This document discusses developing climate-friendly economies in Central Asia through national appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs) in four countries. It summarizes the goals of developing NAMAs and a green growth strategy for Kazakhstan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It identifies challenges including political issues, differing interests within the region, lack of reliable data, weak institutions, and economic barriers to making sectors more sustainable. It questions how to address these challenges and finance NAMA implementation.

1. 10.8.2012
1
1
Developing Climate Friendly Economies in
Central Asia
Bonn, 19 May 2012
ICI networking and knowledge sharing workshop
“From Planning towards Implementation – Developing
Building Blocks of a Global Mitigation Architecture”
2
About the Project
“Integrated Approach for the Development of Climate-Friendly
Economies in Central Asia”
Goals:
4 NAMAs for the non-Annex 1 countries in Central Asia and a Green
Growth strategy for Kazakhstan in cooperation with national experts
and provision of respective advice to governments
Blue prints for key designs on sectoral level
Capacity building, training and technology transfer
Duration: January 2012 – December 2013

2. 10.8.2012
2
The Region
Total GHG
emissions in 2007
like Germany
Constant increase
of GHG emissions
since 1999 after a
sharp decrease in
1990
Harsh climate
Water as key issue
Long term GG
requires inter-
regional
cooperation
3
The NAMA Sectors and Approaches
Uzbekistan
Building sector – about 32% of energy emissions
o Integrated and gradual energy efficient refurbishment concept for
standardised multi-storey residential and public of soviet type
Turkmenistan
Renewable energies in rural areas
o Solar thermal and off-grid PV installations
Kyrgyzstan
Centralised Heating
o Modernisation of small boiler houses (1-10 MW) for centralised heat and
hot water supply
Tajikistan
Afforestation
o Forest management and economy
Important segments of the economy
4

3. 10.8.2012
3
Central Challenges for the NAMAs‘ Implementation
Political challenges which may be special for transition
economies
Common problems but different interests within the region and
different weights of climate change policy
From extreme resource rich countries to LDCs
From high carbon intensity per capita (11.9 tCO2/cap Kaz, 9.54
TKM) to very low carbon intensity (0.4 Tajik)
Top level central decision making only
Weak institutions and civil society
Weak or lacking coordination within governmental bodies
5
Central Challenges II
How do we meet these challenges?
Top down approach with strong involvement of government and
intergovernmental bodies
Implementing entity - governmental institution, may also help to
overcome lacking coordination within government
Capacity building: NAMA seminars for most important
stakeholders in all countries
Regular stakeholder meetings during development of NAMA
concept
The only functioning inter-regional cooperation body is
participant of the Steering Group
6

4. 10.8.2012
4
Central challenges III
Availability of reliable data
Central monitoring and technical supervision bodies abolished after 1991
Privatisation to costumers (residential buildings) and sub-national bodies
(municipalities etc. – public buildings, heating capacities) extreme
decentralisation of information and responsibility – poor development of
civil society bodies and associations
Lack of metering devices and lump-sum billing
This leads to:
Lack of data, even at boiler houses
Non-systematic data
Contradictions of data
Non-coherent overview over sector/subsectors
7
Central Challenges IV
Economics of NAMAs
NAMAs – new, additional instrument for sectors which have not been
successful under CDM - buildings, central and narrow heat supply etc.
Under-supply of heat and hot water
Housing reform - Privatisation of un-refurbished residential buildings and
HOA*s
Weak institutions (non-transparent cash flows in HOAs etc.)
Low purchasing power: Majority of low income households – low energy
and public service tariffs
Low technical quality: Massive underinvestment in the past - bad quality of
infrastructure privatised and over-utilisation of capacities
Weak financial basis of the sector/subsector
Project and policy based measures for these sectors are not
commercially viable
8
* House Owners‘ Associations

5. 10.8.2012
5
9
Sketch baseline vs. modernization scenario including overcome of undersupply
current
time,
2012
Time axisbeginning
of 90’s
Vertical axis: heat supply (MWt)
emissions (Gt CO2 eq.)
The working capacity
of current boiler houses
Emissions under
modernization scenario
*
Emissions under
business as usual
Central Challenges V
Some open questions
On financing
Which type of NAMA financing would be available?
o Grants?
o Soft loans
• At which interest rates? - “0” while national banks assess risks with 19%?
• What would be long term for a soft loan? – 20 Years?
Requirements for minimum share of national contribution?
Difference between ODA and NAMA?
On sustainability versus “urgent needs”
Ability to reach determined, “expected” goals versus need to re-design
NAMA for improving conditions for further NAMAs? – Installation of
meters and metering systems …….?
Design and scope of the NAMA
10

6. 10.8.2012
6
Central Challenges VI
Potential financing institutions for the region and their requirements
Availability of the Green Climate Fund?
Requirements?
Ranking of countries or projects?
GEF/WB – loan based, in principle possible but under condition of
“financial services”
ADB – large infrastructure projects
JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) – principle willingness but
now focusing on large infrastructure projects
EBRD – commercial funding, for example EE-Funds via local banks and
private sector only
…..??
Further clarification is needed on requirements for financing
11
12
Thank you for your attention !
Dr. Petra Opitz
DIW econ GmbH
Mohrenstraße 58
10117 Berlin
Tel.+49.30.89789-223
Email: opitz@diw.de
www.diw-econ.com
Project partners are: