Project co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund through OPTA 2007 – 2013 Romania Climate Change and Low Carbon Green Growth Program OUTPUT A2.7 Developing Monitoring and Evaluation Systems for the National Climate Change and Low Carbon Green Growth Strategy and Action Plan in Romania November 2015 1. [Type a quote from the document or the summary of an interesting point. You 7. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. This report corresponds to the deliverable “Report on monitoring & evaluation indicators related to the implementation of the strategy and action plan” (Output A2.7) in the Advisory Services Agreement on Romania Climate Change and Low Carbon Green Growth Program signed between the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change1and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development on July 23, 2013. 1 Now, Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................................... 5 Abbreviations and Acronyms ........................................................................................................................ 6 Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 7 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 10 1.1. Importance of M&E to Implementing the CC Strategy ............................................................... 10 1.2. Key Concepts ............................................................................................................................... 10 1.3. Design Elements of an M&E and Reporting System for Implementing the Climate Change and Green Growth Strategy ........................................................................................................................... 12 1.4. Overview of this Report .............................................................................................................. 13 2. International Requirements for Climate Change M&E and Reporting ............................................... 15 2.1. The UNFCCC Requirements......................................................................................................... 15 2.2. The European Union (EU) ........................................................................................................... 16 2.3. Summary of Emissions-related Reporting Requirements ........................................................... 18 2.4. Additional EU Evaluation Requirements linked to Funding ........................................................ 21 3. Current Status of M&E and Reporting of CC Mitigation and Adaptation Actions in Romania ........... 23 3.1. Framework for M&E and Reporting of Public Policies ................................................................ 24 3.2. Monitoring and Evaluation of Climate Actions ........................................................................... 26 3.3. GHG Monitoring and Reporting Institutional Arrangements...................................................... 27 3.4. Adaptation Monitoring and Reporting Institutional Arrangements ........................................... 30 3.5. National Sustainable Development Indicators ........................................................................... 31 4. Examples of International Good Practices for M&E and Reporting ................................................... 32 4.1. General Good Practices for M&E and Reporting ........................................................................ 33 4.2. Green Growth Good Practices .................................................................................................... 35 4.3. Special Considerations for Climate Change Adaptation ............................................................. 39 4.4. European M&E Examples ............................................................................................................ 41 5. Evaluation Framework & Indicator Development .............................................................................. 47 5.1. Evaluation Principles ................................................................................................................... 47 5.2. Theory- based Evaluation ........................................................................................................... 48 5.3. Principles for Developing Indicators ........................................................................................... 52 5.4. Verification .................................................................................................................................. 56 6. Discussions and Recommendations for Romania ............................................................................... 58 6.1. Key recommendations from the report ...................................................................................... 59 6.2. Additional general recommendations ........................................................................................ 60 3 6.3. Recommendations for improving institutional arrangements ................................................... 60 6.4. Recommendations for developing a solid evaluation framework .............................................. 62 6.5. Recommendations for reporting ................................................................................................ 64 7. Concluding Remarks............................................................................................................................ 65 8. References .......................................................................................................................................... 66 Annexes ....................................................................................................................................................... 73 Annex 1. Diagram of the NSCC M&E System .......................................................................................... 74 Annex 2. Suggested indicators for the Action Plan on Climate Change for Romania……………………………75 4 Acknowledgements This report is an output of the World Bank’s Romania Climate Change Reimbursable Advisory Service (RAS) Program at the request of the Government of Romania (through its Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests - MEWF). The report was prepared by Liviu Gheorghe, Julia Larkin, and Mark Redman. Jian Xie, Viorel Blujdea, Dumitra Mereuta, Lavinia Andrei, Bianca Moldovean, and Thierry Davy provided input to the report or participated in technical discussions. The team would like to express its gratitude to the Romanian Government, particularly Mihaela Smarandache, Narcis Jeler, Gabriela Popescu, Gherghiţa Nicodim, and Mihaela Stefanescu of the CC General Directorate of MEWF, for their review and discussions on the study findings and recommendations and excellent working relations demonstrated during this assignment. The World Bank program is managed by Jian Xie and Erika Jorgensen, under the general guidance of Paula Caballero, Mamta Murthi, Kulsum Ahmed, and Elisabetta Capannelli from the World Bank. 5 Abbreviations and Acronyms AGEE Arbeitsgruppe Erneuerbare Energien - Statistik (AGEE-Stat) - Working Group on Renewable Energies - Statistics (AGEE-Stat ANRE National Authority for Energy Regulation BR Biennial Reports CC&A Climate Change and Adaptation DAC Development Assistance Committee DGEC Direction Générale de l’Energie et du Climat - Directorate General for Energy and Climate EC European Commission EEA European Environment Agency EED Energy Efficiency Directive EFA Environmental Fund Administration EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESD Effort Sharing Decision EU European Union EU-ETS European Union Emissions Trading Scheme GHG Green House Gases IEKP Integriertes Energie- und Klimaprogramm – Integrated Energy and Climate Program INS National Institute for Statistics IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change LCGGP Low Carbon Green Growth Program LULUCF Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MADR Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development MER Monitoring Evaluation and Reporting MEWF Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests MMD Monitoring Mechanism Decision MRV Monitoring/Measuring, Reporting and Verification MS Member State of the European Union NCCC National Commission for Climate Change NES National Strategy for Evaluation NGO Non-Governmental Organization NIS -NSO National Institute for Statistics NSCC National Strategy on Climate Change OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development ONERC Observatoire national sur les effets du réchauffement climatique - National Observatory for the Effects of Global Warming OP Operational Program OPCOM Romanian Electricity Commercial Operator OPTA Operational Programme Technical Assistance PAM Policies and Measures PP Public Policy PPU Public Policy Unit RAS Reimbursable Advisory Service RENAR Romanian Accreditation Association SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 6 Executive Summary An effective and efficient monitoring, evaluation and reporting system is an essential component of any climate change (CC) strategy and is especially important where policy-makers are still at an early stage in developing their understanding of what exactly makes a good strategy for CC mitigation and adaptation. In support of the Climate Change and Low Carbon Green Growth Program of Romania (LCGGP), the World Bank has prepared the current report with the aim of helping the Romanian Government to operationalize the strategic path chosen by the country for implementing its National Climate Change and Low Carbon Green Growth Strategy 2016-20302 (NSCC) and the associated 2016-2020 Action Plan for Climate Change (APCC). There is currently no comprehensive system in place for monitoring and evaluating the NSCC and APCC, but Romania does have the foundation of a system for the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of public policies. This includes some relevant institutional arrangements and M&E activities for existing CC-related policies and measures, notably those derived from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol, plus the requirements for EU Member States regarding the monitoring and evaluation of the EU-level climate and energy package and the Europe 2020 goals for a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. It is recommended that the Romanian government should build upon current obligations for M&E of public policies, whilst recognizing that the M&E system initially established for the NSCC and APCC for Romania must not be considered as static, but rather as an on-going continuum that will evolve, expand and improve over time. It is also important for the Romanian government to understand that the M&E system should go beyond the systematic collection, analysis, assessment and reporting of data and other relevant information on the progress and performance of the proposed NSCC and APCC. The M&E system should facilitate continuous learning by policy-makers and other key stakeholders in order to underpin the long-term development of the knowledge and understanding needed to better design, implement and deliver future CC strategies and action plans for Romania. The report highlights some key weaknesses in institutional capacity for CC-related M&E and identifies several sector-specific examples of areas for improvement. Overall, the national system for monitoring GHG emissions appears to be complete, although it is not yet functioning as smoothly as it could (e.g. there are problems with the management of data quality) and includes some poorly defined indicators. However, there is currently little focus on evaluation nor experience of monitoring and reporting arrangements for CC adaptation – a significant lack of capacity that needs correcting as soon as possible to meet EU reporting obligations for the period of 2014-2020. Relatively few countries have comprehensive CC-related M&E systems for all policy sectors at the national level, but there are numerous examples of good practice in specific sectors, such as health and energy, which are relevant to Romania. The report usefully reviews international good practices for the M&E of CC strategies and action plans under the headings of General good practice; Green Growth good 2 Referred to as the National Climate Change Strategy (NCCS) in the remainder of this report for a shorter read 7 practices; Special considerations for CC adaptation (including the selection of indicators), and; European examples (including short case studies on relevant M&E practices from Germany and France). Whilst it is well beyond the scope of the report to extend the review of good practice to all potentially relevant evaluation methodologies and approaches, the authors provide a chapter dedicated to outlining a solid, yet flexible, evaluation framework that is consistent with existing Romanian, EU and UNFCCC principles. In order to facilitate the necessary learning processes for policy-makers and other key stakeholders it is recommended that the Romanian government adopts a “theory-based” approach (in conjunction with the OECD DAC criteria) as the evaluation framework for the NSCC and APCC. The theory-based approach follows an iterative process of design, evaluation, and redesign based on lessons learned about whether specific interventions are successful or not, why they succeeded or failed and how they can be improved. Clear and simple guidance is provided by the authors on the key steps in theory-based evaluation; the principles for developing indicators (with specific reference to indicators for CC adaptation); the need for indicator monitoring plans, and; the importance of independent verification. The OECD DAC criteria are: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. They provide a framework with which to organize evaluations. However, the degree to which a specific criterion is addressed, as well as which method is used to assess the appropriate indicators, will depend on the stage of implementation as well as the evaluation objectives. The report concludes with numerous additional practical recommendations for development of a simple, affordable and cost effective M&E system for the NSCC and APCC. These recommendations are grouped into 4 categories: 1. General recommendations  Begin elaborating the M&E system before the implementation of the NSCC and APCC;  Agree and communicate on the purpose of the M&E system with clear objectives and a development strategy;  Define the basis and procedures for an Integrated regular review and revision (every 3-5 years) of the strategic objectives and institutional arrangements into the M&E system  MEWF ensures the key evaluation results are channeled to higher levels (e.g. including prim- minister), and civil society and public.  MEWF to ensure a fully synergetic effort with other reporting processes, e.g. UNFCCC reporting and Mechanism Monitoring Regulation on policies and measures. 2. Recommendations for improving institutional arrangements  The Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests (MEWF) should have overall responsibility for the M&E system, following provisions of GD 775/2005, with specific tasks delegated to the Public Policy Unit (PPU) of the MEWF. In achieving such tasks, the PPU collects information on policy implementation, NCCC provides analysis and MEWF implements the outcome;  The MEWF must ensure adequate financial resources for the operationalization and on-going expansion of the M&E system; 8  The MEWF must ensure that adequate human resources with appropriate knowledge and skills are committed to M&E activities, including adequate capacity and competence in the PPU to deal with CC issues;  Ensure specialized MEWF experts participate actively and thoroughly in national, EU and international processes, and gain working experience with other technical bodies/ evaluation experts/int’l organizations;  Where appropriate, institutional capacity should be increased by using the expertise of third parties;  The PPU should develop a Monitoring Plan defining all relevant institutions, sources of information, frequency of data collection, evaluation procedures, frequency of reporting, consultation on evaluation reports and procedures for amendment of the NSCC and APCC, and promote it by the appropriate legal instrument;  Communication and information exchange (including a clear and efficient process for data sharing, including by online means) must be established and maintained between all governmental entities associated with the M&E system, civil society and public;  All institutional arrangements must be kept up-to-date with the regular reviews and revisions of the M&E system. 3. Recommendations for developing a solid evaluation framework  M&E has to be reinforced by strengthening the CC&A aspects of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), and include in M&E reporting the macro-level indicators currently used for reporting under UE and UNFCCC;  Engage stakeholders early and often using national and institutional networks, including the proposed Climate Partners Network (CPN), by providing them the opportunity to give feedback in written form, by organizing meetings and workshops etc. such as to give input on local priorities, indicators development, and the information on impacts of implementation of policies.  Pay special attention to the monitoring and evaluation of actions for CC&A from NSCC and APCC;  Use third parties for evaluation in order to ensure independence, impartiality and no conflict of interest; also for verification for measures where external verification is important;  Link to other CC&A reporting EU and UNFCCC process by performing evaluations of the NSCC and APCC on a regular basis (e.g. produce a comprehensive evaluation report every 2 years); Deepen the evaluation culture of the MEWF and promote active learning as an integral part of the evaluation framework in order to realize the full potential of M&E activities and recommendations; 4. Recommendations for reporting  Optimize reporting to meet the different needs of different agencies and organizations as much as possible without unnecessary additional effort;  Submit evaluation reports directly to the National Commission on Climate in order to benefit from their expertise and feedback. 9 1. Introduction 1.1. Importance of M&E to Implementing the CC Strategy As public expenditure increases for any form of policy intervention it becomes essential to ensure that the resources committed to the intervention are used as fully, effectively and efficiently as possible . This basic principle is even more important in a policy field such as strategy-making for climate change (CC) where policy-makers are still at an early stage in their understanding of what exactly makes a good strategy for CC mitigation and adaptation, yet have limited resources. Under these circumstances, learning what interventions and actions work well (or not) and for what reasons is critical. One of the most important tools for continuous learning used by policy-makers and other key stakeholders is the structured and on-going process of evaluation, which provides a means to judge whether policies and related actions are meeting the intended purposes and provides feedback on outcomes and consequences to inform future efforts. Evaluation of the national CC Strategy and Action Plan will be a critically important process in Romania. It will require pragmatism (what is possible to monitor and evaluate, and what is not within current constraints?) a clear sense of purpose with defined roles, responsibilities and accountability. But it will also have great potential to: i) enhance understanding amongst policy-makers and other key stakeholders of the country’s climate change risks and vulnerabilities, and; ii) help identify approaches that are cost- effective in reducing those risks3, as well as reducing GHG emissions. 1.2. Key Concepts For the purposes of this report, evaluation can be defined as the systematic and objective measurement and assessment of progress and performance of an intervention. Broadly, there are two principal purposes for evaluation, both of which are relevant for a national climate change strategy: 1. Transparency and accountability: Document the status of implementation of activities/outputs as well as what was achieved (outcomes, impacts) facilitating reporting and holding responsible entities accountable for positive or negative performance. It helps to ensure that the CC Strategy and Action Plan remain “on track” by immediately identifying and correcting any short-term deviation from their objectives and planned interventions. 2. Continuous improvement: The continuous learning through systematic enquiry into what the CC Strategy and Action Plan have achieved facilitates understanding of successes and failures and their causal factors in order to better design and implement future strategies and action plans.4 Indicators are typically used as part of an evaluation strategy for a policy to help monitor or document progress. The indicator data can also facilitate reporting to meet national and international requirements 3 National Monitoring and Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation: Lessons from Developed and Developing Countries (OECD, 2014) 4 EVALSED: The resource for the evaluation of Socio-Economic Development (EC, DG Regio, 2013) 10 as well as to engage the public, such as to address environmental problems, to inform public debates, or to gain support for and legitimize policies. A national climate change strategy typically consists of goals, which are further articulated through objectives/broad policies and (quantifiable) targets. These objectives would then be met through the implementation of actions (e.g. policy instruments and programmes, sectoral activities) which could also then result in projects that implement measures, for example. Verification is used to ensure that selected reported information is accurate and complete. There are a range of verification techniques. Verification can be as simple as internal validation strategies and cross checks to confirm data is entered as intended or involve comprehensive third-party verification by accredited verifiers, such as is already used for the EU ETS, for key indicators or where sources are uncertain. Specific evaluation approaches and the relevant indicators to monitor and the verification strategy for them must be tailored to the situation, addressing the appropriate scale, population, and sectors involved, while linking across different scales to provide the appropriate feedback.5 While this report focuses on the national goal and policy level, there are many different types of M&E that would feed into a national system. Figure 1 illustrates the policy design and evaluation cycle with the continuous improvement and feedback loop of a comprehensive evaluation system. Figure 1 Policy Design, Implementation and Evaluation Cycle 1.2.1. Terminology Evaluation is a broad field and the terminology used also varies depending on the context and primary purpose. The following overlapping concepts and associated acronyms are used in this report: 5 Green Growth Best Practice, 2014, “Green Growth in Practice: Lessons from Country Experiences” http://www.ggbp.org 11  E = Evaluation  M&E = Monitoring and Evaluation  M&E and Reporting = Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (sometimes abbreviated as MER)  MRV = Monitoring (or Measurement), Reporting, and Verification  MRAV (or MRVA) = Monitoring, Reporting, Accreditation (of verifiers) and Verification  EM&V = Evaluation, Measurement (or Monitoring), and Verification This report uses M&E and Reporting to refer generally to the systems needed to support a national climate strategy to acknowledge that external reporting requirements will be a major driver in system design. However, a comprehensive system would incorporate all of these concepts. 1.3. Design Elements of an M&E and Reporting System for Implementing the Climate Change and Green Growth Strategy M&E and Reporting systems addressing a national climate change strategy and action plan should be one important piece of a broader national M&E and Reporting strategy. Also, while there are similarities in topics and sectors addressed, each national climate change strategy is unique, representing the priorities and opportunities most relevant for that country. Therefore, the M&E and Reporting strategy needs to be tailored to national circumstances and priorities. Yet, the data collection for key metrics needs to be transparent enough to facilitate comparisons and/or aggregation with data from other countries. The overall M&E system should also be capable of capturing local, regional and national information and responses to NSCC and APCC measures, both positive and negative. M&E and Reporting Systems are on a continuum that will evolve, expand and improve over time.6 Even the most comprehensive systems that exist today began with more modest origins. Their development is a multi-stage process where the breadth, rigor, level of detail, and degree of consistency and linkages with other systems evolves. For example, early stages may focus on meeting minimum requirements, while middle stages increase the scope, coordination, and begin applying common stringent methodologies, and late stages of the continuum are characterized by addressing all major themes with a high level of coordination between relevant authorities using consistent, stringent, and transparent methodologies that can be easily compared/aggregated with data from other national systems. An effective M&E and Reporting system requires considerable time and resources, therefore building on existing principles and practices is highly recommended, as is integrating the principle of continuous improvement over time. There is no need to “reinvent the wheel” where existing M&E systems are functional or under development, and have the potential to be generating valid data. 6 For more information on different aspects of this continuum, see for example, Wartmann, S., Larkin, J., Eisbrenner, K. and M. Jung, Knowledge Product: Elements and Options for National MRV Systems,“ International Partnership on Mitigation and MRV. http://mitigationpartnership.net/sites/default/files/mrv_knowledge_product_130830.pdf 12 Romania’s M&E and Reporting strategy addressing climate change issues would be expected to address the following overlapping topics:  Requirements at the UNFCCC level, such as for national inventories, national communications, biennial reports, and emission reduction pledges for commitment periods (e.g. intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) for 2020-2030);  Requirements at the EU level, both those that role up to EU-level UNFCCC reporting as well as those that serve other needs, at a minimum addressing: o GHG emissions for all relevant sectors and sources; o Related public funding in-country, EU-level, and international; o Related sustainable development and CC&A benefits or costs (e.g. economic, social, health, other environmental);  National policies and actions addressing mitigation, adaptation, or support, as prioritized. Examples: building code, appliance standards, renewable feed-in tariff, public transit policy A well-designed and organized M&E and Reporting system for Romania will: a) focus on the results and outcomes of implemented CC mitigation and adaptation activities, whilst also taking account of the fact that other processes (e.g. autonomous adaptation) will be taking place alongside these interventions; b) ask the right questions at the right time and ensure all relevant stakeholders are involved in seeking the answers; c) ensure that the right data is being collected at the right time and in the right place during and after implementation of the CC Strategy and Action Plan; d) optimize M&E and Reporting efforts by organizing all work so that it is easily implemented with appropriate resources for the collection, analysis and reporting of relevant data and information; e) systematically review all data and information collected to generate appropriate responses and feedback for the necessary adaptation of the CC Strategy and Action Plan. 1.4. Overview of this Report This report summarizes the current M&E situation for CC issues in Romania and highlights good practices for monitoring and evaluation of climate change strategies and action plans from across the world, with particular reference to European Union (EU) Member States. The report also proposes principles for establishing an evaluation framework and indicators for the NSCC and APCC of Romania, and provides recommendations for the optimization of M&E and Reporting efforts in Romania. The report is structured as follows:  Introduction, highlighting the importance of M&E and Reporting to the strategy and reviewing key concepts;  M&E and Reporting Requirements, which elaborates on the main CC international and reporting requirements for Romania; 13  Current status of M&E and Reporting of CC mitigation and adaptation actions in Romania, describing the current monitoring practices and systems used to address different reporting needs;  Examples of international good practices for M&E and Reporting, with respect to M&E and Reporting on climate change mitigation and adaptation;  Evaluation Framework, with key evaluation principles and suggestions for indicator development;  Recommendations on developing efficient CC M&E and Reporting systems for Romania, elaborating on the indicators, strategy, responsible institutions for the NSCC and APCC for building upon the existing M&E systems/ and the et-up of new M&E systems;  References, including several good guidebooks and best practice links to facilitate future efforts.  Annexes include a diagram of the process and allocation of responsibilities among government agencies for M&E and reporting (Annex 1) and suggested indicators for Romania’s APCC (Annex 2). 14 2. International Requirements for Climate Change M&E and Reporting Romania’s monitoring, evaluation, and reporting (M&E and Reporting) of strategic climate change objectives should expand upon and integrate the required monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) efforts for GHG mitigation and climate change adaptation at the EU and international treaty level. MRV of national efforts to tackle climate change through mitigation and adaptation actions are required in both the international and EU context, with supranational factors significantly influencing the existence and design of the MRV systems. There are strong links between the Policies and Measures adopted at the national level and the requirements of the international agreements/regulation and national strategies. The most significant international obligations derive from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol. EU Member State (MS) requirements relating to the EU-level climate and energy package and related initiatives as well as the deepening evaluation culture at the EU level are also important drivers. 2.1. The UNFCCC Requirements As a Party to the Treaty creating the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in the 1990s, Romania has experience with meeting its commitments to submit the following to the UNFCCC:  Emissions inventories (National GHG Inventory): cataloguing current and historical emissions trends7  National communications (NC) 8: comprehensive reports including emission trends as well as information on a country’s mitigation and adaptation efforts, submitted every four years, and  Biennial reports (BR): outlining progress in achieving emission reductions and the provision of financial, technology and capacity-building support to other countries, submitted every two years. Adaptation reporting requirements are included in the NC in a dedicated section addressing three areas: expected impacts, vulnerability assessment, and adaptation measures. Objectives and targets are designed and established at national level, as there is no specific international requirement, so far. The GHG Inventory, NC and BR are also submitted to the European Commission, which compiles information from all MS and reports at the EU-level to the UNFCCC. The specific requirements for MS are described in the EU Monitoring Mechanism Regulation, discussed in the next subsection. 7 Most parties, including Romania, use the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines that describe methodologies for estimating emissions and Good Practice Guidance that details quality assurance and control procedures for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories as a foundation for their reporting, located here: http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp. The European Commission, together with European Environment Agency, provide additional guidance for Member States, see here: http://www.eea.europa.eu. 8 Approximately every 4-5 years, depending on the reporting schedule agreed in decisions at Conferences of Parties. Decision 9/CP.16 calls for submission of the seventh NCs on 1 January 2018. 15 2.1.1. The Kyoto Protocol The Kyoto Protocol under the UNFCCC is a binding agreement, ratified by Romania in 2001. Under this agreement, 37 countries and the European Union (EU-15 for 1st and EU28 & Iceland for 2nd commitment period) committed to:  Binding national emissions targets and international monitoring and reporting requirements to verify the achievement of these targets9, and  National inventory systems with more specific requirements10 than those required by UNFCCC and penalties for non-compliance.11 For the second commitment period (2013-2020), agreed through the Doha Amendment, Romania is part of EU’s assumed a target of 20% GHG emissions reduction, compared to 1990 levels, to be fulfilled jointly with the EU and its member States. 2.2. The European Union (EU) The EU has established its implementing framework for its low carbon development strategy and associated policies, called the EU climate and energy package, which evolves and expands over time. Current versions of the related EU legislation focus on efforts to reach 2020 goals, yet the EU Commission is currently discussing a package to reach 2030 goals. The four key components of the 2020 goals package, each with associated reporting requirements, include12:  EU Emissions Trading System updates, covering around 45% of the EU's greenhouse gas emissions13;  Effort Sharing Decision addressing sectors not covered in the ETS, such as housing, agriculture, waste and transport;  National Renewable Targets, and the related Renewable Energy Directive and required National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAPs);  Establishing a legal framework to facilitate carbon capture and storage. While energy efficiency was not directly addressed in the formal 2020 climate and energy package, there is related legislation, centering on the Energy Efficiency Directive and the related Energy Performance of Buildings, Energy Labelling and Ecodesign Directives. For example, the Energy Efficiency Directive requires MS to develop National Energy Efficiency Action Plans (NEEAPs) that set out estimated energy consumption, planned energy efficiency measures and the improvements individual EU countries expect to achieve. NEEAPs are to be updated every three years. 9 Romania’s target under the Kyoto protocol was an 8 % reduction of GHG emissions between 2008 – 2012, relative to 1989 levels. 10 The additional requirements to comply with the Kyoto protocol are addressed in the EU Monitoring Mechanism Regulation and are summarized here: http://unfccc.int/national_reports/reporting_and_review_for_annex_i_parties/items/5689.php 11 In 2011, Romania was temporarily suspended from participation in the Kyoto market mechanisms. 12 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/ 13 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/ 16 In addition, there are complementary initiatives at the EU-level addressing, for example: reducing F-gases, promoting innovative technologies and developing climate change adaptation strategies. Most, if not all, of these topics would be expected to be incorporated into Romania’s Climate Change Strategy, as relevant, in addition to locally-driven measures, and should be addressed, as feasible, in the M&E system. At the EU-level, climate and energy package achievements are being monitored following the internationally-agreed compliance framework, the cornerstone of which is the EU Monitoring Mechanism Regulation outlining requirements for Member States (MS), and is evaluated with assessments through the European Semester as well as through in-depth evaluation of specific elements. 2.2.1. EU Monitoring Mechanism Regulation The current version of the Monitoring Mechanism Regulation (MMR) entered into force on 8 July 2013 and specifies the reporting rules on GHG emissions to meet requirements arising from current and future international climate agreements discussed above for GHG Inventories, NCs and BRs, as well as for key components of the EU climate and energy package which relate to the required reporting for national policies and measures (PAMs).14 15 It aims to improve the overall quality of data reported as compared to earlier versions, help the EU and Member States keep track of progress towards meeting their emission targets for 2013-2020 and facilitate further development of the EU climate policy mix. The current MMR also introduced new elements, such as reporting of:  Member States' and the EU's low-carbon development strategies;  Financial and technical support provided to developing countries, and commitments arising from the 2009 Copenhagen Accord and 2010 Cancún Agreements;  Member States' use of revenues from the auctioning of allowances in the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS). Member States have committed to spend at least half of the revenue from such auctions on measures to fight climate change in the EU and third countries;  Emissions and removals from land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF);  Member States' adaptation to climate change.16 2.2.2. EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) Under the EU ETS (Directive 2003/87/EC), operators of covered installations and aircraft must annually report their greenhouse gas emissions, based on the monitoring plan specifying their emissions monitoring methodology, to the national competent authority. The monitoring reports generated by the 14 Information on the EU climate and energy package can be found here: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package 15 Readers should note that much of the EU climate legislation was approved earlier than related international agreements were concluded, and then is updated periodically. Therefore, it is important to check whether there are any updates on the EU Commission website or with another reliable source. 16 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/g-gas/monitoring 17 operators must be verified by a third party, before being submitted. Data reported include activity data, emission factors, specific parameters, oxidation factors, total emissions, and uncertainty. MS have to report annually on arrangements for the allocation of allowances, the operation of registries, the application of the monitoring and reporting guidelines, verification and issues relating to compliance with the Directive and on the fiscal treatment of allowances. The directive also requires MS to ensure covered installations and aircraft operators monitor and report emissions in accordance to the EU ETS Monitoring and Reporting Regulation (Commission Regulation 601/2012) to the national competent authority. Specific monitoring and reporting provisions for companies related to emissions from installations covered by the EU ETS are covered by separate implementing legislation not addressed in this document.17 2.2.3. Progress towards 2020 targets: Assessment through the European Semester The progress of each MS towards meeting the "20-20-20" targets of the climate and energy package is assessed every spring as part of the annual Europe 2020 policy coordination exercise, known as the European Semester. The assessment is based on MS' National Reform Programmes, plus the projections of future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reported under the MMR. MS progress towards meeting their national emission target for 2020 under the Effort Sharing Decision and their national renewable energy target for 2020 under the Renewable Energy Directive are assessed. On the basis of its analysis the EU Commission can propose specific recommendations to MS to help strengthen the mainstreaming of climate action into broader economic policies.18 2.3. Summary of Emissions-related Reporting Requirements 17 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/monitoring/index_en.htm 18 See for example the latest country reports under the European Semester: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/g- gas/progress/studies_en.htm 18 Table 1 summarizes the major current reporting requirements for MS for the EU climate and energy package, illustrating the overlaps between UNFCCC and EU Commission reporting. 