At the doorstep of the year which was supposed to mark the halfway progress to the 2030 climate and energy targets, the Western Balkan countries still seem hesitant to deliver on their commitments, lacking the political will to present credible plans, efficiently adopt them and follow up with accelerated implementation.
After only Albania and North Macedonia managing to prepare and adopt integrated National Energy and Climate Plans in the first agreed timeline within the Energy Community, the submission of drafts by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Serbia last year, was a refreshing flow of action in the otherwise customary ambient of constant delays and failed timeframes. However today, six months after the new missed deadline for the adoption of these national pathways with policies and measures securing the energy transition of the region, only Serbia has concluded the process.
And while we face chronic indecisiveness among the governments when it comes to the national implementation of the commonly agreed climate and energy obligations, we recently witnessed surprisingly speedy development and adoption of the countries’ Reform Agendas under the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans of the EU. The documents present a robust and rare level of ambition encompassing various governmental policy areas, including the climate and energy portfolio. As we recently learned from the documents only now being fully published by their governments, while most of the Western Balkans six countries have been lagging behind with the adoption and implementation of their National Energy and Climate Plans (hereinafter: NECPs), they have included notable actions related to them in their Reform Agendas. Since considerable funds are dedicated and will be delivered by the EU to the region for the fulfilment of the planned reforms, countries no longer have any other choice, but to deliver on their commitments.
Tracking NECPs development and adoption
All European governments, in the EU as well as in the Western Balkans, were obliged to put forward between June 2023 and June 2024, their concrete climate and energy plans for the period until 2030. A credible plan would prerequisite a deep transformation on the way we produce and consume energy. This is where the energy and climate targets and obligations get concrete and translated into policies and measures which would deliver action.
Following the structure and process envisaged by the Governance Regulation, the NECPs should provide the pathway to the adopted national headline climate and energy targets, incorporate the 2050 perspective, and act as a key tool for the strategic planning of energy and climate policies that would ensure alignment with the long-term related goals of the European Union, Paris Agreement and the Energy Community.
Previous CAN Europe tracking of the progress of the development of NECPs in the Western Balkan region, including a deep dive into the first NECPs submitted by Albania and North Macedonia, and an analysis of the follow up submissions of drafts by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Serbia, showed that the governments failed to use a historic opportunity to present concrete pathways to the 2030 targets while responding to the energy crisis in a timely and inclusive manner. We still await the delivery of a true change, by dramatically accelerating climate action to a nature-friendly and socially just energy transition with benefits accessible to all.
Since Albania and North Macedonia were the first countries to submit and draft plans and received the recommendations for their improvement, they were not legally obliged to resubmit them by the end of June 2023. However, following the initial analysis that CAN Europe did on these plans, and the adoption of the 2030 targets they are obliged to prepare revised draft NECPs, implementing the already received recommendations and providing a credible and comprehensive set of policies and measures which would reflect the achievement of the new climate and energy goals. Only the Macedonian final NECP contained improvements on the recommendations received by the EnC Secretariat and connected with the 2050 outlook that needed to be added. Both the Albanian and Macedonian NECPs need to integrate the SEA report findings and public consultations results, and to take into consideration the subsequent health, economic and energy crises. Concrete steps in this regard have not been taken.
The revised Albanian NECP needs to increase its ambition level, especially with regards to the GHG reduction targets. It needs to further develop the existing and provide new policies and measures, harmonise with other strategic documents and better address the linkages between different dimensions. Many of the envisaged policies and measures are only on a policy level and their operationalisation, ways of securing appropriate funding and timelines are missing. Although Albania does not rely on coal as an energy source, the revised NECP should provide a clear pathway for phasing out all fossil fuel use and decoupling growth from emissions. The public consultations process needs to enable effective participation in the decision making process. The environmental concerns raised by the SEA process also need to be addressed.
There is no official public information on the process of revision of the NECP of Albania, and the expected timeline for its adoption. The full Reform Agenda was also not traceable in the Government’s official websites.
With regards to North Macedonia’s NECP, although it presents ambitious climate and energy targets, the lack of a legal basis for it to have a binding character at the moment of adoption and lagging behind with the development of the accompanying documents for the implementation of the envisaged policies and measures, hinders the plausibility of achieving its targets. The coal phase out date determined in the document is only achievable if the revised NECP contains clear decommissioning plans for existing coal-powered plants, with exact timeline and financial resources secured. At the same time, many of the planned gas developments are not reflected in the emissions calculations. Although the consultation process of the NECP was exemplary, it failed to result in a public consultation report showcasing this engagement. The revised NECP needs to integrate the outcomes of the consultation process, as well as the findings of the SEA report.
In the Reform Agenda submitted by North Macedonia it is stated that the process of development of a revised NECP in line with the adopted targets on the 20th Ministerial Council of the Energy Community as well as the considerable changes in the Energy Community acquis, has been initiated.
In our report developed last year where we analysed the draft NECPs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Serbia submitted to the Energy Community Secretariat, we identified that the NECPs avoid new coal investments, however still lack a concrete strategy for phasing out existing coal capacities. The focus on renewable energy is evident, but there is a lack of detailed information on capacity scale, sectoral uptake, and comprehensive grid integration strategies. Further prioritisation of the “Energy efficiency first” principle and related strategies is needed.
A year later and with another missed deadline, only Serbia managed to adopt their NECP and included NECP related action in their Reform Agenda accordingly. As per the NECP, Serbia is not on track to reach climate neutrality by 2050 and needs to ensure consistency and accuracy in emissions forecasting to enhance the effectiveness of the reduction target. Further action is also needed in optimising the carbon pricing structure, to be able to expedite Serbia’s energy transition and generate revenue that can be reinvested to enable energy transition. Although the final NECP contains specific national circumstances to justify the gap between the renewable energy objective there and the target agreed by the Energy Community Ministerial Council, Serbia must elevate the renewable energy ambition and tackle the barriers sooner.
The Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina conducted additional public consultations and developed a final draft in July this year. Similarly to the case of Serbia, while no new coal is envisaged, there is no coal phase out plan provided either. The latest publicly available draft (1) still contains missing elements such as an analytical basis, formulation of tangible policies and measures with an assessment of the impacts and the investments needed to achieve the corresponding targets and objectives. The Government still needs to conduct Strategic Environmental Assessment and incorporate the findings in the final document.
Kosovo has also just published an updated draft of the plan with the consultation period still underway. The Government envisaged the implementation of climate and energy actions of the National Energy and Climate Plan in their Reform Agenda to the Reform and Growth Facility, refering to an expansion of the previous plans by including GHG emissions from non-energy sectors and plans to conduct further analyses, such as the impact of the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.
Montenegro, despite the announcements of the reconvened working group and completion of the development of the plan by June 2024, still has not shared any draft with the public, nor sent it to the Energy Community Secretariat. The Government recognises the finalisation of the NECP as a key activity that needs to be completed in the ‘’upcoming period’’ in their Reform Agenda, without more specifics provided.
Consistently late or late but consistent?
With the NECP Progress Report first deadline scheduled for 15 march 2025, the Western Balkan governments seem to be far from able to present any substantial contribution of their NECPs policies and measures to the overall Energy Community 2030 targets.
While the Reform Agendas references to the NECPs signal an opportunity for accelerated ambition and accessibility of significant funding for the region’s energy transition, profound and long-term results can only be achieved if the national strategies and plans are credible, consistent and timely. The governments must make sure the adoption of the NECPs is no longer delayed, and alleviate the risk of locking in further fossil fuels dependency, short-sided actions and another pool of funds not being used.
