2.2. Contributions by Parties to Attain the UNFCCC Emission Reduction Goals
2.5. Interlinkages between INCDs, LEDS and NAMAs
2.6. Experience with the Development and Implementation of LEDS and NAMAs Since 2010
2.7. Enabling Factors
3.1. Case Study of Georgia
3.2. Data Collection and Analysis
4. The Georgia Case Study
4.1. LEDS Development
4.1.1. Barriers to LEDS Implementation
4.2. NAMA Development
4.2.1. Barriers to NAMA Development
Conflicts of Interest
Bali Action Plan
Covenant of Mayors
Conference of the Parties
Government of Georgia
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Low Emission Development Strategy
Ministry of Energy
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection
Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development
Ministry of Finance
Memorandum of Understanding
Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure
Nationally-Appropriate Mitigation Actions
Sustainable Energy Action Plan
United Nations Convention on Climate Change
United States Agency for International Development
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (Ed.) Synthesis Report on the Aggregate Effect of the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions; UNFCCC: Paris, France, 2015.
- Wlokas, H.; Rennkamp, B.; Torres, M.; Winkler, H.; Boyd, A.; Tyler, E.; Fedorsky, C. Low Carbon Development and Poverty: Exploring Poverty Alleviating Mitigation Action in Developing Countries; MAPS Energy Research Centre: Capetown, South Africa, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Boos, D.; Broecker, H.; Dorr, T.; Sharma, S. How Are INDCs and NAMAs Linked? A Discussion Paper on the Links between INDCs, NAMAs and LEDS by the GIZ TUEWAS Working Group in Collaboration with the UNEP DTU Partnership; Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH: Eschborn, Germany, 2014; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Coetzee, K.; Winkler, H. The international policy context for mitigation actions. Clim. Policy 2014, 6, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Winkler, H. Emerging lessons on designing and implementing mitigation actions in five developing countries. Clim. Dev. 2014, 6, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tyler, E.; Boyd, A.; Coetzee, K.; Torres Gunfaus, M.; Winkler, H. Developing country perspectives on “mitigation actions”, “NAMAs”, and “LCDS”. Clim. Policy 2013, 13, 770–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kurdziel, M.-J.; Röser, F. Summary Report Good Practice Analysis 2.0 on INDCs, LEDS, NAMAs and MRV New Cases 2015; International Partnership on Mitigation and MRV, Low Emission Capacity Building Programme, Ed.; NewClimate Institute: Berlin, Germany, 2015; pp. 1–12.
- Garibaldi, J.A.; Winkler, H.; Lèbre La Rovere, W.; Cadena, A.; Palma, R.; Sanhueza, J.E.; Tyler, E.; Torres Gunfaus, M. Comparative analysis of five case studies: Commonalities and differences in approaches to mitigation actions in five developing countries. Clim. Dev. 2014, 6, 59–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). Agenda 21; United Nations: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Adoption of the Paris Agreement; UNFCCC: Paris, France, 2015; pp. 1–32. [Google Scholar]
- Cimate Policy Observer. Climate Policy Observer, Monitoring Climate Policies; INDC: Venice, Italy, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Clapp, C.; Briner, G.; Karousakis, K. Low-Emission Development Strategies (Leds): Technical, Institutional and Policy Lessons; OECD: Paris, France, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Lütken, S.; Hinostroza, M.; Sharma, S.; Olsen, K. Low Carbon Development Strategies: A Primer on Framing Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) in Developing Countries; Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Risø Nationallaboratoriet For Baeredygtig Energi: Kopenhagen, Danmark, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Holm Olsen, K.; Bizikova, L.; Harris, M.; Boodoo, Z.; Gagnon-Lebrun, F.; Bakhtiari, F. Framework for Measuring Sustainable Development in Namas; International Institute for Sustainable Development: Paris, France, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Sritong, N.; Pattanapongchai, A.; Winyuchakrit, P.; Peerapong, P.; Limmeechokchai, B. CO2 Mitigation in Thailand’s Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs): Policy Analyses of Power Generation. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference and Utility Exhibition on Power and Energy Systems: Issues & Prospects for Asia (ICUE), Pattaya City, Thailand, 28–30 September 2012.