19 Table 1 Current EU MS climate and energy reporting requirements Full title Reporting output requirements (legislation) United  National GHG Inventory Report (NIR) including GHG data, covering up to two Framework years prior to reporting year (annual) Convention on  Biennial reports (BRs) and National Communications (NCs) (regular intervals; Climate Change 7th NC no later than 2018), incl. information on emissions, mitigation policies, (UNFCCC) etc.; MS submit copies to Commission (MMR)  Low-Carbon Development Strategies (LCDs) (once; still to be negotiated). Note: several Progress reported to Commission will follow on a biennial basis from 2015 as reports are to be part of report on policies and measures (PAMs)/projections (MMR) submitted to the  National Adaptation Plans (NAPs). Progress reported to Commission every 4 EU Commission, years from 2015 (MMR) per the MMR (see below)  Information on financial support and technology transfer (S&TT) (including capacity building) activities to developing countries (annual; reported in 2014 as part of BR by the Annex II Parties to the UNFCCC) (MMR) Monitoring  NIRs with GHG data (annual) Mechanism  National PAMs and GHG emission projections by sources and removals by sinks Regulation (biennial) - predefined template for reporting information and separate (MMR) narrative report Regulation (EU) No  Information on use of auctioning revenue and project credits (AR/PC) (annual) 525/2013  No specific strategy required for covering a possible gap between projections and targets Renewable  Ex-ante planning laid down in National Renewable Energy Action Plans (once) Energy Directive with a significant degree of technical analysis and projected developments (RED)  MS monitoring through Progress Reports (biennial) Directive 2009/28/EC Energy  National Energy Efficiency Action Plans (NEEAPs) describing implemented Efficiency measures and respective achieved and/or expected energy savings (triennial) Directive (EED)  National long-term strategies for mobilising investment in the renovation of Directive 2012/27/EU the national building stock to improve EE in residential and commercial buildings (triennial, part of NEEAPs).  Monitoring of public building renovation activities (annual)  Monitoring of progress towards the national EE target as part of European Semester (annual) Europe 2020  National Reform Programmes (NRPs) report on progress towards all objectives strategy/ (annually, April) European  (Adoption of Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs), adopted jointly by Semester Council, as appropriate) Source: Meyer-Ohlendorf, 2015. 20 2.4. Additional EU Evaluation Requirements linked to Funding There is ongoing internalization of the obligation to evaluate not only at the EU level but also at MS level, in part prompted by requirements for structural funds and the use of Regulatory Impact Assessment within the EU legislative bodies and the national ones, as well as the horizontal and bottom up transfer of knowledge and practice through other MS, and the network of Evaluation Societies in Europe.19, 20 This institutionalization of an evaluation culture has intensified since 2013, when the EU Commission published the guide for evaluating social and economic development (EVALSED). In 2015, the EU Commission published Better Regulation Guidelines to cover the entire policy cycle from initiation to evaluation, and provides MS with a toolbox with additional guidance on specific elements, including how to carry out an impact assessment, conducting stakeholder consultations, and information on methods, models and assessing costs and benefits.21 Within the general culture of evaluation, each funding stream also typically has an associated evaluation framework and tailored requirements.22 Therefore, in addition to these requirements, the Romanian government is likely to be subject to more M&E requirements relating to implementation of components of Romania’s NSCC and APCC over time. 2.4.1. Tracking climate action spending Climate action is a priority for the EU and the EU has agreed that at least 20% of its budget for 2014-2020 – as much as €180 billion − should be spent on climate change-related action23. To achieve this, mitigation and adaptation actions will be integrated into all major EU spending programmes, including Operational Programmes (OPs) for cohesion policy, regional development, energy, transport, research and innovation and the Common Agricultural Policy (European Structural and Investment Funds). These are expected to be linked to reporting discussed above in various Action Plans. Progress towards reaching the 20% spending objective will be monitored annually using a common tracking methodology integrated into methodologies for measuring performance of all EU programmes. The climate tracking methodology for climate related expenditure is adapted from an OECD methodology (the ‘Rio markers’) to provide quantified financial data, reflect the specificities of each policy area. Expenditures are marked in one of the three categories:  Climate related only (100%); 19 Ibid. 20 See, for example, the European chapter of the Environmental Evaluators network at http://www.environmentalevaluators.net/europe/, or the European Evaluation Society links to other national and regional societies and networks: http://www.europeanevaluation.org/partnerships/national-and-regional- societies-and-networks 21 http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/evaluation 22 See for example, the EU Evaluation of policy measures for agriculture page at http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/evaluation or the EU Framework Programme Evaluation and Monitoring at http://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations 23 Communication ‘A Budget for Europe 2020’ COM(2011) 500, 29.6.2011 21  Significantly climate related (40%); and;  Not climate related (0%). EU MSs have an obligation to report on climate spending under the five European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds according to this methodology as defined in EU Regulation No 215/2014 24. 2.4.2. Climate actions mainstreamed in the 2014-2020 EU Operational Programmes All MS – including Romania - are obliged to report on climate spending under the five European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds using a methodology defined in EU Regulation No 215/2014. In addition, each Operational Program (OP) must incorporate an indicator framework that captures the targets, outputs and results of climate action (mitigation and adaptation) for the priorities and measures in the OP. The EU Regulation 215/2014 establishes two deadlines for reporting of climate spending and other performance indicators under the five European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds for 2014-2020. MS must report on the achievement of their “indicator milestones” by the end of 2018 and the achievement of their “indicator targets” by the end of 2023. 24 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 215/2014 of 7 March 2014, can be found at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.069.01.0065.01.ENG This implementing act also provides coefficients for specific measure categories. 22 3. Current Status of M&E and Reporting of CC Mitigation and Adaptation Actions in Romania There is no comprehensive M&E system in place for monitoring NSCC and/or APCC, but Romania has the foundations of a system for M&E of public policies upon which it can build. To date, there is little evaluation activity outside EU requirements associated with funding of specific initiatives. There is a general framework for M&E of all public policies, not only those relating to climate change. An M&E system for climate change mitigation and adaptation is to be developed through this current project. However, a foundation for setting-up the M&E and Reporting system for the NSCC and APCC does exist in the form of the institutional arrangements for monitoring and evaluating existing policies and measures that are reported according UN and EU requirements. In Romanian public administration there is a strong culture of reporting to the upper levels or to the financing entities, mostly for conformity purposes, not for continuous improvement or learning . Typically, these actions are primarily descriptive, reporting only the existence of activities, not evaluating the success or efficiency of them. The systems for collecting data are yet not coherently and systemically organized, and evaluation activities are in early stages of development and can be improved. Overall, M&E and Reporting of public policies is not yet comprehensively or consistently performed, this may be due to the lack of specialized personnel, clearly-defined M&E methodologies and/or lack of political will to improve the systems. For example, according to the World Bank’s Functional Review of the Environment, Water and Forestry sector published in 201125: “There is no systematic monitoring and evaluation system for the sector as whole, but only a patchwork of different information systems in different agencies heavily focused on administrative processes, inputs and outputs, and driven by reporting requirements for different EU directives (e.g., Water Framework Directive, Nitrates Directive, National Reform Program) and responding to the European Commission requests”. CC&A expertise is extremely limited at the operational level, which impacts all aspects and levels of CC policymaking and the capacity for future planning. While the concept of CC is somewhat known, the policy implications for each sector are not. Climate change forums and platforms are missing at the regional or local levels in particular, and there are no exchanges of good practices between stakeholders. Thus any accumulated expertise is not shared or maintained. Successful strategies for cross-sectoral issues like CC requires functional intra-institutional communication at the national level. Effective trans-sectorial policy coordination is unfortunately lacking. Sectoral issues with CC implications will be considered solely on criteria used by the authority responsible for the sector, rather than attempting to work in synergy with the Strategy. Furthermore, the information 25 World Bank. 2011. Romania - Functional Review : Environment, Water and Forestry, Volume 1. Main Report. Washington, DC. © World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/12209 License: CC BY 3.0 Unported. 23 needed to make these decisions in an integrated way is frequently only available to the sectoral authority, with no easily available channels for communicating it efficiently to other relevant authorities. Romania has technical experts but not sufficient capacity for policy analysis. The Romanian GHG Inventory and Registry are reporting on GHG emissions in Romania and the functioning of the ETS scheme. However, this is not sufficient for making decisions regarding the impact of new policies. The type of socio- economic information needed on LULUCF, for example, cannot be based simply on CO2 emissions or removals levels. There is little cross-sectoral information and expertise on evaluating it. Enabling an Evaluation Culture As noted in Output A2.3 – “Building Institutional The Romanian Government also sought to assess Capacity for Implementing the National Climate itself against criteria identified in the International Atlas on Evaluation, which independent researchers Change and Low Carbon Green Growth Strategy and found to be lacking. (Garboan and Sandaor, 2007) Action Plan in Romania,” M&E can be reinforced by These criteria are repeated below as they still provide strengthening the CC aspects of SEA and EIA and of good indicators for assessing the evaluation culture: PIU unit from MEWF. The European legislation on • Evaluation takes place in many policy domains impact evaluation provides a solid basis for identifying • There is a supply of domestic evaluators in different relevant CC indicators. discipline • There is a professional organisation of evaluators 3.1. Framework for M&E and Reporting • There is a degree of institutionalisation of evaluation in Government of Public Policies • There is a degree of institutionalisation of In Romania, the rules providing the general evaluation in Parliament framework for M&E of public policies (PP), at the • There is a pluralism of institutions or evaluators performing evaluations within each policy domain Government level are in Governmental Decision (GD) • There is an evaluation function within the Supreme 775/200526, which approves the Regulation on the Audit Institution. process for preparing, monitoring and evaluation of • The three additional criteria for candidate countries public policies at central level. This was followed by are: the GD 870/200627, providing a strategy for improving • There is monitoring capacity the system for preparation, coordination and planning • There is diversity of evaluation: strategy, policy, of public policies by the central public administration programme, projects and the legislation’s Action Plan for implementation. • There is an information flow within government According to GD 775/2005, each Ministry and State relating to evaluation. Agency that initiates public policies must have a Public Policy Unit (PPU). The role of such a unit is to advise the personnel of the different specialized departments within the Ministry/State Agency with respect to the process of the PP, and:  Monitor the implementation of the current Regulation(s)  Link the Ministry with the PPU in the General Secretariat (GS) of the Government 26 http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocumentAfis/63743 27 http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/73751 24  Prepare monitoring reports for PP initiated by the Ministries, in cooperation with the specialized departments. GD 775/2005 includes a framework for M&E of public policies. The action plan for each PP must provide details on M&E for that PP. The PPUs are required to prepare monitoring reports based on a suggested template provided by GD 775/2005 as per a schedule that is to be established by the proposed PP. The monitoring reports must provide details on:  Institutional changes resulted from the implementation of the PP;  Changes of the situation of the target groups, during the implementation and upon completion of implementation of the PP;  Implementation costs;  Whether deadlines were met and how well the content in the Action Plan for that PP was covered;  Delays in implementation of actions and reason for delays. At a minimum, monitoring reports must include an:  Assessment of the results ;  Assessment of costs and comparison of estimated with registered costs;  Assessment of conformity with the contents of activities and deadlines. The activities necessary to complete the monitoring reports may be subcontracted to other entities (including private). 3.1.1. Evaluation Culture In response to GD 870/2006, an evaluation awareness campaign was conducted and a National Strategy for Evaluation (NES) was developed in 2006 addressing the 2007 – 2013 time period, under the Phare- funded Technical Assistance for Programming, Monitoring and Evaluation project28. Prior to development of the NES, the awareness campaign29 held conferences on evaluation for targeted groups focusing on the utility of evaluation, EU requirements and international evaluation experiences. The campaign also distributed a booklet highlighting good practices for evaluation with examples from other EU MS that is still relevant today. Many of the principles in the booklet are reflected in this report.30 The NES focused on developing an evaluation culture rather than systems. Planned activities included31:  Evaluation guidelines, procedures and standards and ethics codes;  Developing competences – establishing evaluation curricula, training activities;  Setting up professional networks; 28 RO 2003/005-551.03.03.04 29 Ibid. 30 http://discutii.mfinante.ro/static/10/Mfp/evaluare/Broshure_on_evaluation_EN.pdf 31 Romanian Ministry of Finance, “Development of the Evaluation Community in Romania” presentation http://www.ideas-global.org/wp-content/.../01/Bedea.pp 25  Setting up a central level unit for training in evaluation;  Setting up monitoring systems at all levels: central, local/regional governments and agencies. The authors were only able to locate limited information on which activities were ultimately conducted and what is still in place. However, current resources include:  Romanian government website focusing on the European Framework for the evaluation of Structural Instruments with the evaluation policy, general guidance on methods such as cost- benefit and multi-criteria analysis as well as an online library of evaluation reports.32  Association for the Development of Evaluation in Romania, however it is not clear how active this association is currently.33 3.1.2. New Regulations Recently, the Romanian Government approved GD 398/201534 for the establishment of institutional framework for the coordination and management of European Structural and Investment funds (ESI) and for ensuring the continuation of the institutional framework for the coordination and management of structural funds 2007 – 2013, in response to EU requirements discussed in Section 2.4.1. Tracking climate action spending. GD 398 /2015 will be enforced as of September 3, 2015. GD 398/2015 provides the institutional framework as well as the role of institutions involved in coordination, management and control of ESI funds and structural instruments 2007 – 2013 and 2014 - 2020. Also, this GD establishes the responsibilities of each institution when/if involved in the coordination management and control of EU Funds in different Programs implemented in Romania. The Ministry of European Funds (MEF) has overall coordination, monitoring and evaluation responsibilities with respect to the EU funds used in Romania. The MEF also prepares monitoring reports for the EU Commissions. Monitoring of the operational programs will be performed by monitoring committees, which are set-up in accordance with the Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013.35 3.2. Monitoring and Evaluation of Climate Actions There is not yet a comprehensive M&E system in place for monitoring NSCC and/or APCC. The first Romanian NSCC and APCC was set-up in 2005, to cover the 2005 – 2007 time horizon, and related to the EU accession and the necessity of adopting the EU ETS regulation as well as to the expected enforcement of the Kyoto Protocol and did not include special M&E provisions or dedicated institutional arrangements. 32 http://www.evaluare-structurale.ro/ 33 http://www.evalrom.ro/ 34 GD 398/2015 : http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/169400 35 REGULATION (EU) No 1303/2013: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:347:0320:0469:EN:PDF 26 Romania’s most recent National CC Strategy, adopted in 2013, reflected Romania as an EU MS. It proposed developing indicators and an M&E system as a part of the APCC, which is being developed in this project. A foundation for setting-up the M&E system for the NSCC and APCC exists in the form of the institutional arrangements for monitoring and evaluating existing policies and measures that are reported according UN and EU requirements – these include the GHG monitoring and reporting system. Yet, Romania has few effective tools for assessing the impact of CC policy. Romania does not have procedures for assessing the socio-economic impact of GHG emission reductions measures or the impact other sectoral measures have on overall GHG emissions. Stakeholder consultation will be critical, however there are few existing frameworks in place. The creation of the Climate Partners Network (CPN) would provide a nexus of CC knowledge as well as a link between public and private stakeholders. The CPN can serve as a “nexus of CC knowledge” and a critical tool for ensuring that “CC decision making is transparent and evidence-based”. 3.3. GHG Monitoring and Reporting Institutional Arrangements In Romania, climate change related regulation and reporting are administered by the Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests; therefore, it holds responsibility for preparation of GHG-related summaries and reports to the EU Commission/EEA and UNFCCC, as summarized in Table 2 and as described in more detail in in Section 2 above. Table 2 Reporting requirements of international institutions Type of report Reported To GHG Inventory UNFCCC & EC National Communications UNFCCC & EC Biennial Report (BR) UNFCCC & EC PAMs Report EC GHG emissions projections EC Report on progress towards the ESD goal EC Romania’s GHG monitoring and reporting (& verification) system is used for the national GHG inventory and related statistics; the Romanian Registry for the EU ETS, which is integrated in the European Union Registry for Emissions Trading; reports under the Kyoto Protocol; submissions of National Communications and Biennial Reports to the UNFCCC; submissions under the EU Monitoring Mechanism Decision; as well as for tracking of individual policies. Table 3 lists entities that have a role in the current GHG MRV system. 27 Table 3 MRV Institutional responsibilities in Romania Entity Relevant responsibility Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests Oversight and policy development in all areas of (MEWF) environment. Leads international reporting (including GHG Inventory, National Communications, Biennial Reports, and Reports under the EU MMD). Competent Authority for EU ETS. Ministry of Economy, Trade and Tourism GHG Inventory input data provider. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development GHG Inventory input data provider. Ministry of Transport GHG Inventory input data provider. Ministry of Health GHG Inventory input data provider. Ministry of Regional Development and Public GHG Inventory input data provider. Administration Ministry of Internal Affairs GHG Inventory input data provider. Customs National Authority GHG Inventory input data provider. National Institute of Statistics (NIS) GHG Inventory input data provider. Reports to EUROSTAT National Agency of Cadaster and Land Registration GHG Inventory input data provider. Authorities and public institutions subordinated to GHG Inventory input data provider. the above mentioned ones, such as the Romanian Civil Aviation Authority or National Regulatory Authority for Energy, also R&D Institutes Other entities identified by MEWF GHG Inventory input data provider. Entities in the Business environment, e.g. energy GHG Inventory input data provider. (through providers or industrial operators NIS) Source: Generated on the basis of GD 120/2014 The National GHG Inventory is prepared based on IPCC sectors, therefore, the data necessary for its preparation is sourced from numerous public entities, as mentioned above, as well as external sources, as shown in Table 4. 28 Table 4 Sector-specific sources for the GHG Inventory Report Sector Data sources Energy National Institute for Statistics - Energy Balance Energy producers and Industrial energy consumers reporting under EU-ETS rules Ministry of Economy, Trade and Tourism Romanian Civil Aviation Authority Transgaz SA National Regulatory Authority for Energy National Agency for Mineral Resources Industrial National Institute for Statistics - Statistical Yearbook and other data sources Processes Industrial operators through 42 Local Environmental Protection Agencies and Direct information from industrial operators Product Use Agriculture National Institute of Statistics Forestry and Ministry of Agriculture Other Land Forests and Rural Development (MADR) - Forests General Directorate (2007-2008) Use Ministry of Environment and Forests - Forests General Directorate (2009-2011); Waste National Institute for Statistics National Environmental Protection Agency Public Health Institute National Administration “Apele Romane” Food and Agriculture Organization Landfill operators through 42 Local/Regional Environmental Protection Agencies Source: Analysis and Recommendations to Improve the Current System of the GHG Inventory in Romania (output 1.2) The World Bank’s Romania Climate Change Reimbursable Advisory Service (RAS) Program at the request of the Government of Romania (through its Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests MEWF). 3.3.1. Findings on Institutional Arrangements for M&E and Reporting of GHG emissions The system for monitoring GHG emissions seems to be complete, but there is room for improvement.36 As found in the output A2.3 report, a serious impediment to effective CC action is that CC is fundamentally a cross-sectoral policy implemented by the MEWF, which has authority over only a fraction of the relevant issues. When a policy is put into place there have been no available tools for monitoring performance, as in the case of housing stock energy efficiency programmes. The institutional arrangements include participants form all socio-economic areas (from Ministries to research entities and to economic operators) and administrative levels (from the national government level to the local level). However, the relationship between government institutions does not demonstrate proactive participation on any side: 36 Also refer to other reports in this series, such as output 2.3, “Building Institutional Capacity for Implementing the National Climate Change Strategy in Romania”. 29  The data providers are not necessarily concerned about the quality of the information provided.  The MEWF could improve communication regarding the results of the monitoring and informing stakeholders about conclusions of the evaluations performed and/or evolution of GHG emissions in a sector. These operating relationships also should be improved, allowing the information to circulate more freely, so that the data providers understand the importance of the process and the results, as well as the importance of their contribution. For example, the MEWF could seek to more deeply understand the priorities and concerns of different stakeholders, and then tailor communications regarding relevant evaluation planning, and also draft communication strategies, such as leaflets and summary reports, during and after evaluations that provide details on next steps to utilize evaluation findings. There are several sector-specific examples of areas for improvement. The individual policies and measures promoted in the GHG emitting sectors (energy including transport, agriculture, waste management) are rarely monitored and accounted for in a bottom up approach.37 Different Agencies and Entities (e.g. ANRE, OPCOM) keep statistics in the fields for which they are responsible (Energy: e.g. guarantees of origin, green certificates, etc.), yet there is no clear link between their databases and the national effort for monitoring GHG emissions, which is a lost opportunity. The indicators and responsibilities are incomplete. The appropriate indicators and responsible institutions are not always clearly defined for the named policies and measures for GHG mitigation. For example, a PAM implemented in the Transport sector promoting the use of biofuels does not specify the responsible institution and there is no indicator to be monitored.38 From a pool of 49 PAMs, only 14 have quantitative indicators mentioned, and those are only address GHGs (CO2, CH4, etc.). 3.4. Adaptation Monitoring and Reporting Institutional Arrangements To date, there have been only a few reporting requirements on CC adaptation as compared to mitigation. The Romanian institutional arrangements for CC adaption designate the MEWF as the responsible entity for both designing the adaptation policy and monitoring its effects. The local Environmental Protection Agencies (EPAs), which report to the MEWF in regards to climate change, are the enforcing bodies at the different administrative levels. Extreme events monitoring is performed by National Meteorological Administration (ANM) and National Administration of Romanian Waters - “Apele Romane” (NARW). However, due to the recent evolution in the EU policies39, the relevant Romanian ministries must now include objectives related to climate change adaptation in their strategies and set up appropriate monitoring and reporting arrangements. 37 e.g. GD 882/2004 National Strategy on the heating supply of localities via district generation and distribution systems, Law no. 220/2008 transposition of the RES directive, National Strategy on Waste Management and the National Waste Management Plan (Official Journal no. 954/18.10.2004) etc. 38 GD 935/2011 promoting the use of biofuels. 39 The EU Strategy on adaptation to climate change (COM/2013/0216 final) and the Technical guidance on integrating climate change adaptation in programmes and investments of Cohesion Policy [SWD(2013) 135] lists requirements with respect to the 2014 - 2020 financial framework. 30 3.5. National Sustainable Development Indicators It is recommended that the NSCC take advantage of relevant indicators addressed in the National Sustainable Development Strategy, which is overseen by the NIS. The current indicators relating to climate and GHG emissions are as follows:  GHG emissions distributed per sectors  Energy consumption per inhabitant  Share of RES electricity in the total  Income from taxes for the use and generated electricity consumption of energy  Energy intensity of the economy  Internal energy consumption by fuel type  Energy dependency  Biofuels use in the transport sector  Mean temperature at soil surface  Emissions intensity for energy consumption  Generation of combined heat and  Income from taxes for the use and power, as a share in the total consumption of energy generated electricity 31 4. Examples of International Good Practices for M&E and Reporting Evaluation is a huge field with a long history and volumes of literature. 40 Also, there are numerous different methodologies, depending on the purpose and characteristics of whatever is being evaluated.41 This section focuses primarily on providing examples of good practices for M&E and Reporting at the national goal and policy level. It also touches upon standardization strategies to facilitate aggregating information from other levels (e.g. sectors, programs, or projects). Regarding M&E and Reporting examples for climate change issues internationally, monitoring systems for GHG emission levels from national inventories under the UNFCCC are typically the most advanced, with M&E for mitigation policies or GHG emission reductions associated with those policies also common (e.g. energy efficiency or renewable capacity).42 M&E for indirect emission reductions (e.g. capacity building or adjusting a legal framework to facilitate emission reductions)43 or other characteristics of mitigation actions (employment or resource use impacts) are less common, and addressing adaptation is still rare. Typically, the existing M&E and Reporting systems allow countries to determine if they are meeting emissions reduction targets, but do not sufficiently incorporate more comprehensive evaluation principles that would allow them to identify the most effective and resource-efficient policies.44 Few countries have comprehensive evaluation strategies for all policy sectors at the national level, yet there are numerous examples in specific sectors, such as education, health or energy. Also, stakeholder engagement and feedback processes are increasingly being incorporated. The evaluation framework section provides more background on good practices for evaluation more generally. 40 Such as evaluation activities for development aid, energy, health, public policy and governance as well as more recently for climate change mitigation and adaptation at the national level to meet UNFCCC requirements. 41 It is beyond the scope of this document to detail all of the different evaluation strategies and methodologies for policies and programs that could feed into a national climate change strategy. Interested readers should see for example: Global Environment Facility, 2015, Good Practice Study on Principles for Indicator Development, Selection, and Use in Climate Change Adaptation, Monitoring and Evaluation; Wörlen, 2013, Guidelines to Climate Mitigation Evaluations; Stern, 2012, Broadening the Range of Designs and Methods for Impact Evaluations. 42 Wartmann et al, 2013. 43 M&E of mitigative capacity, defined as the result of reducing barriers to emission reduction, can be an important component of a national M&E system. 44 Climate Policy Initiative, 2012, “Tracking Emissions and Mitigation Actions: Evaluation of MRV Systems in China, Germany, Italy and the United States.” http://climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Tracking- Emissions-and-Mitigation-Actions-Evaluation.pdf 32 4.1. General Good Practices for M&E and Reporting While there are similarities in topics and sectors addressed in the good practices and examples provided below, each national climate change strategy is unique, representing the priorities and opportunities most relevant for a particular country. Therefore, the M&E and Reporting strategy needs to be tailored to the characteristics of that national climate change strategy and other local characteristics, priorities, and capacities. Yet, there are common themes and issues that have resulted in the following general good practices that follow roughly sequential, but overlapping steps45, 46: Overall  Plan for an incremental staged approach that improves/expands over time.  Allow sufficient time to develop systems, as there are several stages many of which involve engaging stakeholders or obtaining information or action from other entities.  Tailor the system to local objectives, priorities, circumstances and capacities.  The level of effort should generally be proportional to the usefulness/need. Carefully balance potentially competing principles (e.g. completeness and accuracy) with feasibility while prioritizing transparency and comparability (at least within EU). Consider a cost-benefit analysis of different options.  Leverage or adapt existing institutions and systems, including using common reporting formats for reporting, as feasible. Also share knowledge. This also helps maximize compatibility while minimizing double counting or unintended gaps.  Preserve institutional memory -- have sufficient documentation and training to address staff turnover.  A decentralized/integrated structure like an inter-ministerial committee can facilitate coordination. As policy/intervention is being defined  Begin designing M&E and Reporting systems as early as possible, typically during the policy design phase.  Define scope of the M&E and Reporting, sample questions include: o What are the minimum reporting requirements? o To what extent should the system track secondary or unintended impacts (positive or negative) noting that sustainable development co-benefits can actually be larger for climate actions47? o What local circumstances/priorities are relevant to incorporate? 45 Wartmann et al, 2013. 46 Barura et al, 2014. Barura, P et al, 2014, “Climate Policy Implementation Tracking Framework,” World Resources Institute. http://www.wri.org/publication/climate-policy-implementation-tracking-framework. 47 For approaches for addressing co-benefits, see for example the CDM Gold Standard at http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org, and the Social Carbon Standard at http://www.socialcarbon.org. 33 o What existing institutional arrangements are already in place or can be easily adapted?  Assess the relative priorities for evaluation and assessing effectiveness and facilitating continuous learning as opposed to simply tracking.  For a new intervention, develop the initial logic framework identifying expected inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes with milestones -- describe how one can tell if the expectations for each phase/milestone have been achieved.  Assess the potential legal or political mandate necessary to support M&E and Reporting (e.g. assigning responsibility to a ministry or expanding the scope of national accreditation body).  Begin mapping out and synchronizing timetables for finalizing the strategy and developing systems as well as ongoing data collection, compilation, different levels of reporting to ensure there is enough time for each stage, update in future stages as needed. Once the policy/intervention components are clear (but ideally before implementation)  Clearly define institutional structures and assign clear roles and responsibilities, building in sufficient capacity, resources, as well as authority and accountability.  For a new intervention, update the logic framework/diagram and expectations for each phase/milestone, identifying potential indicators (both key performance indicators as well as other indicators). Use focus areas and subcategories as necessary or helpful to ensure comprehensive coverage of all relevant topics. Once priorities and concerns are identified, address the level of evaluation desired for each phase.  Carefully assess which indicators are most relevant for current needs; weighing different options as needed. Sample questions include: o What are the options for indicators for each topic? o What is the expected level of effort, including frequency of collection for each proposed indicator? o What are the relevant existing data sources? What new or improved/altered sources would be needed? o What inconsistencies in definitions across different sources are there? o What are the appropriate baselines for each indicator? As soon as practical (ideally still before implementation)  Specify the approach to evaluation, including monitoring indicators.  Address verification, accreditation of verifiers, and enforcement, as appropriate for each indicator; for example, some countries in the EU require third-party verification for GHG and financial (spending/cost) impact indicators but not for other issues such as adaptation and co- benefits, and not for other stages (e.g. inputs, activities).  Ensure the appropriate legal or political mandate necessary to support M&E and Reporting is in place.  Develop a knowledge management strategy that includes mapping information flows between institutions and other stakeholders. 34  For responsible parties, engage in capacity building, drafting protocols, and ongoing information exchange.  Engage external parties as relevant (e.g. independent evaluators, or technical experts to help develop monitoring protocols or provide training). 4.2. Green Growth Good Practices This subsection is primarily adapted from the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) chapter of the Green Growth Best Practice Initiative’s 2014 report, entitled Green Growth in Practice Lessons from Country Experiences.48 A green growth strategy is similar to and includes the national climate change strategy concept Romania is developing; therefore, the good practices identified in the report are directly relevant and incorporate many of the concepts presented above. GGBP authors found that effective M&E increases government accountability, enhances public trust, improves stakeholder engagement, and facilitates learning. It plays a crucial function in development planning, and consequently has a key role to play in ensuring the effective design and implementation of green growth plans, policies and interventions. Good practice M&E systems are designed around targeted strategic objectives and intermediary results, as determined by the theory of change of the intervention. These factors then should determine the indicator selection, institutional arrangements and the strategies for communication and engagement with stakeholders. In practice, all of the components must come together to make an effective M&E system that enables decision makers and stakeholders to improve the effectiveness of interventions and in time, leads to greater ambition and impact. The current report provides recommendations addressing three common themes for successful M&E strategies, each of which is discussed below. Authors note how recent green growth efforts are, and the long time frame required by M&E systems to reach final results and demonstrate durability, therefore the findings are preliminary, based upon currently available information from countries across the globe. 4.2.1 Indicators M&E systems for green growth typically develop indicators directly linked to the goals and objectives at early stages of the strategy to facilitate monitoring. Authors assume that progress will be communicated to with the general public to create enthusiasm and build trust as well as meet reporting requirements; they offer the following core recommendations for indicators:  Incorporate indicators that cover relevant economic, environmental and social objectives to provide a complete and integrated picture. Indicators such as gross domestic product (GDP), have long provided a focus for economic policy making. Now, governments need indicators that supplement conventional indicators, such as by addressing green job creation, resource efficiency — material resource efficiency and productivity as well as human welfare. 