1. Introduction
The international legal architecture governing climate change has undergone significant transformation over the past three decades. Beginning with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), followed by the Kyoto Protocol and culminating in the Paris Agreement, the international climate regime has shifted from rigid, top-down mandates to a more flexible, nationally determined approach. Despite being a party to the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol, Iran has not ratified the Paris Agreement—placing it among a small minority of states outside the contemporary consensus on climate governance. The present study aimed to provide a legal analysis of Iran’s domestic climate-related actions in light of its international commitments, assessing the extent to which its national laws and policies align with the evolving obligations of the international climate regime.
2. Literature Review
The literature on international climate law increasingly emphasizes the normative significance of the Paris Agreement’s soft-law mechanisms, particularly the principles of Highest Possible Ambition (HPA) and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). In “The Power of the Paris Agreement in International Climate Litigation,” Voigt (2023) argues that, although these principles are not formally binding, they carry significant interpretive weight and increasingly inform international adjudication, as illustrated by the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) 2024 decision.
Further insights can be drawn from the distinction made between conduct-based and result-based obligations, as discussed in Mayer’s contributions titled “Obligations of Conduct in the International Law on Climate Change: A Defence” (Mayer, 2018) and International Law Obligations on Climate Change Mitigation (Mayer, 2022). Moreover, in “Climate Change Mitigation and the Role of Law,” Reins and Verschuuren (2022) explored the interaction between climate policy and domestic legal frameworks. Nevertheless, the existing literature has yet to provide a focused legal critique of Iran’s climate policies within this broader trajectory of international climate governance, particularly in the post-Paris context.
3. Materials and Methods
This study employed a descriptive–analytical research design grounded in two complementary qualitative methodologies: document analysis and critical discourse analysis. The document analysis was used to examine both primary and secondary sources. The primary sources included the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement, as well as relevant Iranian national legislation, including the Clean Air Act (2017), the Energy Consumption Reform Act (2011), and successive national development plans. The secondary sources comprised academic literature on international and domestic climate law, reports published by non-governmental organizations, and assessments of climate policies.
Moreover, critical discourse analysis was used to examine how key principles of international climate law—including due diligence, transparency, cooperation, and the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR)—are articulated and reflected in Iran’s legal and policy discourse. Particular attention was given to the extent to which these principles are incorporated into Iran’s domestic climate governance and to how their interpretation and application have evolved in the context of the emerging normative framework established by the Paris Agreement.
4. Results and Discussion
The evolution of the international climate regime—from the binding emission targets of the Kyoto Protocol to the procedural and participatory framework of the Paris Agreement—reflects a paradigm shift toward conduct-based obligations rooted in nationally determined efforts and good faith. Although the Paris Agreement does not impose binding emissions reductions, it nevertheless establishes a legal architecture characterized by procedural obligations concerning transparency, reporting, and progressively increasing ambition. These obligations, although often characterized as soft law, are increasingly treated as legally relevant by courts, thereby contributing to the normative force of the Agreement.
Within this evolving legal framework, Iran’s position is complex. As a non-party to the Paris Agreement, Iran remains outside the core mechanisms of the global climate regime. However, at the domestic level, it has taken notable legislative and institutional steps that partially align with the objectives of the Agreement. These include mandates promoting renewable energy development, legislation on energy efficiency, and the establishment of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Organization (SATBA) to oversee implementation. In addition, Iran’s national development plans contain measurable targets, including a target of generating 5% of its electricity from renewable sources.
Despite these advancements, Iran continues to face significant challenges. Persistent fossil fuel subsidies, weak enforcement, international sanctions, and limited access to finance and technology undermine the effectiveness of its energy transition policies. These deficiencies raise questions about Iran’s long-term credibility and legal exposure in the context of future international reviews and the evolving normative framework of climate law.
Iran’s current trajectory suggests a willingness to engage with global climate objectives, yet its structural and geopolitical constraints continue to hinder full alignment with the international climate regime. The hybrid nature of this regime, which combines binding and non-binding norms, permits legal assessments even in relation to states that have not ratified the relevant instruments. Nevertheless, without formal ratification and comprehensive policy reform, Iran risks being perceived as non-compliant, potentially foregoing opportunities to access climate finance, strengthen capacity, and enhance international cooperation.
5. Conclusion
Iran’s climate governance exhibits a dual character. While its formal exclusion from the Paris regime persists, its substantial body of domestic legislation indicates a degree of normative convergence with international climate objectives. The evolution of international climate law toward soft obligations does not absolve states of responsibility; rather, it redefines that responsibility in terms of conduct, due diligence, and transparency. For Iran, bridging the gap between domestic efforts and international expectations requires legal integration, policy coherence, and institutional capacity. Ratification of the Paris Agreement, rationalization of subsidies, and creation of transparent oversight mechanisms would significantly enhance Iran’s alignment with the evolving framework of international climate law.