Climate Policy 7 min read

NDC 3.0 explained: why the 2035 climate plans still miss the Paris targets

NDC 3.0 explained: what 113 countries' 2035 climate plans cut, why the emissions gap remains and what the figures mean before COP31.

Kieran Simpson 11 Jul 2026 Updated 13 Jul 2026

The latest 2035 climate plans cover countries responsible for 69% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2019. They move the world further from a no-policy future, but they still promise only a fraction of the cuts associated with the Paris temperature goals.

The third round of national climate plans creates three different questions. How many countries have filed? How much do their targets reduce emissions? And are domestic policies strong enough to deliver those targets?

Those questions are often collapsed into one reassuring submission count. They should not be. A country can file a detailed plan that is more ambitious than its previous one and still leave the collective pathway far above 1.5 degrees Celsius. It can also set a credible target without yet having the laws, investment or administrative capacity needed to meet it.

The latest official figures show progress on coverage and plan quality. The global arithmetic remains much harder.

The 2035 emissions gap in four numbers

Number	What it describes	How to read it
113 parties	Countries and the European Union covered by the United Nations update published in November 2025.	The plans represented 69% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2019.
12% to 15%	Approximate 2035 emissions reductions from full implementation of unconditional and conditional national pledges, compared with 2019, in the United Nations Environment Programme assessment.	This is the pledged pathway, not the reduction required for the Paris temperature goals.
35%	Approximate global emissions reduction needed by 2035 for a pathway aligned with 2 degrees Celsius.	More than twice the reduction implied by conditional pledges.
55%	Approximate global emissions reduction needed by 2035 for a pathway aligned with 1.5 degrees Celsius.	Nearly four times the conditional pledge reduction.

These percentages come from related but not identical assessments. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) update estimated total global greenhouse gas emissions in 2035 at about 12% below 2019 when land use, land-use change and forestry are included. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) estimated that full implementation of unconditional pledges would cut expected 2035 emissions by about 12%, rising to 15% if conditional elements are also delivered.

The figures should be read as a range of evidence rather than forced into a single decimal point. They agree on the central finding: the third round of plans has not closed the 2035 emissions gap.

What is NDC 3.0?

A nationally determined contribution (NDC) is a country's climate plan under the Paris Agreement. Each party prepares its own target and measures, reports the plan to the United Nations and is expected to submit a stronger version every five years.

"NDC 3.0" is informal shorthand for the third generation of these plans. Countries were encouraged to submit targets extending to 2035, informed by the first global stocktake and covering all greenhouse gases, sectors and categories where possible.

The Paris Agreement does not impose the same emissions target on every country. National circumstances differ, and the plans remain nationally determined. The agreement instead creates a recurring cycle: set a target, pursue domestic measures, report progress, assess the collective result and return with a stronger plan.

That design made broad participation possible. It also means the temperature outcome is the sum of national choices rather than a centrally allocated global carbon budget.

How many new climate plans have been submitted?

The formal 2025 UNFCCC synthesis report covered 64 new NDCs from 64 parties, recorded between January 2024 and 30 September 2025. Those parties represented about 30% of global emissions in 2019.

An official update published on 10 November 2025 added later submissions. It covered 86 NDC documents communicated by 113 parties, including the European Union submission on behalf of its members. Together, those parties represented 69% of 2019 global greenhouse gas emissions.

That is a substantial expansion in coverage, but it is not the same as complete coverage. Some countries filed after the main synthesis deadline, some plans did not contain a comparable 2035 target, and emissions outside national targets still require assumptions in global projections.

The registry has continued to receive plans into 2026. Honduras, Samoa, Nauru, Armenia, Congo and others submitted or recorded new contributions after the main 2025 cycle. A live registry count also includes older versions and supporting documents, so the number of search results should not be mistaken for the number of current third-round plans.

The new plans are better structured

The first synthesis found improvements that matter for implementation.

89% of the 64 parties communicated economy-wide targets, compared with 81% in their previous plans.
88% said their plan was informed by the first global stocktake, and 80% explained how.
94% reported legal or policy instruments supporting implementation across areas such as energy, transport, buildings, agriculture, health and disaster risk.
73% included an adaptation component, giving resilience a more prominent place alongside emissions reduction.

Broader targets reduce the risk that a plan cuts emissions in one sector while ignoring growth elsewhere. More explicit policies also make a target easier to scrutinise. A power-sector goal backed by auctions, grid investment and permitting reform is more credible than a percentage without an implementation route.

