Limiting Overshoot
Navigating exceedance of 1.5°C and pathways towards return — crossing the line is now near-certain, and what happens next is still a choice.
UNEP's finding is blunt: emissions cuts have not been fast enough, and global warming will cross 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels within the next few years. Even on an optimistic reading of current pledges — every national climate plan fully implemented and every additional net-zero target met — expected peak warming is 1.8°C. Exceedance is not safe or acceptable; the report states there are no benign scenarios above 1.5°C.
What follows from that is the report's actual argument. The 1.5°C goal is not rescinded — it is now approached from above. The route is an "overshoot, peak and decline" pathway: hold peak warming to the lowest level possible, then bring temperature back below 1.5°C by the end of the century, while adapting to the impacts that arrive in the meantime. Every fraction of a degree avoided and every year by which overshoot is shortened reduces deaths, ecosystem loss and economic damage, and improves the odds that warming can be brought down at all.
The levers are named. Immediate deep cuts to CO₂, methane and other short-lived climate pollutants, which do most to limit peak warming. Net zero treated as a milestone rather than a destination, followed by a long-term path to net-negative emissions. Carbon dioxide removal at scale to bring temperatures back down, with the report explicit about its limits, trade-offs and governance requirements. And transformational adaptation delivered alongside mitigation rather than after it — the two are interdependent, and some losses under overshoot will be irreversible even once temperatures decline.
The response is staged: an immediate phase of rapid emission cuts and urgent protection for the most exposed people and ecosystems; a coping and containment phase around the peak; and a long-term resilience phase through the decline. Throughout, the report puts equity at the centre — countries with greater historical responsibility acting fastest, and governance rebuilt so that those who contributed least do not carry the largest burden.
The agreement itself, its temperature goal, and the five-year ambition cycle that governs every national commitment.
Every Nationally Determined Contribution as submitted, including Indonesia’s — the primary source for what has actually been pledged.
The rules for transferring mitigation outcomes between countries — the legal basis for national carbon markets and crediting.
The scientific baseline: remaining carbon budgets, the mitigation pathways consistent with 1.5°C, and regional impacts for Southeast Asia.
The annual measure of the distance between current pledges and the Paris temperature goal, and what closing it would require.
The comprehensive investment and policy plan for Indonesia’s power sector transition, and its progress reporting.
Generation mix, capacity additions and demand data — the numbers behind any power market or coal retirement argument.
How the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement set the terms, and why net zero is an accounting identity rather than a slogan.
Three national commitments — rice self-sufficiency, B50, and FOLU Net Sink 2030 — competing for the same land.
Recovery that rebuilds the catchment as well as the settlement, financed as flood infrastructure.
Where the national emissions pathway and FOLU accounting work is done, including the second NDC contribution.
Power market reform, carbon pricing, coal retirement and transition finance for Indonesia’s electricity system.
Our own analysis — working papers, rapid assessments and peer-reviewed articles — built on the sources above.