48 http://www.ggbp.org/ 35 The OECD developed a framework of headline indicators (OECD, 2011) focused on the socio- economic context and characteristics of growth, environmental and resource productivity, the natural asset base and economic opportunities and policy responses. The Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Korea, and the Netherlands have all produced green growth indicators following the OECD framework.  Combine a small number of headline indicators to facilitate easy communication for the public with more detailed indicator sets measuring specific outputs and outcomes that facilitate tracking underlying changes as well as meeting reporting requirements. Sectoral indicators are needed to assess key sectors and progress towards specific targets. There are a range of supporting methods and frameworks available relating sectoral performance and impacts, including indicators for the new international Sustainable Development Goals, System of Environmental Economic Accounts (SEEA)49, Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES), and Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). Using common themes across international, national, and local levels allows comparison of trends and patterns. It may be possible to use the same metric at all levels, yet often indicators meaningful at the national level may not be relevant at the community level. It is also important to confirm that the scope is consistent or at least compatible. For example, the UNFCCC applies the national principle (all emissions on the national territory) whereas the SEEA applies the residence principle.  Draw on existing frameworks. Indicator sets such as Sustainable Development Indicators (so called post 2015 SDGs)or National Development Indicator sets can be framed for green growth purposes (OECD, 2011) and also help maximize synergies. Frequently, these national goals and indicators take into account national situations more effectively than universal or international goals and indicators. It is possible to frame national development indicators to allow for M&E of addressing climate change. 4.2.2. Institutional Arrangements Having the appropriate institutional arrangements in place is critical for a smooth and efficient system. System developers should establish institutional arrangements tailored to local circumstances that are accountable, transparent, clear, integrated and built upon existing arrangements. Key institutional qualities include legitimacy, relevance, transparency, inclusivity, flexibility, and reliability. The report recommends to: 49 Currently, a Task Force on the United Nation level, has in duty to establish a key set of climate change-related statistics and related indicators based on the SEEA. For more information, go to: http://www1.unece.org/stat/platform/display/climate/Climate+Change 36  Ensure the relevant institutions responsible for M&E are accountable and that the institutional arrangements are transparent. Institutional arrangements need to maintain independence and autonomy to ensure accountability (Holvoet et al., 2012, Morra-Imas and Rist, 2009). For example, intergovernmental organizations like the World Bank, United Nations Development Programme and the Global Environment Facility, all have evaluation offices that report directly to the organizations’ governing body rather than operational management. Robust institutional arrangements are crucial for M&E to impact policy. They need to be sustainable and resilient in the face of political or other shocks – and efficient in terms of use of human and financial resources. Professional associations such as the American Evaluation Association, the German Evaluation Association and the International Development Evaluation Association have developed codes of conduct and evaluation standards that can be used as tools to ensure a minimum level of reliability, independence, and methodological rigor.  Establish clear roles and responsibilities. Government units and other essential actors should also be involved in M&E. Clear roles and responsibilities can assist in sharing the burden of implementation when addressing issues that cut across different departmental mandates and jurisdictions. Whether centralized or decentralized, ensuring co-ordination and alignment requires particular clarity on the roles and responsibilities within the M&E framework (Morra- Imas and Rist, 2009; Casas et al., 2012; and Lopez Acevedo et al., 2012). All actors need to know whom to go to for what information. For example, the Australian National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (NGER) Scheme, provides clear mandatory requirements for industrial organizations to report their emissions through the government’s Clean Energy Regulator, which replaced a patchwork of voluntary industry surveys and programs (Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, 2012; ANAO, 2013). The institution in charge of CC M&E needs to have influence, authority and capacity. For example, South Africa’s government-wide M&E system is implemented by the Ministry of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, and reports to the President. Through this process, it was highlighted that R&D investment targets were being missed repeatedly, forcing the Minister to take action to rectify problems. This example suggests that operating M&E systems out of a central agency or office with decision-making authority and from a position of limited operational involvement can be effective.  Harmonize with existing M&E systems. Ensuring M&E arrangements are harmonized with existing M&E systems is important for efficiency and sustainability. 37 New policies and reforms take place in the context of existing institutions. Therefore harmonization and alignment are critical to avoid duplication, maximize efficiency (Lopez et al., 2012), and reduce costs (Holvoet et al., 2012). The M&E system should build on existing data collection systems and integrate CC M&E requirements into existing systems to avoid the risk of duplicative or parallel systems. In South Africa, the system has been effectively incorporated into M&E requirements of most public sector departments. However, a key challenge was getting ministers to work together. Integration is also important for avoiding reporting fatigue amongst the responsible organizations (Boyd et al., 2012). Existing institutional structures were utilized for green growth M&E in Australia. To support harmonization across existing requirements, a streamlining protocol was agreed by national, state and territory governments in 2009 (ANAO, 2012). While integration is important, for an M&E system to be viewed as fair and objective it must also ensure independence, such as data verification by an outside entity or impact evaluation by an independent third party. For example, the Sujala Project in India determined that embedding the M&E structure within the entity managing the controversial project would not be seen as sufficiently objective and trustworthy. Instead, they employed an independent government statistics agency and a reputable external M&E organization with a multidisciplinary team (Raju et al., 2010). This was seen as important to ensure that data systems remained independent and robust and the findings and suggestions from the M&E program were respected and acted upon. 4.2.3. Communication and Engagement To maximize usefulness and stakeholder support and engagement, M&E results must be communicated regularly and the level of detail tailored to each audience group. It is important to share information in a timely and audience-appropriate manner using communication methods, messengers, and channels to target and engage green growth relevant stakeholders with often divergent interests. Using communication and reporting mechanisms to facilitate the flow of knowledge, information and resources throughout the process can provide clarity on the scope, roles, and progress achieved, (UNDP, 2009) therefore strengthening stakeholder buy-in and acceptance of M&E results. Authors recommend:  Actively engage stakeholders at every stage to help improve buy-in from local stakeholders, which improves accountability. Engage key stakeholder groups, adapting engagement strategies for government (such as finance, planning, and environment ministries) and other actors (such as businesses and investors, citizens and communities) and disseminate M&E results promptly. Engaging and informing stakeholders are intrinsic to effective M&E, especially for complex agendas which have consequences for stakeholders’ livelihoods and well-being, and can increase its legitimacy (GGKP, 2013). CC policies are best served by inclusive, participatory approaches that capture both social and environmental impacts of policy implementation (AfDB, 2012). 38  Target communication methods to diverse stakeholders. The language, messengers, and communication channels for M&E results should be credible and appropriate. Headline indicators are suitable for the public via the mass media, while more detailed statistical data via technical reports are best for specialists. Involving high profile or influential figures in public announcements concerning the implications (economic and others) of climate change or environmental degradation can be a powerful way of raising public awareness and cultivating a sense of urgency (Regehr et al., 2007). Common language and data visualization are useful for communicating complex results to public audiences.  Create ongoing feedback loops. M&E processes can create communication channels between planners and stakeholders, which should be two-way, creating feedback loops for stakeholders to provide feedback to the M&E process itself, as well as on the M&E results. Feedback loops strengthen transparency, help ensure indicators and data are interpreted and used correctly and ensure decision makers understand the implications to act on them (GGKP, 2013). Formal on-going involvement of stakeholders can enable ownership and learning and have to be built into program and project management processes to ensure effective involvement of stakeholders (UNDP, 2002). Stakeholder committees can provide an important advisory, monitoring and watchdog role (Deaton, 2010). 4.3. Special Considerations for Climate Change Adaptation M&E for adaptation is the assessment of progress made in implementing initiatives that directly or indirectly affect the level of climate resilience. There is vastly more international experience with M&E for emissions reductions and mitigation actions which is more deeply integrated into other subsections. Therefore, this subsection highlights recent findings regarding adaptation to ensure they have solid foundation as well, as they face unique challenges. For example, there is a new dimension of uncertainty. Adaptation efforts aim at addressing future climate variations and impacts along with current development needs. The long time horizons inhibit assessing the effectiveness of adaptation activities. No universally applicable indicator exists, rather context-specific indicators are required to measure reduction in vulnerability or other proxies for the success of adaptation in all the different sectors affected. This means systems need to be robust enough to be useful, but also flexible enough to allow for recognizing the unanticipated outcomes from adaptation and climate resilience drivers or responses. Adaptation M&E can build on experience from different sectors and disciplines, such as tools and indicators from environmental monitoring, environmental impact assessments, cost-benefit analysis, and M&E approaches for disaster risk reduction as well as general evaluation principles. So far, M&E of adaptation has primarily been at the project-level, often using results-based monitoring frameworks of donor and technical cooperation organizations. The majority of M&E and Reporting activities has been conducted by climate funds, such as the Adaptation Fund, the Global Environmental 39 Facility (GEF), and the Pilot Programme for Climate Resilience (PPCR) and by countries that have implemented such systems through their National Strategies and Action Plans. (Dinshaw, A.et al, 2014) A recent study is Climate-Eval’s “Good practice study on principles for indicator development, selection and use in climate change adaptation M&E”. The authors analyzed several frameworks with different characteristics noting that adaptation is not an outcome in itself, yet existing indicators may be repackaged so that they describe adaptation progress and resilience to climate change. GIZ noted in “National Monitoring and Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation”, adaptation plans should address:  How does climate change evolve? Which climate change impacts require most attention?  Which CC adaptation activities are being implemented in our country? Who does what?  Are these activities in line with our national adaptation and development goals?  Are we on the right track in order to achieve national adaptation and development goals?  How much money is being spent on adaptation activities and is it spent effectively?  Which sectors, regions and social groups benefit from these adaptation activities?  Do adaptation interventions actually reduce vulnerability of climate-sensitive sectors and highly vulnerable groups?  Which CC adaptation approaches work and which do not? Under which conditions and why? 4.3.1. Selecting Indicators for Adaptation This section summarizes several good practice principles in selecting indicators identified in the Climate- Eval study,50 which are complementary to the good practices outlined in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 above:  Combine and complement indicators. Different indicators and indicator types should be seen as complementary. At the output level, indicators can be a mix of both qualitative and quantitative to assess whether or not a goal was attained. Yet, too many indicators can burden the agency and interfere with implementation.  Participatory processes are particularly relevant and should be used to inform indicator selection. M&E designers need to consider the diverse drivers of vulnerability and resilience, recognizing that societies, communities, and households are not homogeneous and climate change will affect groups differently, leading to different adaptation responses. Interests, priorities, levels of power, capacities, and access to resources may vary dramatically. Stakeholder consultation can (a) help define the focus for indicators; (b) clarify the methods of data collection and evaluation; (c) frame what ‘success’ points are according to beneficiaries; and (d) promote shared ownership and transparency.  Indicator sets should be engendered. Initiatives must reflect perspectives and priorities of women and other disadvantaged populations for long-term sustainability and success.  Data sources for indicators should be sound. Robust M&E requires reliable data, appropriately calibrated, e.g. Indicators should consider if of data is easily available. 50 Climate-Eval. 2013. Study on Framework for Monitoring and Evaluation of Adaptation to Climate Change. https://www.climate-eval.org/content/framework-monitoring-and-evaluation-adaptation-climate-change 40  Be clear on what is measured. Clear indicator definitions are essential to support data collection and analysis; avoid poorly-defined, vague, or impractical indicators.51  Indicator sets should also capture the enabling environment in which adaptation takes place. The logical framework should be designed to capture changes in the larger context. 4.4. European M&E Examples Evaluation is well-established in many EU MSs, including Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK. Examples from the Netherlands and Italy illustrate key messages at different points on the spectrum.52 The Netherlands In the Netherlands, a distinction is made between ex ante evaluation, ex post evaluation and organizational evaluation. The emphasis is strongly on ex post evaluation, which accounts for 70% of evaluations carried out in the Netherlands. Evaluations historically have focused on three questions:53 1. What do we want to achieve? -> Have we achieved what we intended? 2. What will we do to achieve it? -> Have we done what we should have to achieve it? 3. What will be the cost of our efforts? -> Was the cost what we had expected? There was a switch from purely “financial accounting” to “policy accounting” and they now include result indicators which allow the performance to be analyzed. Other lessons learned include: • The main policy objectives should be evaluated on a regular basis; • Those politically and administratively responsible should be informed about evaluation outcomes; • Within Ministries there should be a clear division of responsibilities for evaluations.54 Italy When the Italian Department for Development and Social Cohesion Policies (DPS) set out to increase capacity to evaluate development programs in the 1990s, they faced several challenges. The DPS initially relied on the EU framework for evaluations of Structural Funds to help build evaluation capacity.55 This was an easy first step for MS to take because the EU framework offers an established body of regulations, guidelines, and methodological indications on which to build national and regional capacity. However, initially neither the general public nor the administration perceived the value of evaluation for local purposes. Other lessons learned from Italy: 51 Good examples of indicators with guidance is provided by the UNFCCC Adaptation Fund in its Core Indicator Methodologies (AFB/EFC.14/6; 2014) and in its Results Framework and Baseline Guideline Document (AFB/B.14/Inf.6; 2011) 52 Romania Ministry of Public Finance, 2007, “Evaluation – an essential component in the process of formulating and implementing public interventions,” Evaluation Central Unit. http://discutii.mfinante.ro/static/10/Mfp/evaluare/Broshure_on_evaluation_EN.pdf 53 Ibid. 54 Ibid. 55 Ibid. 41 • Development of national guidelines and activities to create evaluation capacity within public agencies (such agency self-assessments and setting up evaluation units), builds the knowledge base of evaluation. • Evaluation training should be provided to all public bodies. • Restricting entry to the evaluation market of Structural Fund interventions, and emphasizing large-scale contracts, makes the quality of the evaluation product poorer, as there is less competition, particularly from small specialist evaluation firms. • Agencies that see evaluation guidelines as a blueprint, adopting them in only a mechanical way, rather than to make them meaningful in the context of their activities, does not create the ownership necessary to fully benefit from evaluation. Participation in technical forums, and discussions about the potential and limits of evaluation with the evaluation community facilitates “togetherness” among the commissioners and evaluators in the whole evaluation process.56 4.4.1. Case Study: Climate Change M&E and Reporting Practices in Germany German context for Monitoring and Evaluation Germany has a well-established evaluation culture, particularly as it relates to ex ante and ex post estimation of impacts; and there are numerous research institutes, NGOs and private providers that supplement and complement the activities performed directly by government staff. There is less emphasis on evaluation of processes, efficiency and continuous learning, though it is sometimes included. M&E and Reporting for Mitigation Germany has committed to aggressive emission reduction goals at 40% below 1990 levels by 2020,57 and adopted the Climate Action Programme 2020 in late 2014 to address mitigation, which incorporates Germany’s energy transition strategy, or Energiewende.58 The Climate Action Programme has several components with quantitative GHG targets as well as several soft, cross-sectoral measures, for a total expected reduction is about 82 million tCO2e. Implementation is the responsibility of the Government and the Ministry of Environment who is to produce an annual monitoring report incorporating the findings of the triennial progress report required under the energy transition regulation. As this initiative is relatively new, there is only partial information on the monitoring plan and indicators; therefore, the remainder of this section focuses on the earlier Integrated Energy and Climate Programme (IEKP), implemented since 2008, and other policy instruments59. 56 Ibid. 57 Germany’s reporting to the European Commission and UNFCCC focuses on ex -ante modeling of expected emission impacts rather than calculations of actual emission reductions achieved. 58 http://www.germanwatch.org, website accessed 7 August 2015. 59 Energy Concept (adopted in 2010 and which provided a clear long-term trajectory to reduce emissions by 80-95% by 2050 and specified renewable energy and energy efficiency targets) & energy transition laws – the German Energiewende (adopted in 2011). 42 Under the IEKP, monitoring was divided among the responsible ministries and agencies and was coordinated jointly by the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Economics and Technology. In an interesting example, as part of the indicator development process, designers performed a qualitative assessment of each policy/measure to determine if it was appropriate to monitor with indicators at that time. An extract of the qualitative assessment addressing the Building sector is presented in Table 5. So far, two monitoring reports have been published by the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi). The most recent, in April 2014, concludes all measures are correctly implemented and generating the expected results. The German government also frequently conducts formative or summative evaluations, or hires third parties, for specific programme elements of the overall strategy60. Table 5 Qualitative assessment of indicators in the building sector under the IEKP Original estimate IEKP Qualitative Monitoring No. Title [Mt CO2 in estimate recommended? (yes/no) 2020] Building Sector M10 Energy Saving Ordinance approx. 13.0*  Yes Operating costs in rental M11 -   Not at present accommodation Building refurbishment program M12 approx. 13.3   Yes to reduce CO2 Energy-efficient modernization M13 approx. 1.9  Yes of social infrastructure Renewable Energies Heat Act M14 approx. 17.0  Yes (EEWärmeG) Energetic refurbishment federal M15 approx. 0.4  Yes buildings Legend:  - satisfactory; data present; monitoring system in place  - neutral; data present; monitoring system not in place  - not satisfactory; data not present; monitoring system not in place M&E and Reporting for Adaptation Germany adopted the National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change61 in 2008. The National Action Plan on Adaptation proposed actions in 15 sectors and implementation and monitoring responsibilities are shared between the national and federal state levels. 60 Most national evaluations are in German, see for example the Evaluation of the National Climate Initiative of BMU http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/bmu- import/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/nki_evaluierung_langfassung_2012_bf.pdf 61 German Federal Government, 2008, “German Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change (DAS)” http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/bmu-import/files/english/pdf/application/pdf/das_gesamt_en_bf.pdf 43 The M&E framework for adaptation focuses on impacts and response indicators matched to 15 action and cross-sectional fields prioritized in the German Adaptation Strategy. Characteristics of the indicator system are (Schönthaler et al., 2010): i) It displays climatic impacts and adaptation responses, considers cause-effect-chains, and is accepted by experts; ii) It can be implemented on the basis of existing data; using broad stakeholder engagement to facilitate the identification and application of a wide range of data; iii) It reflects available knowledge on the impacts of climate change and the effectiveness of adaptation measures by government departments as well as by non-governmental institutions and organizations; iv) it is open for regular review in response to evolving climate change knowledge and emerging political priorities; v) it links up with other indicator systems; and vi) it facilitates linkages with monitoring and reporting at the EU and the Länder level. The Adaptation Strategy calls for an M&E framework, the objective of which is not to evaluate the effectiveness of national adaptation initiatives, but rather to generate lessons and to facilitate mid-course adjustments of the adaptation approach. The evaluation framework consists of three components62:  Vulnerability assessment: a descriptive evaluation of progress made on adaptation to climate change. The assessment will be forward-looking, drawing on timely climate projections as well as information from relevant government entities on their awareness of climate change and of complementary adaptation measures.  Indicator-based assessment: an examination of past and present adaptation initiatives in 15 action and cross-sectional fields in the Adaptation Strategy. This will be based on an Indicator System approved by the federal government. It will also include an assessment on e.g. the level of investment in adaptation initiatives and how effective established information portals are.  Evaluation of the Adaptation Strategy: an evaluation of the extent to which ongoing or planned government initiatives address the projected risks and opportunities from climate change. 4.4.2. Case Study: Climate Change M&E and Reporting Practices in France French context for Monitoring and Evaluation As in Germany, France has established an evaluation culture marked by the institutionalization of evaluation as part of the landscape of public policies though the focus is different. This movement started with science and technology, which, compared to other public policies, went through a specific institutionalization process. For French policy makers there has long been a continuum between “evaluation” and “advice”, as reflected in a set of advisory bodies whose are important in shaping and 62 OECD 2014, National Level Monitoring and Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation in Germany, http://www.oecd.org/env/cc/National%20level%20ME%20in%20Germany.pdf 44 understanding of evaluation, and the importance given to indicators. Research institutions, universities, programmes, and agencies are central to the French experience in evaluation.63 Traditionally, Romania’s institutional arrangement are influenced by those of France. M&E and Reporting for Mitigation France has established a goal in the 2005 Energy Policy Orientation Law for a four-fold reduction of GHG emissions by 2050. A mitigation action plan is updated every other year to feed into EU and UNFCCC requirements for National Communications. In 2013, the French Government issued an energy efficiency action plan, in relation with the GHG mitigation actions. This plan envisages measures in the following sectors: transport, residential-tertiary, industry and energy generation, agriculture, forestry, waste, exemplary role of the State, Business, and Research. Policies and measures were proposed in the following sectors: Cross sectoral policies and measures, Transport, Residential – Tertiary, Public administration, Energy, Agriculture and forests, Waste, Public awareness, Information and Education and Industry. Table 6 provides a partial listing of the policies and measures categories for transport as an example. The monitoring system is well established and monitored information is centralized at the level of Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy. Table 6 Partial listing of the French policies and measures categories for transport Transport ETS aviation National plan for transport infrastructure Biofuels sustainability Dynamic regulation of traffic European mobility week Development of high speed train between the airports M&E and Reporting for Adaptation France adopted a National Adaptation Strategy in November 2006 addressing the following:  Develop scientific knowledge  Use of legal instruments  Strengthen the observation system, and  Encourage voluntary approaches and ensure its operation on the long term dialogue with private stakeholders  Inform and motivate all stakeholders  Take into account the specific aspects of  Promote an approach adapted to local overseas territories communities  Contribute to international exchanges  Finance adaptation 63 Larédo, P., 1997,“ Evaluation in France: A Decade of Experience,” Chapter 24 in Policy Eval uation in Innovation and Technology. ISBN 9264156976. pp. 419-441. 45 Based on the Strategy, the first French National Adaptation Plan includes for 19 topic areas and one cross- sectoral theme resulting in a set of 84 actions expressed in over 200 measures. To facilitate monitoring, an action sheet outlines the five or six actions and relevant measures. These actions can be broadly categorized as i) production and dissemination of information, ii) adjustment of standards and regulations, iii) institutional adaptation, and iv) direct investment. Monitoring is performed continuously using indicators defined for each measure and there is annual reporting by the Observatoire National sur les Effets du Réchauffement Climatique (ONERC) within the Directorate General for Energy and Climate (DGEC) based on indicators defined in the Plan. Evaluation is performed by an Evaluation Committee comprised of civil service representatives tasked with implementing the Plan, representatives from the Grenelle Environment Monitoring Committee specializing in adaptation issues, and representatives from the scientific community. A mid-term evaluation in 2013 concluded that implementation for most of the measures is on track. 46 5. Evaluation Framework & Indicator Development It would be impossible to appropriately cover all relevant evaluation methodologies and approaches in this document, instead authors provide a solid yet flexible evaluation framework that is consistent with existing Romanian, EU and UNFCCC principles. In contrast to monitoring, which involves collecting data over time, climate policy evaluation uses data to answer specific questions about policy implementation, effects, or related issues. Outcome or impact evaluations seek to identify the effect of a particular policy, programme, intervention, or investment. Evaluations may assess policy effectiveness vis-à-vis environmental impact, cost, or other qualities. Evaluations can be qualitative or quantitative or both. They can be on an ex-ante or ex-post basis, and can occur as one-off efforts or on a periodic basis throughout the lifecycle of a particular policy effort. 64 M&E and Reporting for climate change requires pragmatism and a clear sense of purpose. They should ‘look’ both downwards and upwards, so that national decisions are informed by sub-national experiences and nations are able to share their progress effectively with the wider international community. 5.1. Evaluation Principles The EU, as well as Romania, have adopted the OECD DAC criteria, which provides a framework to be used during any evaluation: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability65. (See Table 7) The OECD DAC criteria and associated indicators are not necessarily examined in every evaluation, rather the criteria as well as the methods are adapted according to the stage of implementation and evaluation objectives. The multi-annual programming has allowed an “evaluation cycle” to develop, which “follows” the progression of the intervention. The method chosen to evaluate a policy instrument or policy package is of vital importance in ensuring its transparency. A professional evaluator will look at the intervention, and propose a feasible evaluation methodology based on the policy objectives and stage of implementation, as well as the specific evaluation goals, budget and resources available. Standard evaluation methodologies include beneficiary surveys and implementation staff interviews, case studies, stakeholder consultations as well as more technically-based approaches such as cost benefit analysis, econometric analysis, macro-economic modeling and regression analysis. While evaluation can be carried out by the implementing organization, it is strongly recommended that it be carried out by a party external to that unit to maintain sufficient independence to ensure the integrity of the evaluation and results ultimately reported. In addition, specific technical expertise or experience with the evaluation methods needed may necessitate involving external parties. 64 Fransen, Taryn with Casey Cronin. 2013,“A Critical Decade for Climate Policy: Tools and Initiatives to Track Our Progress.” Working Paper. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. Avail able at: wri.org/publication/criticaldecade-for-climate-policy-tools-and-initiatives-to-track-ourprogress 65 The criteria were first outlined in a 1991OECD Development Aid Committee document entitled, the DAC Principles for the Evaluation of Development Assistance. 47 External parties could be, a central evaluation unit in that entity or centralized at a higher government level, and/or external experts, such as professional evaluators and research institutes. If the decision is not already dictated by an overall evaluation policy, it should be determined on a case-by-case basis, reviewing the specific evaluation questions, scope, target group, costs and sensitivity. Table 7 OECD DAC Criteria Evaluation Meaning Criterion Relevance The relevance of an activity is the extent to which its stated objectives and implementation plan correctly address the identified problems. Changes in either the nature of the problems originally identified, or in the circumstances - whether physical, economic, institutional or policy, etc. - in which the activity takes place, can render the action no longer relevant to the problems it was set out to tackle. Efficiency The efficiency criterion concerns how well the activity has used the available resources toward the intended results. It addresses value-for-money issues, that is, whether similar results could have been achieved more by other means at lower cost in the same time. Effectiveness The effectiveness criterion concerns whether the activity achieved its objectives set during the programming phase. The key question is what difference the activity made in practice, as measured by how far the intended beneficiaries really benefited from the products or services it made available. Impact The term impact refers to the extent to which the benefits received by the target beneficiaries had a wider overall effect on larger numbers of people in the sector or region or in the country as a whole. Sustainability The sustainability criterion relates to whether the positive outcomes of the activity at purpose level are likely to continue after external funding ends, and also whether its longer-term impact on the wider development process can also be sustained at the level of the sector, region or country 5.2. Theory- based Evaluation It is recommended that Romania follow a theory-based approach for evaluation frameworks for specific interventions as it facilitates an iterative process of design, evaluation, and redesign based on lessons learned. The theory-based approach has several benefits over other approaches: 66  It facilitates evaluation of the whole policy implementation process, not just in one stage, such as examining only initial inputs or final impacts (i.e., realized energy savings). 66 Harmelink, M. et al, 2007, “Theory-based policy evaluation of 20 energy efficiency instruments,” Energy Efficiency, V1:131-148. 48  Through the development of indicators for each step in the implementation process, the “successes and failures” can be determined to the greatest extent possible.  By applying this approach, evaluators not only learn whether policies are successful or not but also why they succeeded or failed and how they can be improved. It is possible for a significant gap to emerge among policy adoption, implementation, and ultimate effect, due to gaps in implementation (for example, lack of compliance and enforcement) or changes in external drivers (for example, macroeconomic trends or fuel prices that differ from what had been expected). 67 A theory-based evaluation approach is one proven method for identifying the specific point(s) where the policy implementation chain is not performing as expected. The following sample questions are intended to be illustrative rather than prescriptive or exhaustive examples of the types of questions that can be addressed through a theory-based evaluation. In evaluating the success or failure of the policy, what was the contribution of:68  Transparent decision-making?  Financial accountability?  Quality of stakeholder engagement?  Intergovernmental coordination?  Effective tracking?  Enforcement of compliance measures? In addition:  How could lessons learned from this assessment be applied to other policies to improve implementation?  What do the findings suggest for strengthening the functioning of the executive departments or agencies that have been studied?  Should the policy be reviewed?  What key lessons should be integrated into the policy implementation to improve the quality of outcomes? 5.2.1. Steps in a theory-based evaluation For theory-based policy evaluation, the evaluator establishes a plausible theory on how a policy instrument (or a package of instruments) is expected to reach the policy goals, and who is expected to take action at which point in time. (For sample policy instruments, see 67 Fransen, Taryn with Casey Cronin. 2013,“A Critical Decade for Climate Policy: Tools and Initiatives to Track Our Progress.” Working Paper. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. Available at : wri.org/publication/criticaldecade-for-climate-policy-tools-and-initiatives-to-track-ourprogress 68 Barura, P et al, 2014, “Climate Policy Implementation Tracking Framework,” World Resources Institute. http://www.wri.org/publication/climate-policy-implementation-tracking-framework. 49 Table 8). The basic idea is to clearly map out the whole policy implementation process from initial inputs through ultimate direct and indirect impacts.69 (See Figure 2). Figure 2 General policy Input to Impacts Chain This mapping is then incorporated into a logic model which facilitates matching indicators to specific objectives and the broader goals. This general process provides a solid foundation for many levels and types of evaluations, and is applicable for any sector or strategy. The general steps are as follows:70 1. Define and characterize the policy instrument or package, e.g. goals and targets, implementation period, targeted groups, the active agents and the actions they perform, budget, whether it is new or an evolution of an existing policy, linkages, synergies or overlaps with other policies and any other relevant information specific for that policy. Map out the policy implementation process, addressing all cause–impact relationships and all assumptions on the way, i.e. how the policy instrument will reach its target audience and achieve the intended impacts, including the relationship with other policy instruments. This process can be high-level or very detailed, depending on the circumstances. However, it needs to be robust enough to facilitate clearly mapping potential indicators to related objectives in the next step, while accounting for uncertainties or assumptions. Ideally, the policy makers have already clearly described the intended process, and which actor is expected to do what. 2. Table 8Table 9 provides sample mapping of intermediate effect indicators to policy instruments. 3. Translate the information into a logic framework organized into at least three levels policy goals – objectives – and potential indicators for each stage, of implementation, as appropriate, i.e. inputs, processes/activities, outputs, outcomes, impacts (direct and indirect). The OECD DAC criteria as well as the SMART indicator concepts are particularly relevant at this stage. For each assumed cause–impact relation, an indicator can be drawn up to “measure” whether the cause– impact relation actually took place and to “measure” whether the change (or part of the change) 69 Terminology and specific definitions vary, but this is linked to the concepts of “causal chain”, and “theory of change” for example. 