But quality and adequacy are different judgements. A well-constructed plan can show exactly how a country intends to proceed while the collective level of ambition remains insufficient.

Why 12% and 15% are not the same promise

Many developing-country NDCs separate unconditional measures from conditional ones. The unconditional part is intended to proceed using domestic capacity and resources. Conditional action depends on factors such as international climate finance, technology transfer or capacity building.

UNEP estimates that unconditional and conditional pledges reduce projected 2035 emissions by about 12% and 15% respectively against 2019. The three-percentage-point difference represents action that may not happen without support.

That connects the emissions gap directly to the new climate finance goal. Finance is not a separate diplomatic track. It affects whether conditional energy, adaptation, land-use and industrial measures can move from national documents into operating projects. The Belém Mission to 1.5 is now gathering those implementation barriers into a report for COP31.

Some conditional measures also carry social and regional costs that a target table does not show. The proposed COP31 just transition mechanism is one route governments are using to ask how support, technical assistance and participation should work when climate plans affect workers and communities directly.

Even full conditional implementation is not enough. A 15% reduction remains far below the roughly 35% reduction associated with a 2 degrees Celsius pathway and the 55% reduction associated with 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Temperature projections improved, but only slightly

UNEP's 2025 Emissions Gap Report estimates that full implementation of current NDCs would place warming this century at roughly 2.3 to 2.5 degrees Celsius. Current policies, which measure what governments are actually doing rather than everything they have promised, point to around 2.8 degrees Celsius.

The difference between 2.8 and 2.3 to 2.5 degrees is an implementation gap. The distance from 2.3 to 2.5 degrees down to the Paris goals is an ambition gap. Closing one does not automatically close the other.

Updated policies and pledges improved the projected temperature outcome by about 0.3 degrees compared with the previous assessment, although methodological changes explain part of that movement. UNEP also estimated that United States withdrawal from its NDC would cancel about 0.1 degrees of the improvement.

The plans have therefore moved the needle, but not by enough to support claims that the global target is back on course.

What determines whether a national plan is credible?

A credible NDC connects the headline target to decisions that can be tracked before 2035. Five features are particularly revealing.

Coverage

The target should make clear which gases and sectors it includes. Economy-wide coverage is generally easier to compare than a collection of sector-specific goals, although national accounting methods still differ.

A defined baseline

A percentage reduction means little without a base year or reference scenario. Absolute reductions from a historical year are usually easier to interpret than reductions against a projected business-as-usual pathway.

Domestic policy

Electricity-market reform, vehicle rules, building standards, industrial investment, land management and public budgets show whether the target has entered domestic decision-making. The target itself does not cut emissions.

Finance and conditions

Conditional measures should state what external support is required. That makes it possible to distinguish a finance-dependent delivery gap from a domestic policy delay.

Transparent progress reporting

Regular inventories and implementation reports reveal whether emissions are following the promised pathway. A distant 2035 target needs nearer milestones to expose delay early enough for policy to change.

What COP31 needs to reveal

COP31 in Antalya will not replace national targets with one global allocation. Its importance lies in the collective assessment and the pressure it creates for stronger implementation.

Before and during the summit, four developments will be worth checking:

whether the next UNFCCC synthesis captures more submissions and materially changes the 2035 emissions estimate;
whether major emitters strengthen targets or clarify the policies behind them;
whether climate-finance decisions make conditional measures more deliverable;
whether the COP31 outcome responds to the gap with named sector actions rather than another general call for ambition.

The Paris cycle has produced broader plans and a much better view of the intended transition. It has not yet produced a collective 2035 pathway consistent with the temperature goals governments adopted in Paris.

The next meaningful improvement will not be another rise in the submission count. It will be a fall in the projected emissions total, backed by policies that are already changing energy, transport, industry, buildings and land use.

Useful source links

Data checked

Checked 11 July 2026 against the UNFCCC 2025 NDC Synthesis Report, its 10 November 2025 update, the live NDC registry, UNEP's Emissions Gap Report 2025 and current COP31 information. Review after a new UNFCCC synthesis or registry update, a material major-emitter submission, or new COP31 documentation.

Information only

This guide is for general information only. It is not legal, regulatory, financial, investment or policy advice. National climate targets, modelled emissions pathways and country policies can change. Check current official sources before relying on any figure for a decision.