- Hinostroza, M.; Sharma, S.; Karavai, M. Institutional Aspects of NAMA Development and Implementation; UNEP Risø Centre: Copenhagen, Danmark, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Report of the Conference of the Parties on Its Eighteenth Session, Held in Doha from 26 November to 8 December 2012; Nations, U., Ed.; United Nations: Bonn, Germany, 2013.
- Ellis, J.; Moarif, S.; Kim, J. Reporting and recording post-2012 GHG mitigation commitments, actions and support. In OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers; OECD: Paris, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Hänsel, G.; Röser, F.; Hoehne, N.; Tilburg, X.; Cameron, L. Annual Status Report on Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs); ECN Policy Studies: Petten, the Netherlands; Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2014.
- Fridahl, M.; Linnér, B.-O. Objectives for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs): Moving from Mitigation to Sustainable Development for more Ambitious Climate Policy. In Beyond 2015: Exploring the Future of Global Climate Governance; The Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research (CSPR), Department of Thematic Studies—Environmental Change, Linköping University: Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2014; pp. 1–21. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (Ed.) The UNFCCC NAMA Registry; Fact Sheet #3. In The UNFCCC NAMA Registry; UNFCCC: Bonn, Germany, 2015; pp. 1–6.
- Röser, F.; Van Tilburg, X.; Davis, S.; Höhne, N. Annual Status Report on Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs); Ecofys: Washington, DC, USA, 2011; pp. 1–24.
- Boyd, A.; Rennkamp, B.; James Dane, A.; Winkler, H. Current approaches to MRV in South Africa: A scoping study. Clim. Policy 2014, 14, 397–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tyler, E.; Boyd, A.S.; Coetzee, K.; Winkler, H. A case study of South African mitigation actions (For the special issue on mitigation actions in five developing countries). Clim. Dev. 2014, 6, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Upadhyaya, P. Aligning Climate Policy with National Interest: Disengagements with Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions in South Africa. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayalon, O.; Lev-On, M.; Lev-On, P. Greenhouse gas emission mitigation plan for the State of Israel: Strategies, incentives and reporting. Clim. Policy 2015, 15, 784–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaeger, A.; Nugroho, S.B.; Zusman, E.; Nakano, R.; Daggy, R. Governing sustainable low-carbon transport in Indonesia: An assessment of provincial transport plans. Nat. Resour. Forum 2015, 9, 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lèbre La Rovere, E.; Olimpio Pereira, A., Jr.; Burle Schmidt Dubeux, C.; Wills, W. Climate change mitigation actions in Brazil. Clim. Dev. 2014, 6, 25–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delgado, R.; Cadena, A.I.; Espinosa, M.; Peña, C.; Salazar, M. A case study on Colombian mitigation actions. Clim. Dev. 2014, 6, 12–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zevallos, P.; Postigo Takahashi, T.; Paz Cigaran, M.; Coetzee, K. A case study of Peru’s efficient lighting nationally appropriate mitigation action. Clim. Dev. 2014, 6, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanhueza, J.E.; de Guevara, L.E.A. A case study of Chilean mitigation actions. Clim. Dev. 2014, 6, 34–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holm Olsen, K. Sustainable Development Impacts of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions: An integrated approach to assessment of co-benefits based on experience with the Clean Development Mechanism. In Forum on Development and Mitigation; Breakwater Lodge, Graduate School of Business: Cape Town, South Africa, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Lefèvre, B. Incorporating cities into the post-2012 climate change agreements. Environ. Urban. 2012, 24, 575–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lucon, O.; Romeiro, V.; Pacca, S. Reflections on the international climate change negotiations: A synthesis of a working group on carbon emission policy and regulation in Brazil. Energy Policy 2013, 59, 938–941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Halsnaes, K.; Garg, A.; Christensen, J.; Ystanes Føyn, H.; Karavai, M.; La Rovere, E.; Bramley, M.; Zhu, X.; Mitchell, C.; Roy, J.; et al. Climate change mitigation policy paradigms—National objectives and alignments. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2014, 19, 45–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerring, J. Case Study Research. Principles and Practices; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, R. Case Study Research; Design and Methods; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA; London, UK; New Delhi, India, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Varvasovszky, Z.; Brugha, R. How to do (or not to do)…A stakeholder analysis. Health Policy Plan. 2000, 15, 338–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- United States Agency for International Development (USAID)/Caucasus. Nhancing Capacity for Low Emission Development Strategies (EC-LEDS) Clean Energy Program; USAID: Tblisi, Georgia, 2013.
