Bulgaria

In 2004 “Thematic Assessment Report Climate Change” and “Capacity Building Strategy and Plan for Bulgaria’s Implementation of the Obligations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN Convention to Combat Desertification” were published, under the “Bulgarian National Capacity Self -Assessment for Global Environmental Management Project”. The Reports identifies the UNFCCC-specific capacity needs in the following 5 points:

Inadequacy of the organization for formulation, preparation, presentation, reporting, implementation and evaluation of the national and foreign climate change policy: The reports claim that Bulgaria does not have an overall, integrated and purposeful policy to ,fulfill its commitments under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. It also adds that there is no efficient organization for the implementation of that kind of policy.

Lack of a well-functioning national system for the estimation of anthropogenic

green-house gas emissions. The Reports point out the importance of such system for preparation of the national greenhouse gas inventories; for formulation, carrying out and assessment of the national policy on climate change; and for supporting the timely planning and implementation of policies and measures. At the time that the Report was written there was no such complete and well functioning national system in Bulgaria.

Lack of a functioning national registry for accounting green-house gas emissions.

The Reports point out the obligation of establishing a national registry both with the ][ratification of the Convention and the Protocol; and stresses the necessity of it as a condition for participation in the flexible mechanisms (emissions trading and joint implementation). At the time that the Report was written no steps had been taken to build such a registry

Insufficient preparation for participation in the Emission Trading and Joint

Implementation flexibility mechanisms Bulgaria’s involvement in the EU ETS is compulsory under the EU scheme, by Directive 2003/87/EC. Therefore, Bulgaria must accelerate the process of meeting certain conditions, which have been carried out in minimum levels according to the Capacity Building Strategy and Plan Report.

2

Insufficient stakeholder and the general public participation in national and international climate change related activities. In SBI 21 in Buenos Aires, in December 2004, “Additional information on the effectiveness of capacity-building activities in countries with economies in transition” report has been published. According to the Report, there was limited public awareness generally on CC related issues. The National Communications and Inventories were not printed and disseminated in national language, and although they were available on web site of MOEW (only in English), the access to them could be assessed as limited. Therefore, there was lack of capacity of the public for meaningful participation in climate-change-related decision

According to the same report, there was lack of support for participation of experts from EIT in international workshops, trainings and certificate programs, and that there was limited number international workshops in EIT countries. Also during the “Workshop on Capacity-Building on the Implementation of UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol” in October 2005 organized by the Regional Environmental Center for CEE Ms. Ivona Grozeva and Ms. Daniela Stoycheva, Bulgarian Ministry of Environment and Water, identified existing gaps for the implementation of the UNFCCC. They argued that insufficient financial resources, human resources and political support are the biggest difficulties for the fulfillment of the commitments. The questionnaire prepared for the workshop on the capacity building needs revealed that there were difficulties for implementation of Climate Change policies and measures. The participants argued that all activities on Climate Change in Bulgaria are highly depended on donor’s support and that Climate Change is still not a priority of the government.. They reported the lack of specific legislation and argued that the elections have lead to delays and uncertainties. Moreover, the development of the National GHG Inventory, 4th National Communication and the Demonstrable Progress Report would possibly be delayed for 6-8 months due to lack of financial resources and National system. According to the Bulgarian experts, there were no reliable projections for greenhouse gas emissions in the agriculture, forestry and some industry sectors, which created a problem for the submission of National Communication. Moreover, the timely submission of NIR was hindered by the existing system of public tender procedure, which takes 5-6 months. Regarding the education, training and public awareness issues, the participants claimed lack of capacity and budget funding in the governmental organizations for these activities.

3

Croatia

In April 2005, “National Capacity Self-Assessment for Global Environmental Management – NCSA Republic of Croatia Report” was published under the “National Capacity Self-Assessment and Draft National Action Plan for Implementation of UN Conventions” project. The Report includes a SWOT analysis where the UNFCCC-specific capacity needs are revealed under “weaknesses”:

There are no strategy and laws stipulating the implementation of commitments under the Convention and the Protocol;

Lack of sufficient institutional, organizational and human capacities for the Convention implementation;

Unresolved issue of the baseline year for Croatia ; Croatia has not adopted national climate change Action Plan and/or GHG mitigation

programme; There is no national strategy/action plan for adaptation to climate change Absence of coordinated system of data collection and use of data on all climate

system components ; Inadequate development and use of procedures for control/prevention of GHG

emissions, including transfer of environmentally sound technologies; Inadequate presentation in educational curricula and poor public awareness of climate

change; Lack of enabling environment to develop markets and financial mechanisms for

implementation of GHG reduction projects; Lack of knowledge on feasible options and projects for GHG emission reduction; Framework to use flexible mechanisms of Kyoto Protocol (emission trading, joint

implementation, clean development mechanisms) does not exist; Low level of international cooperation.

