Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer 1985:
CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES
Thailand Receives Grant to
Protect the Ozone Layer and
Climate
● Email
●
● Print
●
● Tweet
●
● Share
●
● Share
●
BANGKOK, August 31, 2020 – Thailand signed a US$5 million grant
agreement with the World Bank today in support of reducing the import and
use of ozone-depleting chemicals by 2023 by more than 60 percent, as part of
the country’s obligations under the Montreal Protocol.
Thailand is one of the world’s ten largest importers and consumers of ozonedepleting hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). In 2012, the year before the
Montreal Protocol phase-out obligations began, it imported more than 18,000
metric tons. One of the priorities of the government is to introduce
environment-friendly production practices in Thailand's industry, in line with the
Montreal Protocol’s goal of shifting away from the use of and manufacturing
with these harmful substances.
The grant from the World Bank’s Ozone Projects Trust Fund, financed by the
Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol, is supporting
the second phase of the Thailand HCFC Phase-out Project 2020 to 2023.
“The successful first phase already helped Thailand’s air conditioning
manufacturing sector to end the use of HCFCs,” said Viraj Vithoontien, World
Bank Lead Environment Specialist, “The second phase will focus assistance
on small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) in order to produce HCFC-free
foam insulation.”
The project will also help refrigeration and air-conditioning technicians maintain
and install ozone- and climate-friendly cooling appliances and equipment, in
line with good international practice, and support skills training for government
agencies. These activities will indirectly improve energy efficiency in cooling
applications, which will contribute to reduced emissions and decreased peak
demand for electricity. Consumers will benefit from lower electricity cost. In
addition, the project aims to continue to raise consumers’ awareness about
energy efficiency.
Underpinning the HCFC Phase-out Project is an enduring World Bank
partnership with Thailand’s government and private sector. Since 1994, the
partnership has provided more than $64 million in grant funding to help
industries reduce ozone-depleting substances used in refrigeration, airconditioning, foam manufacturing, aerosol production, and fire suppression.
The World Bank has worked closely with Thailand’s private sector to facilitate
transfer of new ozone- and climate-friendly technologies and has provided
policy and technical advice to government agencies to create the enabling
environment for the shift to these new technologies.
“Thailand’s success in reducing HCFCs is a testament to its commitment to
embrace green industry and effectively address climate change,” said Birgit
Hansl, World Bank Country Manager for Thailand, “Through our strong
partnership, Thailand has made great strides to phase out ozone-depleting
substances, avoiding emissions of the equivalent of 38 million tons of carbon
dioxide, analogous to taking 8 million passenger cars off the road or shutting
down ten coal-fired power plants.”
Contacts
In Bangkok
Kanitha Kongrukgreatiyos
02-686-8385
kanitha@worldbank.org
Sustainable Ozone Protection
and Climate Change Mitigation in
Thailand
● Email
●
● Print
●
● Tweet
●
● Share
●
● Share
●
“In this partnership, our department gained new knowledge and experiences from the Department
of Industrial Works, World Bank experts, and others. We were able to expand our networks to
students and others across the country, people who we never connected with before. Finally, we
were able to get policy prototypes through a hackathon that we organized together, which solicited
new ideas and approaches from stakeholders to develop a bottoms-up policy that will protect the
ozone layer through the reduction of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) in Thailand.”
Dr. Pisut Painmanakul, Associate Dean (Innovation Strategy), Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn
University.
The World Bank has partnered with Thailand’s government and private sector
since 1994 to help industries reduce the use of ozone depleting substances
used in refrigeration, air-conditioning, foam manufacturing, aerosol production,
and fire retardants. Since ozone depleting substances are high global warming
gases, phasing out of ozone depleting substances also benefits climate
protection. The Bank has worked closely with Thai industries for more than two
decades to transfer technology and know-how on ozone and climate-friendly
technology to the private sector, as well as providing policy and technical
advice to relevant government agencies. Through this profound partnership
with government and private sector, carbon dioxide emission has been
reduced by 38.18 million tons, equivalent to taking 8.1 million passenger cars
off the road, or shutting down almost 10 coal fired power plants.
Challenge
Cooling and refrigeration are essential to increasing labor productivity,
improving educational outcomes, safeguarding food and minimizing its waste,
improving healthcare, and supporting countries’ digital ambitions. But all this is
also contributing to climate change as various compounds used as refrigerants
are not only ozone-depleting substances but also potent greenhouse gases.
Thailand, the second-largest producer of air conditioners in the world,
manufactures approximately 16 million air conditioners annually, 90 percent of
which are for export. Thailand is also one of the 10 largest importers and
consumers of hydrochlorofluorocarbon chemicals (HCFCs), importing more
than 18,000 metric tons in 2012. One of the central goals of the government is
to introduce environment-friendly production into Thailand's industries and to
embrace the concept of green industries.
Since Thailand ratified both the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the
Ozone Layer and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer, it is obliged to phase-out chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) and HCFCs.
The HCFC phase-out schedule has posed key challenges to a number of Thai
residential air conditioner manufacturers as well as small- and-medium-scale
enterprises (SMEs) in the foam sector that produced various types of insulation
foam products. Timely implementation of HCFC phase-out through a
combination of investment and policy interventions were undertaken to prevent
business disruption.
With the World Bank support through this project, Thailand completely phased
out CFCs in 2010 and aims to phase out HCFCs completely by 2030.
Approach
For almost 25 years, the World Bank has assisted Thailand as an
implementing agency of the Multilateral Fund for Implementation of the
Montreal Protocol. Since 1994, more than $70 million has been made available
to support the phase-out of harmful CFC and HCFC chemicals in Thailand.
