A comparative architectural analysis of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and the 2015 Paris Agreement and other ways to counter environmental ‘ratification fatigue’

This chapter examines the relative merits of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol's top-down approach with the development of a more hybrid bottom-up approach for the 2015 Paris Agreement. It introduces some alternative legal options that may be viable since the substantive 'ratification fatigue' which has plagued the legal instruments developed to support the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The numerous legal regimes that have sought to formalize environmental protection have relied on such customary law precedent as the guiding 'North Star' to their regimes. The efficacy of Environment regimes largely stems from its fundamental legal foundation, wherein the architecture of such regimes generally conforms to a top-down approach, a bottom-up approach, or a hybrid form of both. The differentiation between bottom-up and top-down approaches is important, but neither option fulfils complete compliance nor appears to completely compel state parties to violate their own interests.