**We need radical systems change immediately to halt climate change at 1.5 Celsius, a Green new deal provides an outline for action that we need to take** - We need to take radically and immediately in order to[ halt climate change to 1.5 Celsius](https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/), by halting climate change to 1.5 we can reduce the impacts of climate change. Failure to immediately act will result in an increase of 2 degrees or more which will have a [much larger magnitude](https://www.wri.org/insights/half-degree-and-world-apart-difference-climate-impacts-between-15c-and-2c-warming) of negative impacts than the already devastating inevitable 1.5 degrees - In order to enact [sufficient change](https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2021/aug/12/the-ipcc-report-is-a-massive-alert-that-the-time-for-climate-action-is-nearly-gone-but-crucially-not-gone-yet) we must role out a whole [systems change](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/systemic-change-and-climate-action-are-key-to-achieving-green-goals-.html), a [Green new deal] provides outline for climate action by also tackling structural inequality implicated in the climate crisis, a Green new deal would tackle the climate crisis and structural inequality simultaneously - Must be at a [international policy and systems change level](https://www.wri.org/climate), although individual action should be [encouraged](https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2019/11/19/greta-is-right-study-shows-individual-climate-action-boosts-systemic-change/?sh=7973c8c24a54) it is not at all enough and we must invoke systems change immediately for survival (eg. [Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions](https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change) - Arguments that the green new deal are too expensive are flawed by the [fact that we can't afford not to act](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/11/climate-action-bargain-britain-net-zero), the impacts of climate change far outweigh the cost of climate action

**The majority of countries in the world have made at least some commitments to tackling climate change, although research suggests that this may not be enough.** For context, let’s have a look at previous world efforts to tackle climate change: • _The Paris Agreement 2015_: [The Paris Agreement](https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/paris-agreement) is a legally binding international treaty with 191 signatories. Its main goal is to prevent the Earth’s average temperature from increasing by 2 degrees Celsius, in comparison to pre-industrial levels. States must try to keep the increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as well as work towards a global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible. • The UK’s Climate Change Act 2008: [The Climate Change Act 2008](https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/climate-change-targets-the-road-to-net-zero/#:~:text=The%20Climate%20Change%20Act%2C%20as,2050%2C%20compared%20to%201990%20levels.) initially committed the UK to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels. In 2019, this Act was amended to achieving net zero emissions. • Legal disputes in Australia: In 2021, the [Federal Court of Australia](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/08/australian-government-must-protect-young-people-from-climate-crisis-harm-court-declares) declared that the country’s Environment Minister has a “duty to take reasonable care” that young people won’t be harmed or killed by carbon dioxide emissions if a coalmine expansion is approved. Despite these efforts, [UN research](https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/11/1052171) suggests that the world is still on track for more than a 3 degree increase in the global temperature, which will have devastating consequences.