The Bank has worked closely with Thai industries for more than two decades
to transfer technology and know-how on ozone and climate-friendly technology
to the private sector, as well as providing policy and technical advice to
relevant government agencies. The key contribution is the Bank’s advice on
the appropriate alternative technological pathway as well as the robust project
design hinging on a proper policy framework and a series of timely investment
intervention to ensure successful implementation of the project in phasing-out
of the ozone depleting substances.
An example is the successful transformation of the Thai residential air
conditioner market. The Bank’s convening power was instrumental in setting
up an open dialogue among Thai air conditioner manufacturers and the sole
provider of new technology that uses a more ozone and climate-friendly
hydrofluorocarbon (HFCs) refrigerant that has a global warming impact of only
one-third of HCFCs. The Bank assisted Thai manufacturers in gaining access
to the new technology and know-how free of charge from the technology
provider, and unlocked the supply of new air conditioner components that were
essential for technology conversion. The early adoption of this new technology
has enabled Thai manufacturers to expand their export market in developed
countries.
For the foam sector, grants under the Multilateral Fund were provided directly
to eligible enterprises with sufficient technical and financial capacity to carry
out the conversion to climate-friendlier technologies on their own. Small foam
enterprises with limited technical and financial capacity received support from
companies that supplied them raw materials.
Finally, the conversion in the two sectors was bolstered by a ban of HCFCs in
the air conditioner and foam sectors (except spray foam). This combination of
investment incentives, policy change, and market drivers led to the project’s
success and sustainability.
Results
The total climate benefit since the start of the project from 1994 to 2014:
● More than 38.21 million carbon dioxide (CO2) emission reduction per
year. This is equivalent to removing about 8.1 million passenger cars
off the road, or shutting down emission from almost 10 coal fire power
plants
● Given that the total grant funds to support this program thus far is
about US$80 million, the cost of CO2 emission reduction is US $2.09
per CO2, which is very cost effective compared to other climate
mitigation measures.
● More than 80 small- and medium-sized foam manufacturers have
changed their production technology to non-ozone depleting and low
climate impact alternatives, resulting in a total permanent phase-out of
more than 1,200 metric tons of HCFC, which is equivalent to a
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 870,000 tons of CO2 per
year.
● Eleven residential air conditioner manufacturers have changed their
production to non-ozone depleting and low climate impact alternatives.
At the completion of the project, total consumption of HCFC was
reduced by more than 5,000 metric tons.
● Thailand has secured its standing in the global market and maintained
its competitiveness as the second largest residential air conditioner
manufacturer in the world – manufacturing more than 16 million units a
year.
In terms of Thailand’s achievements, it was the first country that:
● Proposed to the Multilateral Fund to use a performance-based
approach project for permanent reduction of the use of ozonedepleting substances like CFCs and HCFCs. The fund enabled the
government to come up with a long-term policy to restrict import and
use of these substances.
● Banned the manufacturing and import of CFC refrigerators in 1997. It
was also the first country to transform the air-conditioner market from
HCFCs to new technology that was more ozone and climate-friendly in
2017.
● Implemented the building air-conditioner replacement project to
improve energy efficiency and phase out CFCs at the same time. This
dual benefit (ozone and climate) approach is now included in the
design of the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol.
World Bank Group Contribution
The World Bank’s engagement in ozone protection and cooling industries
development
in Thailand was through its implementation of the Multilateral Fund under the
Montreal Protocol, which provided in total about US$80 million in grant funding.
The Bank’s convening power and its role as a neutral broker has enabled
various stakeholders to share their concerns and interests to help reach a
mutually agreed path forward for the phaseout.
Partners
The project built a strong and effective advisory and operational partnership
with the Department of Industrial Works, serving as the national ozone unit and
primary project management unit, working in close collaboration with the
Customs Department to ensure effective monitoring of the import quota of the
ozone depleting substances. The Bank team also closely cooperated with the
Federation of Thai Industries, particularly for the air conditioner and foam
sectors, to ensure the effective implementation of the project. The Government
Savings Bank also served as the other project management unit to act as a
financial agent to monitor and supervise the disbursement of the sub-grants.
The project also conducted training for the Department of Skill Development
and Office of Vocational Education Commission to strengthen capacity of their
trainers and instructors to comply with good practices for installation and
servicing of the more climate-friendly HFC air conditioners.
Moving Forward
Thailand has made great strides to phase out ozone-depleting substances as a
member of the Montreal Protocol. Thailand’s next step will be ratifying the
Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol to phase down consumption of
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Given their zero impact on the depletion of the
ozone layer, HFCs are currently used as replacements of
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), however
they are still powerful greenhouse gases with global warming potential.
The World Bank will support the Kigali Amendment by helping countries,
including Thailand, phase down HFCs and improve energy efficiency in air
conditioning and refrigeration, resulting in reduced emissions, decreased peak
demand for electricity, and lower consumer electricity costs.
The Bank also aims to establish and strengthen networks among key
stakeholders to ensure smooth implementation, including raising consumers’
awareness on how to properly maintain their appliances by having only
qualified technicians provide regular services to their equipment. This will not
only extend the service life of their appliances but also maximize their energy
efficiency performance. In November 2018, the Bank also supported Thailand’s
Department of Industrial Works to conduct the first Policy Hackathon with more
than 300 participants from various stakeholders, ranging from students, private
entrepreneurs, to farm owners – to develop a bottoms-up policy on ozone
protection. This first Policy Hackathon was well-recognized by the other
Montreal Protocol parties with a potential to be replicated elsewhere.