4

Czech Republic In January 2006 “Identification of Priorities and Capacity Development for Performance of Obligations of the Czech Republic Following from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climatic Change and Kyoto Protocol” Report has been published. The report included an assessment of the implementation of the UNFCCC through a SWOT analysis, which was performed at five levels in accordance with the recommended methodology. The weaknesses/gaps have been grouped under the following levels: 1. Concepts and formulation of policies, strategies, legislation and programmes The political framework for the national policies concerned with climate change was not

unambiguously positive; Strategies and policies regarding strategic priorities (such as economic, transport, energy) of

the Czech Republic had not been interconnected in documents of strategic nature, and there was no interministrial control of these strategies;

Strategies and measures declared in strategic documents aimed at protection of climate (though indirectly) were rather formal, often suppressed, questioned or uncomprehended in practice.;

Regional programmes in the area of climate change were not formulated; The issue of climate change was systematically and institutionally addressed only by the

Ministry of the Environment and was not directly reflected in the programmes of other ministries;

It was suggested as a general problem of Czech Republic that, it was unable to enforce law and to meet systemic and general requirements of the conventions. It was added that, although international convention has the same legally binding effect as Czech laws, they were not perceived as such and, therefore, the provisions thereof were not considered to be binding;

Institutions, especially at regional and local levels, lacked qualified human resources in the field of climate change (both from the legislative viewpoint and from the viewpoint of adaptation measures);

It was suggested that there was inadequate capacity assigned for preparation of a comprehensive strategy including, inter alia, non-energy sector, in particular transport and construction industry and partly industry and agriculture.

2. Implementation of policies, strategies, legislation and programmes It was reported that the National Programme was not supplemented by a more specific plan

for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions;

5

There was inadequate interconnection between the Integrated National Programme of Emission Reduction in the CR and the National Programme to Mitigate the Impact of Climate Change;

There were limited possibilities (abilities) to elaborate the adopted strategies (policies, programmes) into a set of action plans, which would stipulate objectives for a shorter term, the relevant indicators, mutual links, responsibilities, financing and the method of evaluation;

There was inadequate possibility to implement the existing aid programmes in practice, especially the ones aimed at implementing short-term measures;

Environmentally detrimental subsidies (negative incentives) existed – subsidies for measures with a direct or indirect impact on the climate (e.g. refunds of the tax on “green diesel fuel”, i.e. diesel fuel used in agriculture);

The mandate (powers) of institutions involved in protection of the climate was not clearly specified; coordination and the ability to ensure continuity of activities and financing were lacking;

Inadequate mutual coordination of ministries in relation to implementation of policies and measures, low effectiveness of outputs of the interministerial groups;

Absence of qualified and experienced employees for implementation (with technical, legislative and economical knowledge), together with low awareness and inadequate professional basis at regional and local levels were also mentioned.

3. Capacity to engage and build consensus between the interested parties The report suggeted that there was inadequate incentives to reduce emissions with a danger

of preservation of emission-intensive production; Prevailing competitive, rather than cooperative, environment both within departments of the

individual ministries and among the ministries – frequent duplicity or counter-productivity of the measures, also at the legislative level (secondary legislation);

Absence of a long tradition of broader participation and consensus-building in the CR; Relatively high financial requirements for selected flexible mechanisms; Low awareness and motivation of the general public to actively participate in decision-

making processes; Inadequate capacity for disseminating information and unsystematically organized flow of

information across the State administration and local governments; Absence of an active approach (e.g. towards implementation of economically advantageous

measures); Inability and unwillingness to cooperate and to act jointly within the individual departments

as well as within institutions were also suggested in the report. 4. Communication, education and public awareness

6

The report suggested very poor information and public awareness concerned with climate change, the causes thereof and measures aimed at its mitigation, and almost all other obstacles hindering enforcement of the relevant measures followed from this fact;

