Evaluation of Activities Implemented Jointly in Slovenia

Margita Stariha, Andrej Klemenc
Slovenian E-Forum, Society for Energy Economics & Environment

1. SLOVENE OBLIGATIONS REGARDING CO2 EMISSIONS

1.1. CO2 Emissions in Slovenia
Due to the collapse of Yugoslavia and its constituent six republics, and the resulting collapse of the planned economy, Slovenia went through an economic contraction in the early 1990s and CO2 emissions fell. However, after the Slovene economy's recovery, with the support of a successful redirection of exports to foreign markets, CO2 emissions increased rapidly between 1993 and 1996, and continue to increase at a more moderate but still substantial annual rate.

As demonstrated in the table below, the relative composition of total CO2 emissions has changed during the economic transition period. Previously, transport represented only 17 percent of all CO2 emissions, a share that has now increased to 32 percent. CO2 emissions from industrial combustion have fallen from 23 percent to 13 percent. Emissions produced by the energy sector and technological processes have remained essentially unchanged.

The source of the highest increase in CO2 emissions is liquid fuels . CO2 emissions from solid fuels are decreasing, mainly due to decreased coal use in industry and households. Still, the CO2 emissions from solid fuels represent a considerable share of all CO2 emissions.

Although Slovenia is a country in economic transition, its CO2 emissions pattern compares with that of highly developed West European countries. There are many similarities in the CO2 emissions of Slovenia and the European Union, as reflected in the increase of emissions from various sectors.

But there are also considerable differences: in the period 1990-1995, transport CO2 emissions in Slovenia increased by approximately 40 percent, a growth rate of more than four times that of the EU. In the same period, industrial emissions decreased by more than 30 percent - again, four times faster than in the EU. The decrease in industrial emissions is a result of a reduction in the use of coal and electricity in this sector. There are differences in the "other use" sector too: In Slovenia, emissions in this sector are increasing, while in the EU they are decreasing. Emissions from the electricity sector are decreasing, both in Slovenia and in the EU.

In 1997 there were 8 tons of CO2 emissions per capita in Slovenia, and this figure has continued to increase. However, CO2 emissions are still lower than in the EU, where in 1995 the figure was 8.2 tons of CO2 emissions per capita. For comparison, the figure below indicates the world average and CEE averages. It also details a comparison of the specific CO2 emissions per unit of used energy.

1.2. Slovenia and the Kyoto Protocol
Slovenia signed the Kyoto Protocol on October 21, 1998, according to which, in the period 2008-12, Slovenia is obliged to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 8 percent below 1986 emissions levels. Slovenia selected 1986 as a base year, when CO2 emissions were at their highest (15.7 million tons) due to large increases in domestic production of lignite, steel, and aluminum. After the collapse of the "socialist market economy" in the late 1980s, CO2 emissions decreased, only to begin increasing again in 1991 until they again reached 1986 levels in 1996. By 1997 CO2 emissions had already exceeded 1986 levels.

1.3. Slovene Climate Change Policy

1.3.1. The National Program for Environmental Protection
The National Program for Environmental Protection (NPEP), adopted on September 16, 1999, sets climate change amongst the country's environmental protection priorities. The NPEP outlines principles for equalizing the burden of emissions reduction costs among various key sectors. The NPEP also details measures for the preparation of strategic documents and financial instruments.

1.3.2. The Energy Law and Climate
The Energy Law was also adopted on September 16, 1999. This law introduced guidelines for a safe and reliable energy supply based on market principles, established the institutional set up for the grid-bound energy carriers (electricity, gas) market, and addressed the dynamics of opening the market to foreign investment. The Energy Law also introduced sustainable development principles by giving priority and support to energy efficiency, use of renewable energy sources and environment protection, including the clean-up of past damage.

The law directs energy policy toward GHG emissions reduction and also emphasizes use of renewable energy sources and implementation of energy efficiency programmes. The provisions for setting up "a free market" with "green electricity" are also given. The law signifies a turning point in energy policy and is one of the most important pieces of legislation dealing with climate change issues. However, its implementation will face structural, as well as systemic barriers, and resistance from socially and political powerful monopoly energy suppliers.

1.3.3. The CO2 tax in Slovenia
Slovenia is the first CEE country to implement a CO2 tax. The tax came into force on January 1, 1997, and was initiated at a rate of approximately EURO 5.5 per ton of CO2, followed by a March 1998 increase to EURO 16 per ton of CO2. The cost of the CO2 tax is shifted to consumers. Since October 1998 some exemptions among taxpayers have been allowed. Companies that own or manage devices using fossil fuels for energy production can get an allowance for non- CO2 taxed fossil fuels use.