“It might not be obvious to you how much we used ozone depleting
substances like CFCs before in our daily life. From the moment we woke
up, used shaving creams, deodorant, perfume, opened our refrigerators
to get breakfast, turned on the air conditioner in the car, and arrived in
our air conditioned office, these appliances that people use throughout
the day were made with or contained CFCs. Luckily, these products no
longer have them anymore.”
Ms. Supanee Chantasasawat, owner of Kulthorn Group, a manufacturer of air
conditioning and refrigeration parts.
RELATED
● About the Thailand HCFC Phaseout Project (Phase I)
● Press Release: Thailand Receives USD$23 Million “Climate” Grant to Phase Out Production
of Ozone-Depleting Global-Warming Gases
● Press Release: New Air Conditioner Technology Adopted in Thailand: World Bank and The
Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund Support Climate-Friendly Technology
● Video: The World Bank and The Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund Support New Air
Conditioner Climate-Friendly Technology in Thailand
● Feature Story: In Thailand, a Hackathon Crowdsourced Innovative Solutions to Protect the
Ozone
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/8788/Environmental_indicato
rs_Central_Asia.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y - ARTICLE
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/26555/7810-eiPIC_ECASeizuresReport.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y - ARTICLE 2
Main Issue
The ozone layer is mainly found in the lower portion of the stratosphere, about 20 to 30
km (12 to 19 miles) above the earth, though the thickness varies seasonally and
geographically. The ozone layer protects living things from harmful ultraviolet rays from
the sun; without the protection of the ozone layer, millions of people would develop skin
cancer and weakened immune systems.
Concern about a depleting ozone layer dates back to the 1970s. Scientists then
discovered a “hole” in the ozone layer over the Antarctic in the 1980s. Initially, concern
for the ozone focused on chemicals known as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Later, halons,
carbon tetrachloride (CTC), methyl bromide and hydro chlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs)
were targeted.
In 1985, countries adopted the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer.
Two years later, they adopted the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer. This protocol has its own financial mechanism, the Multilateral Fund, which
helps developing countries comply with the protocol.
With 197 nations party to the accord, the Montreal Protocol is the only universally ratified
treaty in United Nations’ history. To date, it has helped reduce more than 97 percent of all
global consumption and production of controlled ozone-depleting substances (ODS). As
a result, the levels of these substances in the atmosphere have begun to fall.
The same chemicals that harm the ozone also warm the climate. Between 1989-2013,
the Montreal Protocol prevented the emissions of 5.6 billion tonnes CO2 equivalent
annually. In 2016, the Parties agreed to regulate hydroflurocarbons (HFCs) under the
Montreal Protocol. While HFCs have largely replaced CFC and HCFCs and do not harm
the ozone layer, they are powerful greenhouse gases. Controlling the uses of HFCs will
effectively prevent a .5 °C increase in global temperature.
● Chemicals and Waste
○ Mercury
○ Ozone
○ Persistent Organic Pollutants
What We Do
The GEF is not formally linked to the Montreal Protocol but actively support its
implementation. Under the terms of the protocol, countries with economies in transition
were not eligible for multilateral funding. The GEF stepped in to fill the gap. The GEF
helps the Russian Federation and nations in Eastern Europe and Central Asia to phase
out their use of ozone-destroying chemicals under the terms of the Montreal Protocol.
The GEF focuses on three activities:
● Phase out use and production of CFCs, halons, and CTC.
● Support efforts in a number of these countries to phase out methyl bromide
completely.
● Support countries in phasing out HCFCs.
PUBLICATIONS
Investing in the phase-out of Ozone-Depleting substances
Results
By 2012, the GEF had helped 18 economies in transition to phase out ozone-depleting
substances under the Montreal Protocol. The GEF has invested $235 million in 29
projects that leveraged another $247 million from our partners and resulted in the
phaseout of 29,000 tons of ozone depleting potential.
Through the Montreal Protocol, total global consumption of ozone-depleting substances
(ODS) has dropped by more than 90 percent compared to a business-as-usual approach.
The GEF has helped decrease consumption and production of CFCs in countries with
economies in transition. But more work is needed to address other substances, in
particular methyl bromide and HCFCs.
More than 99 percent of ODS have been phased out by the Montreal Protocol over the
last 30 years, and the ozone layer is on track to recover by mid-century. Up to 2 million
cases of skin cancer may be prevented globally each year by 2030. Importantly, more
than 135 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions have been averted,
making the Montreal Protocol an important force to combat climate change.
Looking Ahead
The GEF has responded to new chemicals conventions and the movement towards
integration and synergies among the conventions by evolving its strategy to
accommodate these transitions. GEF support has moved from separate Chemicals Focal
Areas (ODS and Persistent Organic Pollutants) to now having one, fully integrated
Chemicals and Waste Focal Area, including POPs, Mercury, ODS, and the Strategic
Approach to International Chemicals Management.
The Chemicals and Waste Focal Area will support the reduction of POPs that are
controlled by the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic pollutants, mercury and
mercury compounds that are controlled by the Minamata Convention on Mercury, Ozone
Depleting Substances and other chemicals controlled by the Montreal Protocol on
Substances that deplete the Ozone Layer, lead in paints, chemicals of global concern in
the supply chain of commercial and domestic products and highly hazardous pesticides
that enter the global food supply.