70 Harmelink, M. et al, 2007, “Theory-based policy evaluation of 20 energy efficiency instruments,” Energy Efficiency, V1:131-148. 50 that took place is due to the implementation of the policy instrument or to external factors (i.e., was the policy instrument was the causal force?). Table 8 Examples of Policy Instrument Types POLICY INSTRUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION Regulations and standards Regulations that specify abatement technologies (technology standard) or minimum requirements for energy consumption, pollution output, or other activities (performance standard). They typically include penalties for non-compliance. Taxes and charges Levies imposed on each unit of activity, such as fuel tax, carbon tax, traffic congestion charge, import or export tax. Subsidies and incentives Direct payments, tax reductions, price supports or the equivalent, from a government to an entity, for implementing a practice or performing a specified action. Tradable permits Programs that establish a limit on aggregate emissions by specified sources, require each source to hold permits, allowances, or other units equal to its actual emissions, and allow permits to be traded among sources. These are also known as emissions trading programs, emissions trading systems (ETS), or cap-and-trade programmes. Voluntary agreements or Agreements, commitments, or measures undertaken voluntarily by measures public or private sector actors, either unilaterally or jointly in a negotiated agreement. Not all voluntary agreements are truly voluntary; some include rewards and/or penalties associated with participating in the agreement or achieving the commitments. Information instruments Requirements for public disclosure of information. These include labeling programmes, rating and certification systems, and information or education campaigns aimed at changing behavior by increasing awareness. Research, development, Policies aimed at supporting technological advancement, through direct and deployment (RD&D) government funding or investment, or facilitation of investment, in policies technology research, development, demonstration, and deployment activities. Public procurement Policies requiring that specific attributes (such as environmental policies attributes) are considered as part of public procurement processes Infrastructure programmes Provision of infrastructure, such as roads, high-speed rail. Financing and investment Public or private sector grants or loans (for example, those supporting development strategies or policies). Source: GHG Protocol Policy and Action Standard (2014), adapted from Gupta et al. (2007), Chapter 13, Box 13.1, and IPCC 2007. 1. Policy implementation and data collection and monitoring proceed. 51 2. At the appropriate stage, defined in the evaluation approach, the policy theory is tested by analyzing monitoring data supported by other evaluation techniques appropriate for that policy which were indicate in the evaluation approach for the policy instrument. 3. Evaluation analyses performed and recommendations developed, and the results are communicated. 4. Policy instrument and/or logic framework and associated indicators would then be adjusted as necessary, as indicated from the evaluation results. Table 9 Sample Intermediate Effects for Common Policy Types Examples of Policies Examples of Intermediate Effects used as Key Performance Indicators Renewable portfolio standard Total electricity generation by source (such as wind, solar, coal, natural gas) Public transit policies Vehicle-kilometers traveled by mode (such as subway, bus, train, private car, taxi, bicycle) Waste management regulation Tonnes of waste sent to landfills; tonnes of waste sent to recycling facilities; tonnes of waste sent to incineration facilities Landfill gas management incentive Tonnes of methane captured and flared or used Sustainable agriculture policies Soil carbon content; tonnes of synthetic fertilizers applied; crop yields Afforestation/reforestation policies Area of forest by type Grants for replacing kerosene lamps Number of renewable lamps sold; market share of renewable with renewable lamps lamps; volume of kerosene used for domestic lighting Subsidy for building retrofits Number of buildings retrofitted; energy use per building Information campaign to encourage Household energy use (sample of households or average use) home energy conservation Source: GHG Protocol Policy and Action Standard (2014). 5.3. Principles for Developing Indicators The indicators selected should actually be effective at their function. Indicators are quantitative or qualitative variables associated to a target value used to show whether the objectives of an action have been achieved. To be relevant, indicators must mirror final or intermediate objectives of an action. Monitoring is the assessment of the indicator value, which can then be compared with the objective. The process of selecting indicators and setting targets for these indicators can be helpful in validating whether the desired objectives of a policy instrument are realistic. 52 Logical framework analysis addressing the different stages of implementation of the policy instrument or policy package provides a good basis for developing indicators:71  Progress indicators track the implementation status of policy implementation activities and outputs. Progress indicators may also relate directly to impact indicators if the impact is assessed on the basis of certain milestones being reached. For example, the number of efficient lighting products distributed could be a progress indicator where the activity is a target for EE lamp distribution. This indicator is also an input to estimate the GHG impacts. Progress indicators help demonstrate implementation effectiveness and funding efficiency for specific activities.  Impact indicators track the outputs and impacts of the policy instrument, referred to as outcomes in the logical framework analysis. Outcomes could be short-term changes (learning: awareness, knowledge, skills, motivations), medium-term changes (behavior, practice, decisions, policies) or long-term changes (consequences: social, economic, environmental etc.). Normally, the long- term outcomes are referred to as impacts. In the context of climate change, two relevant impacts are achievement of sustainable development goals and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. For GHG reductions, the indicator is the amount of GHG emissions. In the case of sustainable development, the goals and potential benefits of implementing the policy are a good starting point for identifying appropriate indicators. Indicators could be either quantitative (MW of RE capacity created) or qualitative (such as the successful enforcement of EE appliance standards). 5.3.1. Criteria for Indicators Good practices almost universally recommend using SMART criteria to develop indicators, while bearing in mind the trade-off between price and precision. SMART is defined as follows: 1. Specific: indicators should be defined precisely, so there is no room for interpretation, whether the target has been achieved or not; 2. Measurable: it is possible to assess the value of the indicator during or after the implementation of the policy instrument; 3. Achievable: the target associated to the indicator can be realistically reached by the policy implementation activities within the set timeframe; 4. Relevant: the indicator is helpful in showing whether the desired outcome has been achieved; 5. Timely: the indicator specifies the timeframe for reaching the target set. For a specific measurement methodology, the following principles should be adhered to when assessing tradeoffs between different options: 71 UNEP, 2014, “Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action: Understanding the MRV Framework for Developing Countries.”http://www.namapartnership.org/- /media/Sites/NAMApartnership/Publications%20Pdfs/MRV/Understanding_the_mrv_framework.ashx?la=da 53  Accuracy: measurement should be as accurate as the budget will allow and aligned with the use of measurement results in evaluating outcomes and impacts. Accuracy trade-offs should be accompanied by increased conservativeness in making estimates and judgements. Further, accuracy should be determined taking into account the significance of the outcomes and impacts.  Completeness: measurement methodologies should cover information related to all the effects of policy implementation activities. Some outcomes and impacts, such as GHG emission reductions, will be estimated from measured data. In such cases, the documentation should clearly outline the process and procedures for estimating outcomes and impacts (emissions factors of electricity production, for example), as well as other measured data used for estimates.  Conservativeness: estimates and measurements should be made so as to err on the side of the conservative reporting of outcomes and impacts. The principle of conservativeness should be applied to situations in which either measurement or estimating have a high level of uncertainty or in which a high level of accuracy of measurement or estimating is not cost-effective. The measurement methodology should expressly identify the uncertainty in measurements and include procedures for choosing conservative values. The estimation methodology for an indicator defines the data to be measured. 5.3.2. Considerations on Indicators for Climate Change Adaptation Approaches for adaptation and climate resilience are less developed than for mitigation actions. M&E and Reporting for adaptation typically focuses on the outcomes of implemented adaptation activities, i.e. how effectively they respond in practice to reduce identified risks and enhance climate resilience. It is important to closely monitor and evaluate responses to avoid potential maladaptive developments. Match approach to ultimate objective. While for some objectives and adaptation options core indicators (for process and outcome) can be established, it might be appropriate for others to focus on an aggregate assessment. For risk reduction measures, an overall risk assessment may be more suited than, for example, for measures aimed at increasing people’s awareness.72 Engage stakeholders and experts. When defining an indicator set for adaptation, broad stakeholder consultation can help target the information generated towards prioritized adaptation needs and filling existing information gaps. Stakeholder consultation can start with the national/local authorities responsible for adaptation and climate change.73 Sectoral experts knowledgeable about the projected climate change risks and vulnerabilities can play an important role in identifying suitable indicators. Further, collectors and holders of national data understand what aspects of adaptation can be measured, what historical data are available, and what information is likely to be collected in the future. The contribution of data collectors to such consultations, however, will be contingent on them having a basic understanding of adaptation. 72 EU Commission, 2013, “Guidelines on developing adaption strategies,” Commission Staff Working Document. http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/what/docs/swd_2013_134_en.pdf 73 European Topic Centre on Air and Climate Change (ETC/ACC), 2010, “Guiding principles for adaptation to climate change in Europe.” http://acm.eionet.europa.eu/docs/ETCACC_TP_2010_6_guiding_principles_cc_adaptation.pdf 54 Anticipate the unintended and unexpected: The M&E approach should be sufficiently flexible to explore the unintended and unexpected as this may be where the most important adaptation lessons are learnt.74 5.3.3. Macro-level indicators for climate strategy progress analysis Whenever feasible, the indicators relevant for the implementation of the APCC associated with the NSCC should also map to the macro-level indicators used to assess the overall progress toward the implementation of Romania’s low carbon development and green growth strategy to ensure the consistency and synergy with country’s and official reporting on climate change. These macro-indicators support policy making at the national level, aid in comparison and understanding of the differences between other EU Member States. The macro indicators should be integrated with those required and reported under the MMR reporting See Annex III for a list of annual indicators from 525/2013/EU and other UNFCCC related reporting, such as the annual level and trend of GHG emissions in the National GHG inventory report, National Communications and Biennial Reports. 5.3.4. Quantifying Indicators The indicator quantification could be undertaken either directly (measurement) or indirectly (estimation) using a variety of techniques. For example, the data to be quantified could either be directly measured (e.g. in estimating GHG emissions reductions from implementing a policy to promote wind energy, the amount of electricity produced through wind-power plants can be directly measured at the wind-power plants established as a result of the policy), collected through survey methods based on sampling techniques (e.g., for estimating GHG emissions reductions from the use of EE lights, data on the number of hours the lamps are used could be obtained through a survey of appropriate samples of installed CFLs), or collected from secondary sources (e.g., the emissions factor for a grid could be sourced either from registered CDM projects or estimated using information available in public documents).75 5.3.5. Responsibilities for Data Collection The implementing entity in the government is typically responsible for ensuring that data are measured, stored and reported in accordance with procedures by those responsible for undertaking measurement. Responsibility for specific data collection activities would depend on the type of activity. For example, for a policy to implement EE measures in the cement industry, measurements of fuel consumption, the emissions factor for fuel and output could be undertaken by participating cement plants in accordance 74 Guidelines on developing adaptation strategies, COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT, 2013 75 UNEP, 2014, “Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action: Understanding the MRV Framework for Developing Countries.” http://www.namapartnership.org/- /media/Sites/NAMApartnership/Publications%20Pdfs/MRV/Understanding_the_mrv_framework.ashx?la=da 55 with the established procedures. Government entities responsible for collecting statistics could also be involved in collecting data by integrating data collection formats in its regular data collection activities. 76 5.3.6. Indicator Monitoring Plans For each indicator it is important to develop a monitoring plan as monitoring approaches should always be laid down in written form at a high level of detail to ensure that the same approaches are used over time, thus facilitating comparability of data over time. 77 The monitoring plan should address:  Definition and overall approach, e.g. accounting principles to be used and whether ex ante and/or ex post data is needed  Data collection methods and procedures, indicating the agencies responsible for the existing indicators  Sources of data (either existing data sources or additional data collected specifically to monitor the indicators)  Overall monitoring period (at least including the policy implementation period) and data collection frequency  Units of measure  Baseline or status quo, as relevant  Methodology: whether the data are measured, calculated or estimated; if a measure is calculated or estimated, how uncertainty will be accounted for. Also address calculation assumptions  Methods for generating, storing, collating, and reporting data on monitored parameters (this would include who is responsible and could range from generating a simple table to uploading information to a real-time web platform)  Procedures for internal auditing, quality assurance, and quality control (QA/QC)  Any other relevant information. The monitoring plan needs to be feasible. For example, data should be collected with as high a frequency as is feasible for that indicator and be appropriate in the context of monitoring objectives as determined by the decision makers considering data availability, without creating undue burden. 5.4. Verification The overall verification approach must be defined, addressing which information should be verified and at what level of independence. Verification strategies seek to ensure that selected reported information is accurate and complete, and are also on a continuum of rigor and complexity. Verification also plays an important role in facilitating implementation by highlighting areas where no further attention is needed 76 UNEP, 2014, “Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action: Understanding the MRV Framework for Developing Countries.”http://www.namapartnership.org/- /media/Sites/NAMApartnership/Publications%20Pdfs/MRV/Understanding_the_mrv_framework.ashx?la=da 77 This process is adapted from the GHG Protocol Policy and Action Standard (2014). The standard also includes sample worksheets and detailed examples. http://www.ghgprotocol.org/policy-and-action-standard 56 and those in need of improvement. This will aid in identifying gaps and better targeting financial or technical resources.78 Independence is a key issue in verification. Whatever the strictness of verification might be, the entity performing the verification should be independent from the entity providing the data to be verified. This is necessary to avoid conflicts of interest. 79 Generally, verification for each metric should involve, at a minimum, internal plausibility checks, which could then be supplemented by review from a disinterested but knowledgeable staff from the same or related entity. A middle option is compliance to a national or international standard with or without verification, the most complex from an implementation perspective is third-party verification by accredited verifiers, Sample Levels of Verification which also requires a framework addressing the qualifications 1st – staff/organization checks data required for and assessment of verifiers, content of verification they collect reports and feedback and compliance strategy, as well as naming 2nd – Another having interest in the organization confirms data an appropriate entity to accredit the verifiers , which is usually a national accreditation body that handles other types of 3rd – review by a party external to the organization accreditations a well. 4th – review and certification by a The verification strategy ultimately must be defined for each party with formal accreditation indicator/metric as determined by EU or international requirements or by Romania itself (if considered necessary). For example, third party verification is used for The EU ETS, where independent verification ensures that companies are accurately reporting their emissions. And related data. However, verification strategies for entire classes of indicators, such as those relating to GHG impacts may be handled the same way, e.g. if third-party verification by accredited verifiers is needed then the Romanian government would authorize the existing National Accreditation Body, the Romanian Accreditation Association (RENAR) to develop an appropriate accreditation path for entities that wish to become accredited verifiers. Internal validation strongly recommended as a minimum for all indicators for the NSCC and APCC. In many cases, countries prioritize by assigning more stringent verification on the areas with the highest relevance and/or greatest risk of error or uncertainty in the beginning, and expanding over time. At a minimum, any data collected from parties that may have an interest in manipulating the results should be subject to third-party verification. For example if Romania must spend a great deal on adaptation strategies, the Romanian Government may find it important to third-party verify the measurements describing conditions and/or that responsible parties are in fact taking the actions/ achieving the results they claim. It is noted that, where both top-down and bottom-up approaches are implemented for similar areas, they can be used for validation purposes, e.g. top-down data might be validated using the bottom up figures, but unlikely to exactly match.80 78 Wartmann et al, 2013. 79 Ibid. 80 Ibid. 57 6. Discussions and Recommendations for Romania An effective and efficient M&E and Reporting system is an essential component of any CC Strategy and is especially important where policy-makers are still at an early stage in developing their understanding of what exactly makes a good strategy for CC mitigation and adaptation. As discussed in Section 3, there is no comprehensive M&E and Reporting system in place for monitoring NSCC and/or APCC, but Romania has the foundations of a system for monitoring and evaluation of public policies upon which it can build. Although, to-date, there is little evaluation activity outside EU requirements associated with funding of specific initiatives, whilst the general framework for M&E and Reporting of all public policies that has been inconsistently implemented. A specific M&E system addressing climate change mitigation and adaptation is to be developed through this current project. Overall, the system for monitoring GHG emissions seems to be complete and operating normally, though it can be further improved. The institutional arrangements and operational relationships need to be improved and roles and responsibilities better clarified. The appropriate indicators and responsible institutions are not always clearly defined for the named policies and measures for GHG mitigation. Databases from different agencies and entities could also be linked to increase efficiency. Also existing legal requirements need to be fully and consistently implemented. As a relatively new area of interest for the Romanian policy, the M&E and Reporting system for CC needs to: ● Be useful for all partners ● Be simple and cost-effective, affordable and practical: ○ Avoid duplication of efforts ○ Use data for multiple purposes, as feasible ○ Ensure that users can obtain data ○ it is based on a manageable number of indicators ● Recognize that different interventions need different time scales ● Allow meaningful interpretation of data over time ● Have the flexibility to respond to changing priorities ● Incorporate the principle of continuous improvement along a continuum Recommendations to the Romanian government for developing a simple, affordable and cost effective M&E system for the NSCC and APCC are set out below. 81 These are clustered into 5 main groups. Firstly, there is a summary of the key recommendations which have been highlighted in the main body of the report. These are followed by a rich set of additional practical recommendations under the headings of:  Additional general recommendations; 81 Also refer to other reports in this series, such as Outpu t A2.3, “Building Institutional Capacity for Implementing the National Climate Change Strategy in Romania.” 58  Recommendations for improving institutional arrangements  Recommendations for developing a solid evaluation framework  Recommendations for reporting 6.1. Key recommendations from the report The M&E and Reporting system for the NSCC and APCC should be built on components of the existing M&E system and, as much as possible, on the current activities of institutions already involved in monitoring. An effective M&E and Reporting system requires considerable time and resources, therefore building on existing principles and practices is highly recommended. Furthermore, the M&E system initially established for the NSCC and APCC must not be considered as static, but rather as an on-going continuum that will evolve, expand and improve over time as linked to long term framework of low carbon development strategy and green growth. Indicators currently monitored by the NIS, ANRE, OP Management Authorities, and other entities should be used for monitoring of the NSCC and APCC to the extent feasible to maximize synergies. Other relevant indicators, are derived from the requirements of EU reporting in the MMR and funding framework (2014 - 2020) also related to UNFCCC reporting. New indicators can be proposed as necessary. The MEWF should facilitate and ensure a fully synergistic effort with other reporting processes, e.g., Low Carbon Development Strategy, UNFCCC reporting and the MMR. A thorough analysis should be performed in order to identify the indicators proposed for the NSCC and APCC, and the indicators monitored by the NIS and/or other agencies/ministries. Differences may appear both in the names and calculation method of indicators, however these can be negotiated so that a consistent and accepted method is agreed, thereby allowing their use for multiple purposes. A working procedure between the main actors involved (i.e. NIS, MEWF etc.) can be adopted in order to ensure all stakeholders use a consistent approach. All work on the identification, development and / or adaptation of indicators should involve a process of stakeholder consultation. Evaluation of the NSCC and APCC should use a theory-based evaluation approach incorporating the OECD DAC criteria, specific evaluation methods and indicators need to be tailored to the individual policy instrument or policy package. The theory-based approach facilitates an iterative process design, evaluation, and redesign based on lessons learned. The theory-based policy evaluation method has several benefits over other evaluation methods since it facilitates evaluation of the whole policy implementation process (not just one stage); through the development of indicators for each step in the implementation process, the “successes and failures” can be determined to the greatest extent possible, and; by applying this approach it is possible to not only learn whether policies are successful or not, but also why they succeeded or failed and how they can be improved. 59 6.2. Additional general recommendations Begin elaborating the M&E system before the implementation of the NSCC and APCC. It is advisable that elaboration of the evaluation approach, including identification of indicators, starts before or in the early implementation phase of the NSCC and APCC so that there is a possibility for collecting relevant and necessary data for the monitoring process. For example, the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) procedure may be a good moment for developing and for refining indicators either by generating new ones or by using existing indicators. Agree and communicate on the purpose of the M&E system with clear objectives and a development strategy. Before mapping-out out a plan (see below) to develop and implement a monitoring, evaluating and reporting system it is important to agree and communicate on its purpose. There are numerous reasons that might drive M&E efforts, including a need to account for public funds; to learn what works (or not) and why; to track progress; ensure equity and social justice; or to measure efficiency and effectiveness. All are valid, although be aware that tensions (as well as synergies) can develop between them. Integrate regular reviews and revisions (e.g. every 3-5 years) of the strategic objectives and institutional arrangements of the NSCC into the M&E system from the outset. It is recommended that procedures for regular review and revision of the strategic objectives of the NSCC, plus the status of the institutional infrastructure for implementing the NSCC and APCC, are fully integrated into the M&E system at the design stage. The timing of review / revision may be connected to the schedule for preparing evaluation reports, but they are not the same process and should be considered separately. 6.3. Recommendations for improving institutional arrangements Overall responsibility for monitoring, evaluation and reporting of the NSCC should be given to the Public Policy Unit (PPU) of the MEWF. Governmental Decision no. 775/2005 provides the general framework and basic indications for the M&E of public policies, including the obligation to create a Public Policy Unit (PPU) dealing with policy formulation and monitoring in each Ministry and State Agency. The MEWF PPU, assisted by the Climate Change Department, should interact with other specialized units within the MEWF and the NCCC in order to aggregate the necessary information from responsible institutions in accordance with a Monitoring Plan (see below and the diagram in Annex 1). In order to undertake this work, the PPU must ensure it has enough internal or acquired competence with respect to climate change monitoring and reporting. The MEWF should ensure that the key results of evaluations are channeled to higher levels, up to and including the prime-minister, as well as civil society and the general public, as appropriate. Every 2 years, an in-depth analysis of both macro indicators and National Action Plan specific indicators should be performed by PPU with support of NCCC, and MEWF. 60 The MEWF must ensure adequate financial resources for the building, operationalization and on-going expansion of the M&E system. This not only includes ensuring funding (i.e. financial resources) for dedicated staff, but also for the necessary stakeholder engagement, review, knowledge exchange and outreach activities, which could include workshops, consultation meetings, as well as preparing, printing and publishing reports, leaflets, and newsletters). This also includes broader evaluation activities, collecting stakeholder feedback on the evaluation reports and adjusting the Strategy and Action Plan over time. These resources can be allocated either through the Environment Fund Administration (EFA) or directly through the budget of the MEWF. The MEWF must ensure that adequate human resources with appropriate knowledge and skills are committed to M&E activities, including adequate capacity and competence in the PPU to deal with CC issues. This includes having adequate numbers of staff dedicated exclusively, or primarily to monitoring, evaluation and reporting activities, who have the appropriate knowledge and training. Any problems with high staff turnover should be addressed since this can significantly limit technical capacity and competence. Staff training programs are essential. For example, MEWF experts performing environmental impact assessments have to-date only touched on CC in minimal ways, as issues of general context. Many have considerable knowledge of environmental concerns, but fewer are aware of CC risk and impact assessments. Therefore specialized training, perhaps financed by the ESI Funds, will need to be made available to ensure that relevant CC indicators, etc., are selected for all projects and programs. The MEWF could also consider support for work experience with international organizations (e.g. MEWF to support secondments in international organizations like EU, UNFCCC) or bilateral or twining with other governments. Relevant MEWF experts should actively engage in international networks for sharing knowledge and experience with other technical / evaluation experts. Active engagement with international networks and the activities of the EU and other intergovernmental bodies is a great way for MEWF experts to keep abreast of the latest developments and innovations, to avoid duplication of effort and improve working inefficiency. Such networking should be encouraged and supported by MEWF senior management as a critical part of their staff’s professional development. Where appropriate, institutional capacity should be increased by using the expertise of third parties. MEWF does not currently have enough staff competent in CC-related issues and in the short to medium- term (whilst capacity is being built) should not hesitate to use external expertise where appropriate / available. The PPU should develop a Monitoring Plan defining all responsible institutions, sources of information, frequency of data collection, evaluation procedures, frequency of reporting, consultation on evaluation reports and procedures for amendment of the NSCC and APCC. It is important that the Monitoring Plan defines the beneficiaries of all reports, as well as the process of collecting the feedback of the stakeholders on the evaluation reports and the process and schedule for 61 reassessment of the NSCC and APCC. This feedback may be collected both in writing and through workshops organized and led by the MEWF. Communication and information exchange (including a clear and efficient process for data sharing) must be established and maintained between all governmental entities associated with the M&E system. There is a need for increased communication and data / information exchange between relevant government entities at all governance levels to improve system functioning and proactively address any weaknesses. This will be particularly important as the M&E system expands and is also compatible with the broader needs, as highlighted in the NSCC, for the Romanian government to: i) establish a well- functioning, automated communication system for early warning announcements about climate-related hazards, such as floods, droughts, landslides and wildfires, and; ii) develop a consistent approach and dedicated database for monitoring and assessing the damage associated with these hazards. There is an urgent necessity for updating, upgrading and strengthening the communication network between all responsible agencies and authorities – an investment which will serve multiple purposes since fast data acquisition and processing is essential to support decision-making, damage assessment, monitoring, evaluation and reporting – as well as the on-going creation of a consolidated knowledge base of climate-related risks and impacts on a national scale. All institutional arrangements must be kept up-to-date with the regular reviews and revisions of the M&E system. Conduct periodic reviews of system needs and update legal frameworks, roles and responsibilities, resource allocation, and knowledge management as necessary. Ensure a systematic procedure for integrating additional components into the M&E system. 6.4. Recommendations for developing a solid evaluation framework M&E can be reinforced by strengthening the CC aspects of SEA and EIA. The European legislation on impact evaluation provides a solid basis for identifying relevant CC indicators. In fact the EIA Directive 2014/52/EU, which is to be transposed by 2017, clearly establishes climate change impact as one of the factors to be monitored. SEA legislation has similar provisions. However, while the new legislation is being transposed a provision will need to be added to the current impact assessment legislation which would require the owner of the strategy/program/project to assess the GHG emissions projections and climate change hazards while considering the development/investment alternatives and the possibility of adopting a more CC friendly option. By adding this provision, the Government can contribute to enhancing CC awareness at all levels (business, public authorities, civil society) and ensure consistent financing and monitoring for CC projects. Since the majority of projects funded by the ESI Funds will go through EIA or SEA they will, for the period 2014-2020, need to monitor CC indicators relevant for each individual project. Romanian ESI Funds managing authorities will need to ensure that guidelines for EU Operational Programmes include a reference to the need to monitor CC indicators identified through the impact assessments, as well as a channel for the data to be aggregated. 62 Engage stakeholders early and often by providing them the opportunity to give feedback in written form, by organizing meetings and workshops etc. Consultation and feedback need to become an integral part of the M&E system and are essential for ensuring transparency and accountability to the general public and wider stakeholder community. However, public consultation and feedback processes also require staff and budget resources, as well as support by senior management and the other actors involved. It is advisable that the MEWF creates a budgetary line for the evaluation process and for collecting and analyzing the feedback (either directly or through the EFA) and that it allocates the necessary human resources to manage the process (either through the PPU or through the Climate Change Direction Unit). Feedback may be received either in writing or during the workshops/meetings of the stakeholders. Based on the feedback received, the PPU of the Ministry should propose any updates / modifications necessary for improving implementation of the NSCC and/or APCC. A key principle will be to engage stakeholders early and often. The SEA procedure offers one opportunity for broad public consultation involving the highest level of the authority managing the programme and groups of future users of the system, as well as the main suppliers of information, which are the different institutions who implement the actions in the field. Their participation is likely to ensure that the system is pragmatic because they are familiar with the practical possibilities and limits of data collection. Creation of the Climate Partners Network (CPN) will provide a formalized channel of communication between key stakeholders and national authorities for making CC policies, including the NSCC and APCC, more responsive and effective. Pay special attention to the monitoring and evaluation of actions for CC adaptation. Romanian legislation currently makes no provision for the monitoring of actions for CC adaptation, despite the fact that the country’s first Adaptation Plan was established in 2008. The foundation for M&E of mitigation actions is, on the other hand, much better established. MEWF should therefore give particular attention to monitoring and evaluating the adaptation components of the NSCC and APCC, including close liaison with Ministries responsible for monitoring investments in adaptation under the 5 EU Operational Programmes (the Regional Operational Programme, Large Infrastructure Operational Programme, Human Capital Operational Programme, Administrative Capacity Operational Programme, and Competition Operational Programme) financed by the 2014-2020 ESI Funds. Adaptation requires people to act. The M&E of CC adaptation will inevitably involve some form of engagement with the efforts and initiatives of local communities and businesses. If local authorities are encouraged to make use of available funding for preparing and implementing local adaptation strategies, then they must also be supported with the monitoring, evaluation and reporting of these actions. Use third parties for evaluation in order to ensure independence, impartiality and no conflict of interest. In accordance with international good practice it is recommended that all evaluation activities should be undertaken by external third parties (based on the OECD DAC principles) in order to ensure independence, impartiality and avoid conflict of interest. Since Romanian regulation permits this, the necessary resources should be made available. 63 Perform evaluations of the NSCC and APCC on a regular basis (e.g. produce a comprehensive evaluation report every 2 years). Evaluation is recommended to be performed on regular basis with a comprehensive evaluation report produced at least every three years during the implementation of the strategy. The frequency of the evaluation reports may be connected with the frequency of reporting to the UNFCCC and/or EC. For further specific recommendations on reporting see below. Deepen the evaluation culture of the MEWF and promote active learning as an integral part of the evaluation framework in order to realize the full potential of M&E actions. A broad commitment to full and effective evaluation of the NSCC and APCC should be encouraged at all levels of government and amongst all relevant stakeholders. Fostering a real “culture of evaluation” will help to fully utilize the M&E and Reporting system potential and take advantage of the feedback to increase effectiveness and better target resources. Take heed of the Italian example in Section 4 and take ownership of the M&E and Reporting system and incorporate mechanisms to provide the feedback the Romanian government seeks, in addition to meeting external requirements. Also, expand capacity building and protocol development and actively engage in knowledge exchange. Regain the momentum that was lost from previous efforts. 