This argument is rather childish. Developing countries may not have the technology to limit their carbon output, and these same developing countries are not emitting nearly the same levels of carbon as industrialized countries. Doing the right thing for the environment, and future generations, should not be contingent on the acts of others.
Many countries actually submitted their new plans before climate change conference, known as COP21, started last month -- but those pledges aren't enough to keep warming below the 2-degree target. But the participants' hope is that over time, countries will aim for more ambitious goals and ratchet up their commitments.
Another sticking point has been coming up with a way to punish nations that don't do their part, but observers say that was never really on the table.
Instead, the agreement calls for the creation of a committee of experts to "facilitate implementation" and "promote compliance" with the agreement, but it won't have the power to punish violators.
If industrialized nations come to the conclusion that limiting their carbon output would slow the effects of global warming, than why would they need the participation of developing countries anyway? One's commitment to go green should not depend on whether or not someone else agrees to hold them accountable. First off, countries are led by adults who are ( or at least should be) familiar with the practice of self-accountability already. Secondly, developing nations likely wouldn't have the means nor resources to enforce rules against an industrialized nation anyway.
All countries, all companies, all people need to do their part, regardless of what others are doing. Simply saying that you aren't going to step up and do the right things because someone else isn't either doesn't solve the problem. It just makes it worse. Even if only some people help, it makes a big difference in the long run.