A fully integrated focal area that is better aligned with sectoral investments in countries
to address pollution, agriculture, and industrial efficiency can better attract the private
sector and link to efforts on increasing environmental sustainability in these sectors,
since the actions will be based on sectors rather than targeting a single chemical.
Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution: CENTRAL
ASIAN COUNTRIES
file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/kiev_chapt_05.pdf - ARTICLE
UNECE-GTZ programme helps Central Asian countries
to strengthen regional institutions for transboundary
water management
Geneva, 10 December 2009 --
Opportunities for strengthening regional institutional and legal frameworks for the management of
transboundary water resources in Central Asia are being discussed today in Almaty. The two-day
meeting of the Working Group on Institutional and Legal Strengthening is convened by the
Executive Committee of the International Fund for saving the Aral Sea (IFAS) and facilitated by the
UNECE under the programme on Regional Dialogue and Cooperation on Water Resources
Management in Central Asia, financed by the Government of Germany through GTZ in the
framework of the Berlin Water Process.
The process provides support to the implementation of the decisions of the IFAS Summit (28 April
2009, Almaty), where the Heads of Central Asian States expressed their firm commitment to
further improve the institutional structure and legal framework for regional water resources
management and mandated the Executive Committee of IFAS to develop the new Aral Sea Basin
Program for 2011-2015. The decisions of the Summit are an exceptionally important window of
opportunity to start real, sustainable progress towards the solution of complex, often controversial
issues related to water, energy and environment in Central Asia.
In this process, the UNECE offers an impartial umbrella, in-house expertise and a solid legal basis
in the form of the UNECE environmental instruments, in particular the UNECE Water Convention,
its institutions and advisory support. The UNECE efforts are part of the broader efforts by the
donors’ community and key regional and international organizations to provide support to improve
the management of water and energy resources and protect the environment in Central Asia.
The Working Group is the first of a series of regional and national meetings designed to elaborate
a set of proposals to improve the efficiency of regional cooperation. The proposals will be
submitted for approval to the governments of States-members of the IFAS by the end of 2010.
Notes for Editors
The International Fund for saving the Aral Sea (IFAS) was established by five Central Asian states
- Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan – to implement in a
coordinated way the practical measures and programs to overcome the impacts of the Aral crises
and to improve environmental and socio-economic conditions in Aral Sea basin.
Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH is an international cooperation
enterprise for sustainable development with worldwide operations, which supports the German
Government in achieving its development-policy objectives. It provides viable, forwardlooking
solutions for political, economic, ecological and social development in a globalised world. Working
under difficult conditions, GTZ promotes complex reforms and change processes. Its corporate
objective is to improve people’s living conditions on a sustainable basis.
Berlin Water Process was launched at the first “Water Unites” conference (Berlin, 1 April 2008) by
German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier. The Process is an important part of the water
and environment pillar of the European Union’s Central Asia Strategy. The Transboundary Water
Management in Central Asia Program is implemented by GTZ under the Berlin Water Process to
optimize cooperation in the Central Asian water sector and improve the lives of people in the
region.
The Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes
(Water Convention) of 1992 aims to strengthen national measures and transboundary cooperation
for the protection and ecologically sound management of transboundary surface waters and
groundwaters. 35 States and the European Community are Parties to the Water Convention. In
Central Asia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are Parties to this instrument.
https://wecoop.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/9WGECC-Session-2-SarangooRadnaaragchaa-EN-080220.pdf - PRESENTATION
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/107558/e82809.pdf?sequence=1&isA
llowed=y - ARTICLE
POLICIES FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT Progress in Eastern Europe, Caucasus
and Central Asia SUMMARY FOR POLICYMAKERS © Photo: Gennadiy
Ratushenko/The World Bank © Photo: Yuri Mechitov/The World Bank
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT
The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 30 democracies work
together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of
globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help
governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate
governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The
Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences,
seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate
domestic and international policies. © OECD 2007 No reproduction, copy,
transmission or translation of this publication may be made without written
permission. Applications should be sent to OECD Publishing: rights@oecd.org or by
fax (33 1) 45 24 13 91. Permission to photocopy a portion of this work should be
addressed to Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie, 20, rue des GrandsAugustins, 75006 Paris, France (contact@cfcopies.com). This work is published on
the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and
arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the
Organisation or of the governments of its member countries. This booklet is a
summary of a longer report with the same title, prepared in collaboration with the
following organisations: UNECE Introduction 4 A region on the move 5 Progress
underway 6 Strengthening environmental legislation, policies and institutions 7
Protecting health by fighting pollution 8 Managing natural resources for sustainable
development 9 Using sectoral policies to enhance environmental quality 10 Financing
environmental improvements 11 Making better decisions: information and public
involvement 12 Addressing transboundary issues in a co-operative way 13 Barriers
blocking the way 14 Moving forward – An agenda for the future 15 Table of Contents
© Photo: Anvar Ilyasov/The World Bank © Photo: Curt Carnemark/The World Bank
Policies for a Better Environment 4 © OECD 2007 Introduction The political and
economic landscape in the countries of Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia is
changing. Are environmental policies keeping pace? What major environmental
policy measures have been taken by each country? What are the main barriers to
further progress? What are the emerging policy issues and priority areas for action? In
2003, the Ministers of Environment of the 12 countries of Eastern Europe, Caucasus
and Central Asia (EECCA), together with their partners in the “Environment for
Europe” process, adopted the EECCA Environment Strategy. The Strategy aims to
promote sustainable development through environmental policy reform and
environmental partnerships. This booklet provides a summary of progress in achieving
the Strategy’s objectives. It is based in a longer report of the same title. Preparation of
this policy assessment involved a unique process of collaboration among all the major
international institutions active on environmental issues in this region. By focusing on
the policy actions taken by EECCA countries, it complements «Europe’s
Environment: The Fourth Assessment” – prepared by the European Environment
