By Anna Bohushenko, Aliya Wedelich
In Astana, Kazakhstan, rows of wind turbines capture the steppe winds, feeding thousands of households with green energy and the country’s hope for a greener, more secure future. In Armenia, rooftop solar projects are reducing communities’ energy dependence on imported gas. In Ukraine, amid war, more ambitious climate goals are being set, reducing the timeframe for achieving climate neutrality and implementing laws to control industrial pollution.
These and many other individual examples of climate action prove that even in regions deeply tied to fossil fuels, progress toward climate neutrality is possible. In Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia (EECCA), effective and consistent climate policies can forge a path to sustainable development, offering a pathway to social and economic community growth.
However, while some countries are taking bold steps, others remain stuck with old energy models. In six EECCA countries, fossil fuel subsidies keep coal and gas at the center of national energy strategies, making it difficult to develop sustainable renewables.
This article explores the “good, the bad, and the very bad” of climate policy in the EECCA region, from promising green initiatives to policies that slow down or even prevent change altogether. With each such decision, our region is moving either toward a sustainable future — by protecting itself from the effects of the climate crisis and adapting — or toward increased climate vulnerability, which will irreversibly impact local communities, environments, and economies
The EECCA region is facing enormous climate-related challenges, from settlement flooding to droughts that threaten dominant sectors like agriculture and energy. In response, we see a patchwork of climate actions — some inspiring in their ambition, others disappointing because of their missed opportunities. Our 2024 EECCA Climate policy overview raises an essential question: will these efforts be enough to overcome the complex economic and social barriers ahead?
As we dive into the “good, the bad, and the very bad” of climate policy in the EECCA region, we see how some policies are advancing community resilience while others are still clinging to ineffective climate solutions that hinder the transition to climate neutrality. From the long-term economic benefits of energy efficiency measures to the human rights-based approaches essential for climate justice, this analysis sheds light on what it truly means to build a climate-resilient future in the EECCA region.
Good Policies: Green Shoots Emerge
Let’s start with Kazakhstan. In the EECCA region, it is the only country that has implemented an emissions trading system (ETS). This journey began in 2013 with a pilot phase, and today, the trading system covers more than 200 facilities across the power, district heating, mining, and manufacturing sectors. This has made Kazakhstan a pioneer in market-based solutions to reduce GHG emissions in a region still dominated by fossil fuels.
Moldova‘s climate legislation is an essential part of its strategy to move towards EU membership. This year, the country approved a Climate Law to expand the use of renewable energy sources, improve energy efficiency, and invest in sustainable infrastructure.
Furthermore, it’s important to highlight the establishment of the National Commission on Climate Change to coordinate and approve climate change policies and projects. Thus, this law is the first of its kind in Moldova, setting out clear regulations on the responsibilities of government bodies in tackling climate change.
In October 2024, Ukraine also adopted the Law “On the Basic Principles of the State Climate Policy”, which is in line with the EU acquis. The law sets a new goal of climate neutrality—no later than 2050—and the organizational structure of climate change management and regulation. It also introduces principles for progress monitoring and for the National GHG Emissions Inventory System. In doing so, Ukraine has not only demonstrated the determination to tackle the climate crisis even in times of war but also that climate action can be a key component of the country’s green reconstruction.
The power of energy efficiency is often overlooked in our region, but Armenia is setting an example. The country has developed a National Program on Energy Saving and Renewable Energy Sources (RES) for 2022-2030 to achieve the NDC targets. The program outlines measures to improve the energy efficiency of the Armenian economy, promote energy saving, and increase the use of RES. It also projects GHG emissions reduction in the sector upon implementing the established measures, including in the transport sector.
Bad Policies: Mixed Signals
In Uzbekistan‘s vast plains, the story unfolds differently. While the government is aware of the global shift towards green energy, its policies still prioritize funding coal and gas projects over renewable alternatives. The energy sector remains the largest contributor to the country’s total emissions, accounting for around 76% in 2017. Uzbekistan relies heavily on fossil fuels for energy production, with renewables contributing only around 1% as of 2022.
But there is promise. The country has outlined a strategy to transition to a green economy by 2030, aiming to increase renewables’ share to above 25% of total electricity production. A 2024 amendment to Uzbekistan’s renewable energy legislation set even more ambitious goals, targeting an increase to 40% of electricity production from renewable sources by 2030. Additionally, the government has introduced support mechanisms, including temporary tax exemptions for both owners of renewable energy installations and consumers, to encourage the growth of clean energy.
How can we realistically achieve an effective, fair, and rapid transition to renewable energy driven by market tools in a country that continues to uphold fossil fuel subsidies? With 32% of GDP directed toward supporting the fossil fuel sector as of 2022, the obstacles for Uzbekistan seem daunting. It’s time to rethink priorities and shift public resources toward sustainable energy solutions.