Since October, the Decree also includes a scheme of incentives for energy efficiency measures and new low-emissions power producers.

Initially the tax, which was considered more of a fiscal policy instrument and not an important tool of environmental/climate policy, was implemented quietly. However, perception of the tax changed after it was substantially increased in 1998. Some energy-intensive producers of energy saving goods (rock-wool insulation, for example) and the Chamber of Industry protested the increase. The Ministry of the Environment, which initiated the tax, responded with considerable attention to the concerns of industry and to the proposal of energy efficiency experts on how to integrate incentives for stimulation of energy efficiency into the tax mechanism. After meetings between representatives of the ministry, industry, experts and NGOs, a consensus was reached in autumn of 1998.

In 1998, the money collected with the CO2 tax represented 2.1 percent of all budget income. Exemptions are targeted to stimulate substantial CO2 emissions reductions while keeping the financial burden low. The considerable budget contribution of the CO2 tax has not been accompanied by an increase in government spending on the environment, or with a program for reduction of GHG. But the tax's budget contribution does provide a good opportunity for environmental NGOs to lobby for a general environmental spending increase and to demand the tools, measures and incentives needed to form a comprehensive climate policy.

2. THE STATE OF AIJ/JI IN SLOVENIA

At the first Conference of Parties (COP-1) in Berlin, the Activities Implemented Jointly (AIJ) projects were accepted as the pilot phase of Joint Implementation (JI) projects.

According to the April 7, 1995 decision of the COP, AIJ projects are to be implemented on a voluntary basis. In Slovenia, no such projects have been implemented.

However, there are some activities for preparation of the GHG Emissions Reduction Programme. The results will partly be included in the First National Communication to the UNFCCC. The ongoing studies in the energy field are:

• Urbancic A., Merse S.: Technical Options for CO2 Reductions to Reach the Kyoto Target for Slovenia - A Contribution to the National Program for Environmental Protection. Technical Report, Ljubljana: Jozef Stefan Institute-DP-7863, March 1998. (In Slovene.),
• Tomsic M: Reduction of GHG Emission, Methodology of Design of Strategies and Assessment of Effectiveness of Emission Reduction Potential. DRAFT Technical Report, Ljubljana: IJS, 1999. (in Slovene), and
• A. Urbancic et al.: Potentials for GHG reduction in IPCC sector energy - survey and analysis of measures, Technical Report, IJS-DP-7953, Ljubljana 1999. (In Slovene.)

2.1. Slovene policy and position on AIJ/JI
Formerly, foreign investors interested in AIJ/JI projects in Slovenia were met with the government's lack of interest. The Slovene government is focused on what it considers to be more important issues, such as accession to the EU.

Additionally, most of the proposals have involved either environmentally sensitive/risky technologies (like incinerators), proffered by half-privatized companies with bad environmental records; or large infrastructure investments proposed by companies in state or municipal ownership. Implementation of these projects would be a "hard sell" from a financial and/or public acceptance perspective, even if climate issues had more priority than they currently do. From 1991 on, the political agenda was dominated by the management of economic recovery following the collapse of the former Yugoslavia, conflicts over denationalization and privatization, and the growing importance of compliance with EU rules. This left little space for issues like integrated environmental protection and climate change, which are well integrated in the agendas of more developed countries.

It should be noted that, of all countries involved in the "Capacity for Climate Protection in CEE" project, as well as the five CEE countries that are first in line for full EU membership, only Slovenia was not an internationally recognized until 1991. Slovenia also continues to be burdened by the political and economic collapse of the other former Yugoslav republics.

The Slovene government is aware of its international obligations to reduce emissions, and agrees that something must be done . The government's view is that Slovenia is not capable of reducing CO2 emissions without assistance and that the country will have to use JI projects or emissions allowance trading to reach its Kyoto target. The Government is preparing its GHG Emissions Reduction Strategy, which should be finished by the end of this year.