Inadequate systematic support for science and research and education, not only in the area of climate change and the related areas;

The report suggessted that there was a low applicability of the results of science and research in practice, and insufficient applied research programmes. It was added that the topics of research programmes were limited, not adequately updated and were adapted to professional specialization of a limited number of participants (interest groups, associations of members of Scientific Councils etc.). The report moreover argued that research in the area of climate change had not been included as a priority area in ministerial research programmes;

Research activities also suffered from absence of qualified human resources and good coordination;

It was also argued that there was inadequate initiative and experience in seeking and preparation of high-quality projects at the international level;

Insufficient awareness of climate change and absence of an adequate professional basis at regional and local levels were also pointed out;

Low ratio of private resources in financing of research activities, absence of an information campaign on the impact of climate change, inadequate support for systematic environmental education at schools were also among the suggested gaps.

5. Monitoring, evaluation, reporting The report argued that monitoring and reporting were madein order to meet external

requirements rather than to improve the current state of affairs; Incomplete process of ensuring compatibility of registers of emission units and administration

of the registers were reported as well as the incompatibility of the input data provided by the stakeholders, use of varying methodologies, difficulties with collecting relevant input data from the private sector;

Moreover, inadequate incentives to improve education, monitoring, evaluation and reporting were also pointed out;

Finally, it was suggested that commitments other than quantitative requirements following from the KP are not being performed and these requirements were fulfilled only due to the selected reference year.

7

Estonia In 2004 “Final NCSA-Estonia Document Report” was published under the “National Capacity Needs Self-Assessment for Global Environmental Management in Estonia” project. The report identified capacity constraints to implementation of the Convention on Climate Change, under the titles “Priority Issues”, “Systemic Constraints”, “Institutional Constraints” and “Individual Constraints”. According to the Report, the priority issues together with systematic constraints were as follows: Preference is given to political/short-term goals rather than to long-term national

development plans/programmes/strategies. The goals set out in long-term development are not given (sufficient) funding, thus they are lacking sustainability. Moreover, role of issues dedicated to climate change in national curricula is insufficient;

The responsibilities of government bodies are not clearly defined and institutions are not sufficiently aware of their roles. Also, there is no clear division of responsibilities on national reports preparation;

Poor legislative supervision over the implementation of the Convention. Insufficient harmonization of legislation between sectors, there is no clear division between developing policies and implementing policies;

There is poor co-operation between state agencies in matters concerning the Convention. co-ordination and co-operation between ministries and between the state and local government levels is also poor;

Conflicts have been built into legislation concerning co-operation and division of responsibilities between the government and the Parliamentary Commissions in crucial state matters (e.g. development plans to direct the developments in power engineering);

There is no national registry of greenhouse gas emissions and no national system of assessing the emissions. No implementation acts have been adopted on the basis of the framework laws supporting the Convention on Climate Change, including such acts that would give systematic guidance on arranging the necessary information. This issue also suffers from lack substantial financial resources;

There is poor standardization in developing various national programmes and strategies, and follow-up on implementations are insufficient;

State budget funding for performing the commitments undertaken under the Convention on Climate Change (annual inventories, national reports etc) and connection with the state budget are poor. There is limited financial and human resources;.

Creating awareness among the general public about the principles of implementing the Convention has been insufficient and difficult to understand by the general public. Moreover, access to information is not sufficient. The informative policies supporting the Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol are too declarative. Moreover, they suffer from limited financial sources;.

8

Insufficient information about the possibilities of the implementing mechanisms of the Protocol (e.g. emissions trading). Also, there are contradictory policies regarding to emissions trading;

The state has not sufficiently involved the stakeholders in dealing with the issues pertaining to the Convention. NGOs and occupational associations are not sufficiently involved in resolving issues pertaining to climate change;

Insufficient funding of scientific research on Climate Change and circulation of greenhouse gases. To date the scientific research policies have not regarded this field as a priority. There is lack of financial and human resources in this area also.