6.5. Recommendations for reporting Optimize reporting to meet the different needs of different agencies and organizations as much as possible without unnecessary additional effort. The revised M&E and Reporting system will need to respond to multiple needs. It is in the interest of the MEWF to ensure multipurpose monitoring and evaluation and associated reporting. The MEWF (as well as the General Secretariat of the Government) submits regular reports to the UNFCCC and to the EC. Therefore it is recommended that the monitoring system is designed in such a way so that it ensures data consistency and comparability across the different needs, while allowing access to reliable sources of verifiable information. This will also reduce incremental increases in reporting efforts. Submit evaluation reports directly to the National Commission on Climate Change (NCCC) in order to benefit from their expertise and feedback. The NCCC should receive the outputs of the M&E and Reporting system and be involved in reporting. In order to benefit from the expertise acquired by the National Commission on Climate at national level, it is recommended that the evaluation reports are submitted to this Commission in order to get feedback and to the General Secretariat of the Government for formal approval and follow-up of policy implementation. Also, the results and recommendations of the reports must be shared with all the stakeholders involved in implementation and in monitoring of the NCCC and APCC, asking for feedback and implementation of corrections/corrective actions, if the case. Evaluation reports or parts of the evaluation reports are to be published on the MEWF website. The process and allocation of responsibility among government agencies for M&E and reporting are presented in Annex 1. Suggested indicators for Romania’s APCC are included in Annex 2. 64 7. Concluding Remarks The Romanian National Strategy on Climate Change and Low Carbon Green Growth and the CC Action Plan (which are under developing) must aim to for practical yet effective M&E and Reporting activities, building upon and improving the existing systems and current activities of the institutions involved that provides valuable and accurate data to better report on the targets established and assess policy effectiveness. An effective and efficient M&E and Reporting system is an essential component of any CC Strategy and is especially important where policy-makers are still at an early stage in developing their understanding of what exactly makes a good strategy for CC mitigation and adaptation. In support of the LCGGP, the World Bank has prepared this report with the aim of helping the Romanian Government to operationalize the strategic path chosen by the country for implementing its NSCC. After reviewing the current CC-related obligations and M&E and reporting systems in Romania as well as international best practices, authors identified and highlight opportunities to further strengthen the institutional capacity and evaluation framework for CC-related M&E. The Romanian government should build upon existing obligations for CC-related policies and measures to develop a simple, affordable and cost-effective M&E and reporting system for M&E the NSCC and APCC that evolves, expands and improves over time. To ensure a robust framework, the M&E and Reporting system should clearly define goals, indicators, responsibilities and communication strategies. It should facilitate continuous learning by policy-makers and other key stakeholders in order to underpin the long- term development of the knowledge and understanding needed to better design, implement and deliver future CC strategies and action plans for Romania. 65 8. References AfDB, 2012, Facilitating Green Growth in Africa: Perspectives from the African Development Bank. African Development Bank. Australian National Auditing Office (ANAO). (2012). Auditing Climate Change Programs. Administration of the National Greenhouse And Energy Reporting Scheme (NGERS). ANAO. 20 September 2012. Barura, P et al, 2014, “Climate Policy Implementation Tracking Framework,” World Resources Institute. http://www.wri.org/publication/climate-policy-implementation-tracking-framework. Beaulieu, N. 2009. Evaluation as an integral part of climate change adaptation in Africa. Casas, F. et al, 2012. Testing the Personal Wellbeing Index on 12-16 Year-Old Adolescents in 3 Different Countries with 2 New Items. Social Indicators Research. 105. 461-482. Climate-Eval. 2013. Study on Framework for Monitoring and Evaluation of Adaptation to Climate Change. https://www.climate-eval.org/content/framework-monitoring-and-evaluation-adaptation-climate- change Climate Policy Initiative, 2012, “Tracking Emissions and Mitigation Actions: Evaluation of MRV Systems in China, Germany, Italy and the United States.” http://climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Tracking-Emissions-and-Mitigation- Actions-Evaluation.pdf Climate Policy Initiative. 2012. Tracking Emissions and Mitigation Actions: Current Practice in China, Germany, Italy, and the United States. Deaton, A., 2010. Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development. Journal of Economic Literature. 48: 424-455. Degnbol, P., 2005. Indicators as a Means of Communicating Knowledge. ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil. 62: 606-611. Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Australia, 2012. Administration of the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Scheme. The Auditor-General Audit Report – Performance Audit. Canberra: Australian NationalAudit Office. Direction Generale de l’Energie et du Climat. 2013. Rapport de la Frace au titre du paragraphe 2 de l’article 3 de la decision no 280/2004/CE du Parlament Europen et du Conseil du 11 fevrier 2004. Actualisation 2013 at: http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Fr_RMS_2013__.pdf) Dinshaw, A. et al., 2014, “Monitoring and Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation: Methodological Approaches”, OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 74, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jxrclr0ntjd-en Frederiksen, P. and Larsen, E. L., 2013. Use and Influence of Indicators for Agri-Environmental Policies in Denmark: A Case Study of Indicators for the Danish Policy on the Aquatic Environment. Aarhus University. 66 Meyer-Ohlendorf, N. et al. 2015, An Effective Governance System for 2030 EU Climate and Energy Policy: Design and Requirements Ecologic Institute. http://www.ecologic.eu/sites/files/publication/2015/meyer- ohlendorf-15-effective-governance-syystem-2030.pdf Ecologic Institute. 2014. Assessment of climate change policies in the context of the European Semester, Country Report: Germany Elsayed, S., 2013, “Knowledge Product: Institutional Arrangements for MRV. International Partnership on Mitigation and MRV. http://mitigationpartnership.net/international-partnership-mitigation-and-mrv- 2013-knowledge-product-institutional-arrangements-mrv Energiewende in Germany. Implementation as of 2011 and targets for 2050 European Environment Agency, 2013, “EMEP/EEA Air Pollutant Emission Inventory Guidebook,” Technical Report No. 12/2013. http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-guidebook-2013 European Topic Centre on Air and Climate Change (ETC/ACC), 2010, “Guiding principles for adaptation to climate change in Europe.” http://acm.eionet.europa.eu/docs/ETCACC_TP_2010_6_guiding_principles_cc_adaptation.pdf EU Commission. 2014. Guidance Document on Monitoring and Evaluation. European Cohesion Fund; European Regional Development Fund. Concepts and Recommendations EU Commission, 2013, “Guidelines on developing adaption strategies,” Commission Staff Working Document. http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/what/docs/swd_2013_134_en.pdf EU Commission, 2013, “Greenhouse gas Monitoring Mechanism Regulation (MMR). Regulation (EU) No 525/2013. EVALSED, 2013, “The resource for the evaluation of Socio-Economic Development”. EU Commission DG Regio. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/guide/guide_evalsed.pdf FE4, 2011 'Using indicators to assess sustainable development in the European Union, Finland, Malta and Slovakia' Jari Lyytimäki, Janne Rinne, Petrus Kautto and Timo Assmuth (eds.), 2011. The Finnish Environment 4/2011, Environmental protection, 78 p Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE). http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?contentid=374879&lan=en Federal Environment Agency. Germany. 2013. Germany 2050 a greenhouse gas-neutral Country Federal Government, 2008, “German Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change (DAS)”. Germany. http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/bmu- import/files/english/pdf/application/pdf/das_gesamt_en_bf.pdf Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy. 2014a. The Energy of the Future. First “Energy Transition” Progress Report – Summary. Germany. Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. Germany. 2014b. Background paper: Climate Action Programme 2020 Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. Germany. 2014c. Aktionsprogramm Klimaschutz 2020 67 Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. Germany. 2014d. German Climate Governance Perspectives on North Rhine-Westphalia. Fisher, S. and M. Slaney. 2013. The monitoring and evaluation of climate change adaptation in Nepal: a review of national systems. International Institute for Environment and Development Fransen, Taryn with Casey Cronin. 2013,“A Critical Decade for Climate Policy: Tools and Initiatives to Track Our Progress.” Working Paper. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. Available at wri.org/publication/criticaldecade-for-climate-policy-tools-and-initiatives-to-track-ourprogress GIZ, 2014, “MRV Tool: How to Set up National MRV Systems,” International Partnership on Mitigation and MRV. Note: This is a PowerPoint Tool in an easy to read format were readers can click on a link to find more information on a particular topic. http://mitigationpartnership.net/sites/default/files/u1585/mrv- tool-20-10-2014.pdf GIZ.2013a. Adaptation made to measure. A guidebook to the design and results-based monitoring of climate change. GIZ. 2013b. National Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) of Climate Change Adaptation. GIZ, 2011, Climate Results. The GIZ sourcebook for climate-specific monitoring in the context of international cooperation. http://mitigationpartnership.net/giz-2011-climate-results-giz-sourcebook- climate-specific-monitoring-context-international-cooperation. Global Environment Facility, 2015, Good Practice Study on Principles for Indicator Development, Selection, and Use in Climate Change Adaptation, Monitoring and Evaluation. Green Growth Best Practice, 2014, “Green Growth in Practice: Lessons from Country Experiences” http://www.ggbp.org Green Growth Knowledge Platform (GGKP). (2013). Moving towards a Common Approach on Green Growth Indicators: A Green Growth Knowledge Platform Scoping Paper. Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The World Bank. Harmelink, M. et al, 2007, “Theory-based policy evaluation of 20 energy efficiency instruments,” Energy Efficiency, V1:131-148. Heinrich Böll Foundation. 2014. Energy Transition. The German Energiewende. Holvoet, N., Gildemyn, M. and Inberg, L., 2012, Taking Stock of Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements in the Context of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers: Evidence from 20 Aid- Dependent Countries in Sub- Saharan Africa. Development Policy Review. 30: 749-772. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, website accessed August 2015. http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp HOTĂRÂRE nr. 882 din 3 iunie 2004 pentru aprobarea Strategiei naţionale privind alimentarea cu energie termica a localităţilor prin sisteme de producere şi distribuţie centralizate 68 HOTĂRÂRE nr. 775 din 14 iulie 2005pentru aprobarea Regulamentului privind procedurile de elaborare, monitorizare şi evaluare a politicilor publice la nivel central HOTĂRÂRE nr. 870 din 28 iunie 2006privind aprobarea Strategiei pentru îmbunătăţirea sistemului de elaborare, coordonare şi planificare a politicilor publice la nivelul administraţiei publice central Hotărârea Nr.935 din 21.09.2011 privind promovarea utilizării biocarburanţilor şi a biolichidelor International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River. 2013. ICPDR Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change Jacob, S., Speer, S., and J. Furubo, “The institutionalization of evaluation matters: Updating the International Atlas of Evaluation 10 years later”, Evaluation January 2015 21: 6-31, Lamhauge, N., (2014), “Monitoring and Evaluation for Adaptation: Lessons from Developed and Developing Countries”, OECD Environment Working Papers, Final Consultation Draft Larédo, P., 1997,“ Evaluation in France: A Decade of Experience,” Chapter 24 in Policy Evaluation in Innovation and Technology. ISBN 9264156976. pp. 419-441. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Berkeley, California. 2000. Best Practices Guide: Monitoring, Evaluation, Reporting, Verification, and Certification of Climate Change Mitigation Projects LEDS Global Partnership, 2014. Development Impacts Assessment (DIA) Toolkit. http://en.openei.org/wiki/LEDSGP/DIA-Toolkit LEDS, IPMR, NAMA Partnership, 2014, Linkages between NAMA – LEDS – MRV. http://ledsgp.org/w/index.php?title=File:Linkages-LEDS-NAMAs-MRV.pdf&page=1 Legea 220/2008 pentru stabilirea sistemului de promovare a producerii energiei din surse regenerabile de energie Lopez, A., Krause, P., Mackay, K., 2012. Building Better Policies: the Nuts and Bolts of Monitoring and Evaluation Systems. Washington: The World Bank. Melenciuc, I. 2015, “The Role of a Mature European Evaluation Culture in Optimizing the Public Organizational Changes,” Dissertation Abstract for the National University of Political Studies and Public Administration. Bucharest. Ministère de l'écologie, du développement durable et de l'énergie. Observatoire national sur les effets du réchauffement climatique en France métropolitaine et dans les départements et territoires d’outre mer (ONERC). 2013. Rapport d’évaluation à mi-parcours du plan national d'adaptation au changement climatique 2011-2015 Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development, Transport and Housing. 2011. French National Climate Change Impact Adaptation Plan 2011 – 2015. Ministry of the Environment Republic of Poland. 2013. Polish National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change (NAS 2020). 69 Morra-Imas L. G. and Rist, R. C. (2009). The Road to Results: Designing and Conducting Effective Development Evaluations. Washington: The World Bank. Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment 2004, “Manual for Monitoring and Evaluating Climate Change Policy Instruments.” http://acm.eionet.europa.eu/docs/meetings/ 061212_ghg_emiss_proj_ws/ ManualMonEvalCCPolicyInstrumEnglish.pdf OECD. 2015. National Climate Change Adaptation. Emerging Practices in Monitoring and Evaluation OECD 2014a, National Level Monitoring and Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation in Germany, http://www.oecd.org/env/cc/National%20level%20ME%20in%20Germany.pdf OECD, 2014b, National Monitoring and Evaluation of Climate Change Adaptation: Lessons from Developed and Developing Countries. OECD, 2011, “Towards Green Growth.” Paris: OECD Publishing. Programul Național de Dezvoltare Rurală pentru perioada 2014–2020, Versiunea 26.05.2015 Prowse, M. and B. Snilstveit. 2010. Impact Evaluation and Interventions to Address Climate Change: A Scoping Study. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation Raju, M. S. and Dhananjaya, B. N. (2010). Alternate Implementation Mechanism: A Case Study on Sujala Project. Karnataka. Rebolledo, 2014, “Mexico: Building a comprehensive national MRV framework,” Global Good Practice Analysis on LEDS, NAMAs and MRV, International Partnership on Mitigation and MRV. http://mitigationpartnership.net/sites/default/files/mexico_gpa_long_1.pdf Regehr, C., Stern, S., and Shlonsky, A., 2007, Operationalizing Evidence-Based Practice: The Development of an Institute for Evidence-Based Social Work. Research on Social Work Practice. 17: 408-416. Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP), 2014, Energy Efficiency Evaluation, Measurement and Verification: A Regional Overview of Practices in China, the European Union, India, and the United States,” Global Power Best Practices Series. http://www.raponline.org/document/download/id/7064 Republic of Kenya, 2012. National Performance and Benefit Measurement Framework. November 2012. 110 Section A: NPBMF and MRV+ System Design, Roadmap and Guidance. Kenya: Ministry of Environment and Mineral Resources. Romania Ministry of Public Finance, 2007, “Evaluation – an essential component in the process of formulating and implementing public interventions,” Evaluation Central Unit. http://discutii.mfinante.ro/static/10/Mfp/evaluare/Broshure_on_evaluation_EN.pdf Romanian Ministry of Finance, “Development of the Evaluation Community in Romania” presentation http://www.ideas-global.org/wp-content/.../01/Bedea.pp Schiller, A. et al, 2001, Communicating Ecological Indicators to Decision Makers and the Public. Conservation Ecology. 5(1): Art. 19. 70 Umwelt Bundesamt. 2012. Determining the climate impact of the German government’s Integrated Energy and Climate Programme (IEKP) and proposing a plan to continuously monitor its climate impact Umwelt Bundesamt. 2012. Ermittlung der Klimaschutzwirkung des Integrierten Energie- und Klimaschutzprogramms der Bundesregierung IEKP und Vorschlag für ein Konzept zur kontinuierlichen Überprüfung der Klimaschutzwirkung des IEKP. Umwelt Bundesamt.2010. Establishment of an Indicator Concept for the German Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change. UNDP, 2010, “Low-Emission Development Strategies and National Appropriate Mitigation Actions: Europe and CIS.” https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/956041_ How%20to%20guide-%20low%20emission%20development%20strategies.pdf UNDP, 2009, “Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results,” http://www.undp.org/eo/handbook United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2002, Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluating for Results. 2002 Edition. New York: UNDP. UNEP, 2014, “Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action: Understanding the MRV Framework for Developing Countries.” http://www.namapartnership.org/-/media/ Sites/NAMApartnership/Publications%20Pdfs/MRV/Understanding_the_mrv_framework.ashx?la=da UNFCCC. LDC Expert Group.2012. The National Adaptation Plan Process. UNFCCC. LDC Expert Group.2012. The National Adaptation Plan. Technical guidelines for the national adaptation plan process. UNEP Risoe, 2012, “MRV of NAMAs – Measuring, Reporting, Verifying – A Primer on MRV for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions”. http://mitigationpartnership.net/unep-risoe-2012-measuring- reporting-verifying-primer-mrv-nationally-appropriate-mitigation-actions Wartmann, S., Larkin, J., Eisbrenner, K. and M. Jung, Knowledge Product: Elements and Options for National MRV Systems,“ International Partnership on Mitigation and MRV. http://mitigationpartnership.net/sites/default/files/mrv_knowledge_product_130830.pdf Wörlen, 2013, Guidelines to Climate Mitigation Evaluations; Stern, 2012, Broadening the Range of Designs and Methods for Impact Evaluations. World Bank. 2011. Romania - Functional Review : Environment, Water and Forestry, Volume 1. Main Report. Washington, DC. © World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/12209 License: CC BY 3.0 Unported http://hdl.handle.net/10986/12209 World Resources Institute, 2014, “GHG Protocol Mitigation Goal Standard.” http://ghgprotocol.org/mitigation-goal-standard World Resources Institute, 2014, “GHG Protocol Policy and Action Standard.” http://ghgprotocol.org/policy-and-action-standard 71 Wuppertal Institute, 2009, “Evaluation and Monitoring for the EU Directive on Energy End-Use Efficiency and Energy Services: Results and Recommendations form the EMEEES project. http://www.emeees.eu/emeees/en/publications/reports/EMEEES_Final_Report.pdf 72 Annexes Annex 1. Diagram of the NSCC M&E System Annex 2. Suggested indicators for the Action Plan on Climate Change for Romania 73 Annex 1. Diagram of the NSCC M&E System 74 Annex 2. Suggested indicators for the Action Plan on Climate Change for Romania The Public Policy Unit (PPU) of the Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests (MEFW) will be the main responsible institution for monitoring. This annex provides suggested indicators for monitoring the activities in the Action Plan for Climate Change for Romania. It is organized into the following subsections:  Macro level indicators, according to 525/2013/EU, also known as the Mechanism for Monitoring and Reporting (MMR) and from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) regarding national adaptation plans.  Glossary of acronyms.  Mitigation tables by objective for Energy, Transport, Industry, Agriculture and Rural Development, Urban Development, Waste Management, Water, Forestry.  Adaptation tables by objective for Agriculture and Rural Development, Drinking Water and Water Resources, Human Environment (Infrastructure and Urban Planning), Transport, Industry, Energy, Tourism and Recreation, Forestry, Biodiversity, Public Health and Response Services in Emergency Situations, Public Education and Awareness Raising, Insurance as an Instrument to Adjust to Climate Change. Macro level indicators, according to from the MMR (525/2013/EU) and UNFCCC technical guidelines on adaptation There are several existing indicators that can also serve as macro level indicators to monitor the implementation of the National Climate Change Strategy. The most suitable indicators may be those already reported by Romania under the European Union (EU) and UNFCCC, as provided in Regulation 525/2013/EU on a mechanism for monitoring and reporting greenhouse gas emissions and for reporting other information at national and Union level relevant to climate change. The following indicators extracted from its Annex III, Table 1 are relevant:  Total CO2 intensity of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)  Energy-related CO2 intensity of GDP  CO2 emissions from passenger cars  Number of kilometres by passenger cars  Energy-related CO2 intensity of industry  Specific CO2 emissions of households  CO2 intensity of the commercial and institutional sector  Specific CO2 emissions of public and autoproducer power plants. Pending the ability of the monitoring entity as well as the availability of information, the indicators presented in Tables 2 an 3 of the MMR may also be used. Adaptation objectives can be monitored using indicators from: Table 5 of the National Adaptation Plans: Technical Guidelines for the National Adaptation Plan Process (UNFCCC LDC Expert Group, 2012, pp.47) available at: https://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/cancun_adaptation_framework/application/pdf/naptechguidelines_eng_high__res.pdf 75 Glossary ANRSC National Regulatory Authority for Public Utilities Community Services MIA Ministry of Internal Affairs APIA Agency for Payments and Intervention in Agriculture MICE Meetings, Incentives, Conventions and Exhibitions CC Climate Change MMFPS Ministry of Labor, Family and Social Protection CFR Romanian Railway Company MMR Mechanism for Monitoring and Reporting 2 CO Carbon dioxide MoH Ministry of Health DES Department for Emergency Situations MPF Ministry of Public Finance DHS District heating systems MT Ministry of Transport DMO Destination Management Organization Mtoe One million tonnes of oil equivalent EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development MW Megawatt EFA Environment Fund Administration NA Not applicable EU European Union NACLR National Agency for Cadastre and Land Registration FSA Financial Supervisory Authority NFA National Forest Administration GDP Gross Domestic Product NARW National Administration for Romanian Waters GHG Greenhouse gases NASRI National Authority for Scientific Research GIES General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations NAT National Authority for Tourism GTMP General Transport Master Plan NCCC National Commission for Climate Change GWh Gigawatt-hour NMA National Meteorological Administration ha Hectare NEPA National Environmental Protection Agency HE High efficiency NGO Non-governmental organization IDAs Intercommunity Development Associations NIRDT National Institute for Research and Development in Tourism IFN Non-banking Financial Institution NIS National Institute for Statistics INCDS – MD National Research and Development Institute for Forestry “Marin Dracea” NRACS National Regulatory Authority for Community Services kgoe Kilograms of oil equivalent NRDP National Rural Development Program km kilometre RADET Bucharest District Heating Company kW kilowatt RAR Romanian Automotive Registry LULUCF Land Use, Land Use Change, Forestry RERA Romanian Energy Regulatory Authority 3 m Square meters RES Renewable energy supply MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development RIFA Rural Investment Financing Agency MDRAP Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum MECS Ministry of Education and Scientific Research SME Small and medium-sized enterprise MEF Ministry of European Funds TA Technical Assistance MEI Ministry of European Integration tCO2 Tons of carbon dioxide MESMEBE Ministry of Energy, SMEs and Business Environment UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change MEWF Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests 76 Mitigation Tables: Energy Estimated Objective 1: Reducing Proposed Mitigation: Energy starting / Existing Proposed the intensity of carbon Responsible Result indicator/measure responsible Monitoring and Existing Indicator monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting emissions related to body unit monitoring frequency Type of action completion arrangement institutions energy supply agency dates (year) Policy The promotion of Global objective for GHG emissions from energy Ministry of GHG emissions from energy MEWF RERA Yearly Yearly renewable sources in emission reduction: Electricity generated from Environment, Electricity generated from RES, energy generation: 2016-2020 Romanian - 20% reduction in CO2 by renewable sources (RES) Water and by type of RES NIS RERA Yearly Yearly - green certificates 2016-2023 Energy 2020 Share of electricity Forests Share of electricity generated scheme Regulatory - Installed renewable generated from RES in the (MEWF) from RES in the final electricity NIS RERA Yearly Yearly - support for Authority energy capacities in 2020: final electricity RERA consumption cogeneration through (RERA) Wind: 4,000 MW consumption Installed capacity in wind power the cogeneration bonus Solar: 260 MW Installed capacity in wind RERA Installed capacity in solar PV scheme Biomass: 405 MW power National power Biogas: 195 MW Installed capacity in solar Institute for Installed capacity in biomass (biomass and biogas will be PV power Statistics (NIS power NIS Transelectrica Yearly Yearly cogeneration capacities) Installed capacity in - for the Installed capacity in biogas & RERA Cogeneration: up to 4,000 biomass power National power MW supported Installed capacity in biogas Sustainable Installed capacity in high power Development efficiency cogeneration Installed capacity in high Strategy) efficiency cogeneration Transelectrica Institutional/capacity Completion of the energy 2016 MESMEBE, Implementation of the Approved Strategy document MESMEBE Line Yearly Yearly building strategy for 2016-2030 RERA energy strategy Share of smart meters in the Ministries and prospective 2050 (as 8 distribution companies total installed electricity meters RERA per the latest decisions) 2016-2018 that benefit of intelligent Number and scale (MWh and NIS Yearly Yearly Technical assistance for networks number of users) of pilot the Ministry of Energy, projects SMEs and Business Value of pilot projects (EUR) Environment (MESMEBE) and RERA to scale up pilot and demonstrative smart grids projects Investment The promotion of 2016-2023 48,000 tons of CO2 Number of projects EU co- MEF Management Yearly Yearly renewable sources: MESMEBE, equivalent reduced as a financed in the RES field authorities of support for renewable Ministry of result of additional Amount EU funding as co- different sources which lag behind European Funds capacity from renewable financing financing targets despite the green 2016-2023 (MEF) sources of 60 MW Total amount of funding programmes certificates scheme - 65,800 tons of CO2 (financing and co-financing) for (biomass, biogas, 2016-2023 MEF, RERA reduced– as a result of the projects co-financed in the RES geothermal), including reduction in primary field their connection to grids MEF, RERA, energy consumption (from Capacity installed through the - supporting Transelectrica 172 to 232 Ktoe) co-financed projects (total and cogeneration for - 1000 MW – an increase in per type of technology) industrial consumers the capacity to integrate (and recovery of waste renewables from 2,200 gas) MW to 3,200 MW - support for the transmission grid to integrate renewable sources 77 Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Objective 2: Improving end-user Existing Proposed Energy starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ measure responsible Monitoring energy efficiency, particularly in Existing Indicator monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion body unit monitoring frequency buildings and industries arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Policy The liberalization of the electricity 2012-2018 National 19% reduction in primary Share of electricity RERA Share of electricity RERA RERA Yearly Yearly and natural gas market for Government, energy consumption; (savings consumers that have consumers that have Transelectrica household and non-household RERA of 10 million toe of the signed negotiated signed negotiated consumers and fully competitive Ministry of primary energy consumption contracts (household) contracts (household) contracting for energy, at market 2016-2020 Regional in 2020): Share of electricity Share of electricity prices (electricity and gas) Development 0.92 mil. toe energy savings in consumers that have consumers that have The extension of the ”Termoficare and the supply, transmission and signed negotiated signed negotiated 2006-2015” program (rehabilitation Administration distribution of energy. contracts (non contracts (non of district heating capacities - (MDRAP) 1.33 million toe of energy household) household) generation, transport and National savings in the housing sector Share of natural gas Share of natural gas distribution networks) Regulatory 1.432 million. toe of energy consumers that have consumers that have Authority for savings in public buildings signed negotiated signed negotiated Public Utilities 1 mil. toe energy savings in contracts (household) contracts (household) Community services Share of natural gas Share of natural gas Services (ANRSC) consumers that have consumers that have signed negotiated signed negotiated contracts (non contracts (non household) household) + Availability of extended Termoficare 2006-2015 + Value of investments made through the extended Termoficare 2006-2015 Institutional/ Developing the administrative 2016-2020 MESMEBE Number of trained and NA NA Approved Strategy capacity building capacity to implement the 2016- assigned staff NA document 2030 energy strategy and 2016-2018 MDRAP NA Share of smart meters MESMEBE Line Quarterly Yearly perspectives for 2050 (according to in the total installed Ministries the latest decisions) Number of studies performed electricity meters Study on the demand for electricity Number and scale and heat supply in cities in the (MWh and number of context of changing the climate users) of pilot projects RERA pattern Value of pilot projects (EUR) Number of cities for which there is an updated socio- economical study Investment The promotion of energy efficiency 121.5 Kgoe / 1,000 EUR Energy Intensity of the Energy Intensity of the in the industry: energy intensity in 2023 Economy Economy NIS RERA Yearly Yearly - monitoring energy consumption 2015-2023 MEF, RERA 1.2 MWh / household / year - Energy consumption per NIS Energy consumption at industrial platform level the average annual inhabitant per inhabitant The promotion of energy efficiency consumption of energy in Energy consumption for Energy consumption for in households: 2015-2023 MEF, RERA households in 2023 households households (total) - developing and implementing Local authorities 15% losses in district heating Number of apartments Number. of apartments smart distribution metering systems 2015-2023 (7 cities) networks, transport and using District Heating National using DHS ANRSC that operate at low and medium City hall of distribution nationwide in Systems (DHS) Regulatory Energy losses in district voltage levels 2015-2023 Bucharest, 2023 Energy losses in district Authority for heating networks [by NIS RERA Yearly Yearly 78 Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Objective 2: Improving end-user Existing Proposed Energy starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ measure responsible Monitoring energy efficiency, particularly in Existing Indicator monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion body unit monitoring frequency buildings and industries arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency - increasing the energy efficiency of Bucharest 0.006 million toe / year heating networks Public network) the district heating transmission District Heating reduction in energy Number and surface of Utilities Number, surface and and distribution in 7 cities 2015-2023 Company consumption in public buildings owned and/or Community energy consumption of - increasing energy efficiency for (RADET) buildings used by the central Services buildings owned and/or the centralized heat supply in 36 + 194 GWh / year - public administration (ANRSC) used by the central Bucharest MDRAP , local Reduction of primary energy Number and surface of NIS public administration MDRAP Building Yearly Yearly 2015-2023 authorities consumption in public buildings owned and/or Number of owners/ Public buildings and services: buildings or 8,765 + 46,823 used by the central apartments/flats/public users - improving energy efficiency tons of CO2 reduced public administration buildings that have MDRAP Yearly Yearly through complete thermal 2015-2023 0.012 Mtoe / year of primary MDRAP raised the energy ANRSC rehabilitation, including thermal MDRAP, local energy consumption in the (partly performance & initial City halls insulation, lighting and energy authorities residential sector in monitored as and final energy management of public buildings developed regions and 0.171 a performance class Residential buildings: Mtoe / year in less developed requirement Number and share of - rehabilitation and upgrading of the regions of the Energy beneficiaries of public heating distribution network, 1.65 Mtoe / year – the annual Efficiency lighting improvement of the thermal energy consumption for public Directive) Energy consumption of insulation of households lighting in developed regions public lighting systems -and upgrading public lighting and 23.26 kWh / year in less (MWh / year and kWh / developed regions until 2023 m2 lighted and year) Estimated Mitigation: Proposed Objective 3: Affordable energy for starting / Result Existing Proposed Energy Existing responsible Monitoring the economically vulnerable and Responsible body indicator/measure monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Indicator monitoring frequency groups completion unit arrangement institutions Type of action agency dates (year) Public policy Improving public policies on 2013-2015- Ministry of Labor, Number of targeted None None Total value of aid to vulnerable MMFPS RERA, Yearly Yearly support for vulnerable consumers, 2018 Family and Social vulnerable consumers MDRAP, and replacing social tariffs with the Protection (MMFPS) consumers Number of targeted vulnerable local provision of aid for improving consumers(households) authorities, energy efficiency in dwellings for NGOs low-income persons Institutional/ The development of the 2012-2015- MMFPS, with Number of staff None None Number of staff involved in the MMFPS RERA, Yearly Yearly capacity building administrative capacity 2018 support from RERA, involved in the implementation MDRAP, responsible for implementing the MDRAP, local implementation local policies on vulnerable consumers authorities authorities, in terms of “energy poverty” NGOs Investment Thermal rehabilitation of housing 2016-2020 MMFPS, with Number of dwellings None None Number of dwellings rehabilitated MMFPS RERA, Yearly Yearly for consumers affected by energy support from RERA, rehabilitated dwellings for the consumers MDRAP, poverty MDRAP, local dwellings for the affected by energy poverty local authorities consumers affected Energy performance class before authorities, by energy poverty rehabilitation NGOs Energy performance class after rehabilitation Investment Improving energy efficiency in 2016-2020 MMFPS, MDRAP, tCO2 reduction None None Energy performance class before MMFPS RERA, Yearly Yearly households (home appliances, local authorities and rehabilitation MDRAP, lighting, etc.) non-governmental Energy performance class after local organizations rehabilitation authorities, (NGO)s tCO2 reduction NGOs 79 Mitigation Tables: Transport Objective 1: Introducing strong Estimated Proposed Mitigation: Transport economic incentives for a Existing Proposed starting / and Result Existing responsible Monitoring climate friendly transport Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion indicator/measure unit Indicator monitoring frequency Type of action system through pricing arrangement institutions dates (year) agency instruments Public policy Increasing fuel price taxation Reviewed legislation - - Reviewed regulation MPF Local Quarterly Yearly 2016-2020 Ministry of Public Percent of km of streets in/near MDRAP authorities Vehicle registration tax Finance (MPF) congestion zones that charge for 2016-2020 MPF parking Local Quarterly Yearly Charging for Parking Number of studies prepared per authorities Charging for Urban Congestions 2016-2020 Local authorities administrative level 2016-2022 Local authorities Percent of covered population Number of studies applied for reducing urban congestion Institutional/capacity Technical assistance provided to 2016-2022 MEWF/ MDRAP/ Number of advisory - - Number of advisory service building local authorities for the Ministry of Transport service programs programs implemented MT MEWF/ Quarterly Yearly implementation of policies 2016-2022 (MT) implemented Percent of communities where MDRAP Study on the measures to advisory service programs encourage freight haulers to One case study implemented in total targeted accelerate the use of performed communities technologies to reduce vehicle One case study performed emissions and related behavior Investment The “Rabla” program 2016-2020 Environment Fund Number of scrapped Number of EFA Number of scrapped vehicles EFA - Yearly Yearly Administration (EFA) vehicles tickets Average age of scrapped vehicles The amount of CO2 claimed Amount of CO2 reduced reduced Number of tickets used Estimated Proposed Mitigation: Transport Objective 2: Increasing the Existing Proposed starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring efficiency of urban Responsible body Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion dates Indicator monitoring frequency Type of action transport arrangement institutions (year) agency Policy Speed restrictions 2016-2022 Local authorities Number of normative acts into - - Number of cities that have MDRAP Local authorities Yearly Yearly Low-emission/Green driving 2016-2020 Local authorities force established normative acts Local authorities Low emissions zones 2016-2022 Local authorities The amount of CO2 reduced – - - (into force) Local authorities Smarter choices/Soft 2016-2022 Local authorities tCO2 - - The amount of CO2 reduced – Local authorities measures tCO2 Institutional/capacity Study on fiscal measures to 2016-2022 MT, Number of studies and - - Availability and number of MT METT Yearly Yearly building influence private car/LDV Ministry of Economy, research activities studies at national level purchase and use choices Trade and Tourism - - Number of research reports MPF Yearly Yearly Study on alternative fuels 2016-2022 (METT) Investment Ultra-low emission vehicles 2015-2030 MEWF/MDRAP Number of vehicles purchased - - Number of vehicles purchased MDRAP Romanian Yearly Yearly Investing in pedestrian and Local authorities tCO2 reduced tCO2 reduced Automotive Yearly Yearly cycling infrastructure and in 2016-2022 Local authorities in Km of developed - - Km of developed Registry (RAR) Yearly Yearly the development of non- partnership with the infrastructure infrastructure by mode Regional motorized and electrical public transport tCO2 reduced - - tCO2 reduced Operational vehicle infrastructure operator Number of electric vehicles - - Number of electric vehicles Programme Local