Information on these developments and assisting decision-makers in the successful implementation of palestinian Authority mechanisms therefore remain an essential task for academic research. Although there is research that supports and challenges the effectiveness of PA, no attempt has been made to systematically synthesize this area of research, as existing audits do not have systematic methods (Petticrew and Mccartney 2011, Minx et al.2017) or too closely (see page 4 of the protocol in the supplementary documents stacks.iop.org/ERL/15/083006/mmedia for an overview of existing reviews). We provide new evidence of the effectiveness of the Paris Agreement by systematically mapping the literature. To our knowledge, this is the first application of systematic synthesis of data in this area of literature. In addition, we offer conceptual advances, evaluation of the AP by pilots, obstacles and recommendations for efficiency. After a rigorous and transparent protocol, we create a comprehensive database with peer review literature on paUhr, which is not trivial in size and depth. We share our subsequent analysis of this literature in three sections: the Paris Agreement (PA) aims to strengthen the global response to climate change, to set mitigation, adaptation and financing targets, and to put in place mechanisms to achieve these goals. However, the effectiveness of the Palestinian Authority`s mechanisms in achieving its objectives has been questioned. This revision systematically represents the literature of the Palestinian Authority, which the experts have examined, and categorizes the available evidence as to whether or not the “Paris regime” is effective.
We will divide our analysis into three methodically different sections: first, we classify the literature according to the mechanisms studied. We find a diverse literature, but with a clear focus on mitigation, and we identify adaptation and capacity building as obvious gaps. Second, we conduct a content analysis that identifies common drivers, obstacles and efficiency recommendations. Here, we find mixed supporting documents, with potential drivers often being qualified by more concrete barriers. Third, we use scientometry to identify six research centres. They include losses and damages, finances, legal issues, international policies, experimental evidence and studies aimed at continuing progress in the goals of the Palestinian Authority. We conclude with a narrative discussion of our discoveries and present three central themes. First, transparency is widely seen as a precondition for the institutional effectiveness of the Palestinian Authority. However, the lack of clear standards for comparable reporting and information renders the Palestinian Authority`s transparency rules ineffective. Second, the environmental impact is based on national ambitions, which are currently insufficient.
It remains unclear to what extent the structure of the Paris regime itself can lead to a considerable reinforcement of ambitions. Finally, the Palestinian Authority facilitates the dissemination of standards, allows learning and the exchange of good practices. This production of common standards offers the most promising way to overcome the current lack of ambition. One of the Palestinian Authority`s main successes is the provision of a platform for the exchange of experiences and ideas. Although the United States and Turkey are not parties to the agreement, as they have not indicated their intention to withdraw from the 1992 UNFCCC, they will continue to be required, as an “Annex 1” country under the UNFCCC, to end national communications and establish an annual inventory of greenhouse gases.  In order to ensure the relevance of the literature identified by our research, we verify all documents identified by the research chain at the title and abstract level, using strict criteria of inclusion and exclusion.