9

Hungary

In 2005 the Final Report was published, under the “National Capacity Self -Assessment for Global Environmental Management Project-Hungary”. The report clearly identifies the existing problems and difficulties. Capacity building gaps:

Legislative process is rather ambivalent, there is delay adopting the needed legal regulations for the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol;

Energy and Climate strategy for short and long run was missing (in 2005); Political support was assessed as very diverse. On the one hand, it seems that government is

very supportive, but on the other hand, the climate related issues are missing from the decision making processes.(sectoral integration is still needed in mid 2007);

Agency responsible to annual inventory preparation is very much understaffed; Inter-Ministerial Committee exists to coordinate tasks, but Committee members are not

decision takers; Governmental representatives and business sector have different views on the implement of

the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol.

Capacity building needs: The executing ministries would need a reliable external expert base that can prepare the

necessary analyses in time; The most important issue is to promote the incorporation of climate protection

considerations in economic/investment/political decisions.

Also during the “Workshop on Capacity-Building on the Implementation of UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol”, in October 2005 (organized by the Regional Environmental Center for CEE), Mr. Jozsef Feiler, National Focal point for CC, Hungary presented the capacity-building needs and gaps regarding flexible mechanisms . Assessment of needs was as follows::

Setting up the National System, which currently has several shortcoming; Inventory for 2003 is latest inventory submitted, inventory for 2004 are to be submitted

by end of December 2005; No responsible body for inventory preparation by law; No QA/QC; No uncertainty management; No data management system; A staff of 1,5 persons.

10

• monitoring and verification requirements • accreditation of independent entities for determination of PDDs and verification

of emissions • recalculations of GHG emissions • 1988 - base year recalculation urgently needed;

11

Latvia

In 2005 “Thematic Assessment Materials on Climate Change” and “Capacity Evaluation of Latvia in Fields of Biological Diversity, Climate Change and Land Degradation” were published, under Latvian National Capacity Self -Assessment for Global Environmental Management Project. The report clearly states the ppriorities for short- and long-term measures including: In the summary of the thematic profile problems were identified as follows: In the field of activity programmes and introduction of technologies:

National system for preparation of GHG emission inventories has not yet been developed;

Lack of quality assessment and quality control (QA/QC) procedures and practices; Lack of information for companies on the flexible mechanisms; Instruments to motivate companies to use clean technologies have not been sufficiently

developed. In the field of science and preparation of specialists the gaps were identified as follows:

Insufficient research base to be used as ground for reporting in the areas of information acquiring, processing, monitoring and information exchange;

Insufficient co-operation information flow among different stakeholders; Collecting data for the National Communications is not managed properly; Public Access to environment related information is limited.

In the field of general public involvement and education the gaps were identified as follows: Insufficient human capacity in environmental protection institutions; Responsibility of sectors and sector institutions is not clearly described; Limited human and financial resources to represent Latvia in international

negotiations.

Key barriers were identified as follows: Insufficient human and financial capacity, scarcity of sectoral experts; Insufficient institutional co-operation; Lack of air pollution and CC Action Plan; Limited access for public to environmental information; Lack of an operation systems for GHG Inventories preparation; flexible mechanisms,

monitoring and reporting; Lack of awareness and support of key decision makers; Ensure efficient capacity for timely performance and operation of the national system Lack of quality assessment and quality control procedures (QC/QA); There is no designated national entity to prepare GHG Inventories; Lack of legislative/regulatory framework

12

Capacity needs of Latvia were also presented on the workshop hold in Riga, in April 2006 entitled “Future Climate Change Policy in the Baltic states: Looking beyond 2012”. The event was organized under the framework of the EC financed project “Capacity Building in New Member States, Acceding and Candidate Countries on Further Climate Change Action Post-2012, Series of events 2006-2007”. The workshop was organised by Ecologic – Institute for International and European Environmental Policy, Berlin, in co-operation with the Institute for Sustainable Development (ISD), Warsaw, the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM) at the Free University of Amsterdam, the Foundation for International Environmental Law and Development (FIELD), London, the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW), Berlin, and a network of experts from additional institutions in the new and old Member States.

Main problems and shortages related to capacity needs in Baltic States (including Latvia) were identified as follows:

Integration of climate change policies into sectoral and regional policies, consistency among different strategies (climate and energy in particular);

Involvement of Ministries beyond MoE, awareness raising for governmental officials; Training experts on cost/benefit analysis; For future burden sharing: modelling different scenarios, more information provision for

industry, and promotion of the stakeholders’ participation for wide acceptance of climate policies by business and the whole society.