Although in Slovenia there are no current AIJ/JI projects, energy efficiency measures are being undertaken, such as :

• An information and awareness building programme: publications, seminars, workshops, exhibitions and similar events are organized on a regular basis.
• Advisory services: Energy Advisory Network ENSVET for households, energy advising to large industrial energy consumers, and local energy concepts.
• An energy auditing programme.
• A demonstration programme of energy efficient technologies.
• Financial and tax incentives: financial incentives for small energy saving measures in households, tax incentives for energy efficient household appliances, and financial incentives for energy efficiency investments.
• Fund for energy efficiency investments.

2.2. Agents and Network of Climate Policy in Slovenia

Slovene Government
After the environmental summit in Rio de Janeiro, the Slovene government in 1994 appointed Mr. Andrej Kranjc from the Ministry of Environment-Hydrometeorological Institute of Slovenia as coordinator for climate change issues, including AIJ/JI issues. Mr. Kranjc is now the national coordinator for UNFCCC and at the same time secretary of "The Slovene Committee for Climate Change Issues." In June 1995, Mr. Kranjc organized a meeting to define a strategy for identifying potential AIJ projects, bringing together representatives of industry and government, including the Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning, the Ministry of Economic Relations and Development and the Ministry of Economic Affairs.

Industry representatives suggested AIJ projects in the course of two following meetings, but no strategy has been drafted. This is due largely to the fact that the Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning does not regard climate issues and AIJ as strategic national environmental policy priorities, thus depriving the issue coordinator of needed administrative and technical support.

The political circumstances supporting this situation consists of strong attempts by the politically influential energy supply side investment lobby to pass the extensive National Energy Action Programme (NEAP). This programme favors the renewal and expansion of supply side options, with a special emphasis on the use of low energy value-high sulphur concentration and expensive domestic brown coal for the new (TET3) 200 MW unit of Trbovlje Thermal Plant, which after 2004 would replace the old 120 MW unit (TET2) currently operating without expensive desulphurization facilities.

However, none of the many NEAP drafts have been in line with the National Development Strategy, since it would demand an average increase of state budget investments in the energy (electricity) sector from 1.2 percent to 2.3 percent of GDP until 2010 . The NEAP has never been officially approved by the Government of Slovenia and has not been given parliamentary approval.

In September 1997, the Slovene government established "The Slovene Committee for Climate Change Issues." This committee aids the government in making development decisions related to climate change. Tasks of this committee include :

• cooperation in implementing the state policy related to climate change;
• cooperation in preparing the Slovene positions for the Conferences of the Parties;
• cooperation in preparing the national report, as anticipated by UNFCCC;
• preparing opinions on environment protection documents regarding the national programme and other national development programs from the fields of energy, transport, agriculture and forestry, which also refers to the UNFCCC.

The members of the Slovene Committee for Climate Change Issues are named on the following pages. Responsibility for various Committee tasks remains unclear. It is not clear, for example, when the Minister of Environment and Spatial Planning is acting as president of the Committee and when he is representing the ministry responsible for co-ordination and implementation of climate change policy. These two roles are incompatible and can create a conflict of interests.

The Committee's responsibilities and agenda should be defined and subjected to precise procedures. The same is also necessary for the hierarchy of tasks, national coordinator reporting procedures and the president's responsibility to initiate and define policy statements, which serve as a basis for the national position in the COP meetings and within international negotiations.

In addition, the preparation of the First National Communication to the UNFCCC is now managed on a contractual basis, as Mr. Bostjan Paradiz is no longer a Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning employee.

Although the Committee has been working for two years, there has been little progress on AIJ/JI. The Slovene government is now preparing, pursuant to the Kyoto Protocol, a GHG Emissions Reduction Strategy. This strategy will include estimates for Slovene AIJ/JI capacity and needs.

Business Community
Industry has demonstrated little interest in playing the role of the AIJ promoter, as it is focusing its energies on privatization and company and market restructuring. The following proposals have, however, been raised :

1. Waste incineration at the cement plant in Trbovlje ;

2. Waste incineration at the cement plant in Anhovo ;

3. Waste incineration at the aluminum factory TALUM in Kidricevo ;

4. The natural gas-based cogeneration plant and distance heating in Maribor ;

5. The natural gas-based cogeneration plant in Ljubljana ;

6. The biogas-based small scale cogeneration plant on Ljubljana's waste disposal site at Barje ;

7. The conceptual preparation of the tramway project in Ljubljana .

The electricity sector remains in state ownership with a disaggregated industrial structure. Since the government's energy policy has focused on keeping prices down to battle inflation - one of the government's most important macroeconomic priorities - it has not been willing to implement production costs based-pricing, and consequently is also unwilling to internalize external cost in electricity generation. Since the government not only controls the selection of the sector's top management, but is also involved in the sector's day-to-day technical operations, management was neither capable nor willing to take on any activities which would lead toward GHG emissions reduction. On the contrary, during the 1997-98 campaign for state subsidies/credit guarantees for a new domestic, brown coal fired 200 MW power plant in Trbovlje, the representatives of the electricity sector denied any need for a GHG reduction policy by claiming that the emissions from the sector already have been reduced by 10 percent as a result of a decline of energy intensive industries .