authorities purchased - - purchased Local authorities MDRAP, local tCO2 reduced Percent of ultra-low emission authorities Number of electric vehicles vehicles in the total (/buses) purchased - - transportation capacity tCO2 reduced - - Number of publically GHG objective 17,750.44 Mtoe accessible charging stations 80 CO2 / year; 1.03 to 1.11 billion. - - tCO2 reduced passengers / year on public - - Number of electric vehicles transport (/buses) purchased tCO2 reduced GHG objective 17,750.44 Mtoe CO2 / year; 1.03 to 1.11 billion. passengers / year on public transport Proposed Mitigation: Transport Objective 3: Reversing the Existing Proposed Estimated starting / and Result Existing responsible Monitoring long-term decline of Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion dates (year) indicator/measure unit Indicator monitoring frequency Type of action passenger rail transport arrangement institutions agency Policy Full implementation of 2011-2030 MT Professional - - Share of professional MT Yearly Yearly professional management management of CFR managers in state owned for state companies Calatori companies (of total) (Emergency Ordinance no. 109/2011) Institutional/capacity Comprehensive review of 2016-2018 MT Study with prioritized - - Existence of the approved MT Yearly Yearly building the rail network prior to actions (within General study with prioritized actions further investment outside Transport Master Plan - (within GTMP) the priority TEN-T network GTMP) Investment Increasing mobility on the 2015-2023 MEF, MT, Romanian Number of attracted - - Number of supplementary MT MEF, MT, Yearly Yearly TEN-T core network - railway Railway Company travelers travels CFR, NIS Increasing the use of the 2015-2023 (CFR) Number of attracted Number of supplementary Metrorex, Yearly Yearly subway network in travelers travels NIS Bucharest - Ilfov 2015-2023 MEF, MT, Metrorex Number of supplementary Railway Yearly Yearly Increasing the sustainability travels operators, and quality of rail transport MEF, MT, Metrorex NIS 81 Mitigation Tables: Industry Estimated Mitigation: starting / Existing Proposed Proposed Industry Objective 1: Reducing the carbon Result Existing Monitoring and Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator responsible partner Reporting intensity in industry indicator/measure unit Indicator frequency completion arrangement monitoring agency institutions Type of action dates (year) Policy Developing the legal and regulatory 2017 - 2018 MESMEBE;,MPF Number of ESCOs Number of RERA Number of ESCOs RERA - Yearly Yearly framework for the development of established ESCOs established ESCOs (Energy Service Companies) established and introducing Energy Performance Contracts (EnPC) using the experience of the EBRD in Romania. Developing the support schemes for 2016 -2017 METT Number of financing - - Number and scope of METT - Yearly Yearly SME financing to purchase low schemes financing schemes carbon dioxide emission technologies. Institutional/ Increasing the number of CC expert 2016 MESMEBE, METT, MEWF, Number new staff - - Number of [net] new MESMEBE, METT, MEWF Yearly Yearly capacity staff from line ministries employees RERA employed, dedicated to staff in the dedicated RERA building CC climate team of line ministries 2016-2020 MESMEBE, METT, MEWF, Number of people - - Number of trained staff MESMEBE, METT, MEWF Yearly Yearly Training CC expert staff RERA trained working on CC in the MEWF, RERA line ministries Information campaigns for banks 2016-2020 METT, MEWF Number of information - - Number and scope of METT MEWF Yearly Yearly regarding energy efficiency projects campaigns information campaigns and reducing GHG emissions. Investment Reducing GHG emissions by 2016-2020 METT Energy saving - - Energy saving METT Yearly Yearly investments in energy efficiency in (MWh/year) (MWh/an) MEWF ETS sectors Reducing GHG emissions Energy saving per NIS (CO2 t/tear) economic sector (MWh/an) Reducing GHG emissions (CO2 t/an) Investments in technologies with 2016-2020 METT Energy saving - - Energy saving METT Yearly Yearly low carbon dioxide emissions in (MWh/year) (MWh/an) MEWF SMEs / non-ETS installations Reduced GHG emissions Energy saving per NIS (CO2 t/year) economic sector (MWh/an Reducing GHG emissions (CO2 t/an) Estimated Objective 2: Assessing the Proposed Mitigation: Industry starting / Result Existing Proposed best available techniques Existing responsible Monitoring and Responsible body indicator/measure monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting (BAT) from the perspective Indicator monitoring frequency Type of action completion unit arrangement institutions of GHG emissions agency dates (year) Policy Knowledge improvement 2016-2020 METT, MEWF Number of studies - - Number and scope of studies METT MEWF Yearly Yearly and transfer regarding the and exchanges of Number of meetings/workshops of the NCCC most cost effective experience Technical groups of the new National technologies Commission for Climate Change (NCCC) having as subject knowledge sharing 82 regarding the most cost effective technologies Institutional/capacity Opening the debate on 2017-2020 Chamber of Commerce Number of sector- Institutional/ Number and scope of sector-wide METT Chamber of Yearly Yearly building successful projects using and Industry in wide debates capacity debates Commerce the most cost effective partnership with the Number of building Number and scope of consultation with and Industry technologies in various METT and MEWF informative the professional associations Number and MEWF industrial sectors materials scope of informative materials distributed Investment Benchmarking studies 2016-2018 METT Number of studies - - Number and scope of studies METT - Yearly Yearly regarding BATs [best Catalog with the best technologies used available technologies] in industry used in member states and industrial sectors in Romania that have reduced GHG emissions Estimated Proposed Mitigation: Industry Objective 3: Exploring Existing Proposed starting / and Result indicator/measure Existing responsible Monitoring voluntary approaches, Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion dates unit Indicator monitoring frequency Type of action emissions trading, taxes arrangement institutions (year) agency Policy Identifying voluntary 2017-2018 MPF, METT Number of normative acts - - Adopted legislation MPF METT Yearly Yearly instruments for reducing adopted GHG emissions level in the industry Institutional/capacity Providing technical 2016-2017 METT, MPF Number of staff with - - Number staff with METT MPF Yearly Yearly building expertise and economic improved technical and technical and support for the new economic expertise improved economic instruments, to stimulate expertise the industry to reduce GHG emissions Investment Analysis of the member 2016 MESMEBE Analysis of the member - - Existence of Study on MESMEBE MPF Yearly Yearly states’ experience on states’ experience on the feasibility of voluntary agreements, voluntary agreements, introducing new tools emissions trading schemes emissions trading schemes to stimulate the and internal taxes and internal taxes applicable reduction in GHG applicable to industrial to industrial sectors Emission in Romania sectors 83 Mitigation Tables: Agriculture and Rural Development Mitigation: Agriculture and Estimated Proposed Objective 1: Promoting CC knowledge Existing Rural starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ Existing responsible Proposed partner Monitoring transfer and advisory services among monitoring Proposed indicator Reporting Development completion body measure unit Indicator monitoring institutions frequency farmers arrangement dates (year) agency Type of action Institutional/ National Rural Development Program 2016-2022 Ministry of Number of - - Number of participants in training MARD Local Authorities Yearly Yearly capacity (NRDP) Measure 1 - Knowledge transfer and Agriculture participants to sessions building information actions and Rural training sessions / Sub-measure 1.1 - Support for vocational Development 153,168 training and skills acquisition (MARD) Measure 1 - Knowledge transfer and 2016-2022 MARD Public expenditure - - MARD Yearly Yearly information actions dedicated to farmers Amount of expenditures dedicated Local Authorities Sub-measure 1.2 Support for sharing experience, to farmers sharing experience, demonstration and information actions demonstrations, etc. demonstrations, etc. Number of cities participating in training programs Percent of farmers with access to training programs / demonstration events NRDP Measure 2 - Advisory services, farm 2016-2022 MARD Number of advised - - Number of advised beneficiaries by MARD NIS Yearly Yearly management and farm relief services beneficiaries / type of farmer Local authorities Sub-measure 2.1 Advisory services for 132,901 Private sector farmers, young farmers, micro-enterprises and small enterprises Mitigation: Agriculture and Estimated Proposed Objective 2: Investment Existing Proposed Rural starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring support for farm Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Development completion body Indicator monitoring frequency modernization arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Investment NRDP Measure 4 - 2016-2022 MARD/ Rural Number of operations that received - - Number of operations that received support Yearly Yearly Investments in physical Investment support for investment (i.e., manure for investment (i.e., manure storage, manure MARD RIFA assets Financing storage, manure treatment, etc.) / treatment, etc.) Sub-measure 4.1 - Agency 870 LUs targeted by the investments in livestock Investments in (RIFA) Livestock units (LU) targeted by the management to reduce GHG emissions agricultural holdings investments in livestock management Percent of relevant LUs invested in to reduce GHG emissions / 21,749 NRDP Measure 6 - 2016-2022 MARD/ RIFA Number of beneficiaries supported for - - Number of beneficiaries supported for Yearly Yearly Development of farms creating/ investing in non-agricultural creating/ investing in non-agricultural MARD RIFA and enterprises activities / 9 activities Sub-measure 6.4 - Yearly Yearly Investment in the creation and development of non- agricultural activities 84 Mitigation: Agriculture and Estimated Proposed Result Existing Proposed Rural Objective 3: Investment support for farm starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring indicator/measure monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Development modernization completion body Indicator monitoring frequency unit arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Legal/financial NRDP Measure 10 - Agri-environment and climate 2016-2022 MARD/ Area (ha) under - - Area (ha) under agri-environmental Yearly Yearly Agency for agri-environmental and climate commitment MARD APIA Sub-measure 10.1 - Payments for agri-environmental Payments and climate Amount of payments by package and climate commitments and commitments / Percent of relevant area Package 1 – pastures of high wildlife importance Intervention 1,351,100 Package 2 – traditional agricultural practices in Package 3 – pastures of importance to birdlife, Agriculture Package 4 – green crops, (APIA) Package 6 – pastures of importance to butterflies (Maculinea sp.) Package 7 – arable land of feeding importance for the red-breasted goose (Branta ruficollis) Package 8 – raising local farm breeds at risk of abandonment NRDP Measure 11 - Organic farming 2015-2022 MARD/APIA Area (ha) - - - Area (ha) - converted to organic Yearly Yearly Sub-measure 11.1 - Support for converting to organic conversion to farming MARD APIA farming methods organic farming Amount/type of support /136,550 Percent of relevant area converted NRDP Measure 11 - Organic farming 2015-2022 MARD/APIA Area (ha) – - - Area (ha) – maintaining organic Yearly Yearly Sub-measure 11.2 - Support for maintaining organic maintaining organic farming practices MARD APIA farming practices farming practices / Amount of payment 89,400 Percent of relevant area with these practices NRDP Measure 13 - Payments to areas facing natural 2015-2022 MARD/APIA Area (ha) - - - Area (ha) - mountainous area Yearly Yearly constraints or other specific constraints mountainous Amount of payments MARD APIA Sub-measure 13.1 – Compensatory payments in area/1,370,000 Percent of areas receiving payments mountain areas NRDP Measure 13 - Payments to areas facing natural 2015-2022 MARD/APIA Area (ha) - areas - - Area (ha) - areas facing natural Yearly Yearly constraints or other specific constraints facing natural constraints MARD APIA Sub-measure 13.2 - Compensatory payments for constraints Amount of payments areas facing significant natural constraints /3,150,000 Percent of areas receiving payments NRDP Measure 13 - Payments to areas facing natural 2015-2022 MARD/APIA Area (ha) - areas - - Area (ha) - areas facing with specific Yearly Yearly constraints or other specific constraints facing with specific constraints MARD APIA Sub-measure 13.3 - Compensatory payments for constraints/ Amount of payments areas facing specific constraints 180,000 Percent of areas receiving payments Mitigation: Agriculture and Proposed Objective 4: Promoting carbon Estimated starting / Existing Proposed Rural Responsible Result indicator/measure Existing responsible Monitoring sequestration in agriculture and completion monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Development body unit Indicator monitoring frequency dates (year) arrangement institutions agency Type of action Legal/financial NRDP Measure 10 - Agri- Area (ha) of farming land - - Area (ha) of farming land covered Yearly Yearly environment and climate 2015-2022 MARD/APIA covered by soil improvement by soil improvement and/or MARD APIA and/or erosion prevention erosion prevention land Sub-measure 10.1 - Payments for land management contracts/ management contracts agri-environmental and climate 505,080 Amount of payment commitments (package 4 – green Percent of relevant area crops) 85 Mitigation Tables: Urban Development Mitigation: Objective 1: Promote more compact, Estimated Agriculture mixed use, and transit-oriented Proposed starting / Existing Proposed and Rural development measures as a way of Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring and Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Development reducing vehicle miles traveled, to body Indicator monitoring frequency completion arrangement institutions develop the infrastructure and reduce agency dates (year) Type of action maintenance costs Policy Modify local tax policies or FAR (floor By 2020 MDRAP Housing density near targeted - - Housing density near targeted MDRAP Local Yearly Yearly to area ratio) policies in cities to Local transportation nodes in cities transportation nodes in cities authorities incentivize infill and transit-oriented authorities Number of persons served by the development targeted transportation nodes in Modify zoning or land use policies to cities promote mixed-use development Institutional/ Prepare guidance for cities on By 2020 MDRAP Number of cities representatives - - Number of cities representatives MDRAP Local Yearly Yearly capacity strategies for promoting infill/transit participating in training programs participating in training programs authorities building oriented building development Number of cities with that change Number of cities with that change policies/codes to allow mixed policies/codes to allow mixed use/infill development use/infill development Investment Investment in building expansion/new By 2020 Private m2 built for housing or trading/retail - - m2 built for housing or MDRAP Local Yearly Yearly development in targeted areas sector purposes in the targeted areas trading/retail purposes in the authorities targeted areas Mitigation: Objective 2: Promote energy Estimated Agriculture Proposed efficiency improvements in buildings starting / Existing Proposed and Rural Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring and major urban infrastructure and Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Development body Indicator monitoring frequency systems completion arrangement institutions agency dates (year) Type of action Policy Establish efficiency upgrade programs 2016-2020 MDRAP Number of functional programs - - Number of functional programs MDRAP Local Yearly Yearly for residential buildings MT authorities Continue shift away from (transport Amount of the local budget Amount of the local budget MT subsidies/market controls on energy fleet) Value of subsidies for energy prices Establish energy efficiency upgrade programs for major infrastructure systems in the field of urban transportation/vehicle fleets Institutional/ Service provider training on improving By 2020 MDRAP Number of trained/certified energy - - Number of trained/certified MDRAP Local Yearly Yearly capacity energy efficiency expertise Ministry of efficiency experts energy efficiency experts authorities building Training for trainers in energy Education Number of participants in energy MECS efficiency and Scientific efficiency training programs Number of participants in energy Research efficiency training programs (MECS) Investment Increased investment in energy 2016 - 2020 MDRAP Energy consumption per m2 (for - - Energy consumption per m2 (for MDRAP Local Yearly Yearly efficiency Local public different building types) different building types) authorities authorities Liters of fuel per 100 km for public Liters and type of fuel per 100 km transportation fleets for public transportation fleets 86 Mitigation Tables: Waste Management Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Waste Objective 1: Promote waste Existing Proposed starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring Management prevention Responsible body Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Investment Integrated projects for strengthening 2016-2020 County Councils Number of integrated projects for - - Number of integrated MEWF Yearly Yearly and expanding integrated waste through additional waste recycling projects for additional County management systems, respecting the Intercommunity capacities waste recycling Councils waste hierarchy (prevention, Development Number of additional capacities for capacities preparation for reuse, recycling, other Associations (IDAs). waste recovery Number of additional Municipalities recovery methods, including capacities for waste treatment and disposal) Number of non- compliant landfills recovery Closure and rehabilitation of non- closed / rehabilitated Number and share of compliant deposits and opening / non- compliant landfills expansion of new compliant landfills. closed / rehabilitated Institutional/ Training for waste facility operators on 2016-2020 MEWF Number of trained staff Number of trained staff MEWF Yearly Yearly capacity climate-sensitive design and operation Percent of facilities with building of the installations trained staff Research / Fund research for the use of regional 2016-2020 MEWF Number of research project - - Number and scope of MEWF Yearly Yearly Analysis and local-level forecasts of the global MECS programs engaged research programs MECS climate models to provide more defined and operational localized assessments of climate Number and scope of impacts in different regions, enabling research programs solid waste facility operators to accessed analyze the vulnerability of their Number and scope of operation during future climate projects funded shocks. Institutional/ Schedule conferences/training 2016-2020 MEWF Number of events - - Number of MEWF Yearly Yearly capacity programs for waste system operators Number of participants conferences/training building and local authority officials on “best sessions practice” solid waste management Number of participants strategies around Romania. in the conferences/trainings Objective 2: Increase the reuse or recycling of the materials included in the Mitigation: waste stream, reducing the amount of Estimated Proposed Waste material that must be managed as waste starting / Existing Proposed Existing responsible Monitoring Management by promotion of industrial synergy and Responsible body Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Indicator monitoring frequency processes and application of the resource- completion arrangement institutions agency Type of action efficient sustainable management of dates (year) waste concept. Investment Implementation of selective collection 2016-2020 County Councils Additional capacity to recycle - - Additional capacity to MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly systems through IDAs waste recycle waste County Additional capacity for waste Additional capacity for Councils recovery waste recovery Municipalities 87 Investment Solid waste management upgrades in 2016-2020 County Councils Additional capacity to recycle Additional capacity to MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly towns/cities/regions to ensure compliance through IDAs waste recycle waste County with relevant EU directives (including Additional capacity for waste Additional capacity for Councils composting facilities, anaerobic digestion recovery waste recovery Municipalities facilities, and recycling programs). Percent of counties compliant with the EU rules Policy / Conduct studies on tariff levels to assess 2016-2020 National Regulatory Number of studies - - Number and scope of MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly Research the extent to which they successfully Authority for approved studies County support the ‘polluter pays principle’ Community Councils Services (NRACS)/ Municipalities MDRAP/ MEWF Institutional/ Support efforts to promote expanded 2016-2020 County Councils Number of events held and local - - Number of events held MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly capacity County/Local Authority knowledge on the through IDAs authorities involved and local authorities County building link between climate change and solid involved Councils waste management operations Number of participants Municipalities Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Waste Objective 3: Selective collection and Existing Proposed starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Management composting of biodegradable waste Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Investment Construction of transfer and 2016-2020 County Councils Construction of transfer and recovery / - - Number and capacities MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly recovery / treatment installations, through IDAs treatment installations, including of facilities built County including composting platforms and composting platforms and individual Councils individual composting units and composting units and mechanical biological Municipalities mechanical biological treatment treatment (MBT) plants. (MBT) plants. Policy / Fund waste composition studies in 2016-2020 County Councils Fund waste composition studies in cities and - - Number and scope of MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly Research cities and counties that have through IDAs counties that have deployed backyard approved studies County deployed backyard composting bins composting bins to assess the extent to Percent of country Councils to assess the extent to which such which such programs are effective at councils with approved Municipalities programs are effective at diverting diverting biodegradable waste from landfill studies biodegradable waste from landfill waste. waste. Policy analysis Conduct studies on management 2016-2020 County Councils Conduct studies on management practices - - Number of approved MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly practices for biodegradable through IDAs for biodegradable substances and publish studies County substances and publish those those completed to date in order to assess Councils completed to date in order to assess the cost effectiveness of different Municipalities the cost effectiveness of different approaches. approaches. Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Waste Objective 4: Produce energy from Existing Proposed starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Management waste via combustion Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Policy / Fund research on processes, costs, 2016-2020 MEWF Number of research programs - - Number and scope of research MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly Research standards, international experiences MECS engaged programs defined and operational MPF on producing energy via the Number and scope of research MECS combustion of solid wastes. programs accessed Number and scope of projects funded 88 Mitigation Tables: Water Estimated Mitigation: Proposed Objective 1: Reduce GHG emissions from starting / Existing Proposed Water Existing responsible Monitoring water supply and wastewater treatment and Responsible body Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Indicator monitoring frequency completion arrangement institutions Type of action agency dates (year) Investment Implement effective management of the 2016-2020 Intercommunity Tons of sludge managed Generated MEWF Tons of sludge managed MEWF IDAs Yearly Yearly sludge resulting from the wastewater Development sludge treatment process. Associations (IDAs) (kg/person * through Regional year) Operators Investment Continue to finance water supply, 2016-2020 MEWF Number of inhabitants having Number of ANRSC Number of inhabitants MEWF MEWF Yearly Yearly distribution, and waste water treatment MDRAP access to the service/ energy inhabitant having access to the MDRAP system upgrades in towns/cities/regions to savings having access service/ energy savings ANRSC ensure compliance with relevant EU water to the service quality and service coverage requirements and to reduce GHG emissions. Institutional/ Fund research for the use of regional and 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of research programs - - Number and scope of MEWF MESR Yearly Yearly capacity local scale forecasts of the global climate MESR initiated research programs MPF building models to provide more localized initiated assessments of climate impacts in different Percent of regions (in the water basins/regions, enabling improved long total defined) with term water supply localized assessments Institutional/ Provide training for water system operators 2016-2020 MDRAP Number of operators trained - - Number of operators MDRAP MEWF Yearly Yearly capacity on climate-sensitive design and operations trained County building Councils Mitigation: Objective 2: Increase energy efficiency Proposed Estimated starting Result Existing Proposed Water of pumping in large water delivery Existing responsible Monitoring / and completion Responsible body indicator/measure monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting systems Indicator monitoring frequency dates (year) unit arrangement institutions Type of action agency Investment Implement pilot projects for energy 2016-2020 MDRAP kWh used /ha - - kWh used /ha irrigated MDRAP MARD Yearly Yearly efficient irrigation systems. irrigated number/scope of pilots Investment / Procurement of high efficiency (HE) 2016-2020 RERA Tons of reduced - - Percent of systems using HE pumps MARD MDRAP Yearly Yearly Technical pumps to reduce the GHG emissions CO2 Tons of reduced CO2/ha irrigated EA Assistance from the water and wastewater systems (TA) investments 89 Mitigation Tables: Forestry Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Objective 1: Managing existing forests Existing Proposed Forestry starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring to sequester carbon in the context of Responsible body Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion Indicator monitoring frequency sustainable forest management arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Final adoption of the Forest Sector 2016 MEWF (DG Approved National Forest Sector - - Approved National Forest Sector Central Yearly Yearly Development Strategy, including Forests) Development Strategy Development Strategy authority measures for GHG emissions mitigation for forestry and forest sector climate change adaptation, taking into account the economic aspects of the sector Updating technical norms for 2016-2017 MEWF (DG Number of technical rules - - Number and scope of technical Central INCDS –MD, Yearly Yearly management operations and Forests), National approved rules approved authority universities, application of treatments to streamline Research and Technical norms are based on Technical norms are based on for forestry NFA and increase the efficiency of state and Development robust scientific data, relevant for robust scientific data, relevant private forest management, taking into Institute for GHG emissions reduction and/or for GHG emissions reduction account the new knowledge on the Forestry “Marin increased carbon sequestration in and/or increased carbon conservation and increase of the Dracea” (INCDS – all forestry ecosystem deposits, sequestration in all forestry Policy carbon stock in the eco-systemic MD), universities, specific to every forestry activity ecosystem deposits, specific to storage facilities National Forest every forestry activity Administration (NFA) Promotion of the production and use 2016-2020 METT, MARD, Awareness actions on the - - number of awareness actions; Central METT, MARD, Yearly Yearly of long-lived wood products able to NFA, NIS, benefits of wood and wood Support [funding] for the authority NFA, NIS, substitute traditionally used materials managers of products (number of awareness introduction of wood products for forestry managers of private forests, actions) and technologies private forests, forestry Support for the introduction of Industrial production per type of forestry companies, the wood products and technologies wood products (monetary units) companies, the wood exploitation (monetary units) wood and processing Industrial production per type of exploitation industries wood products (monetary units) and processing industries Strengthening of the national GHG 2015-2020 MEWF (DG Publicly available non-banking - - Available IFN cycle 1 results Central INCDS-MD, NIS Yearly Yearly estimation and forecasting system for Climate Change financial institution (IFN) cycle 1 Enforced Forest GHG emissions authority Institutional/ land use and the forestry sector by and DG Forests), results monitoring system for forestry capacity ensuring the continuity of the National INCDS-MD, NIS Functional monitoring, recording building Forestry Stock and forecasting system for GHG emissions and carbon removal (LULUCF) 90 Building the capacity of the 2016-2020 MEWF (DG The territorial structure of the - - operational models reported in Central INCDS-MD Yearly Yearly environment protection authorities Forests), INCDS- forestry authority National Inventory Report of authority (central and at the level of territorial MD Development of a system for the Romania to UNFCCC for forestry administrative units) to implement the analysis of the forest C stock Number of trained staff to forestry regime in order to monitor the anthropogenic degradation, operate the models anthropogenic and natural forest based on repeated degradation phenomena and to follow measurements of the National up the ecological recovery / restoration Forest Inventory in IFN (approved process following disruptions by MEWF – DG Forests) Publication of a report on this type of degradation, including in the annual report on the state of the environment (online) The area affected by anthropogenic degradation (ha) and degraded area under recovery (ha) Functional system to monitor natural disruptions in forests and annual reporting of the area under recovery (ha) Improvement of forest accessibility by 2016-2020 MARD, MEWF, Linear km of built forest roads - - Linear km of built forest roads MARD MEWF, NFA, Yearly Yearly the rehabilitation and construction of NFA, private (km) (km) private forest new forest roads, aimed at the correct forest Linear meters of usable forest Linear meters of usable forest administrators, implementation of the forest administrators, road per forest hectare road per forest hectare forest owners management, wood harvesting and forest owners forest renewal actions included in the management plans, on the one hand, and the exploitation of non-timber forest products, on the other Promotion of carbon sequestration and 2015-2020 MEWF (DG Rate of updating the forest - Rate of updating the forest MEWF (DG NFA, MARD, Yearly Yearly conservation in both state and Forests, Forestry management plans (%) management plans (%) Forests, forest owners privately owned forests Guard1), NFA, National trend in the forest National trend in the forest Forestry and MARD, forest carbon stock reported in the land carbon stock reported in the Guard) administrators, owners and use GHG inventory (estimation land use GHG inventory INCDS –MD and administrators, based on UNFCCC-revised IFN (estimation based on UNFCCC- universities INCDS –MD and data) revised IFN data) universities Actual levels annually recorded in Actual levels annually recorded forest management (tCO2) and in forest management (tCO2) reported by Romania according and reported by Romania to the Kyoto Protocol according to the Kyoto Protocol Area committed under sub- Area committed under sub- measure 15.1 (ha) measure 15.1 (ha) Diminishing emissions caused by 2015-2020 MEWF (DG Awareness raising actions Number of events MEWF (DG MARD, NFA, Yearly Yearly wildfires Forests, Forestry regarding the effects of wildfires Percent of people reached Forests, GIES Guard), MARD, and their spreading (number of Forestry NFA, DG for actions) Guard), Emergency Situations (GIES) 1 The name „Forest Guard” is generically used for the “Forest Rangers” structures by the central forestry authority 91 Promotion and investing in new forest 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Level of investment in new Amount invested in new MEWF (DG MARD, INCDS- Yearly Yearly management, wood harvesting and Forests), MARD, technologies that enable better technologies that enable better Forests) MD, NFA, wood processing technologies to INCDS-MD, NFA, management (in terms on management (in terms on universities, achieve sustainable management universities, monetary units) monetary units) forest forest Level of investment in new Amount invested in new administrators, administrators, processing technologies (in terms processing technologies (in wood wood harvesting on monetary units) terms on monetary units) harvesting and and processing processing industries industries Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Forestry Objective 2: Expansion of afforested starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting areas completion Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Updating the National Program for 2016-2017 MEWF (DG Forests), Approved National Program for - - Existence of Central MARD, NACLR, Yearly Yearly Afforestation and the National Forest MARD, National Afforestation (including for enforced/officially authority for INCDS-MD and Belt System to meet land availability Agency for Cadastre 2016-2020) approved National forestry other R&D and funding sources and to highlight and Land Registration Approved Annual Program for Program for institutes, the greenhouse gas mitigation role of (NACLR), INCDS-MD Setting up Forest Belts Afforestation universities the afforestation activities and other R&D (including for 2016-2020) Approved Annual institutes, universities Inclusion, in the specific Program for Setting up Policy technical norms, of criteria on Forest Belts descriptors regarding land use Specific technical norms and land degradation in that include criteria on afforestation-suitable land descriptors regarding land use and land degradation in afforestation-suitable land Completion of the identification and 2016 MEWF (DG Forests), GIS system for identification - - Existence of GIS Central MARD, NASRI, Yearly Yearly operationalization stages of the MARD, National and description of land suitable database system with authority for INCDS-MD and database of afforestation-suitable Authority for Scientific for afforestation identification and forestry other R&D lands (e.g. degraded lands, degraded Research (NASRI), description of land institutes, agricultural lands, agricultural lands) INCDS-MD and other suitable for afforestation universities and prioritizing their afforestation R&D institutes, Availability of risk zoning according to the initial size of the use- universities maps related carbon deposits; risk zoning Institutional/ System promoting the existing 2016 MEWF (DG Forests, Functional promotion system - - Existence of an Central NRDP Yearly Yearly capacity measures for the afforestation of Forest Guard) Awareness raising on operational afforestation authority for building degraded land and the creation of afforestation measures incentives system forestry, forest belts (embedded in the (actions/yr.) Awareness raising on implementation role that central Project applications afforestation measures authorities and forest guard structures (number/yr.) (actions/yr.) play in the programs) Number of people reached Project applications (number/yr.) 92 Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Forestry Objective 2: Expansion of afforested starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting areas completion Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Creation of a system of to promote and 2016-2018 MEWF (DG Forests, Awareness raising actions - - Awareness raising Central METT, MEI Yearly Yearly incentivize short rotation energy and EFA), METT, Ministry (number of actions) actions (number of authority for biomass plantations and the use of of European Functional system of incentives actions) forestry residual biomass generated by logging Integration (MEI) for energy plantations Functional system of activities incentives for energy plantations Number of energy plantations receiving incentives Afforestation of degraded land and of 2015-2020 MEWF (DG Forests, Annual afforestation of double - - Annual afforestation of MEWF (DG MARD, NIS, NFA, Yearly Yearly agricultural land EFA, Forestry Guard), the historic average surface in double the historic Forests, EFA, and private MARD, NIS, NFA, and the 1990-2012 period (ha)2 average surface in the Forestry owners private owners Area afforested annually (ha) 1990-2012 period (ha) Guard) Area afforested annually (ha) Creation of forest belts, including 2016-2020 MEWF, NFA, MARD, Annual planting of new forest - - Annual planting of new MEWF NFA, MARD, Yearly Yearly through “greening” measures related private owners belts equal to double the forest belts equal to private owners to Pillar 1 of the EU Common historic average surface in the double the historic Agricultural Policy (CAP) 1990-2012 period (ha) average surface in the Surface of forest belts planted 1990-2012 period (ha) annually (ha) Surface of forest belts Surface or length planted with planted annually (ha) shrub or tree species with the Surface or length purpose of greening farming planted with shrub or Investment land (ha or lm) tree species with the purpose of greening farming land (ha or lm) Investments in setting up and 2017-2020 MEWF Development and approval of - - Development and MARD NRDP Yearly Yearly preserving plantations and in facilities technical rules/guidelines on approval of technical for harvesting and processing wood low-GHG harvesting rules/guidelines on low- biomass technologies GHG harvesting Surface of intensive wood crops technologies set up (ha) Surface of intensive Annual wood biomass wood crops set up (ha) production per destination Annual wood biomass (tons of dry weight/yr.). production per destination (tons of dry weight/yr.) 2 According to the information Romania submitted in the additional report under the Kyoto Protocol, the overall afforestation area for 1990-2012 was 27.52 kha, i.e. 1,196 ha/yr. on average 93 Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Objective 3: Foster the sustainable Existing Proposed Forestry starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring management of private forest Responsible body Result indicator/measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion Indicator monitoring frequency ownership arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Simplification of regulations and 2016-2017 MEWF (DG Forests), Specific provisions in the - - provisions in the MEWF (DG private forest Yearly Yearly technical norms for compliance with private forest owners, approved technical rules approved technical Forests) owners, sustainable farming legal requirements INCDS-MD, universities rules INCDS-MD, Policy for small privately owned forest areas Percent of targeted universities regulations and technical norms simplified Strengthening the central authority 