13

Lithuania In 2006 the Final Report of the“Nat onal Capac ty Self Assessment for Global Env ronmental ? ?Management” project was published. The Report made an assessment of the implementation of the UNFCCC through a SWOT analysis and concluding remarks. However, the gaps mentioned were limited to policy and measure gaps together with some institutional capacity gaps. The Report suggested the existance of following capacity gaps:

By the time the Report was prepared, there was no programme for the implementation of

the UNFCCC and monitoring of effects of climate change. The National Environment Monitoring Programme evaluated indicators relating to the air quality but not to the effect of climate change on ecosystems;

The most important strategic provisions of the reduction of the impact of climate changes were included in the strategic documents of economic, transport, environment, and rural development sectors. However, the strategies of individual sectors were predominated by the measures to improve the quality of environment with no consideration to the inter-relations of the conventions and the integral impact of climate changes on ecosystems and human health;

The report suggested that individual funds for the implementation of the means of the National Implementation Strategy of the UNFCCC had not been allocated. It was argued that quite a few means were financed while implementing the National Energy Strategy, the National Programme on Increase of Energy Consumption Efficiency and the Law on Environmental Monitoring. It was also suggested that climate change mitigation means were not directly mentioned in the Single Programming Document 2004–2006;

As one of the conclusions, it was reported that lack of action coordination (not only among different ministries but also among the departments of the Ministry of Environment) was witnessed during the implementation of the UNFCCC. It was also suggested that the activity of the National Committee on Climate Change was ineffective, arguing that it had no rules of procedure and there are no ways to ensure that the related institutions included committee’s decisions into their strategic documents and action plans.

14

Poland

In 2005 The Final Report was published, under the “Polish National Capacity Self -Assessment for Global Environmental Management Project”. The report clearly states the ppriorities for short- and long-term measures including:

- Ccontinuation of implementation of tasks resulting form the Accession Treaty; - Integration of Poland’s climate protection policy with the policy of the European

Union, allowing for the adoption of joint commitments in the second period (after 2012);

- Continuation of integration of the climate policy into other national policies; - Continuation of integration of the climate policy with governmental sectoral

policies.

The Reports gathers the UNFCCC-specific capacity needs in the following points: Systemic barriers

There are no appropriate legal regulations; The legal bases and the operational system (register, monitoring, verification and

certification of the reduced emission units) are lacking’ The national system of inventory greenhouse emission is not fully prepared to meet the

requirements of collecting data on the GHG emissions; There is a lack of long-term strategies for sectors of the national economy including

specific activities and scenarios for greenhouse gas emission reduction by individual sectors and separately for each gas;

Poland’s climate policy is poorly integrated with other national policies; Systems of human resources training in the field of environment protection have not been

sufficiently developed, particularly at the local level.. B. Institutional barriers

Lack of institutional arrangements at the ministry level, both at the Ministry of the Environment and at other ministries and institutions that would contribute to effective adaptation of the mechanisms set out in the Kyoto Protocol and implementation of the Climate Convention;

Insufficient number of staff at the Departments of the Ministry of the Environment responsible for implementation of the Climate Convention and the Protocol (among others for working out, developing and implementing the policy and legal regulations related to the two agreements);

15

Unsatisfactory inter- and intra-institutional flow of information, that is, between ministries and departments, including the Ministry of the Environment;

Poor or non-existing flow of information between governmental agencies included into the process of implementation of the Climate Convention and Kyoto Protocol and self-governmental agencies.

C. Barriers at the individual level Insufficient awareness of changing requirements related to compilation of official reports constitutes a barrier at the individual level. That results in not fully satisfactory quality of reporting to the Conference of the Parties to the Climate Convention and Kyoto Protocol. At all levels of governmental and self-governmental agencies and particularly at the local level, insufficient training of the workforce in the field of environment protection constitutes the barrier.