Until June 1999, when the new Law on Foreign Investment was approved by parliament, Slovenia was relatively closed to foreign investments.

NGO Community
Until now only three Slovene environmental NGOs have attempted to play an active role in the climate change policy: The Institute for Climate Change of the Slovene Ecological Movement, the Slovenian E-Forum and the Association of Nuclear Physicists. Additionally, Umanotera, the Slovene Foundation for Sustainable Development and the Institute for Sustainable Development, both based in Ljubljana, and the Association of Permaculture have shown some interest in this issue. The Slovene Academy of Science and Arts is closely aligned with the above mentioned Institute for Climate Change.

The Institute for Climate Change was established in 1994 as a non-profit private institute within the Slovene Environmental Movement, the NGO with the largest constituency in Slovenia. The institute is staffed by one self-employed person, Mr. Timi Ecimovic, its director. Aside from spreading the message that state and international climate change policy is a bureaucratic "conspiracy" that does not take the public into account, the institute focuses mainly on international events and activities related to climate change and opposes IPCC's approach and methodology, as well as all governmental activities in line with IPCC. The Institute for Climate Change is a member of the European Environmental Institute based in Tubingen, Germany .

Slovenian E-forum (SE-F) was established in 1993 and has a staff of two full-time employees. It has the support of some 40 experts from the fields of environmental science, economy, geography, energy engineering and energy planning, who constitute the majority of its constituency. Prior to 1997, its climate policy approach was limited to focusing on climate issues as a part of energy policy and as a tool for opposing economically inefficient or environmentally unfriendly policy options. After 1997, the group gave more priority to climate change. The SE-F put climate change in all its aspects - including international emissions trading and JI projects - on its agenda as an essential future strategic task. Together with Umanotera, SE-F was successful in placing the issue of air quality as a priority on the National Environmental Action Plan. SE-F was also successful in lobbying for the inclusion of "sustainable development" and "energy services" concepts, and the opening of the market for "green electricity", into new energy legislation .

The Association of Nuclear Physicists, an NGO of professionals in the field of nuclear energy, was the first NGO to issue leaflets on climate change and launch public campaigns on the issue, with the goal of promoting nuclear energy as an essential option to efficiently deal with the danger of global warming. The NGO also publicly challenged the construction of the TET3 coal fired power plant by protesting that the plant's contribution to GHG emissions was a powerful argument against the investment.

Nature conservation NGOs, which make up a majority of the Slovene environmental NGO community and have a long-standing tradition, are focused mostly on the conservation of particular species or habitats and do not see climate change as an actual threat. That is, they are not concerned to point of pursuing the issue within or outside the NGO community .

Considering that neither the Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning nor any other Slovene Ministry or private foundation has funded NGO activities related to climate change, and considering also that sustainable development NGOs form a minority of the larger environmental NGO community, it is not surprising that the issue isn't significantly important within the NGO sector. Furthermore, anecdotal evidence demonstrates that no Slovene NGO has yet to officially integrate into any of the global, EU and/or CEE NGO-networks. Members of Slovene and international NGOs do, however, meet occasionally at NGO climate change conferences and events.

As was shown in the previous chart, NGO representatives participate on the National Committee for Climate Issues. Because some NGO representatives also work for national research institutes, undertaking research regarding national climate strategy, the NGO community is well provided with expert knowledge in the field. Nevertheless this double role of NGO representatives serving as government employees in national scientific institutions, while representing the NGOs as a "watchdog" on national policies, could lead to conflicts of interest. The situation is paradigmatic for the position of NGOs and their members in Slovene environmental policy in general. Because of the small number of experts and the weak NGO community, the same people are simultaneously working on behalf of the government and - as the only persons with professional background and understanding of the issues - representing NGOs on government bodies. If the institutional development of the environmental NGO community would receive more government support, more impartial persons could take the role of NGO representatives on governmental bodies. Nevertheless, thus far there have not been any apparent conflicts of interest, either between the experts and their employers or within the NGO community. And government funding for research that ultimately educates NGO representatives has substantially improved the outputs of the National Committee for Climate Change Issues.

