While the enhanced transparency framework is universal and the global inventory is carried out every five years, the framework must provide „integrated flexibility” to distinguish the capabilities of developed and developing countries. In this context, the Paris Agreement contains provisions to improve the capacity-building framework.  The agreement recognizes the different circumstances of some countries and notes, in particular, that the technical review of experts for each country takes into account the specific capacity of that country to report.  The agreement also develops a capacity-building initiative for transparency to help developing countries put in place the necessary institutions and procedures to comply with the transparency framework.  The EU and its member states are individually responsible for ratifying the Paris Agreement. There was a strong preference for the EU and its 28 Member States to simultaneously table their ratification instruments to ensure that neither the EU nor its Member States commit to commitments that belong exclusively to the other and there was concern that there was a disagreement on each Member State`s share of the EU-wide reduction target. just as Britain`s vote to leave the EU could delay the Paris pact.  However, on 4 October 2016, the European Parliament approved the ratification of the Paris Agreement and the EU tabled its ratification instruments on 5 October 2016 with several EU Member States.  A study published in 2018 shows a threshold where temperatures could reach 4 or 5 degrees (ambiguous formulation, continuity would be 4 to 5 degrees Celsius) compared to pre-industrial levels, due to climate self-feedback, indicating that this threshold is below the 2-degree temperature target agreed in the Paris climate agreement. Study author Katherine Richardson points out: „We find that in its history, the Earth has never had a nearly stable state, warmer than that of pre-industrial, and suggests that there is a significant risk that the system itself, because of all these other processes, will want to continue warming, even if we stop emissions. This means not only reducing emissions, but much more.  The Paris Agreement has a bottom-up structure, unlike most international environmental treaties that are „top down,” characterized by internationally defined standards and objectives and must be implemented by states.
 Unlike its predecessor, the Kyoto Protocol, which sets legal commitment targets, the Paris Agreement, which focuses on consensual training, allows for voluntary and national objectives.  Specific climate targets are therefore politically promoted and not legally binding. Only the processes governing reporting and revision of these objectives are imposed by international law. This structure is particularly noteworthy for the United States – in the absence of legal mitigation or funding objectives, the agreement is seen as an „executive agreement, not a treaty.” Since the 1992 UNFCCC treaty was approved by the Senate, this new agreement does not require further legislation from Congress for it to enter into force.  Funding is essential to support emerging economies and support the transition to carbon-free economies.