Rajamani L (2015) Negotiating the 2015 climate agreement: questions of legal form and nature. Research paper 28. Mitigation Action Plans – Scenarios, Cape Town, South Africa, p. 26 A dichotomous interpretation of CBDR-RC has led to an international agreement on the Convention and its Kyoto Protocol. Industrialised countries (Annex I) committed to absolute emission reduction or limit targets, while all other countries (excluding Appendix I) did not have such commitments. However, this rigid distinction does not reflect the dynamic diversification between developing countries since 1992, as evidenced by the diversity of contributions to global emissions and economic growth models (Deleuil, 2012). Dubash, 2009). This led Depledge and Yamin (2009, 443) to refer to UnFCCC Schedule I/non-Annex I as the dichotomy and « greatest weakness of the regime. » Given that countries have different circumstances, resources and capabilities, the agreement was designed so that each country would define its own commitments in terms of objectives and contributions to the universal agreement. These country commitments are THE CN. In accordance with the Paris Agreement adopted in December 2015, INDC will be the first national contribution (CNN) when a country ratifies the agreement, unless it decides to present a new CNN at the same time. Once the Paris Agreement is ratified, the NDCD will be the UNFCCC`s first greenhouse gas target, which will apply to both developed and developing countries.  On August 3, 2016, China and the United States ratified the agreement. Together, they account for 38% of total global emissions, with China alone emitting 20%.
 India, which accounts for 4.1% of emissions, ratified the Paris Agreement on 2 October 2016 by tabling the ratification instrument with the United Nations.  In order to ensure effective and safe participation, a comprehensive agreement on climate change must be considered fair by the countries concerned. The Paris Agreement has moved closer to differentiating countries` responsibilities in the fight against climate change by removing the rigid distinction between developed and developing countries, by providing for « subtle differentiation » of certain subgroups of countries (e.B LDCs) on substantive issues (e.g. B climate change financing) and/or for specific procedures (for example. B calendars and reports). In this article, we analyze whether countries of self-differentiation are compatible with the subtle differentiation of the Paris Agreement in formulating their own climate plans or national contributions (NDC). We find that there is a consistency for mitigation and adaptation, but not for support (climate finance, technology transfer and capacity building).