2.3. Importance of climate policy for EU accession
In order to join the European Union, Slovene environmental legislation will have to be harmonized with EU directives. This is already the case with the majority of Slovene environmental legislation. The remaining work will have to be completed before 2002. Directives for GHG emissions monitoring mechanisms and reports have also been accepted.

2.4. Slovenia - investor or host country for AIJ/JI?
In the future, Slovenia will need foreign investment for financing domestic energy efficiency and other GHG emission reducing projects. So far, no studies about Slovene AIJ/JI capacity have been undertaken. In the future, Slovenia will try to reduce its CO2 emissions according to the GHG Emissions Reduction Strategy, which is expected to be prepared by the end of this year and will probably include the following options:

• reducing CO2 emissions through energy efficiency, energy conservation, fuel substitution and renewable sources use;
• buying emissions trading allowances on the international market;
• using forests as a CO2 sink (if this were considered an internationally accepted CO2 sink).

Domestic emission trading is theoretically possible, but is not viable for Slovenia, because the Slovene market is too small for such activities.

2.5. Criteria for AIJ/JI
In Slovenia the criteria for AIJ/JI have yet to be developed. First, the national GHG emissions reduction strategy (which is expected to be prepared by the end of this year) will have to be approved. Only then will AIJ/JI criteria be developed.

3. FORESTS MANAGEMENT IN SLOVENIA

Forests cover more than one half of Slovenia's territory and represent its essential geographic characteristic. Slovenia's forest density of 55 percent ranks it fourth among European countries. Forests have primarily been preserved in higher and steeper locations, which are less suitable for agriculture, and where the significance of protection is even higher. Most Slovene forests are located within areas of beech (44 percent), fir-beech (15 percent) and beech-oak (11 percent) sites, indicating relatively high timber production capacity.

As a result of Slovenia's nearly 50-year-long post-war forest management programme, timber supplies have been replenished and tree quality has improved. This period saw a 26 percent increase in forest area and a 109 percent increase in growing stock. Thanks to proper forest management over the past decades Slovenia in this regard stands well in comparison with other European countries.

3.1. The Denationalization Process
After the collapse of the "social market economy" in the late 1980s and early 1990s, many Slovenians began to request the return of property that had been nationalized after the Second World War. Among these requests were calls for the return of forest property. The people's rights to receive returned property are spelled out in the 1991 Denationalization Law. Slovenia's Constitutional Court emphasized that the purpose of the law is to correct injustices perpetrated by the state against property owners after the Second World War. The law does not cancel the nationalization legislation. For economic and political reasons, the Denationalization Law does not seek to restore the country to the pre-Second World War status quo regarding property, but to correct injustices - sometimes with cash compensation. Anyone whose property was nationalized may apply for redress. The government determines how much compensation is due, and whether it should be given in the form of physical property or money. These decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, and take into account such factors as the public interest, agricultural activity of the claimant and the means of acquisition.

Among the more controversial groups laying claim to forests via the denationalization process is the Roman Catholic Church, which in many cases gained its property rights by kings' or emperors' decrees (as a reward for co-operation in wars and campaigns of Christianization and Germanization) and later by sharing power with other authorities. Another potentially controversial claim comes from a group of German landowners who formerly lived on Slovene territory and are now requesting from 4,000 to 40,000 hectares of forests.

When the Denationalization Law was first adopted, it was estimated that the there would be claims on 132,300 hectares of forest land, but by February 1997 there were requests for 172,800 hectares. According to the Agriculture Areas and Forests Fund, by February 1998, 72,000 hectares of forest land had been returned due to denationalization requests.

Because of the denationalization process, the forest ownership structure is changing every day. The table below represents the owners' structure of forests for 1997 and 1998.

Table 3 indicates that the denationalization process has decreased the area of state owned forests and increased that of private forests. However, the total forested area in Slovenia is increasing, a fact attributable to wild reforestation of abandoned grassland, which over the last few years has been grown over by bushes and young forests.

