Results of the UNDP survey

“ Assessment of capacities for low-carbon and climate resilient

development ”

Western Balkan countries

© 2009 UNDP. All Rights

Reserved Worldwide.

Proprietary and

Confidential. Not For

Distribution Without Prior

Written Permission.

Roundtable, 25-26 May, 2011, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Daniela Stoycheva,

Climate Change Policy Advisor

Survey Background • Conducted 20 April -19 May 2011 in 5 WB countries + Kosovo*

• Targeted representatives of the government, relevant agencies and institutions, industry associations, NGOs

• The results of the survey provide a basis for both host countries and donors to better address the emerging issues that these countries face in addressing low-carbon and climate resilient development, and point towards capacity gaps that may need to be addressed immediately or need further in-depth analysis

• 80 respondents – almost 50% governmental organizations, 50% academia, private companies, and NGOs

• Mostly from environment and energy sector, 11% from areas connected with development and 20% other sectors

• Majority are senior (56%) and medium level (28%), of which 54% are men, 81% are indirectly involved in CC policy formulation and 58% indirectly in policy implementation

*referred to in the context of the UN Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999)

Conclusions (1):Strengthening and enhancement of existing capacity

– Institutional capacity assessed as very high priority by all – Some capacity exists, but more to be done

Broader participation in international climate change negotiations– National Focal Points on Climate Change- Broadening negotiation teams and their capacities

Enlarging departments/expertise on climate change– Departments mainly in the environmental ministries– Some experts in other ministries and organizations– The need for more departments/experts recognized

Establishment and improvement of coordination mechanisms on climate change– National coordination mechanisms weak– Important to have a NCC or similar– NCC should have sufficient authority and resources to effectively coordinate

climate change initiatives and should be inclusive

Conclusions (2):

Using lessons learned from regional cooperation– Good records– Found by the majority as important – Performance of existing ones not very high

Challenges to introduce CC related legislation – Still lack of comprehensive CC legislation– Given very high importance for the CC legislation– Capacity to introduce CC legislation not sufficient– Resourcing of implementation not sufficient– Engaging stakeholders as well– Capacity of private sector to understand and implement– Capacity to bring the legislation to local level low

Conclusions (3):Low participation in carbon emissions trading– DNAs operational, lack of CDM projects– Private sector capacity to implement CDM projects low– Plans for EU ETS– The importance of the flexible mechanisms high– Preparedness for new market-based mechanisms is relatively low – Preparedness to take part in the EU ETS is relatively low– Little awareness of the private sector on the EU ETS requirements

Strengthening reporting, awareness and knowledge– National expertise engaged in NC generally sufficient– Sustainability in preparation of the NC marginally sufficient– Not well prepared to report more frequently– NCSA is not making a significant difference in policy making– Provided training not sufficient – more in various CC areas

Conclusions (4):More actions on adaptation needed

– Importance of adaptation strategy is unanimously shown as very high– Regional cooperation very important

– Need to mobilize international funding high

Time to transition to low-carbon development– Capacity to define and submit NAMAs - 27% as good; 35% as not enough

– About 50% not aware of political will to undertake ambitious NAMAs post-2012 regime

– The need for international support of NAMAs is exceeding 65%

– The capacity of the government to develop LEDS is considered as low 55%, sufficient 22%

– The expertise possessed by the countries in the specific areas varies

Lack of financial resources – Lack of national financial resources– Not efficient use and coordination of the existing international financial resources

– Lack of capacity to submit projects

More to be done on monitoring and reporting

The results of the mapping survey could be found at:

Summary:

http://europeandcis.undp.org/go/LjubljanaRoundtable

Mapping:

http://desktop.websurveyor.net/analysis/generatepublicreport.aspx?esid=343779&subaccountid=92349

Survey:

http://desktop.websurveyor.net/analysis/generatepublicreport.aspx?esid=343776&subaccountid=92349