Also, during the “Workshop on Capacity-Building on the Implementation of UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol”, in October 2005 (organized by the Regional Environmental Center for CEE), capacity-building needs in the sphere of GHG Inventories and preparation of the AAU report in Poland was presented by Krysztof Olendrzynski ( National Emission Centre manager). Assessment of needs identified the followings needs:

Need to establishing the National Inventory System with solid legal basis: o for data collection and processing, (new legislation needed);j o division of work and responsibilities for all stakeholders, o with secure long-term funding, o formalized QA/QC procedures;

Need to develop Tier 2/3 methods for all key sources; Need to fill the gaps in time series, recalculations (use of CRF Report); 1988 - base year recalculation urgently needed; Administrative need for the extension of NEC (National Emission Centre); no Environmental Protection Agency in Poland! Tasks spread among various

institutions; plans to establish EA; NEC – part of EA? Capacity needs of Poland were also partly covered on the opening workshop (Warsaw, January 2006) under the EC financed project “Capacity Building in New Member States, Acceding and Candidate Countries on Further Climate Change Action Post-2012, Series of events 2006-2007. The event was organised by Ecologic – Institute for International and European Environmental Policy, Berlin, in co-operation with the Institute for Sustainable Development (ISD), Warsaw, the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM) at the Free University of Amsterdam, the Foundation for International Environmental Law and Development (FIELD), London, the German Institute

16

for Economic Research (DIW), Berlin, and a network of experts from additional institutions in the new and old Member States. Main problems and shortages related to capacity needs in Poland were identified as follows:

Integration of climate change policies into sectoral and regional policies; Lack of capacity to develop and implement climate policies (“rationale” utilization of

existing capacities, furthermore problem is because the lack of national contribution to available EU funding);

Awareness raising among general public; Research and development, technology and adaptation are the main areas where further

capacity building would be needed.

17

Romania In July 2005 “The Final Report on the Implementation of Rio Conventions” was published, under the “National Capacity Self–Assessment of Romania for Global Environment Management” project. The Report considered the following 13 capacity gaps as the Tier 1 issues for satisfying the requirements of UNFCCC:

1. Lack of a country-level coherent approach within the planning process for climate change;

2. Insufficient, inefficient legislative framework with no correlation at the activity sectorial level;

3. Lack of strategies for adaptation of climate change impact’ 4. Deficiencies relative to primary databases specific to emissions stocktaking (structuring,

correlating, checking, collecting) and lack of a GHG Registry at country level; 5. Reduced promotion of information dissemination and raising public awareness relative to

climate change; 6. Lack of a specialized structure for JI projects management and lack of a legislative

framework for emission trading; 7. Insufficient capacity for measures adopted to cut down climate change impact and

vulnerability to such impact; 8. Lack of specific mechanisms for stimulation of transfer and use of clean technologies; 9. Reduced capacity for financial support attraction within UNFCCC and PK mechanisms; 10. Lack of coherent and efficient approach at the country level; 11. Poor nationwide and worldwide cooperation between institutions involved with data and

information exchange’’ 12. Insufficient consideration of the anthropic activities impact on climate when social and

economic development scenarios are worked out; 13. Dysfunctions in reporting activity.

Also, during the “Workshop on Capacity-Building on the Implementation of UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol” in October 2005 (organized by the Regional Environmental Center for CEE), Vlad Trusca, Romanian Ministry of Environment and Water Management, identified existing gaps for that time. He pointed out existence of gaps in the following areas:

Financial and technical resources (as the most important gap); Studies on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation; Emissions trading procedure – GIS, and database with possible JI projects; Clear methodology on GHG emissions assessment and cooperation between institutions; Training for new experts.

18

Later on in the same workshop, a questionnaire related to the Capacity building needs showed that according to the participants from Romania, the most challenging difficulties for implementation of Climate Change policies and measures are that Climate Change is not a priority for the government. Romania lacks national experts, and there is scarcity in financial resources. Also coordination between entities, institutional framework and responsibility are missing. Moreover, for the National Inventory preparation, the participants claimed in the questionnaire that collection of statistical data is the biggest challenge, together with the national specific emission factors and methods. Lack of financial resources was pointed out as the only biggest challenge for the implementation of Kyoto Mechanisms, and for education, training and for raising public awareness.