The problem with spreading ownership over a wider group is that the new owners' management of forests is less controlled or coordinated. The pattern of the first half of this century is being repeated, as timber merchants benefit from the owners' desire to cut and sell timber in order to purchase a car or build a house. Typically, individual owners regard forests as a chance to make a quick profit. Planned and possible forest cutting volume exceed forest management projections for the 1991-2000 period by 7.4 percent in 1997, 8.2 percent in 1996, 10.8 percent in 1995 and 7.8 percent in 1994. This data gives national forest management institutions cause for concern about the future of Slovene forests.

Slovenia now faces questions about balancing the rights and needs of individuals with those of the community. The issue could be described as follows: should individual forest owners be guided only by gaining profit or should they also consider the public's interest in forests - including the need for forests as a living space for many plant and animal species, their importance in conserving and protecting water supplies, their use of CO2 in oxygen production, etc. If all the forests are returned to those making applications via the denationalization process in Slovenia, only about 22 percent of forests will remain publicly owned.

3.2. Forests - GHG sinks?
Methodologically as well as politically, the controversial issue of greenhouse gas (GHG) sinks is of great importance for Slovenia and its climate policy. However, the issues of forest management and the contribution of wood use to energy policy are far more important. Wood still represents about 4-5 percent of total primary energy supply and provides about 20 percent of space heating . Utilization of wood for energy is the most important issue with respect to the climate policy within the space heating sector .

Preliminary conclusions of an integrated approach to dealing with GHG emission reduction suggest that - considering potential macroeconomic and regional development effects - increased volume of biomass and efficiency in its conversion to heat are one of the best costs/benefits options in dealing with CO2 reduction.

Presently, there are no forest-related activities in Slovenia that would result in "additional" GHG reduction. According to Mr. Kranjc forests in Slovenia are probably ineligible for AIJ/JI projects. However, this is dependent on the GHG Emissions Reduction Strategy.

4. FINAL CONCLUSIONS

1. Slovenia is the only CEE Annex I country which has already exceeded the base year CO2 emissions.

2. The CO2 emission pattern by sectors in Slovenia is very similar to the pattern of developed (EU) countries.

3. Slovenia has not entered any AIJ nor has it designed a JI projects policy.

4. Since the mid 1990s Slovenia is progressively improving energy efficiency (especially in industry), however, despite having a direct impact on climate issues energy policy, has not yet been directly linked to the climate change policy.

5. In 1997, Slovenia introduced a CO2 tax as a fiscal instrument of the budget policy. Substantial redesign and increase of the tax in 1998 made this instrument important not only for budget revenues but also for climate policy.

6. The instrumentalization of climate-policy-relevant budget revenues (CO2 tax) and expenditures are far from being balanced.

7. The symbolic importance of climate change policy for integration of environmental and nature protection issues with the issues of employment, regional development and environmental modernization of the industry and energy sector has not yet been recognized by government or within the NGO and business communities.

8. Until recently, climate change issues have not been considered relevant either by national policy makers or for environmental policymaking, even though considerable progress has been made in the energy efficiency policy (especially in industry). However, climate change issues are still predominantly seen as an additional burden/barrier and not as a challenge/solution for other issues.

9. As a complex policy issue, AIJ and JI are known only to a few experts.

10. Despite the improved acknowledgement of climate change issues and the ongoing sector studies, the political will to install and support corresponding institutional capacities is lacking.

11. Ongoing studies suggest that the climate change issue is very complex and Slovenia will probably not be able to achieve the Kyoto target without JI projects and emissions trading.

12. There are no transparent divisions of tasks and competencies (support, monitoring, reporting) within the government, and precise procedures within The National Committee for Climate Change Issues are lacking.

13. Most NGOs lack any governmental (Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning) support in dealing with climate change issues.

5. RECOMMENDATIONS

14. Create a committee of experts (or use the Slovene Committee for Climate Change Issues), who will learn from the experience of AIJ in other countries. This will help the Slovene committee to set criteria for evaluating AIJ and JI projects proposals in Slovenia.

15. Raise public awareness of climate change issue as a challenge and oppor- tunity through the media and by supporting NGO training activities as well as awareness raising, promotion and information campaigns.

16. Slovene NGOs should be supported in taking an active role in international NGO networks on climate change issues. The representation of Climate Action Network, Climate Alliance (climate policy in local communities) and Fifty-Fifty Network (schools) in Slovenia as well as active networking should begin and secure support of government and international structures.

17.Organize a set of meetings with representatives of business, experts and NGO communities on climate change (and related) issues.

