Good Practices in Climate Mitigation Policies and Measures in CEE

Workshop

Szentendre, Hungary, September 13-14. 2001

Objectives of the workshop:

• Inform and build a broader constituency for climate change mitigation policies and measures in CEE
• Develop a set of common criteria for assessing climate change mitigation impact of selected policies and measures
• Identify practical steps for support of climate change mitigation policies and measures in CEE

The workshop facilitated discussion that center around 3 issues:

1. Introduction into policies and measures for climate protection and criteria used for evaluating best practices in policies and measures.

An introductory presentation on policies and measures for climate protection was given by Elena Petkova of WRI. The following discussion reflected a fact that the criteria for selection of policies and measures are multi-parametric by their nature. Several participants in the discussion focused on issues regarding the context in which the policies and measures are being selected, namely issues such as transition of CEE economies towards open markets and the accession process to the EU. Towards this end, the participants agreed that a coherent and co-ordinated framework of policy instruments should be implemented, avoiding double or multiple regulation, and providing security for long-term investment into cleaner climate related technologies. The selection of measures is going to be also affected by the requirement of consistency with other EU policies particularly the security of energy supply and the completion of the integral energy market. Policies and measures for climate change should be market oriented and cost-effective and they should be implemented in an equitable manner.

2. Case studies evaluating good practices on policies and measures in CEE.

Five case studies were presented as follows:

• assessment of performance of combined heat and power generation (CHP) in Romania;
• experience with application of C-tax and its implications on the deployment of CHP in Slovenia;
• several policies and measures applicable for the transport sector in the Czech Republic (e.g. combined transport, optimization of construction of motorways, bio-fuel, internalization of external costs);
• potential of renewable energy sources in Poland;
• energy efficiency measures applicable at municipality level in Bulgaria.

The findings of each study provided important information about the effectiveness of certain policies and measures in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and meeting national development objectives. The findings also showed that there are several policies and measures that can be considered mature and therefore ready-to-use for the CEE countries while other policies and measures need some more work before they can be applied on a wide scale in CEE. This is similar to the division of policies and measures in the Climate Change Programme of the European Union.

It can be surprising that with certain policies or measures there is at present more experience in the CEE countries than in the EU. Combined heat and power generation (CHP) is such an example as levels of CHP installation capacity in the CEE countries are superior to those in the EU and therefore the CEE region has a lot to offer in this respect. The Romanian case study presented two examples of CHP companies differing by size and ownership and showed that CEE countries have acquired a lot of experience that could be useful in the wake of adoption of the new co-generation directive (CHP-E) by the EC.

The Slovenian case presented experience with the CO2 tax and VAT on economics of combined heat and power generation. This experience can be interesting for other CEE countries in the accession process as Slovenia has been adjusting its energy policy to the rules of EU internal electricity market.

The Czech case study presented two important elements of a policy for mitigation of GHG emissions. As the EU is elaborating a directive promoting penetration of bio-fuels for transport, the Czech case study is a source of early experience for the other accession countries and the EU. Moreover, it also brought about an interesting view on the policy of internalization of external cost of transport and can be seen as a contribution from the CEE region to the current discussion in EU about fair infrastructure pricing.

The Polish case concluded that even a more modest targets for increasing the share of renewable energy sources in the structure of primary energy carriers adopted by the CEE countries can be unachievable unless a more systematic and direct support is provided by the CEE governments. The study provides valuable recommendations that can be useful when the EU programme on support to renewables is open for the CEE accession countries.

The Bulgarian case study demonstrated a role of local governments in the reduction of GHG emissions particularly through energy efficiency measures on consumers' side in the residential sector and provides thus an insight into areas such as energy-efficiency in buildings where EU standards can be introduced in the CEE.

All the studies offered some lessons and conclusions that would be useful for policymakers. For instance, whereas certain policies and measures were very successful in achieving emission reductions, other have the same potential only if more governmental and financial support is provided for their better implementation. The country studies also provided valuable information regarding the criteria used to evaluate policies and measures. One of the main conclusions from the country studies and the subsequent discussion is that it's not been common yet to evaluate and compare policies and measures and that having common criteria and benchmarks is instrumental to support informed decision-making. Lastly, conclusions from the findings about effectiveness of certain criteria will be useful to track future progress of projects.

3. The nexus between accession to the EU and climate mitigation policies and measures in CEE.

The European Union is planning to achieve 50% of its GHG emission reduction commitment under the Kyoto Protocol through domestic polices and measures. As CEE countries prepare for entering the EU, mandatory harmonization requirements and optional recommendations influence positively or negatively climate mitigation.

Tibor Farago of the Hungarian Ministry of Environment made a presentation about the EU Climate Change Programme and links to the interest and involvement of CEE countries. He presented the three pillars of the EU climate policy and identified key policy areas and sectors for further work and involvement of CEE accession countries.

Furthermore, Mr. Farago informed the participants about recent developments in the EU climate programme and particularly about implications for the accession countries. He also pinpointed several future events where CEE countries will be involved, such as ECCP conference, ET workshop and UNFCCC roundtable on JI.

Alexandru-Valeriu Binig, from the EU Delegation in Romania, made a concise presentation on the EU policy towards renewables. He paid special attention to the status of the EU programme on renewables ALTENER in light of the fact that the EU has decided that it is politically and economically desirable to open this programme to the accession countries. He informed about eligible actions under this programme (studies, development of sectoral strategies, information dissemination, education campaigns, creation market for renewables, etc.) and stressed that most of the actions are financed 100% by the EC under conditions fixed in the respective association agreements of CEE countries.