19

The Slovakia Republic (Slovakia) In December 2004 “The Thematic Assessment Report of Capacity Development Needs for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change” was published by Slovakia. The Report included a SWOT analysis where the UNFCCC-specific capacity needs were revealed under “weaknesses”, and were grouped into five basic topics according to generic UNDP/GEF indicators. According to the Report, the weaknesses under each basic topic were as follows: Topic 1: Capacity to propose and formulate policy, strategy, legislation and programmes:

Strategic priorities of the country are changing continuously, synergy of MEA is not taken into account in the development of concepts;

Strategies are not sufficiently transformed into action plans and sets of measures with identified responsibility, financial and human sources ;

Significant differences in qualification of managers as regards to climate change; Insufficient capacity to monitor and assess the implementation of strategies and

programmes; Insufficient capacity is devoted to the development of strategy and measures for non-

energy sector- industrial processes; Insufficient coordination of sectors in the development of strategies, low effectiveness of

cross-sectoral associations. Topic 2: Capacity to implement policy, legislation, strategy and programmes

Low capability to implement adopted strategies, policy and programs, lack of systemic support for the transformation of action plans into measures that really will be implemented;

No direct legislation to support implementation of policy; measures for the whole field of climate change has not been prepared;

No direct legislation to support the enhancement of energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy source has been adopted;

The capacities for continual monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of policy and measures are not adequate;

The mandates of institutions involved in the process have not been always explicitly stipulated, there is a lack of financial and human sources and the institutions are often unable to ensure the continuity of their activities;

Insufficient coordination of sectors in the implementation of policy and measures, low effectiveness of outcomes of cross-sectoral groupings;

Lack of qualified and experienced experts in the field of implementation (the combination of technical, legal and economic knowledge is required).

20

Topic 3: Capacity for engagement and building consensus among all stakeholders

Formation of broadly based engagement and building consensus has no tradition in Slovakia;

Low effectiveness of cross-sectoral groupings in the enforcement of common objectives; Public is not adequately informed and motivated to more actively influence relevant

decision making; Insufficient depth of information needed to achieve the commitments under the

Convention; Available capacities (information, material, human sources) are not used effectively;

horizontal and vertical flows of information are not provided systemically; Low expert and managing level of already established information centres and public

relation centres; Slovakia has not become a Party to the Aarhus Convention.

Topic 4: Capacity to mobilize information and knowledge:

The research on climate change has not been a priority field of the state research and development programs;

The synergy of research activities within UNFCCC – CBD – UNCCD has not applied in Slovakia;

Existing scientific and research capacities are not used adequately and effectively; Coordination of research activities is insufficient, managing and researching skills do not

exist; National funds, allocated for research, are very limited for the field of climate change; Lack of initiative in searching new ideas for projects and lack of experience in

developing new project proposals funded from international funds; The share of private funds in financing research activities is very low; Information campaign on the impact of climate change on human activities, focused

directly on soil owners and users, technicians and managers in the energy, transport and waste management sectors have not been addressed. Information campaigns for general public have been prepared unsystematically and without innovation.

Many teachers specialized in environmental education are leaving their jobs due to either retirement or low salaries;

Systemic support for specific and continuous education of new experts, technically skilled for achieving commitments under UNFCCC and KP, does not exist.

Topic 5: Capacity for monitoring, assessment, reporting and education:

21

The mandate for the emission inventory pursuant to the KP is not well defined with regard to legal and institutional Aspects

Mandates of experts that represent Slovakia according to the definition of KP are not well defined with regard to legal and institutional aspects

Inadequate financial, personnel, material and information capacities to achieve the commitments under UNFCCC and KP

Non- transparent collection of and analyses of information, high uncertainty of input data and lack of mandate to obtain the data on activities

Lack of capacity (financial sources and managers) for meeting the requirements of QA/QC process and for accreditation and certification

Incompatibility of input data from different institutions due to different methodologies for data collection

Maintenance of status quo, missing stimulation for further development of monitoring, assessment, reporting and education

Obtaining input data from the private sector for reporting purposes is difficult” Also in October 2005, a workshop on “The Capacity Building on the Implementation of the UNFCCC and the KP” was organized (by the Regional Environmental Center), where the participants from the Slovak Republic filled out a questionnaire. According to the results, the participants confirmed the comment, that the responsibilities of institutions were not explicitly specified especially with regard to responsibility and providing information and promotion of voluntary instruments, which also took place in the NCSA Report. Moreover, the questionnaire pointed out the following existing constrains for capacity building for that time that:

There were obstacles in preparing the National Communication, such that there was permanent lack of staff and significant changes in positions connected with the subject during the year 2005 (director of Air Protection Department, NFP for CC, staff in CC unit, etc.), and lack of financial resources;

There was a lack of resources and capacity to establish the National inventory system with overall responsibility and clear mandates and competences.