Agency – which assesses environmental conditions in the pan-European region. Box
1. Assessing progress: A collective undertaking • At the 2003 Kiev Conference,
Environment Ministers of the pan-European region asked the EAP Task Force to
facilitate and support achievement of the objectives of the EECCA Environment
Strategy • A first assessment prepared for a meeting of EECCA Environment
Ministers in Tbilisi in 2004 established a baseline • Subsequently, the OECD/EAP
Task Force Secretariat launched the assessment process for the Belgrade Conference •
EECCA Ministries of Environment advised on the structure and focus of the report
and provided national-level data • UNDP, UNECE, UNEP, WHO, World Bank, the
Project Preparation Committee, the Regional Environmental Centres and the NGO
network ECO-Forum provided written inputs, advice, peer review and organisational
support, as appropriate • Western European Ministries of Environment supported
financially the work of the OECD/EAP Task Force Secretariat • The EAP Task Force,
co-Chaired by the European Commission and Kazakhstan, oversaw the preparatory
process and endorsed the report Progress in Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central
Asia © OECD 2007 5 A region on the move Most EECCA countries are experiencing
significant economic growth. In 2003-2006 the region’s GDP grew at 7% per year, but
average growth rates vary greatly across countries – from 4.5% for the Kyrgyz
Republic to 18% for Azerbaijan. Per capita income is expected to double over the next
10 years, but it will still remain low, at around 30% of the EU15 minimum for 2005.
The region has largely become a Russia-centred trade bloc, with trade dominated by
commodity exports. Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan have attracted significant foreign
direct investment, mostly in their oil sectors. Poverty is decreasing, particularly in the
populous middle-income countries, thanks to a combination of economic growth and
decreasing inequality. Low-income EECCA countries, however, still have extremely
high levels of poverty – more than 40%, reaching 70% in Tajikistan. Poverty has
declined far more rapidly in capital cities than elsewhere. In some countries poverty
risks are as high in secondary cities as in rural areas, but rural residents still count for
some 70% of the poor in low-income EECCA countries. Governance is improving in
some countries, but not in the region as a whole. The World Bank Governance
Indicators show low levels of governance for all EECCA countries. The Soviet legacy
has left many EECCA countries with weak institutions and even weaker policymaking capacities. Commitment to reform of state institutions is weak across much of
the region. In some countries corruption is proving an important challenge to progress
with reforms. The region is undergoing political diversification. Since the Kiev
Ministerial Conference, so-called “colour revolutions” have taken place in Georgia,
Ukraine and the Kyrgyz Republic. Freedom House, however, reports that most
countries in the region still have few political rights and civil liberties, and a low level
of democracy. Some EECCA countries have been affected over the 2003-2006 period
by political instability and/or armed conflict, and experience a “no peace/no war”
situation. EECCA countries can be very different 2005 ARM AZE BLR GEO KAZ
KGZ MDA RUS TJK TKM UKR UZB Population (million) 3.0 8.4 9.8 4.5 15.1 5.2
4.2 143 6.5 4.8 47.1 26.6 GDP (billion USD) 4.9 12.6 29.6 6.4 57.1 2.4 2.9 763.7 2.3
8.1 82.9 14.0 GDP per capita (th. USD) 1.6 1.5 3.0 1.4 3.8 0.5 0.7 5.3 0.4 1.7 1.8 0.5
Urban population (% total) 64 51 72 52 57 36 47 73 25 46 68 27 ODA/OA (% GNI)
7.1 1.9 0.2 6.1 0.6 10.5 3.9 0.2 11.4 0.3 0.5 1.9 Note: See country profiles section of
the main report for definitions and sources Policies for a Better Environment 6 ©
OECD 2007 Progress underway Achieving progress is hard. Most EECCA countries
lack the strong drivers for environmental improvement that exist in western countries
(public demand, price signals) and Central European countries (European Union
accession requirements). They also face a governance situation that, given uneven
progress in public administration reform and tackling corruption, often does not
support modern environmental management approaches. Nevertheless, there are many
examples of successful action. The speed of progress varies across countries and
policy areas. Noticeable progress seems to have been made on compliance assurance,
water supply and sanitation, water resources management and agriculture. Less
progress is apparent in waste management, biodiversity, transport and energy
efficiency. Even in some areas that seem “frozen” in time (such as environmental
quality standards), at least the need for reform has finally been recognised. The
implementation gap persists. The basic legal and policy frameworks are often in place
and keep improving, even if further important reforms are still needed. The real
problem is implementation, particularly at the sub-national level. Also, where progress
is taking place, there is little evidence of countries taking a coherent approach to
reform. Environmental progress in EECCA will take a much longer time than in
Central and Eastern European countries. On the surface, progress does not seem to
have accelerated after the Kiev Ministerial Conference in many environmental policy
areas. Indeed, in some cases there has even been regression, with the authority and
capacities of environmental agencies in some countries downgraded. But there are
signs that some countries are doing the necessary groundwork, and that consistency
and patience will pay off. Recent progress in some countries was made possible by
foundations established several years earlier. Donor support has often been a catalyst
for fostering progress. While the assessment focuses on the reform efforts made by
EECCA countries, much of the progress has taken place with some form of support
from bilateral donors or international organisations. Box 2. Patterns across policy
areas: Infrastructure Well-designed and managed infrastructure can generate major
environmental payoffs. In EECCA, the situation with environment-related
infrastructure – whether water supply and sanitation, waste, energy, urban transport or
irrigation – is often characterised by unsustainable financial models that result in
crumbling infrastructure, poor service and negative environmental impacts. Ongoing
and upcoming reforms in infrastructure sectors offer a major opportunity to put
national economies onto a sustainable path. Progress in Eastern Europe, Caucasus and
Central Asia © OECD 2007 7 Strengthening environmental legislation, policies and
institutions KEY SIGNALS • Planning and legislation. EECCA planning and legal
frameworks are still largely unsystematic and lack coherence. Priority-setting and
strategic planning are weak. Numerous thematic strategies have been formulated, but
often in an unco-ordinated way and largely driven by donor support. They lack
targets, financial plans and evaluation arrangements. Lawmaking practices now
include broader stakeholder consultations and clearer transitional provisions, but the
development of implementing regulations remains slow. • Policy Instruments. The
idea of reforming excessively stringent environmental quality standards has finally
become politically acceptable. Progress is taking place in environmental permitting
but not so much in environmental impact assessment. The old system of pollution
charges, mainly geared to raising revenues, remains largely unreformed. Some
inspectorates have been strengthened and compliance promotion efforts are underway,
but compliance assurance strategies remain unbalanced. • Institutions. Environmental
institutions in most EECCA countries show signs of improvement, but from a low
base and at a slow pace. Re-structuring is too frequent and often lacking strategic
direction. Internal fragmentation still hampers the adoption of integrated approaches.