Six countries in our region are among the top 25 worldwide, with the highest share of their GDP allocated to subsidizing fossil fuel projects. Uzbekistan leads at 32%, followed by Turkmenistan (20%), Azerbaijan (16%), Kazakhstan (15%), Ukraine (13%), and Russia (7%), continuing this dangerous trend. Thus, fossil fuel subsidies remain the norm, artificially keeping energy prices low but trapping the region in a vicious circle of dependence.
These subsidies not only discourage an immediate transition to energy-efficient technologies and renewables. They also reinforce countries’ entrenched dependence on fossil fuels across various economic sectors, leading to human losses and a deterioration in quality of life.
Let’s take Azerbaijan as an example. Emissions of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), mainly from wind-borne dust and fossil fuel combustion, contribute to non-accidental deaths by 10-18%. Although Azerbaijan’s NDC includes plans to reduce transport emissions through the development of electric transport and rail infrastructure, most government spending on transport goes into road infrastructure, while less than 1% is allocated to railroads. This again highlights the need to redirect public finances towards solutions that align with decarbonization goals.
Another factor causing concern is countries’ reliance on nuclear power development to reduce emissions. Kazakhstan’s recent turn to nuclear power is especially troubling. On the one hand, the country sets a goal to halve the energy intensity of its GDP from the 2008 level by 2050 and increase the share of alternative energy sources in electricity production to 50% by 2050. However, these targets include energy from hydro and nuclear power plants, overlooking the potential to replace the country’s dependence on coal with more sustainable energy sources.
Other countries in the region, such as Russia, Ukraine, and Armenia, continue to rely on false solutions to the climate crisis, such as nuclear energy, including small modular reactor projects, with Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Moldova joining this trend. These long-term and costly projects divert the necessary attention and investment away from existing green energy solutions capable of achieving decarbonization and energy independence in the short term. Developing energy efficiency and local RES capacities would keep money within communities, support local businesses, and attract investment rather than fuel geopolitical dependence and pressure.
Very Bad Policies: Missed Opportunities
In the EECCA region, the absence of a carbon pricing mechanism and ETSs is a story of missed potential. With the right policies and the availability of these market-based instruments, emissions could be reduced. Economic incentives would support cleaner energy, pushing polluters to upgrade their infrastructure and enable communities to enjoy a healthier, more sustainable future.
Without such mechanisms, EECCA countries continue to rely on fossil fuels, with the costs borne by the environment and public health. It is not the polluter who pays, but nature, the current generation, and future generations. By continuing to subsidize fossil fuel prices, governments reinforce reliance on dirty fuels instead of fostering a transition to cleaner alternatives.
Central Asia is recognized as a global hot spot of climate change and is among the world’s most vulnerable regions. EECCA countries are already experiencing alarming changes in season duration, precipitation patterns, droughts, floods, and reductions in water reserves. These negative consequences will only intensify in the context of rising global temperatures.
However, no country in the region, except Armenia, has adopted a National Adaptation Plan. Such a plan is essential for gaining a clear understanding of the actions needed to address the impacts of the climate crisis. It provides a foundation for developing a practical strategy to finance these measures and for appealing to international grants. This is an urgent issue that needs to be solved by the EECCA region.
As a network of civil society organizations, we place extra emphasis on the need to promote a participatory approach to climate policies in the region. An approach that promotes broad stakeholder engagement, including marginalized communities, is essential for effective climate action. Policies that include civil society in decision-making enable a shared understanding and coherence among different groups, saving time and resources in the policymaking process. This approach also enhances accessibility and transparency, which can build trust. Such trust is necessary to foster cooperation and create concrete policy recommendations that reflect community needs.
This issue requires more focused attention, as a just transition to a climate-neutral future is only possible with a thriving and meaningfully engaged civil society.
Remaining Hope for Reforms
Climate policy in the EECCA region reflects a spectrum of contradictory approaches, ranging from progressive, forward-thinking adaptation and mitigation strategies to outdated and counterproductive measures. Kazakhstan’s experience serves as a model for other countries in the region, demonstrating that implementing emission reduction measures like an ETS can be effective even in areas traditionally reliant on coal. At the same time, a clear division of responsibilities between state entities, as in Moldova, helps establish a clear national roadmap to climate neutrality. The persistence of fossil fuel subsidies and a lack of transparency in other countries underscores the need for reform.
In a time of multiple overlapping crises, when global climate action is more important than ever, the EECCA region has both the potential and the responsibility to adopt policies that protect the environment and people. Engaging the public, redirecting public funds to energy efficiency and renewable energy, and using tools such as carbon pricing are essential to achieve this vision.
