The Water-Energy-Food (WEF) nexus approach has proved valuable in the investigation of complex systems, allowing for tailored analysis for specific scopes. This is particularly relevant due to variations in WEF nexus interactions observed between countries and regions. This article uses qualitative methods to investigate the effects of Fiji’s ambitious carbon mitigation policies through a WEF nexus approach. A framework for Policy Coherence assessment was used to score the strength and direction of policy interactions. Overall, the assessment revealed more synergies than trade-offs between Fiji’s Low Emission Development Strategy (LEDS) and nexus sectoral policies, with the energy sector having the most interactions. Analysis of data obtained from key informant interviews and the policy coherence outcomes show important trade-offs and synergies between sectors, which are useful in informing national and sectoral level policy development. The research provides policy recommendations that address governance, technology and innovation, human capital, and land issues to overcome barriers to implementing climate mitigation targets in the LEDS and Nationally Determined Contributions. This study demonstrates the utility of the WEF nexus approach through applying qualitative methods to provide valuable insights for sectoral-level nexus research. Such an approach can be applied to other small island nations facing similar challenges.

Ecosystems across the globe are vulnerable to the effects of climate change, as are the communities that depend on them. However, ecosystems can also protect people from climate change impacts. As the evidence base strengthens, nature-based solutions (NbS) are increasingly prominent in climate change policy, especially in developing nations. Yet intentions rarely translate into measurable, evidence-based targets. As Paris Agreement signatories revise their Nationally Determined Contributions, we argue that NbS are key to meeting global goals for climate and biodiversity, and we urge researchers to work more closely with policy-makers to identify targets that benefit both people and ecosystems.

This article analyzes the international law obligations that arise in relation to nationally determined contributions (NDCs). It argues that distinct and concurrent obligations arise from two separate sources. On the one hand, treaty obligations arise under the Paris Agreement, which imposes an obligation of conduct on parties: they must take adequate measures towards the realization of the mitigation targets contained in their NDCs. On the other hand, communications such as NDCs may constitute unilateral declarations that also create legal obligations. These unilateral declarations impose obligations of various types, which may extend beyond mitigation. For example, they may specify measures of implementation or demand the achievement of a particular result. The potential ‘double-bindingness’ of NDCs should be a central consideration in the interpretation of international law obligations regarding climate change.

The 2015 Paris Agreement represents a historic achievement in multilateral diplomacy. After years of deeply discordant negotiations, Parties harnessed the political will necessary to arrive at a climate change agreement that strikes a careful balance between ambition and differentiation. The Paris Agreement contains aspirational goals, binding obligations of conduct in relation to mitigation, a rigorous system of oversight, and a nuanced form of differentiation between developed and developing countries. This article will explore the key building blocks of the Paris Agreement—ambition and differentiation—with an eye to mining the text of the Agreement for its interpretative possibilities and underlying politics.