Relations with non-governmental stakeholders are improving. Budgetary resources
generally are increasing. EXAMPLES OF PROGRESS • Armenia, Kazakhstan,
Moldova and the Russian Federation have initiated reform of environmental quality
standards. • Kazakhstan is moving towards cross-media integration of permit
requirements. • Armenia and Ukraine have reduced the number of parameters subject
to pollution charges. • Georgia and Kazakhstan have created environmental
inspectorates. • Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Ukraine have adopted rating
schemes to assess and disclose industry’s environmental performance. 0 0.15 0.05
0.10 0.20 0.25 0.30 % GDP 2002 2005 ARM AZE BLR GEO KAZ KGZ MDA RUS
TJK TKM UKR UZB The budgets of Environment Ministries are growing faster than
GDP Source: EECCA countries’ responses to EAP Task Force questionnaire Policies
for a Better Environment 8 © OECD 2007 Protecting health by fighting pollution
KEY SIGNALS • Air Quality. Policy frameworks are relatively well developed but
implementation mechanisms are not described in sufficient detail. There has been no
significant progress in reform of ambient standards or in air quality monitoring. Many
countries have increased rates for air pollution charges, but they remain generally too
low to have an incentive effect. • Water Supply and Sanitation. Institutional and
legislative frameworks have improved in many countries. Little progress has been
achieved in transferring financial resources to, or improving institutional arrangements
at, the local level. The role of private sector operators is evolving rapidly in some
EECCA countries. • Waste and Chemicals Management. Progress is taking place at
waste policy development level, but is not accompanied by action plans and effective
legislation, including for hazardous waste. International support is facilitating progress
in chemicals management. There are no systematic procedures and plans to clean up
contaminated land. EXAMPLES OF PROGRESS • Belarus has developed an ambient
standard for PM10. • Air pollution charges have increased significantly in Armenia,
Belarus and Ukraine. • The Russian Federation and Ukraine have improved their
water tariff-setting frameworks. • Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic are taking
advantage of the opportunities offered by the Clean Development Mechanism to
upgrade their landfills. • Projects on persistent organic pollutants have been launched
in Belarus and Georgia. Reform is progressing in the water supply and sanitation
sector Notes: A - Average tariff covers at least 100% of operational costs (excl. capital
costs) B - The tariff setting mechanism follows international good practice C - More
that 30% of water connections are metered D - At least 5% of the population are
served by utilities based contracts Source: EAP Task Force Water Utility Performance
Indicator Database 0 6 4 2 8 10 12 2002 2006 A B C D No of countries Progress in
Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia © OECD 2007 9 Managing natural
resources for sustainable development KEY SIGNALS • Water Resources
Management. The transition to a governance system based on integrated water
resources management (IWRM) is in progress in most EECCA countries. There is
little progress on the integration aspects. Institutional weaknesses and resource
constraints hinder the implementation of action plans. Awareness-raising has focused
on politicians and water professionals; it remains limited among water users. Progress
in water pricing is uneven. There are no significant improvements in water quality
monitoring. • Biodiversity Conservation. The basic legal and planning framework is in
place. The extent of area under protection has increased in half of the countries.
Significant efforts are being made to improve the management of protected areas.