In the same workshop Helena Princova from Air Protection Department of Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic argued in her presentation that there was no native driving force for capacity development due to relatively guaranteed meeting of reduction commitments under KP; and that there was low sustainability – no systemic support for continuous training and educations.

22

Slovenia In December 2005 the “Assessment of Implementation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Slovenia” Report and the “Assessment of Implementation of Measures in Cross-cutting Areas of the Three Global Conventions” Report were published under the “NCSA Project”. The both reports had parts mentioning about capacity building gaps of Slovenia for the UNFCCC. The summary of the gaps pointed out in the reports were as follows: Some key operational documents (adapting of agriculture to climate change) had not been

prepared yet, by the time the reports were written. The reports also point out that a considerable number of legal documents had to be prepared. Moreover, Climate Change was not mentioned at all in basic strategic and operational documents in the areas of agriculture and tourism. They remained in declarative level;

Horizontal and vertical cooperation and harmonization of administrative and professional institutions were deficient and insufficient. There was no stable network available that would connect individuals to make research, educational promotional or political projects/programmes, which could enable better regulation of roles, activities, and coordination of new incentives. It was mentioned that they were often carried out only informally (ad hoc working bodies for elimination of problems or deficiencies) and that they were not a part of permanent institutional framework. So it was concluded that important potentials aimed at strengthening capacity for the implementation of the Convention remained unused;

It was also reported that involvement of non-governmental organizations and the public in processes of preparation and implementation of policies were limited to the “notice and comment” model. This point was mentioned as a cross-cutting issue with the other two conventions of CBD and CCD;

The reports suggested that the deficiencies were evident in establishment and implementation of monitoring (content, extent and implementation of monitoring). And that data sequences and gathered through environmental monitoring was insufficient and deficient. The GHG emission had not been measured with classical measurement methods, but through calculations of emissions from indirect data. Monitoring had been primarily carried out to fulfil obligations of monitoring and reporting to the European Commission and its institutions;

The reports pointed out about lack of a general monitoring system for assessment of implementation of measures, whether the goals were achieved or not. This point was mentioned as a general capacity gap, rather than as a UNFCCC specific gap;

The reports suggested that education for the convention was limited to sectoral efforts; examples of inter-sectoral integration in the area of education were rare. It was also pointed out that the public was aware of the existence of climate change, but they didn’t know they contribute to it through their ways of life and its effects on the weather etc;

23

Also the informative campaigns suffered from insufficient financial sources. It was concluded that campaigns usually fail to reach accumulative and synergetic effects among wider population.

The Ministry of Environment was reported not to have a planned information exchange on climate change. It was reported that providing of and access to information had not yet overcome the sectoral approach. Moreover, it was mentioned that insufficient attention was given to exchange of information (on good practice examples, technological or methodological solutions). And that cooperation between various stakeholders outside public administration was insufficient;

The reports mentioned that research programmes lack financial resources for assessing the current state, managing the collections, methodological issues, as well as for intersectoral/ inter-disciplinary target researches, in order for satisfying the needs of the Convention implementation;.

The need for more active involvement of local agencies rather than the existing “top-down” approach for the sake of successful implementation of projects related to climate change, such as energy efficiency projects were also mentioned in the reports;

The variety of existing financial mechanisms and financial resources to support measures for the conventions were suggested to be insufficient, in the reports;

The existence of quality experts (especially in the field of energy) in government and non-governmental institutions was mentioned, however it was also suggested that they were overburdened and couldn’t dedicate much time on climate change issues.

There were low awareness climate change issues among decision makers, especially about the interaction between climate change and sectoral activities, particularly in transport and agriculture.

The reports also suggest some unused potential for efficient implementation of the Convention especially in the area of sustainable mobility programmes, green public and finance reforms. Also, the reports suggested that there was adequate technology knowledge on efficient energy use, however, it has not been utilized;

In national budget for 2005, no special budgetary item existed for the implementation of UNFCCC. However, some specific tasks of the Convention were aimed directly;.

Also, there was no special budgetary item for the implementation of the Operational Programme, individual tasks were carried out within the framework of other activities;.

Slovenia occasionally assisted other countries in implementing various projects on climate change. However, it was claimed not to be completely aware of its responsibility for global problems, aids for developing countries in particular;

A procedure of acquiring aid was not clearly defined, and similarly Slovenia lacked a clear aid strategy for JI and CDM.