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests, Parameters on the state of - - Parameters on the MEWF (DG private forest Yearly Yearly responsible for forestry, enabling it to Forestry Guard), private private forests state of private Forests, owners, Institutional/ better assist small forest owners in forest owners, INCDS- forests Forestry Guard) INCDS-MD, capacity sustainably managing their resources, MD, universities universities building including assistance in case of natural disruptions Mitigation: Estimated Proposed Objective 4: Opportunities for carbon Existing Forestry starting / and Responsible Result indicator/measure Existing responsible Proposed Monitoring stock management in forests in monitoring Proposed indicator Reporting completion body unit Indicator monitoring partner frequency protected areas arrangement Type of action dates (year) agency institutions Building capacity of the central and 2016-2020 MEWF, National Number of protected areas - - Number of protected areas with MEWF NEPA Yearly Yearly local environment protection Environmental with enforced management enforced management plans authorities to assess the quality of Protection plans protected areas management plans Agency (NEPA) Percent of protected areas with development and implementation, National report on the enforced management plans, in the including the management of situations anthropogenic degradation total number of protected areas caused by natural or anthropogenic of forests in protected disruption areas, included in the report Existence of National report on the on anthropogenic anthropogenic degradation of Institutional/ degradation of forests forests in protected areas, included capacity in the report on anthropogenic building degradation of forests Considering the development of a 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Scientific report on the - - Existence of the report MEWF (DG private forest Yearly Yearly system compensating for the Natura Forests), private national impact of changes Forests) administrators, 2000 restrictions, in order to ensure forest in carbon management and INCDS-MD, sustainable forest management within administrators, on their impact on the universities natural areas that have become INCDS-MD, accounted quantities that protected following changes in the universities count toward Romania’s management system emission reduction targets 94 Adaptation Tables: Agriculture and Rural Development Adaptation: Agriculture and Estimated Proposed Objective 1: Promote the transfer of Result Existing Rural starting / and Existing responsible Proposed partner Monitoring knowledge and consultancy services on Responsible body indicator/ monitoring Proposed indicator Reporting Development completion Indicator monitoring institutions frequency climate change among farmers measure unit arrangement dates (year) agency Type of action Capacity NRDP Measure 1 – Knowledge transfer and 2016-2022 Ministry of Number of Number of trainees MARD Yearly Yearly building information actions Agriculture and trainees - - Sub-measure 1.1 - Support for vocational Rural training and skills acquisition Development NRDP Measure 2 – Advisory services, farm (MARD) management and farm relief services Sub-measure 2.1 – Advisory services for farmers, young farmers, micro-enterprises and Number of Number of advised persons small enterprises in rural areas advised persons Research/ Regular updating of climate scenarios based on 2016-2020 Ministry of Assessment - - Assessment study and MEWF MEWF / National Yearly Yearly Analysis Romania’s regional climate adaption models, Environment, study/number updates/number of works/coverage Meteorological and impact assessment in the agricultural Water and Forests of works (percent of country Administration / sector (MEWF), National surface)/availability of modelling National Institute of Meteorological updates at least every 3 years or Hydrology and Administration synchronized with international Water Management (NMA), National requirements (IPCC) Institute of Hydrology and Water Management Adaptation: Agriculture and Estimated Proposed Objective 2: Rehabilitate and Existing Proposed Rural starting / and Result Existing Proposed responsible Monitoring modernize the irrigation and Responsible body monitoring partner Reporting Development completion indicator/measure unit Indicator indicator monitoring frequency drainage infrastructure arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Investment NRDP Measure 4 – Investments in 2016-2022 MARD/ Rural The surface (in ha) - - The surface (in MARD RIFA Yearly Yearly physical assets Investment Financing targeted for water- ha) targeted for Sub-measure 4.3 – Investments in Agency (RIFA) saving investments (i.e. water-saving the development, modernization or more efficient irrigation investments adaptation of agricultural and systems, etc.) / 362,745 forestry infrastructure 95 Adaptation: Agriculture Estimated Proposed Objective 3: Appropriate management of Existing Proposed and Rural starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring agricultural land for climate change Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Development completion body Indicator monitoring frequency adaptation arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Financial/legal EAGF: The payment for agricultural 2016-2022 MARD/ Number of farmers enrolled in the Number of farmers enrolled MARD APIA Yearly Yearly practices beneficial for the climate and the Agency for scheme - - in the scheme environment (greening or green payments) Payments Area (ha) – 30,000 Area enrolled (ha) NRDP: NRDP Measure 10 – Agri- and environment and climate 2015-2022 Intervention Sub-measure 10.1 – Payments for agri- in environmental and climate commitments Agriculture (package 5 – adaption to CC effects) {APIA} Institutional/ See NRDP Measure 1 – Knowledge transfer 2016-2022 MARD Public expenditures - - Public expenditures MARD - Yearly Yearly capacity and information actions Number of actions building Sub-measure 1.2 – Support for Number of people reached demonstration and information actions Regional distribution of people reached Legal/financial NRDP Measure 17 - Risk management 2016-2022 MARD/RIFA Number of agricultural holdings that - - Number and percent of MARD RIFA Yearly Yearly Sub-measure 17.2 – Mutual Funds participate in mutual funds / 15,000 agricultural holdings that participate in mutual funds National system for anti-hail and 2016-2020 MARD Protected area (thou. ha) - - Surface of protected area MARD Yearly Yearly precipitation increase EAGF-funded Insurance premiums for wine 2014-2018 MARD/APIA Surface ensured (ha) / 15,000 per year - - Surface ensured (ha) MARD APIA Yearly Yearly grape producers Number of requests for support / 300- Number of requests for 350,000 support Total expenditure / 350,000 - 450,000 Total expenditure EUR per year 96 Adaptation Tables: Drinking Water and Water Resources Adaptation: Drinking Water Estimated Proposed Objective 1: Reduce the risk of water Existing Proposed and Water starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring shortages Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Resources completion unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Investment Support utility investments aimed at 2016-2020 Ministry of Regional Percent of reduction of - - Percent of reduction of MDRAP Yearly Yearly reducing system losses in water Development and losses/ number of Km of losses distribution networks (currently estimated Public Administration pipes replaced at approx. 50%). (MDRAP) Length of pipes replaced Investment Promote treated wastewater reuse in 2016-2020 MEWF m3 of water saving - - Amount of water saved MEWF MDRAP Yearly Yearly industrial sectors MDRAP Share of waste water Research/ Assess the impact of climate change on the 2016-2020 MEWF, National Assessment study - - Existence of the MEWF NMA, National Yearly Yearly Analysis water resource sector based on the regular Meteorological regularly updated Study Institute of updating of climate evolution scenarios for Administration (NMA), report (based on the hydrology and Romania National Institute of results and correlated Water hydrology and Water with the scenario Management Management modelling) Research/ Assess feasibility of using aquifers coupled 2016-2020 MEWF m3 of water saving - - Amount of water saved MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly Analysis with artificial recharge for inter-annual Ministry of Education Assessment study (m3) water storage in water-scarce basins and Scientific Research m3 stored Regularly (every 5 yrs.) (MECS) updated assessment study Amount of stored water (m3) Policy Establish requirements for protection of 2016-2020 MEWF Regulation in force - - Enforced regulation MEWF - Yearly Yearly critical water supply sources (reservoirs or aquifers) in water-scarce localities Research/ Assess feasibility of desalinization for 2016-2020 MEWF Number of studies - - Number of recently MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly Analysis provision of drinking water supplies in MECS updated assessment water-scarce coastal basins studies Percent of water scarce coastal basins with available studies Research/ Follow through studies like the 2016-2020 MEWF Number of studies - - Number of recently MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly Analysis “Identification of the main water-scarce MECS updated assessment NARW areas at the national level, under the National Administration studies Institute of current circumstances and in the prospect for Romanian Waters Hydrology of climate change”, in the context of CC (NARW) NMA effects Institute of Hydrology NMA Research/ Ensure that RBMPs under preparation in 2016-2020 MEWF Number of integrated Number and share of MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly Analysis 2015 are updated with respect to climate MECS RBMPs integrated RBMPs (year NARW change NARW of last update) Research/ Conduct analysis to assess the specific 2016-2020 Environment Fund Number of studies Number of studies EFA MECS Yearly Yearly Analysis levels and types of irrigated agriculture Administration (EFA) that can be sustained in each of the river MECS basins, accounting for climate change impacts Research/ Conduct quantitative assessments for 2016-2020 MEWF Number of studies Number of studies MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly Analysis water needs of various ecosystems MECS 97 Adaptation: Drinking Water Estimated Proposed Objective 1: Reduce the risk of water Existing Proposed and Water starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring shortages Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Resources completion unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Research/ Conduct meteorological, hydrological and 2016-2018 MARD – Administration Number of studies Number of studies MARD Administration Yearly Yearly Analysis climatology studies in order to develop, of the National System of the National optimize and assess the impact of the for Anti-Hail and System for Anti- cloud seeding technology included in the Precipitation Increase Hail and National System for Anti-Hail and Precipitation Precipitation Increase Increase Investment Setting up operational cloud seeding 2018-2020 MARD – Administration Number of operational Number of operational MARD Administration Yearly Yearly facilities within the National System for of the National System facilities facilities of the National Anti-Hail and Precipitation Increase for Anti-Hail and System for Anti- Precipitation Increase Hail and Precipitation Increase Policy Establish regulations to limit the use of 2016-2020 MEWF Legislation adopted Legislation adopted MEWF Yearly Yearly groundwater, in the areas where groundwater over-abstraction is leading to serious depletion of aquifers. Adaptation: Drinking Water Estimated Existing Proposed Proposed and Water Objective 2: Reduce flood risk starting / and Result indicator/ Existing Monitoring Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator responsible partner Reporting Resources completion measure unit Indicator frequency arrangement monitoring agency institutions dates (year) Type of action Investment Upgrade the existing radar network for 2016-2020 NMA Number of new radars - - Number of new radars NMA - Yearly Yearly measuring precipitation intensity, and installing a new radar station in Slobozia area to monitor extreme weather phenomena occurring around the curvature of the Carpathian Mts. Research/ Assess feasibility of regulation for monitoring 2016-2020 MEWF Adoption of the legal act - - Regulation update MEWF - Yearly Yearly Analysis and managing construction activities in the high flood-risk areas. Adaptation: Drinking Water Estimated Proposed Objective 3: Enhance the Existing Proposed and Water starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring environmental safety of dams and monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Resources completion body unit Indicator monitoring frequency dykes arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Investment Construction, renewal and 2016-2020 MEWF Number of infrastructures - - Number of infrastructures (built, MEWF NARW Yearly Yearly improvement of the safety of flood NARW (built, renewed) renewed) management infrastructure, estimated Area protected at 8 billion EUR; investments should be Number of population protected prioritized on the basis of updated Percent of flood management flood hazard/risk mapping (Flood infrastructure up-to-date Directive) 98 Adaptation Tables: Human Environment (Infrastructure and Urban Planning) Adaptation: Estimated Proposed Human Existing Proposed Objective 1: Holistic urban planning for starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring Environment Responsible body Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting climate resilient cities completion Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Policy Upgrade of the master plans – the land By 2020 MDRAP Number of upgraded MPs - - Number and share of MDRAP Local Yearly Yearly use planning document, the general integrating CC issues upgraded MPs integrating CC authorities transport master plan (MP), as well as Local authorities issues other sectoral planning processes so as to better integrate CC considerations in the design and contents of the plans Institutional/ Providing local authorities with training By 2020 MDRAP Number of local authorities - - Number of local authorities MDRAP Local Yearly Yearly capacity on how to integrate CC considerations in Local authorities taking part in the training and persons taking part in the authorities building the local planning processes sessions training sessions Number of local authorities Number of local authorities thoroughly integrating CC in and persons thoroughly their planning processes integrating CC in their planning processes Investment Investment in CC resilient infrastructure By 2020 and Regional authorities Level of investment (EUR) in - - Level of investment (EUR) in MDRAP Regional Yearly Yearly systems, technologies and structures beyond Local authorities / new CC resilient infrastructure new CC resilient authorities Private sector infrastructure Local Percent of infrastructure that authorities / is considered CC resilient Private sector Adaptation: Objective 2: Adjustment of the existing Estimated Proposed Human Existing Proposed building codes and other field-related starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring Environment monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting codes and norms so as to better respond to completion body unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions climate and extreme weather conditions dates (year) agency Type of action Policy Changes in the building codes and relevant By 2020 NMA Number of modified codes - - Number and share of MDRAP NMA Yearly Yearly building policies (including zoning) to reflect MDRAP and norms modified codes and norms Local authorities future climate change Local authorities Institutional/ Projecting the results of small scale climate By 2020 NMA Number of people - - Number of people MDRAP NMA Yearly Yearly capacity models for different regions in Romania MDRAP participating in the local participating in the local Local authorities building Developing training programs for civil Local authorities training sessions on the training sessions on the servants working in local public building codes changes building codes changes administration as well as for other Number of awareness raising Number and scope of stakeholders on how to translate accurately campaigns awareness raising the CC data into the national and local campaigns building policies Developing training programs and other forms of information dissemination to help communicate the data on CC risks to building owners and managers Investment Investment in advanced hydro- By 2020 NMA Weather stations that may - - Weather stations that may NMA Yearly Yearly meteorological systems allowing for better contribute to CC data contribute to CC data CC modeling across the country modeling in the National modeling in the National Meteorological Meteorological Administration Administration (to be coordinated with actions in the water sector) 99 Adaptation: Estimated Objective 3: Adapting risk assessment Proposed Human starting / Existing Proposed and risk coverage plans, as well as Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring Environment and Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting specific contingency plans, by taking unit Indicator monitoring frequency completion arrangement institutions climate change into account agency Type of action dates (year) Policy Preparation of updated guidance in the By 2020 General Inspectorate for Revision of the planning - - Revision of the planning GIES Yearly Yearly CC context, regarding the risk Emergency Situations guidance guidance assessment and management plans, as (GIES) well as the specific contingency plans Institutional/ Development of training programs for By 2020 GIES Number of local authorities - - Number of local authorities GIES Local Yearly Yearly capacity the local stakeholders on the new taking part in the training and number of persons authorities building guidance/ new disaster management programs taking part in the training policy Number of disaster programs management plans Number of disaster containing the latest CC management plans data containing the latest CC data Adaptation: Estimated Proposed Human Existing Proposed starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring Environment Objective 4: Strengthening local capacity Responsible body Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Policy Developing CC focused training programs By 2020 MEWF Number and types of curricula - - Percent of needed curricula MEWF Yearly Yearly for civil servants working in local designed for various types of types developed administration and other local audience Number and types of stakeholders curricula designed for various types of audience Institutional/ Implementation of CC focused training By 2020 MEWF Number of participants in the - - Number of participants in MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly capacity programs and other capacity CC focused training programs the CC focused training building strengthening measures for civil servants Number of students and pupils programs working in local administration and other MECS participating in the CC curricula Number of students and local stakeholders pupils participating in the Development of CC university and high- CC curricula school curricula tailored for students and high-school pupils 100 Adaptation Tables: Transport Objective 1: Mainstream climate Adaptation: Estimated change considerations into key Existing Proposed Proposed Transport starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing Monitoring planning and decision-making Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator responsible partner Reporting completion unit Indicator frequency processes arrangement monitoring agency institutions Type of action dates (year) Public policy Emergency preparedness planning 2016-2022 Ministry of Transport Planning document - - Existence of the MT Yearly Yearly Review of road and rail design and 2016-2022 (MT) Number of revised planning document safety standards MT standards Number and percent of revised standards Institutional/ Revised planning and project 2016-2022 MT Revised planning - - Revised planning MT Yearly Yearly capacity development documentation document document building Investment Asset inventory - areas vulnerable 2016-2022 MT Vulnerable area inventory - - Vulnerable area MT Yearly Yearly to climate change updated (every 5 years) inventory Adaptation: Estimated Objective 2: Conduct vulnerability Existing Proposed Proposed Transport starting / and Result indicator/ Existing Monitoring assessments for the transport Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator responsible partner Reporting completion measure unit Indicator frequency sector arrangement monitoring agency institutions Type of action dates (year) Institutional/ Technical assistance (TA) to 2016-2022 MEWF, MT Number of vulnerability - - Number and scope of MEWF MT Yearly Yearly capacity develop vulnerability assessments assessment TA contracts vulnerability assessment building TA contracts Investment Asset inventory - areas vulnerable 2016-2022 MT Operational inventory - - Operational updated MT Yearly Yearly to climate change (every 5 years) inventory 101 Adaptation Tables: Industry Adaptation: Objective 1: Increase use of Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Industry preventive measures and be well starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting prepared for climate-related completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action emergency situations in key industries dates (year) agency Policy Plan of action on adaptation to the CC 2018-2020 Ministry of Adopting the action plan - - Adopting the updated (every METT MEWF Yearly Yearly effects in industrial sectors Economy, Trade 5 years) action plan and Tourism (METT) Institutional/ Improving expertise in risk assessment 2016-2020 METT Number of climate risk - - Number of climate risk METT MEWF Yearly Yearly capacity and risk management and climate management experts management trained experts building vulnerabilities in industry Number of training courses Number of training courses Investment Procedures and supplying the 2016-2018 METT Number of industrial sectors - - Number of industrial sectors METT MEWF Yearly Yearly necessary equipment in case of prepared for emergency response prepared for emergency emergencies in most vulnerable to CC caused disasters response to CC caused industries disasters Objective 2: Increase awareness among Adaptation: Estimated private owners of industrial enterprises Existing Proposed Proposed Industry starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing Monitoring on the need for measures of climate Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator responsible partner Reporting completion unit Indicator frequency change adaptation arrangement monitoring agency institutions Type of action dates (year) Policy Integrating adaptation measures to CC 2018-2020 METT Number of industrial units - - Number and share of METT Private and Yearly Yearly in industrial enterprises management industrial units including CC in state owned system its policy companies Institutional/ Establishing an online platform for the 2016-2020 Professional Number of visits to the - - Existence of an updated web MEWF Professional Yearly Yearly capacity exchange of information on the results associations portal portal associations building of monitoring the effects of climate Number of visits to the portal change and the best adaptation measures implemented Institutional/ Dissemination of best practice on cost 2018-2020 Partnership: Number of disseminated - - Number of disseminated best Partnership: METT MEWF Yearly Yearly capacity effective CC adaption measures METT /Chamber best practices practices y/Chamber of building implemented in industry of Trade and Number of persons reached Trade and Industry Industry by dissemination strategy /Employers’ /Employers’ associations associations Investment Integrated studies on CC and its effects 2017-2019 METT Number of studies - - Number of studies METT MEWF Yearly Yearly on industrial sectors, identifying Share of sectors with recent vulnerabilities and adaptation measures studies Investment Information campaigns on CC effects 2016-2020 Non- Number of information - - Number and scope of NGOs MEWF Yearly Yearly and cross-sectoral best practice governmental campaigns information campaigns examples of adaption measures organizations (NGOs) Adaptation: Objective 3: Support increased use Estimated Existing Proposed Proposed Industry of insurance against industrial losses starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ measure Existing Monitoring monitoring Proposed indicator responsible partner Reporting due to climate events completion body unit Indicator frequency arrangement monitoring agency institutions Type of action dates (year) Policy Reducing the impact on the industry 2016-2020 Insurance Number of insurance tools - - Number of insurance instruments Insurance Yearly Yearly by identifying CC insurance solutions companies Share of industrial actors with access companies to appropriate insurance instruments 102 Adaptation: Objective 3: Support increased use Estimated Existing Proposed Proposed Industry of insurance against industrial losses starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ measure Existing Monitoring monitoring Proposed indicator responsible partner Reporting due to climate events completion body unit Indicator frequency arrangement monitoring agency institutions Type of action dates (year) Investment Creating climate risk insurance funds 2019-2020 Insurance Number of insurance - - Number of insurance companies Insurance Yearly Yearly in the industry companies companies establishing establishing funds for climate risks in companies funds for climate risks in the industry the industry Overall value of the business related to climate risk 103 Adaptation Tables: Energy Adaptation: Objective 1 : Determine the critical Estimated Existing Proposed Proposed Energy infrastructure in energy systems and starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing Monitoring Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator responsible monitoring partner Reporting put in place measures for dealing completion unit Indicator frequency arrangement agency institutions Type of action with the impacts of extreme events dates (year) Policy Development of the energy strategy 2016 Ministry of Energy, Small Adoption of the strategy - - Strategy document MESMEBE Yearly Yearly for 2016-2035, including adaptation and Medium-sized document measures for supply and demand Enterprises and Business Environment (MESMEBE) Institutional/ Study identifying the risks of adapting 2016-2020 Study regarding the risks - - Study regarding the MESMEBE Yearly Yearly capacity the critical energy infrastructure related to critical risks related to building infrastructure critical infrastructure Adaptation: Estimated Objective 2: Understand the Existing Proposed Proposed Energy starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing Monitoring potential impacts of climate change Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator responsible monitoring partner Reporting completion unit Indicator frequency in the energy demand system arrangement agency institutions Type of action dates (year) Policy Development of the energy strategy 2016 MESMEBE Adoption of the strategy - - Strategy document MESMEBE - Yearly Yearly 2016-2035, including adaptation document measures for supply and demand Institutional/ Study regarding the development of 2016-2020 MESMEBE Study regarding - - Study regarding MESMEBE - Yearly Yearly capacity the institutional capacity to institutional responsibilities institutional responsibilities building evaluate CC adaptation risks for adaption for adaption Further training on CC adaptation Number of training courses Number of training courses for the relevant institutions and Number of participants Number of participants companies in the energy sector 104 Adaptation Tables: Tourism and Recreation Estimated Adaptation: Tourism Objective 1: Protecting and Proposed starting / Existing Proposed and Recreation enlarging natural recreational Existing responsible Monitoring and Responsible body Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting areas in cities and in their Indicator monitoring frequency completion arrangement institutions Type of action vicinity agency dates (year) Policy Defining the concept and 2015- Major municipalities Regulatory document - - Existence of regularly updated maps MDRAP Rank I Yearly Yearly mapping the natural onwards (cities ranking I in in the regulatory document municipalities recreational areas in cities and Law no. 351/2001) their vicinity (with precise and the surface and boundaries) on the municipalities in appropriate land use plan (PUG urban and PUZ). agglomerations Policy Integrating the natural 2015- Major municipalities Action plans of metropolitan - - Number and share of action plans of MDRAP Rank I Yearly Yearly recreational areas in cities and onwards (cities ranking I in areas that include nature metropolitan areas that include municipalities their vicinity into the national Law no. 351/2001) recreational areas nature recreational areas territorial planning document and the (PATN, Law 351/2001), under municipalities in the metropolitan areas as one urban of the main objectives of the agglomerations association of municipalities. Policy Introduction of the landscape 2015 – 2025 Municipalities Number of new urban planning - - Number and share of new urban MDRAP Municipalities Yearly Yearly planning and recreation regulations that include planning regulations that include opportunity spectrum (ROS) landscape and recreation as a landscape and recreation as a urban approach in the urban planning urban sprawl management sprawl management technique regulations and/or their technique implementation. Policy Drafting of a maintenance and 2015- Major municipalities Peri-urban natural areas zoning - - Strategies for peri-urban natural MDRAP Rank I Yearly Yearly development strategy for the onwards (cities ranking I in strategies areas municipalities green areas around urban Law 351/2001) and Percent of peri-urban areas that areas: parks, urban gardens, the municipalities in have relevant strategies natural areas overlapping their urban agricultural land, etc. agglomerations Institutional/capacity Training of urban planning 2015-2023 Municipalities Number of training courses - - Number of training courses MDRAP Municipalities Yearly Yearly building personnel to understand the Number of participants Percent of urban planning personnel landscape and recreational with recent training planning (ROS) practices Number of participants Investment Development of peri-urban 2015- Major municipalities Peri-urban nature recreation - - Number of strategies for peri-urban MDRAP Rank I Yearly Yearly natural recreational parks onwards (cities ranking I in areas open to the public at nature recreation areas open to the municipalities according to the zoning strategy Law 351/2001) and large for recreation public the municipalities in Percent of peri-urban areas as their agglomeration recreation areas open to the public Adaptation: Tourism and Objective 2: Strategic planning Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Recreation for developing tourism starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting destinations that are less completion body unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of dependent on climate change dates (year) agency action Policy 2.1.Developing a ranking system 2015-2017 National Ranking system - - Ranking system in place NAT NIRDT, Yearly Yearly for assessing risks and Authority for MEWF opportunities arising from Tourism (NAT), climate change on each tourism National destination sector (Risk and Institute for Opportunity Ranking system – Research and 105 Adaptation: Tourism and Objective 2: Strategic planning Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Recreation for developing tourism starting / and Responsible Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting destinations that are less completion body unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of dependent on climate change dates (year) agency action ROR System) Development in Tourism (NIRDT), MEWF Policy 2.2 Listing all the available 2017-2018 NAT Complete list of - - Updated list of destination made available NAT Yearly Yearly destinations on each tourism destinations; sector and prioritizing them using Prioritizing list. the above ROR System (updating the list whenever necessary). Policy 2.3 Developing or updating 2018-2019 NAT Minimum five sectoral - - Five sectoral tourism strategies approved (during NAT Yearly Yearly sectorial tourism strategies and tourism strategies the time period), made available and regularly action plans (e.g. spa tourism, updated ecotourism, MICE [Meetings, Incentives, Conventions and Exhibitions], mountain tourism, coastal tourism) considering climate change adaptation based on risk and opportunity analysis. Policy 2.4 Developing destination 2018-2020 NAT, County Minimum ten destinations - - Ten strategies and action plans approved (during NAT County Councils Yearly Yearly strategies and action plans for Councils and strategies the time period), made available and regularly and Local each prioritized destination in Local updated Municipalities Romania considering sectorial Municipalities tourism strategy and climate change risk and opportunity analysis. Policy 2.5 Adopting regulatory 2015-2018 NAT, MDRAP, Number of new provisions - - Number and scope of provisions in the urban NAT MDRAP, Yearly Yearly framework for ensuring a better MEWF, in the urban planning planning regulations and funding criteria for the MEWF, NEPA energy efficiency of tourism National regulations and funding adaptation of tourism facilities to climate change infrastructure and facilities (solar Environmental criteria for the adaptation architecture, etc.) as part of land Protection of tourism facilities to use planning and funding Agency (NEPA) climate change projects. Adaptation: Tourism and Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Recreation Objective 3: Long term planning for starting / and Result indicator/ Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting season green mountain resorts completion measure unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of dates (year) agency action Policy 3.1 Developing green mountain 2015-2017 NAT, NIRDT Green mountain - - Set of criteria considering climate change NAT NIRDT Yearly Yearly destination* criteria considering climate destination set of adaptation and effective management of change adaptation and effective criteria a tourist destination made available management of a tourist destination (e.g. Alpine Pearls network in the Alps) and defining the minimum conditions to become a green mountain destination. Policy 3.2 Evaluation of mountain destination 2017-2020 NAT, NIRDT List of green mountain - - List of green mountain destinations made NAT NIRDT Yearly Yearly according to criteria. destinations available 106 Adaptation: Tourism and Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Recreation Objective 3: Long term planning for starting / and Result indicator/ Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting season green mountain resorts completion measure unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of dates (year) agency action Policy 3.3 Developing green mountain 2016-2020 NAT, County Global network - - Number of resorts included in green NAT County Councils Yearly Yearly destination strategies and action plans Councils and Local mountains global networks and Local (correlated with action 2.4) to become Municipalities Number of resorts supported to convert Municipalities sustainable all-year green mountain resorts. Capacity 3.4 Establishing Green Mountain 2017- NAT, County Operational GM DMO - - GM DMO operational NAT County Councils Yearly Yearly building Destination Management Organization onwards Councils and Local and Local (GM DMO), resource allocation and Municipalities Municipalities training Policy 3.5 Implementation of a crisis 2015-2018 Local Operational crisis - - Operational crisis management system NAT Local Yearly Yearly management system caused by natural municipalities, management system municipalities, hazards by the municipalities, DMOs and NAT, GIES, NEPA NAT, GIES, tourism operators NEPA Investment 3.6 Implement economical, cost- 2019- DMOs, Local Number of solutions - - Number of solutions identified and NAT DMOs, Local Yearly Yearly effective and innovative solutions for onwards Municipalities, implemented Number of solutions implemented Municipalities, green infrastructure development in County Councils Number of areas with solutions County Councils mountainous areas (correlated with 3.3.) implemented Estimated Adaptation: Tourism Proposed Objective 4: Adapting coastal tourism to starting / Existing and Recreation Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Proposed partner Monitoring climate change and protecting it by and Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator Reporting unit Indicator monitoring institutions frequency infrastructure measures completion arrangement Type of action agency dates (year) Policy Developing planning regulations and 2018 -2020 DMOs, County Percent of coastal - - Percent of coastal DMOs DMOs, Local Yearly Yearly action plans (correlated with 2.4 and 4.1) Council and Local municipalities covered by municipalities covered by Municipalities, Municipalities regulation planning regulation planning County Councils considering climate change considering climate change Share of population covered by regulation planning considering climate change Policy Implementation of a crisis management 2015-2018 Local Operational crisis - - Operational crisis NAT Local Yearly Yearly system for tackling natural disasters – by municipalities, NAT, management system management system municipalities, the municipalities, DMOs and tourism GIES, NEPA made available GIES, NEPA operators Institutional/capacity Establishing Destination Management 2018 - MEWF, County Number of public employees - - Number and share of MEWF Local Yearly Yearly building Organizations (DMOs), resource onwards Council, Local trained for the public employees trained Municipalities, allocation and training for developing Municipalities measurement and for the measurement and County Councils and implementing action plans for the monitoring of the coastal monitoring of the coastal tourism development based on climate territory carrying capacity territory carrying capacity change adaptation Investment Risk assessing of vulnerable coastal areas 2016-2018 NAT, Local Risk maps for the coastal - - Risk maps for the coastal NAT Local Yearly Yearly (risk maps) municipalities, area area municipalities, MEWF, MDRAP, Percent of coastal areas MEWF, MDRAP, NEPA, GIES with risk maps NEPA, GIES 107 Estimated Adaptation: Tourism Proposed Objective 4: Adapting coastal tourism to starting / Existing and Recreation Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Proposed partner Monitoring climate change and protecting it by and Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator Reporting unit Indicator monitoring institutions frequency infrastructure measures completion arrangement Type of action agency dates (year) Investment Innovative and environmentally-friendly 2018- Local Number of km of beaches - - Number of km of beaches NAT Local Yearly Yearly measures for beach nourishment municipalities, NAT, that are protected against that are protected against municipalities, MDRAP, GIES, erosion erosion MEWF, MDRAP, NEPA, etc. NEPA, GIES Estimated Adaptation: Tourism Proposed Objective 5: Long term planning, policy and starting / Existing and Recreation Responsible Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Proposed partner Monitoring education for climate change resilient and monitoring Proposed indicator Reporting body unit Indicator monitoring institutions frequency tourism destinations completion arrangement Type of action agency dates (year) Capacity building Developing tourism & climate change 2016-2018 NAT, NIRDT 2 sets of guidelines - - Number of guidelines NAT NIRDT Yearly Yearly guidelines and training for national and local level stakeholders Number of training Number of training programs programs Number of persons recently trained Policy Adapting the action plans for tourism 2017- NAT, DMOs Action plans - - Number