The legal stage, not just the existence
Each instrument is placed on the path from proposal to operation, so an announced plan is never mistaken for a binding obligation.
Impact
Making the distance between pledge and law visible.
Climate commitments are announced in a day and legislated over years. Green Diplomat shows, with sources, which commitments have become enforceable law, and trains the people who make that happen.
The problem
Pledges are counted. Laws are rarely verified.
The latest national climate plans would cut global emissions by about 12% below 2019 levels by 2035, against roughly 60% needed to keep 1.5°C within reach. Whether any of those plans binds depends on national law, and few public tools say, with a source and a date, which commitments are enforceable today, at what stage, and since when.
The 2035 gap: pledged cuts versus what the science requires
Change in global greenhouse gas emissions by 2035 relative to 2019: what the new NDCs add up to, against the IPCC benchmarks for 2°C and 1.5°C.
12%projected cut by 2035 from all new NDCs, against 60% needed for 1.5°C
| Pathway | Cut in global GHG by 2035 vs 2019 (%) |
|---|---|
| All new NDCs (UNFCCC, Nov 2025) | 12 |
| Needed for 2°C (IPCC AR6) | 35 |
| Needed for 1.5°C (IPCC AR6) | 60 |
Source: UNFCCC NDC synthesis report update (Nov 2025); IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report, Table SPM.1 · November 2025; IPCC 2023 · Unit: %
What Green Diplomat adds
Verification, timelines, training and AI, in one open place.
Sourced, dated and logged
Every record names the document it was checked against and the date of the check, and every change is logged in public.
Pledge-to-law timelines
Dated legal milestones show how long each instrument took to bind, and where the road stalled.
Open and reusable
Records are open data under CC BY 4.0, with a key-free API, a change feed and an embeddable live map.
Training tied to the evidence
The Academy teaches negotiators and drafters to read and write instruments, using the same verified records.
AI with provenance
Ask the Radar answers only from verified records and shows its sources, so AI speeds up research without replacing verification.
Theory of change
From verified records to laws that bind.
-
Inputs
Evidence and method
Verified legal records, neutral international data, an open curriculum and a published method.
-
Outputs
Open public goods
Radar records and legal journeys, open datasets, Academy modules, briefings and analysis.
-
Outcomes
Better-prepared practitioners
Negotiators, drafters and analysts work from sourced comparisons, prepare faster and draft instruments designed to bind.
-
Impact
Commitments that bind
More climate commitments carried into enforceable, well-designed law, and a public record of the gap where they are not.
Evidence, live
What has been built so far.
Counted live from the site’s database on 4 October 2026. Nothing on this band is typed by hand.
Alignment
Built for commitments countries have already made.
Paris Agreement
Article 12
Climate change education, training, public awareness and public access to information: the Academy, the glossary and the open data serve it directly.
Paris Agreement
Articles 11 and 13
Capacity-building for developing countries, and the transparency framework that turns reporting into negotiating leverage.
SDG 13
Climate action
Target 13.2, integrating climate measures into national policy, and target 13.3, education and institutional capacity.
SDGs 16 and 17
Institutions and partnerships
Target 16.10, public access to information, and target 17.9, capacity-building in developing countries.
Measuring progress
What we track, and will publish.
Impact claims should be checkable. These are the measures we track, in aggregate and without identifying anyone, and will report:
- Freshness: the share of records re-verified in the last 90 days, and the time from an official change to its record update.
- Source integrity: the share of records checked against an official source rather than a reference compilation.
- Corrections: reported, accepted and resolved, each logged on the record.
- AI answer quality: on a fixed set of test questions, the share of answers that cite the right records, and of correct refusals.
- Coverage balance: the share of instruments not yet in force, and of jurisdictions that existing trackers document least.
- Reuse and reach: open-data downloads, embeds of the live map on other websites, questions answered and self-tests completed.
- Learning and demand: Academy modules completed, briefings requested and the kinds of institutions requesting them.
- Use stories: documented cases where a record, briefing or module was used in real work, published with permission.
Risks, and how they are managed
- Independence. The initiative is conducted in a personal capacity, relies only on public sources, and takes no campaign positions. Funding confers no influence over findings.
- Accuracy. Every record cites its source and the date of the check; corrections are logged in public.
- AI error. Answers are grounded in verified records only, show their sources, and say when the records do not cover a question.
- Continuity. The data is open and portable, so the public record survives any change to the platform.
Read the full standards and methodology.
Support the work
Help carry pledges into law.
Partners help add jurisdictions, translate the tools and fund places in the Academy for practitioners from developing and emerging economies.