Approximately 40, 000 attendees, more then 100 of them being government figures, are part of the Climate Change Conference occurring in Paris, Time Magazine reports.

This conference, which hopes to bring the world’s leaders together to combat the climate change crisis, officially launched Nov. 30th and will run for two weeks.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), as the conference is formally called, has made the world very excited as hope for reaching a global plan to make our planet healthier appears more and more achievable. Conferences with this topic at hand have happened before but with much less success.

However, this time around a new approach is going to be used which makes it easier and more beneficial for countries to participate in the agreements made, unlike previously with the Copenhagen Accord which was not successful, according to Time Magazine.

Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) allows for more flexibility as they all create a plan together by constructing it from the ground up. This sort of approach has less restriction on the nations involved which in turn will make it easier for everyone involved. However, this flexibility does not mean that the countries involved will not receive any consequence if they do not follow through in their agreements. Part of the conference is to lay out legal framework to assure nations follow the terms they agreed to.

The New York Times reports that the INDC has already submitted plans which go into detail about how they will “cut their domestic emissions after 2020.” The agreement is expected to have countries meet again every 10 years to discuss the topic and make more emission reduction pledges.

However, despite all the positivity, the main question lies in whether these governments can be trusted to make these changes. The United States believes that there should be legal  “binding provisions that would require governments to monitor, verify and report their emissions reductions to an international body.” This has met with the argument that such terms are “intrusive” and “a potential violation of sovereignty.”

Ultimately, it’s a matter of waiting to see what the future will bring, and if these nations will follow through with the agreements they’ve made. The world now stands with anticipation and hope for a better earth since it becomes a greater possibility through this global partnership.

(Photo provided by The New York Times.)