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Georgia’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution Submission to the UNFCCC; UNFCCC: Bonn, Germany, 2015; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). INDCs as Communicated by Parties; United Nations: Bonn, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- MoENRP. Available online: www.moe.gov.ge/index.php?sec_id=119&lang_id=ENG&project_id=92 (accessed on 14 July 2014).
- Covenant of Mayors Office. Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy. 2016. Available online: http://www.covenantofmayors.eu/about/covenant-of-mayors_en.html (accessed on 2 June 2016).
- Covenant of Mayors—Kerry County Council Experience. County Kerry Covenant of Mayors STEP Seminar Alternative Financing for Sustainable Energy. 2014. Available online: http://www.slideshare.net/stepinterregivc/xavier-dubuisson-xdl-2014-03-21-step-confco-kerry-comxdc (accessed on 2 June 2016).
- Women in Europe for a Common Future (WECF). About WECF; United Nations: Amsterdam, the Netherland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
|Enabling Factors||Literature References|
|1||City Hall representative||Rustavi City Hall|
|2||City Hall representative||Batumi City Hall|
|3||Municipality representative||Gori City Hall|
|4||International expert||Centre for International Migration and Development|
|5||Climate change mitigation strategy expert non-Annex-I countries||Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (German Corporation for International Cooperation; GIZ)|
|6||Climate change mitigation strategy expert non-Annex-I countries||Ecofys|
|7||Climate change mitigation strategy expert non-Annex-I countries||Center for Clean Air Policy|
|8||Climate change mitigation strategy expert in Georgia||Sustainable Development Center “Remissia”|
|9||NGO representative||Green Movement of Georgia|
|10||NGO representative||Energy Efficiency Centre—Georgia|
|11||International organization representative||German Corporation for International Cooperation, Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN)|
|12||Head of the Climate Change office||Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources Protection Georgia|
|13||Head of the Renewable and Alternative Energy Service||Ministry of Energy|
|15||Mayor||Rustavi City Hall|
|16||Condominium sector engagement project representative||Batumi City Hall|
|17||Private sector representative operating in the green buildings market||Charity Humanitarian Centre Abkhazeti Ltd. Wood Service|
|1||Agriculture||Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture.|
|2||Buildings||Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all.|
|3||Energy||Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all.|
|4||Forestry||Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.|
|5||Transport and Industry||Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. |
Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns.
|6||Waste||Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.|
|Barriers Observed in the EC-LEDS Program Implementation||Barriers Observed in NAMA Preparation|
|Lack of coordination between central and local tiers of government.||Lack of communication due to:|
|Vertical policy integration processes have a rather occasional (non-structural) nature.||Georgia is a young democracy, with young, underdeveloped institutions in terms of climate policy.|
|“Gap” between central government preparing EC-LEDS and local governments (cities) preparing SEAPs. |
In the SEAP, process it is only local authorities that are involved in preparation processes (and vice versa regarding central government involvement in EC-LEDS: municipal representatives do not participate in LEDS WGs).
|Lack of knowledge due to:|
|The LEDS program stresses vertical policy integration, but neglects horizontal policy integration.||Lack of available data due to:|
|Lack of (earmarked) program budget.||Ad hoc decision making (little strategy and coordinated action).|
|High degree of confusion between stakeholders, particularly between the various departments involved (who tend to confine their views to their own focal areas).|
|LEDS are perceived as very abstract concepts by the very stakeholders involved in its implementation.|
|Improper prioritization of issues by central government (GoG).|
|Ownership of the LEDS process by MoENRP. Other stakeholders (particularly other departments) feel less committed.|
|Lack of compliance and task evasion by stakeholders who do not prioritize or commit themselves to LEDS.|
|Lack of expertise and personnel.|
|Barriers||Options for Breaking Down the Barriers|
|Lack of coordination between central and local levels of government|
|Limitations in understanding the basic concepts and working mechanism of NAMAs by the national implementing organizations|
|Lack of data/information|
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).