and share of action NAT DMOs Yearly Yearly product development, marketing and plans infrastructure development based on the tourism & climate change guidelines Institutional/capacity Creation of curriculum content for DMO 2016-2020 NAT, MECS, New curricula created - - New curricula created MEWF MECS, universities Yearly Yearly building managers, to enhance their abilities in universities climate change adaptation and GHG mitigation actions/management Institutional/capacity Drafting guidelines for tourism operators 2015-2018 NAT, tourism Number of guidelines for - - Number of guidelines for tourism NAT Tourism Yearly Yearly building (accommodation, etc.) on the measures for operators’ tourism operators operators operators’ adapting their offer to climate change. associations associations Percent of tourism operators who have received appropriate guidelines Institutional/capacity Drafting guidelines for academic and 2015-2018 NAT, NIRDT Number of guidelines for - - Number of guidelines for NAT NIRDT Yearly Yearly building professional education on the measures for academic and professional academic and professional adapting their curricula to climate change. tourism education tourism education Number of persons reached by the guidelines 108 Adaptation Tables: Forestry Adaptation: Objective 1: Improve the Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Forestry management of forests to improve starting / and Result indicator/ Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting their adaptive capacity to climate completion measure unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action change dates (year) agency Policy Update of the technical norms for 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests), National Update and approval of - - Percent of technical norms updated MEWF NFA, Yearly Yearly forest management, to make valuable Forest Administration (NFA), the technical norms and approved (DG Forests) INCDS-MD, forests management more efficient National Research and with adaptation universities and effective in terms of climate Development Institute for measures included change adaptation Forestry “Marin Dracea” (INCDS-MD), universities Institutional/ Upscale general economy and 2017 MEWF (DG Forests), INCDS- Practical training and - - Number of practical trainings MEWF INCDS-MD, Yearly Yearly Capacity market knowledge among forestry MD, universities awareness raising (DG Forests) universities Building operators and along the wood handbook Number of persons reached processing chain, so as the local and through trainings or receiving regional forestry sector can anticipate handbook climate change and ensure sector resilience Awareness raising handbook available Investment Development of the anticipation 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests), MECS, Indicators of research - - Available indicators for research MEWF NFA, Yearly Yearly capacity through the analysis of the NFA, INCDS-MD, universities success (publications, activity (publications, patents for (DG Forests) INCDS-MD, forest response in various climate patents for technological solutions) universities change scenarios and through the technological solutions) adaptation of forest operations to Available functional models for new climate conditions Functional forestry forestry ecosystem dynamics ecosystem dynamics modeling modeling Adaptation: Objective 2: Adaptation of forest Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Forestry regeneration practices to the starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting necessities imposed by climate completion unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action change dates (year) agency Policy Update technical norms for forest 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests), Enforced new technical - - Available enforced new technical MEWF INCDS-MD, Yearly Yearly regeneration, to include the latest INCDS-MD, norms for forest norms for forest regeneration (DG Forests) universities, scientific findings in the area of universities, public regeneration public and species distribution and suitability in and private forest Percent of technical norms that private forest the context of climate change administrators have been recently updated administrators Institutional/ Stimulation of future distribution of 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests), Specific indicators for - - Specific indicators for research MEWF INCDS-MD, Yearly Yearly capacity building species in the context of climate INCDS-MD, research projects projects (DG Forests) universities, change and prioritization of areas universities, NFA NFA where changes in forest composition Number of reports Number of reports must be considered for climate change adaptation purposes Validation and integration in Validation and integration in the the updated technical norms updated technical norms Continuous research in the area of 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests), approved - - approved MEWF (DG MECS, INCDS- Yearly Yearly genetic resources and climate change MECS, INCDS-MD, Forests) MD, implications in forest genetic Functional forestry Available functional models for universities, universities, NFA ecosystem dynamics forestry ecosystem dynamics resources NFA 109 Adaptation: Objective 2: Adaptation of forest Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Forestry regeneration practices to the starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting necessities imposed by climate completion unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action change dates (year) agency Revision of the network of genetic 2019-2020 MEWF (DG Forests), modeling - - modeling MEWF (DG INCDS-MD, Yearly Yearly resources for forest species INCDS-MD, Forests) universities, universities, NFA Approved technical Approved technical guidelines on NFA guidelines on the trading, the trading, transfer and transfer and management of management of genetic genetic resources resources Adaptation: Objective 3: Minimization of climate Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Forestry change risk for forestry and through starting / and Result indicator/ Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting forestry completion measure unit Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Policy Maintain and improve the monitoring and 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests), Functional monitoring - - Functional monitoring MEWF (DG Forest Yearly Yearly observation system for biotic and abiotic forest system system (reviewed/updated Forests) administrators forest pests, forest fires, drying of forests, administrators (e.g. Publicly disclosed reports every two years) (e.g. NFA), windfall disturbance and the evolution of NFA), INCDS-MD, of the monitoring units Publicly disclosed reports of INCDS-MD, invasive wooden species in forests universities the monitoring units universities Institutional/ Continuing research for better 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests), Specific indicators for - - Specific indicators for MEWF (DG Forest Yearly Yearly capacity building understanding of the climate change effects forest research projects research projects Forests) administrators on forests and finding scientifically proved administrators (e.g. Level of funding of research (e.g. NFA), solutions for practical actions against forest NFA), INCDS-MD, projects dedicated to the INCDS-MD, pests, forest drying phenomena and universities, NMA subject universities, invasive species evolution NMA Strengthen the signaling and rapid reaction 2016-2020 MEWF (DG Forests, Enforced system of - - Enforced system of MEWF (DG GIES, INCDS-MD, Yearly Yearly systems to forest fires Forestry Guard), signaling and rapid signaling and rapid reaction Forests, universities, GIES, INCDS-MD, reaction to forest fires to forest fires Forestry forest universities, forest Guard) administrators administrators Continuous research in understanding the 2016-2020 MECS, NFA, INCDS- Specific indicators for Specific indicators for MECS NFA, INCDS-MD, attenuation effects of forests in mitigating MD, NMA, research projects research projects NMA, land sliding, droughts and help water universities, etc. universities, etc. management 110 Adaptation Tables: Biodiversity Adaptation: Objective 1: Vulnerability assessments of Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Biodiversity natural habitats and protected species of starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting flora and fauna based on monitoring completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action system of conservation status dates (year) agency Policy Development of the National Program to 2016-2018 MEWF Approved national vulnerability - - Availability of an approved MEWF - Yearly Yearly assess the vulnerability of natural habitats assessment program for CC national vulnerability and protected species to climate change natural habitats protected assessment program for CC species to CC natural habitats protected species to CC Institutional/ Designate the responsible bodies to assess 2016 MEWF A responsible body - - Listing of responsible bodies MEWF - Yearly Yearly capacity the vulnerability of natural habitats and building protected species to climate change Establish and training a structured network 2018-2019 MEWF A network of observers - - Availability of a network of MEWF - Yearly Yearly of volunteer observers of the impact of observers [number and listing] climate change on biodiversity and changes in biodiversity Investment Develop the methodologies and protocols 2016-2018 MEWF/ MECS Number of methodologies/ - - Number of methodologies/ MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly to assess the CC vulnerability of natural protocols realized protocols realized habitats and protected species Integrate the CC vulnerability of natural 2019 MEWF/ Number of protected areas - - Number and share of protected MEWF Administrators/ Yearly Yearly habitats and protected species in the administrators/ where the vulnerability of areas where the vulnerability of custodians of biodiversity monitoring systems both at custodians of natural habitats and protected natural habitats and protected natural national and natural protected areas level natural species are integrated species are integrated protected areas protected areas Adaptation: Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Biodiversity Objective2: Maintain and increase starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting the resilience of ecosystems completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Policy Integrate climate change adaptation 2016-2020 MEWF Number of strategies and action - - Number and share of strategies and MEWF Yearly Yearly into strategies and national action plans that integrate climate change action plans that integrate climate plans for species protection and the adaptation change adaptation fight against alien invasive species Mainstream the effects of climate 2016-2020 MEWF Number of plans/projects that take - - Number and share of plans/projects MEWF Yearly Yearly change in assessments of the into account the climate change that take into account the climate environmental impacts of plans/ effects change effects projects submitted which infringe stringent protection of species Promote integrated land 2016-2020 MEWF Number of integrated management - - Number and share of integrated MEWF EFA Yearly Yearly management, mainstreaming the EFA plans that take into account the management plans that take into effects of climate change on climate change effects account the climate change effects biodiversity Pilot catchment based approaches 2016-2020 MEWF Number of plans that take into - - Number of plans that take into MEWF Yearly Yearly to water management account the climate change effects account the climate change effects Number of pilot projects Institutional/ Increase the capacity of the 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of decision makers trained - - Number of decision makers trained MEWF MDRAP, Yearly Yearly capacity building decision-makers to understand and MDRAP, Percent of targeted decision makers METT, assess the impact of climate change METT, by agency MESMEBE on the goods and services provided MESMEBE by ecosystems 111 Adaptation: Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Biodiversity Objective2: Maintain and increase starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting the resilience of ecosystems completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Investment Use green infrastructure in order to 2016-2020 MEWF No. of species with conservation - - Number of species with conservation MEWF NEPA Yearly Yearly assure the connectivity of status improved status improved populations or migration corridors, especially for fish species of community interest Estimated Adaptation: Objective 3: Increase the biodiversity Proposed starting / Existing Proposed Biodiversity capacity to accommodate to climate Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring and Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting change by promoting the adaptive body Indicator monitoring frequency completion arrangement institutions Type of action management agency dates (year) Policy Development of biodiversity management 2016-2017 MEWF Number of systems developed - - Number and share of systems MEWF Yearly Yearly using the decision-making system based developed on the monitoring data obtained in the field Establish the structure of the 2016-2017 MEWF Achieved structure - - Set up structure MEWF Yearly Yearly management plans for protected areas taking into account the adaptive management principles Vulnerability assessment and adaptation 2016-2019 MEWF Vulnerability assessment study - - Vulnerability assessment study MEWF Yearly Yearly strategy for SCIs and SPAs occurred in the Steppic and continental bio-geographic regions Studies on alien species presenting the 2016-2018 MEWF Number of studies - - Number of studies MEWF Yearly Yearly risk of invading the nature protected Percent of species (or areas) areas (in the framework of the addressed by studies management plans) Institutional/ Develop the capacity of the 2016-2018 MEWF Number of administrators/ - - Number and share of MEWF Yearly Yearly capacity building administrators and custodians of natural custodians applying the administrators/ custodians protected areas to apply the CC adaptive adaptive management applying the adaptive management principles principles management principles Investment Ecological restoration and nature recovery 2016-2020 MEWF Number of ha restored or - - Number and share of ha restored MEWF Yearly Yearly of the wetland habitats occurred in the Number of habitats and species or Number of habitats and natural protected areas situated in the with improved conservation species with improved Lower Danube Basin (in line with the status conservation status funding regulations and guidelines of the financing program) Improve the conservation status of the 2016-2020 MEWF Number of ha of each habitat - - Number and share of ha of each MEWF Yearly Yearly bogs, mires and fens – found within or type with improved habitat type with improved outside protected areas conservation status conservation status Develop and use the prevention fire 2016-2020 MEWF, No. of ha protected - - Number of ha protected MEWF administrators/ Yearly Yearly systems in the areas with a high risk of fire administrators/ custodians custodians 112 Adaptation: Estimated Proposed Objective 4: Evaluation of the ecosystem Existing Proposed Biodiversity starting / and Result indicator/ measure Existing responsible Monitoring services and implementing the ecosystems Responsible body monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting completion unit Indicator monitoring frequency approach in decision making systems arrangement institutions Type of action dates (year) agency Policy Include the evaluation of the ecosystem 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of management - - Number of management MEWF Administrators/ Yearly Yearly services and the ecosystem approach in the administrators/ systems of natural resources systems of natural resources custodians, management of natural resources custodians, local based on ecosystem approach based on ecosystem local public public approach administrations administrations Include the CC ecosystem approach in the 2016-2020 MESR Number of universities with - - Number of universities with MESR Yearly Yearly University curricula curricula curricula Embed the understanding of climate change 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of payment systems - - Number of payment systems MEWF Administrators/ Yearly Yearly into the payment system for ecosystem administrators/ and Number of natural and number of natural custodians, services and the business case for investing in custodians, METT, solutions applied in business solutions applied in business METT, MARD, natural solutions MARD, micro- micro- enterprises, SMEs enterprises, SMEs Institutional/ Increase the understanding capacity of public 2016-2020 MEWF, MDRAP Number of trained people - - Number of trained people MEWF MDRAP Yearly Yearly capacity authorities on ecosystem services value and building ecosystem approach in the CC context Establish of the Inter-governmental platform 2016-2020 MEWF Number of governmental - - Number of governmental MEWF Yearly Yearly for biodiversity and ecosystem services in entities included in the entities included in the order to provide the expertise required for Platform Platform policy-making relating to biodiversity within the framework of global change Develop special courses on CC adaption in the 2016-2020 MEWF Number of people trained - - Number of people trained MEWF Yearly Yearly ecosystem approach for managers of the natural resources and administrators/ custodians of the natural protected areas Investment Evaluate the ecosystem services provided by 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of protected areas - - Number of protected areas MEWF Administrators/ Yearly Yearly the natural protected areas and their administrators/ where the ecosystem services where the ecosystem custodians importance custodians were evaluated services were evaluated Evaluate the contribution of the natural 2016-2020 MEWF, - - Available evaluation MEWF Administrators/ Yearly Yearly protected areas network to the climate administrators/ custodians change control custodians Adaptation: Objective 5: Deepen/Enhance the knowledge Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Biodiversity and understanding of the role of biodiversity starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting and its contribution to climate change completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action adaptation dates (year) agency Policy Promote the scientific studies to enhance the 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of studies financed - - Number of studies financed MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly knowledge and understanding of the role of MECS Level of funding of research biodiversity and its contribution to climate projects dedicated to the subject change adaptation Reinforce research via modeling and scenario- 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of studies financed - - Number of studies financed MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly setting for biodiversity, notably in relation to MECS Level of funding of research the effect of environmental changes, by projects dedicated to the subject incorporating the socio-economic aspect Institutional/ Development of the technical and human 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of training courses/ - - Number of training courses/ MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly capacity capacities in order to enhance the knowledge MECS Number trainees Number trainees building and understanding of the biodiversity’s role and its contribution to climate change adaptation Promote and stimulate the know-how transfer 2016-2020 MEWF, Number of cases of know-how - - Number of cases of know-how MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly and experience exchange among different MECS transfer and experience transfer and experience research sectors and between research and exchange exchange economic sectors 113 Adaptation: Objective 5: Deepen/Enhance the knowledge Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Biodiversity and understanding of the role of biodiversity starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting and its contribution to climate change completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions Type of action adaptation dates (year) agency Create or designate a permanent center to 2015-2018 MEWF, Biodiversity Center - - Biodiversity Center made MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly study how biodiversity reacts to CC, where MECS available biodiversity experts from various fields can pool their scientific data sets and their ideas 114 Adaptation Tables: Public Health and Response Services in Emergency Situations Adaptation: Public Health Objective 1: Development of the capacity at Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed and Response national level to surveil public health starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Services events caused by various factors that completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions impact on public health dates (year) agency Type of action Policy Specific policy on the detection, assessment, 2016-2020 Ministry of Early warning systems in place - - Set-up early warning systems MoH Yearly Yearly notification and response to all acute health Health System of epidemiological Set-up system of epidemiological events or health risks that may constitute a (MoH) surveillance of the environment surveillance of the environment at threat to human health at national level achieved national level List of priority events for List of priority events for surveillance surveillance established available Facilitate planning and resource allocation 2016-2020 MoH Planned multi annual budgetary - - Available multi annual budgetary MoH Yearly Yearly on the basis of lessons learned from allocations allocations, including funding for program evaluation evaluation of programs Institutional/ TA for trainings and tools for early detection 2016-2020 MoH Number of trained personnel - - Number of trained personnel MoH Yearly Yearly capacity and response based on syndromic Number of guidelines prepared Share of targeted personnel recently building surveillance approach trained Number of guidelines or tools prepared TA for developing the environmental 2016-2020 MoH Number of studies prepared - - Number of studies prepared MoH MEWF Yearly Yearly surveillance activities by undertaking MEWF Number of TA programs Number of TA programs research studies on the factors that are likely to adversely affect public health TA for assessment of the capacity for early 2016-2018 MoH Number of national and local - - Number of national and local actual MoH Yearly Yearly detection of acute events with an impact on actual capacities for early capacities for early detection of public health; mapping across the country detection of serious public serious public health events assessed (industrial sites, large chemical installations, health events assessed Map of the risk areas for human chemical, radioactive or hazardous material Map of the risk areas for human health transportation routes, poultry, meat or health Percent of targeted events assessed seafood processing sites, and areas at risk for flooding or earthquakes) Investment Upgrading the IT equipment and 2016-2018 MoH Number of IT equipment and - - Number of IT equipment and MoH Yearly Yearly epidemiological software to implement the epidemiological software epidemiological software upgraded electronic surveillance system upgraded Percent of targeted equipment and epidemiological software upgraded Strengthening and upgrading the laboratory 2016-2020 MoH Labs rehabilitated and fully - - Number of labs rehabilitated and fully MoH Yearly Yearly equipment at the level of public health equipped at the level of public equipped at the level of public health institutes and public health directorates health institutes and public institutes and public health health directorates directorates 115 Adaptation: Public Health and Objective 2: Safeguard th e citizens’ Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Response health from impacts of disasters by starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Services strengthening the Romanian emergency completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions management system dates (year) agency Type of action Public policies Completion and harmonization of the 2016 Ministry of Regulatory framework approved - - Regulatory framework approved MIA Yearly Yearly regulatory framework for the national Internal Affairs emergency management system (MIA) – through Department for Emergency Situations (DES) and GIES Development the risk reduction strategy 2016-2018 Line ministries3 Risk reduction strategy - - Risk reduction strategy Line ministries Yearly Yearly and mitigation measures related to approved and implemented approved and implemented climate change with regard to human health in order to reduce natural disaster cases and vulnerability in critical areas in Romania Preparation of the Catastrophe Insurance 2016-2020 MPF, Line Catastrophe Insurance Program - - Catastrophe Insurance Program MPF, Line Yearly Yearly Program ministries prepared prepared and adopted ministries The development of a baseline model 2016-2018 Line ministries Baseline model and - - Baseline model and Line ministries Yearly Yearly and performance indicators, to better performance indicators performance indicators quantify risk and measure the impact of developed developed risk management strategies Institutional/ Establish risk monitoring capabilities and 2016-2020 Line ministries Number of risk monitoring - - Number of risk monitoring Line ministries Yearly Yearly capacity building early warning systems as integrated capabilities established capabilities established processes, with particular focus on emerging threats with global implications such as those related to climate variation and change Provision of TAs for training programs to 2016-2020 Line ministries Number of trained personnel - - Number of trained personnel Line ministries Yearly Yearly the representative of various functions Share of targeted personnel that involved in responding to emergencies has received training TA to develop mapping of each kind of 2016-2018 Line ministries Number of mappings by risk - - Number of mappings by risk Line ministries Yearly Yearly climate change threat categories categories Share of mappings by risk categories TA to develop the specific risk scenarios 2016-2018 Line ministries Earthquake scenario in specific - - Earthquake scenario in specific Line ministries Yearly Yearly regions regions available Floods scenario in a specific Floods scenario in a specific region region available TA for public awareness program 2016-2020 Line ministries - - To be developed by the line Line ministries Yearly Yearly ministries 3 Line ministries are [according to Emergency Ordinance no. 1/2014 regarding certain measures in the area of emergency management amending and completing the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 21/2004 regarding the National Emergency Management System and establishing the list of ministries and public institutions in which emergency operational centers with permanent activity are established and operate}. 1. Ministry of Internal Affairs 8. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development 15. National Commission for Nuclear Activities Control 2. Ministry of Foreign Affairs 9. Ministry of Economy, Commerce and Tourism 16. National Sanitary Veterinary and Food Safety Authority 3. Ministry of Defense 10. Ministry for Information Society 17. Agency for Nuclear and Radioactive Waste 4. Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration 11. Romanian Intelligence Service 18. Department for foreign investments and public-private partnership 5. Ministry of Health 12. Special Telecommunications Service 19. Ministry of Energy, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises and Business Environment 6. Ministry of Transport 13. Protection and Guard Service 7. Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests 14. General Secretariat of the Government 116 Adaptation: Public Health and Objective 2: Safeguard th e citizens’ Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed Response health from impacts of disasters by starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Services strengthening the Romanian emergency completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions management system dates (year) agency Type of action Investment 1. Upgrading emergency 2016-2018 Line ministries Emergency communications - - Emergency communications Line ministries Yearly Yearly communications at national level system at national level system at national level upgraded upgraded 2. Development of a coordinated IT- 2016-2018 Line ministries Coordinated IT-based disaster - - Coordinated IT-based disaster Line ministries Yearly Yearly based disaster information management information management information management system by risk type system by risk type developed system by risk type developed 3. Upgrading equipment at the level of 2016-2018 Line ministries Number of dispatch equipment - - Number and share of dispatch Line ministries Yearly Yearly dispatches upgraded equipment upgraded 4. Strengthening of high priority public 2016-2020 Line ministries High priority public facilities - - High priority public facilities Line ministries Yearly Yearly facilities strengthened strengthened Share of high priority public facilities strengthened 117 Adaptation Tables: Public Education and Awareness Raising Adaptation: Objective 1: Improved level of Public Education Estimated Proposed information and awareness raising Existing Proposed and Awareness starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring among the population with regard to Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Raising completion body Indicator monitoring frequency the impact and adjustment to climate arrangement institutions dates (year) agency change Type of action Institutional/ Awareness raising and information 2016-2020 MEWF Number of awareness raising - - Number of awareness raising MEWF EFA Yearly Yearly capacity building campaigns for various target groups EFA campaigns regarding the developed campaigns regarding the developed (farmers, entrepreneurs, teachers, CC CC pupils, students, etc.) regarding the Percent of population aware of CC Percent of population aware of CC impact of climate change, the reduction by target group of greenhouse gas emissions and adjustment to climate change Media campaigns to inform the general 2016-2020 MEWF Number of media campaigns - - Number of media campaigns MEWF EFA Yearly Yearly public with regard to the CC issues EFA implemented implemented The campaign rating Number of people reached The campaign rating Development of partnerships and 2016-2020 MEWF and Number of - - Number of MEWF local Yearly Yearly working groups between public local partnerships/networks/working partnerships/networks/working authorities authorities and civil society organizations authorities groups groups with a view to raising awareness and informing the public with regard to the CC issues and making the decision- making processes in this area more transparent. Adaptation: Public Education Objective 2: Improved citizen Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed and Awareness education on CC mitigation and starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Raising adaption completion Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Institutional Development of a curriculum on 2016-2020 MECS Number of students trained - - Number and share of students MECS Yearly Yearly /capacity climate change for the pre- trained, by grade level building university education. The university and post-university 2016-2020 MECS Number of modules introduced - - Number of modules introduced MECS Yearly Yearly curriculum completed with Number of graduates Number of graduates topics/modules on climate change. Development of lifelong learning 2016-2020 MECS Number of LLL programs on CC - - Number of LLL programs on CC MECS National Yearly Yearly programs on climate change. National Authority Number of participants Share of targeted population with Authority for for Qualifications access to programs, Number of Qualifications participants Developing new occupational 2016-2020 National Authority Number of new occupations - - Number of new occupations MECS National Yearly Yearly standards and adding to the for Qualifications Authority for Romanian Code of Occupations Qualifications new qualifications in the area of green jobs (e.g. renewable energy electrician, renewable energy plumber etc.). 118 Adaptation: Public Education Objective 2: Improved citizen Estimated Proposed Existing Proposed and Awareness education on CC mitigation and starting / and Existing responsible Monitoring Responsible body Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting Raising adaption completion Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions dates (year) agency Type of action Policy and Supporting partnerships between 2016-2020 MECS Number of students taking part in - - Number of students taking part in MECS MEF Yearly Yearly Institutional universities and the private sector, Ministry of such internships in the area of such internships in the area of /capacity in order to facilitate the transition European Funds climate change and in related areas climate change and in related building from education to employment by (MEF) areas means of an internship system in the area of climate change or in related areas. 119 Adaptation Tables: Insurance as an Instrument to Adjust to Climate Change Adaptation: Objective 1: Increase the use of and Estimated Proposed Insurance as Existing Proposed access to insurance products against starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring an Instrument Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting extreme events by different vulnerable completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions groups (people in poverty, farmers, SMEs) dates (year) agency Type of action Policy Improvement of Law 260/2008 2016-2018 Financial Number of regulations - - Number of regulations providing FSA and MPF, Yearly Yearly Supervisory providing for central/local for central/local authorities to Government MDRAP Authority (FSA) authorities to cover insurance cover insurance premiums for The state budget should cover the PAD 2017-2019 and Government premiums for families living on families living on under 450 (property insurance) premiums under for MPF, MDRAP under 450 RON/month/member persons under the poverty threshold RON/month/member Percent of families living on under 450 RON/month/member who have access/ or have premiums covered Institutional/ Enforcement of the penalties under Law 2016-2020 Local authorities Number of notifications sent - - Number of notifications sent Local Local Yearly Yearly capacity 260/2008; the law provides for RON 100- Number of fines applied Percent compliance authorities authorities building 500 fine in case of failure to cover property Number of fines applied Legal Increase the number of optional insurance 2016-2020 Government, Percent of optional policies - - Percent of optional policies Government FSA and Yearly Yearly policies by decoupling mandatory FSA and insurers Property insurance in total Property insurance in total insurers insurance Number of dwellings Number of dwellings Institutional/ Awareness raising campaigns for the 2016-2020 MEWF Number of campaigns - - Number of campaigns deployed MEWF FSA and Yearly Yearly Capacity general public on the importance of FSA and insurers deployed Number of persons informed insurers building coverage against CC-caused disasters NGOs Number of persons informed Percent of target informed NGOs Institutional/ Develop new insurance products to cover 2016-2018 FSA and insurers Number of new product - - Number of new product FSA insurers Yearly Yearly Capacity CC-caused disasters tailored to the needs developed developed building of the vulnerable groups Number of sold policies Number of sold policies Percent potential CC-caused disasters with coverage tailored to the needs of the vulnerable groups Legal Amendments to the fiscal code so as to 2016-2017 MARD, MPF, FSA Number on amendments to - - Number on amendments to the MARD MF, FSA Yearly Yearly create fiscal incentives the law law (reduces taxation for a limited time (e.g. 1- Number of SMEs per year that 2 years) for the SMEs that bought such benefitted from reduced taxation coverage due to compliance Institutional/ Development of information campaigns on 2016-2020 MEWF Number of campaigns - - Number of campaigns deployed MEWF MARD Yearly Yearly Capacity CC-caused disasters tailored for employers MARD deployed Number of employers and FSA and Building FSA and insurers Number of employers and associations involved insurers NGOs associations involved Percent targeted that were NGOs reached Legal Amendments to the fiscal code so as to 2016-2017 MARD, MPF Number of insurance policies - - Number of insurance policies MARD MF Yearly Yearly create incentives for small farms that are bought by farmers bought by farmers covered against disasters; the same applies Percent of farms with insurance to large farms but only for a limited time Institutional/ Develop information campaigns on CC- 2016-2020 MEWF Number of campaigns - - Number of campaigns deployed MEWF MARD Yearly Yearly Capacity caused disaster coverage tailored for MARD deployed Number of people informed FSA and building employers’ associations in agriculture, FSA and insurers Number of people informed Percent of target reached insurers chambers of agriculture and farmers NGOs Number of employers Number of employers NGOs associations ‘associations and farmers’ ‘associations and farmers’ associations informed associations informed 120 Adaptation: Objective 1: Increase the use of and Estimated Proposed Insurance as Existing Proposed access to insurance products against starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring an Instrument Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting extreme events by different vulnerable completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions groups (people in poverty, farmers, SMEs) dates (year) agency Type of action Institutional/ Introduction of optional curricular courses 2018-2020 MEWF, MECS Number of optional courses - - Number of optional courses MEWF MECS Yearly Yearly Capacity dwelling on insurance as a CC adaption approved approved building measure Percent of targeted population that has accessed Adaptation: Objective 2: Increase the insurance Estimated Proposed Insurance as Existing Proposed industry institutional capacity, so as to starting / and Responsible Existing responsible Monitoring an Instrument Result indicator/ measure unit monitoring Proposed indicator partner Reporting enable the development of dedicated CC completion body Indicator monitoring frequency arrangement institutions adaption insurance products dates (year) agency Type of action Institutional / Training staff in the insurance industry on 2016 - 2020 MEWF, FSA, Number on training courses - - Number on training courses MEWF FSA, Yearly Yearly Capacity the causes and effects of climate change insurers delivered delivered insurers building with the purpose to facilitate the Share of the target population development of new insurance products that benefited from the courses Institutional / Study on the identification of common 2016 - 2017 MEWF, FSA, Timely completion of the study - - Availability of the study MEWF FSA, NGOs Yearly Yearly Capacity areas of interest in CC disaster coverage for NGOs building authorities, the insurance industry and the population Investment Building partnerships between public 2016- 2018 MEWF, FSA, Number of policies signed by - - Number of policies signed by MEWF FSA, Yearly Yearly authorities and the insurance industry in insurers companies using non-polluting companies using non-polluting insurers order to promote more effective coverage technologies technologies products for non-polluting technologies Institutional / Systematic risk studies conducted or 2016 - 2020 FSA, insurers No. of risk studies completed - - Number of risk studies MEWF FSA, Yearly Yearly Capacity commissioned by insurers used to anchor completed insurers building the actuarial calculations of the premiums for the covered risks 121