventions and technologies as saviours. The priority commitment of the international community is to maintain the current social and economic system. As a result, the refusal to combat greenhouse gas emissions is incompatible with sustainable economic growth. The reality is that nation states and international groups are working tirelessly and continuously to develop the exploration, extraction and burning of fossil fuels and the construction of production and consumption infrastructure. The objectives and promises of the Paris Agreement are not linked to the