High-nature value farmland has not received much attention. Most countries have
explicitly identified invasive alien species as a threat to biodiversity. Little progress
has been made in improving biodiversity information, but some is being made in
raising awareness. EXAMPLES OF PROGRESS • Armenia and Kazakhstan are
already implementing more integrated approaches to water resources development,
management and use. • Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and the Russian Federation have
passed Water Codes establishing a river basin management approach. • The Russian
Federation is actively participating in a pan-European effort to produce biodiversity
indicators. • National budgets for protected areas management have increased 7 times
in Kazakhstan and more than doubled in Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkmenistan. •
Armenia has set a time schedule and budget to fight invasive alien species. Water for
economic activities remains practically free in most EECCA countries Note: No data
for Ukraine. No data for Kazakhstan in 2003. Tariffs for industrial activities were
calculated using 2005 exchange rates. Source: EECCA countries’ responses to EAP
Task Force questionnaire 0 60 40 20 80 100 120 2003 2006 US cents/m3 ARM AZE
BLR GEO KAZ KGZ MDA RUS TJK TKM UKR UZB Policies for a Better
Environment 10 © OECD 2007 Using sectoral policies to enhance environmental
quality KEY SIGNALS • Overall aspects of environmental policy integration. Interministerial working groups are common but not universal. Most countries include
environmental targets in sectoral strategies, but those strategies do not undergo
strategic environmental assessment. Environmental units are common in ministries
dealing with natural resources, less so in those dealing with pollution. Strategic
Environmental Assessment has been introduced in the region, usually as part of
international projects. • Energy. Surprisingly little progress has been made in energy
efficiency, given the energy intensity of EECCA economies. Policy frameworks to
promote renewable energy are still in their infancy. Some countries are moving quite
strongly in terms of pricing policies for energy services. The potential for improving
the environmental performance of energy operation remains largely untapped. •
Transport. The use of economic instruments to influence transport demand, modal
share and fuel choice remains limited. Leaded petrol has not yet been fully phased out.
European vehicle emission standards are being gradually introduced, but not much
progress has been made in tightening fuel quality standards. Negative trends in public
urban transport have not been reversed. • Agriculture and Forestry. Development of
agriculture advisory services still has far to go, especially in natural resources
management. There are good practices in soil, nutrient, water and salinity
management, but scaling up remains a challenge. Integrated pest management, organic
farming and timber certification are expanding. Progress is being made in combating
illegal logging. EXAMPLES OF PROGRESS • Armenia has passed an energy savings
and renewables law, established a dedicated fund and developed an energy efficiency
programme. • Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova and Uzbekistan have
phased out leaded petrol. • The Russian Federation and Ukraine have introduced
EURO II vehicle emission standards. • Pilot programmes to provide information to
farmers have been introduced in Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Russian Federation and
Uzbekistan. • Timber certification is taking hold in the Russian Federation, Ukraine
and Belarus. Progress in Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia © OECD 2007
11 Financing environmental improvements KEY SIGNALS • Expenditure trends.
Environmental expenditures have slightly increased in almost all countries in absolute
terms. As a share of GDP and total government expenditure the evolution is mixed.
Sectoral allocation of resources is dominated by wastewater management. • Sources of
finance. User charges represent the largest source of environmental finance. Private
industry is a major contributor to expenditures in air pollution control and waste
management. There is progress in managing inter-governmental transfers, not so much
in tapping local capital/financial markets. Carbon finance is a promising financing
mechanism, but EECCA countries are not exploiting its potential. International
assistance represents a small fraction of total environmental expenditure in EECCA.
The structure of this assistance is changing – multilateral assistance is now six times
that channelled through bilateral donors. • Expenditure management. Most public
resources in the environmental sector are sill spent without clear programmatic
frameworks. Cost estimates to support policy development remain unavailable.
Environmental funds manage modest resources, risking inefficient use due to high
administration costs. Note: Data for Georgia refer to 2001 only. Source: EAP Task
Force Environmental Expenditure Database 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 2003 USD per capita
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Belarus Ukraine Armenia Tajikistan Kyrgyz Rep.
Azerbaijan Uzbekistan Moldova Kazakhstan Russia Georgia Environmental
expenditure remains low, particularly in the smaller, poorer countries Policies for a
Better Environment 12 © OECD 2007 Making better decisions: information and
public involvement KEY SIGNALS • Information management. The state of
information management remains critical, as EECCA countries continue to struggle
with every step of the environmental information chain. Although environmental
indicators exist, they are hardly used anywhere for policy analysis or linked to policy
targets. Much progress has been achieved in website-based communications. • Public
participation. National legal and regulatory frameworks for public participation have
continued to be developed. While there are still significant gaps in the implementation
and enforcement of legislation, NGOs and the public have now more rights to
participate in environmental decision-making. Real public participation practices are
emerging. • Environmental education. Many national programmes and plans include
support for environmental education, but public resources available for environmental
education and education for sustainable development are very limited. Environmental
education is well established in the education systems. Non-formal education
activities are carried mostly by NGOs, often with donor support. A transition to
education for sustainable development is taking place. EXAMPLES OF PROGRESS •
Belarus and Ukraine have established inter-agency monitoring commissions to
improve institutional co-operation and data flows. • Armenia, Belarus, the Russian
Federation and Tajikistan have installed new air quality monitoring stations. PM10
monitoring has been introduced in Moscow and Minsk. • Environment Ministries in
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation and Uzbekistan have launched
advisory boards with NGO participation. • Environment Ministries in Armenia,
Ukraine and Uzbekistan have implemented training programmes for civil servants
interacting with the public. • Inter-sectoral structures on education for sustainable
development have been created in Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova
and Ukraine. © Photo: Gennadiy Ratushenko/The World Bank Progress in Eastern
Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia © OECD 2007 13 Addressing transboundary
issues in a co-operative way KEY SIGNALS • Multilateral environmental agreements.
