The false certainties of climate policy: Rethinking risk and cooperation in an uncertain future

Although the Paris Agreement's temperature targets are widely endorsed, they are based on three problematic assumptions: that current climate governance arrangements will likely be successful, that climate sensitivity is predictable enough for policy planning, and that policy pathways will remain stable over time. These “false certainties” distort risk assessment and undermine effective climate governance. We argue that embracing uncertainty strengthens cooperation by increasing salience, supporting stress testing, and exposing shared vulnerabilities. Drawing on recent behavioral and negotiation research, as well as the concept of climate storylines, we propose reorienting climate negotiations toward plausible worst-case scenarios and deep uncertainty. Specifically, we advocate for three institutional innovations: a formal scenario stress-testing track within COP negotiations; a requirement for Parties to include scenario-based resilience strategies in their nationally determined contributions (NDCs); and an IPCC-UNFCCC task force to translate deep uncertainty into structured decision-support tools for negotiators. Implementing our propositions would improve resilience, build trust, and ground international climate policy in more realistic planning frameworks.