18.The Government should take an comprehensive approach in climate policy by integrating issues of bio-diversity, management of natural resources, regional development (especially rural areas), use of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency. Examples: removal of the barriers for third party financing (TPF) in energy efficiency in the public and households sector; subsidies for the cleaning and maintenance of forests should be related to the sustainable management and energy use of wood biomass. This would also enable Slovenia to take a more consistent and active negotiation position (on the issue of GHG sinks for example) within the international negotiation process.

19.Governmental institutions should invite applications for support of climate change related projects.

20.More attention and support of the Government should be given to energy efficiency in the public sector and the use of renewable energy sources.

21.The Government should clearly distinguish roles and responsibilities as well as set up a structured and transparent agenda for the National Committee for Climate Change Issues. In addition, the National Committee for Sustainable Development should start its activities and take a comprehensive stance while focusing on climate policy as a challenge and opportunity.

 

REFERENCES

1. Climate Change: Fall in CO2 Emissions Only Temporary, Europe Energy, n 468, May 1996.

2. CO2 tax regulation (Off. J. RS, 68/96).

3. Contributions to the National Energy Action Program, Ljubljana: WEC - Slovene National Board, 1996.

4. Decision 5/CP.1.

5. Draft of Energy Law, version of final reading in Parliament, September 10, 1999.

6. Energy in Europe. 1997 - Annual Energy Review. Special Issue - September 1997. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1997.

7. Gams Ivan: Geographical characteristics of Slovenia for secondary schools. Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga, 1996.

8. http://www.sigov.si/mop/index.htm

9. http://www.sigov.si/zgs-sfs/index.html

10.Iterative Closed Loop - IRP Modeling Framework in Slovenia. Phare Energy Framework Contract. Final Report 1997.

11.Klemenc A.; Marega M.: Bright People for Blue Sky - Slovene NGOs and their projects, Ljubljana : REC Slovene Office, 1997.

12.Mlinsek Dusan: Some Thoughts About Forest Property Structure and Successfulness of Forests Additional Revitalization in Slovenia. Flajsman Bozidar, ed., The Importance of Public Forests. Ljubljana: Ecological forum LDS, 1997.

13.National Energy Action Program, draft version October 1996; Maribor: EGS-RI, 1996.

14.National Environmental Action Program, Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning, Ljubljana, 1999.

15."Preparing for Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol", Commission Communication to the Council and the Parliament. COM (1999) 230.

16.Removal of the Barriers for Energy Use of Biomass in Slovenia, 1996, pp. 3.

17.Resolution of Establishment of The Slovene Committee for Climate Change Issues, Off. J. RS 59/97.

18. SLOVENIA - Analysis of Economic Developments and Target Developmental Scenario by 2001: 1997 Spring Report. Ljubljana : Institute of Macroeconomic Analysis and Development, 1997.

19.Slovenian Forests and Forestry. Published by Association of Slovenian Forest Societies, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of the Republic of Slovenia, Slovenian Forest Service. Ljubljana: 1998.

20.Statistical Information of Statistical office of RS, 1999.

21.Statistical Yearbook of RS, Statistical Office, Yearly publication.

22.Statistical Yearbook of Energy Economy, Ministry of Economic Affairs (Yearly Publication) and IPCC Default Emission Factors.

23. Sinkovec Janez: Particularities of Lawful Relations Regarding Forests With a View on Denationalization. Flajsman Bozidar, ed., The Importance of Public Forests. Ljubljana: Ecological forum LDS, 1997.

24.The Energy Policy of Slovenia. Paris: IAE, 1998.

25.The Slovenian Forest Institution Report on Forests in Year 1998, 1999, pp. 6.

26.Tomcic Miha: CO2 tax in Slovenia, 1998.

27.Urbancic Andreja: Reduction of CO2 Emissions in Slovenia, Jozef Stefan Institute, 1999.

28.Urbancic et al.: Strategies for GHG Reduction in Power Sector. Draft Technical Report, Ljubljana: Jozef Stefan Institute-DP, 1999a. (In Slovene.)

29. Winkler Iztok: Public Forests and Denationalization. Flajsman Bozidar, ed., The Importance of Public Forests. Ljubljana: Ecological forum LDS, 1997.

30.Workshop papers "Removal for the barriers for energy use of biomass in Slovenia". Ljubljana: APE, 1996.

31.Zupancic Meta: Execution of The Denationalization Law in Agriculture Until the End of February 1997. Flajsman Bozidar, ed., The Importance of Public Forests. Ljubljana: Ecological forum LDS, 1997.