The rate of ratification of the more recent UNECE conventions and protocols, in
particular protocols signed at the Kiev Ministerial Conference, has been slow. EECCA
countries provide very limited domestic funds for the implementation of conventions,
depending almost exclusively on external assistance. Not all EECCA countries report
to the conventions, information often arrives late and many reports are of poor quality,
making thorough assessment of implementation impossible. EXAMPLES OF
PROGRESS • Monitoring stations following the requirements of the long-range
transboundary air pollution convention are being established in Armenia, Georgia,
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Moldova and Ukraine. • Kazakhstan and the Kyrgyz
Republic have established the Chu-Talas river basin commission. Ratification of
multilateral environmental agreements proceeds at a slow pace Source:
UNECE/UNEP Conventions’ websites 0 6 4 2 8 10 12 Jun-03 Jan-07 Nr of countries
UNECE Air Pollution Convention EMEP Protocol to Air Convention UNECE Water
Convention Water and Health Protocol Basel Convention on Transboundary Waste
Convention on Biological Diversity Biosafety Protocol • Armenia and the Russian
Federation have issued regulations restricting transboundary movements of hazardous
waste. • Armenia, Belarus and Moldova have prepared implementation plans related
to the convention on persistent organic pollutants. • Belarus and the Russian
Federation have ratified the Kyoto protocol. © Photo: Yuri Mechitov/The World Bank
Policies for a Better Environment 14 © OECD 2007 Barriers blocking the way The
low level of financial resources available is a common constraint to achieving
progress in the different environmental policy areas. But lack of finance is not always
the most important barrier blocking the way. Environmental authorities in most of the
region suffer from severe institutional and organisational weaknesses. These
weaknesses are often related to public administration practices inherited from the
Soviet era. Additional weaknesses include a shortage of skills related to the
functioning of market economies; a poor understanding of the role of information
management in policy development and implementation; weak horizontal and vertical
interinstitutional co-ordination; as well as low environmental awareness of the public
and economic agents. Environmental authorities also face structural and political
constraints. These include the lack of strong drivers for environmental improvement
(and the subsequent low profile of environment on national policy agendas); a poor
governance context; the challenge of decentralising responsibilities in a fiscallyresponsible manner; concerns about the competitiveness and social impacts of
environmental policies; decreasing donor co-ordination; and a common perception
among top policy-makers that environmental protection is a hindrance to economic
growth, rather than a necessary element to ensure socio-economic development over
the long term. © Photo: Yuri Kozyrev/The World Bank © Photo: Gennadiy
Ratushenko/The World Bank Progress in Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
© OECD 2007 15 Moving forward – An agenda for the future Although there is no
single roadmap for accelerating progress in environmental management across
EECCA countries, a number of key, common areas for action can be identified: • A
clear vision of where each EECCA country wants to go and how it can get there – this
will require setting clear objectives and targets, making the case for environmental
issues to be included in national development plans (and donor country programmes),
and establishing alliances with finance and line ministries to support “win-win”
sectoral reforms. • A step-by-step approach to reform – this will require setting clear
targets, sequencing actions and adopting a reform pace that is commensurate with
each country’s political, economic and technical restrictions. • A stronger focus on
implementation – this will require linking planning, budgeting and monitoring
processes; developing secondary legislation (implementing regulations); improving
inter-sectoral co-ordination and monitoring the contribution of line ministries to
national environmental objectives; and empowering sub-national environmental
authorities. • A new environmental management approach built around providing real
incentives to encourage producers and consumers to improve their environmental
performance in the most cost-effective manner – this will require streamlining
regulation, stepping up enforcement and emphasising demand management. • An
improved institutional framework – this will require institutional stability, clarification
of responsibilities at sub-national level, removal of incentives with perverse effects for
staff, and more robust and policy-relevant information systems. • A comprehensive
approach to environmental financing – this will require considering the role of all
potential funding sources and policy actions needed to leverage them (public
expenditures, incentives for private investments in pollution abatement, user charges
for environmental services, private investments in infrastructure, clean development
mechanism, donor assistance) and building the capacity to mobilise and manage them.
• A strategic investment in skills – this will require paying particular attention to
building capacities in environmental economics, financial and human resources
management, policy integration and public/stakeholder relations, as well as
strengthening the capacities of subnational actors. • A stronger engagement of
stakeholders – this will require understanding industry concerns, and the role of NGOs
as both watchdogs and agents of action at local level, and the potential of mass-media
for promoting good environmental behaviour. Policies for a Better Environment 16 ©
OECD 2007 • A more supportive international co-operation framework – this will
require efforts on the part of EECCA countries to motivate, co-ordinate and make
efficient use of donor support, and also more strategic and sophisticated approaches to
co-operation on the part of donors. Box 3. Has the EECCA Environment Strategy
proved useful? EECCA countries feel that the EECCA Environment Strategy has been
useful as a guidance document and a framework for benchmarking and guiding
support. They also feel, however, that a more differentiated approach is now needed,
tailored to the specific needs of the EECCA sub-regions, groups of countries or
individual countries. At the same time, there is still need for an EECCA-wide
mechanism to exchange information and good practices in areas of common interest,
and to facilitate dialogue and co-operation with donors. Ministries of Environment
from some OECD countries have found the Strategy very useful, as it has allowed
them both to guide their co-operation efforts and to be more effective in mobilising
funds for environmental co-operation with EECCA countries. Other development
partners, such as the World Bank, find the monitoring work associated with the
EECCA Environment Strategy to be a positive and important feature of the Strategy
process. 00 2007 2D 1 – 88397 © Photo: Gennadiy Ratushenko/The World Bank ©
Photo: Yuri Mechitov/The World Bank « www.oecd.org/env/eap POLICIES FOR A
BETTER ENVIRONMENT Progress in Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
SUMMARY FOR POLICYMAKERS