Lessons learned for international climate policy from the programming, implementation, and monitoring of the European Structural and Investment Funds in EU Member States

The report analyzes how the EU's ESIF, particularly the ERDF and CF, supports climate mitigation and energy efficiency in Member States like Lithuania and Slovakia. It identifies success factors such as partnership-based negotiations, alignment with national priorities, and the use of non-grant financial instruments to leverage private capital. However, it notes limitations including administrative hurdles, limited project preparation capacities, and a tendency to fund 'low-hanging fruits' over advanced R&D. The document concludes with five key lessons for international climate policy, emphasizing national ownership, simplified procurement, and the need for comprehensive technical assistance.

• The EU's partnership-based approach to programming, which treats Member States as equal parties in negotiations, is a significant success factor compared to the more top-down 'grant agreement' model often found in international climate finance.
• Aligning climate objectives with national socio-economic priorities ensures higher stakeholder buy-in and demand. For example, Lithuania's building energy efficiency program created local jobs and supported SMEs while reducing CO2 emissions.
• ESIF's design as a broader development finance tool, rather than a narrow climate instrument, allows it to support essential socio-economic reforms that enable long-term decarbonization, such as the transition of coal-intensive regions in Slovakia and Czechia.
• Non-grant financial instruments are more efficient than grants for promoting low-carbon transitions because they leverage private sector capital and act as catalysts, provided there are no parallel subsidies that distort the market.
• The provision of targeted technical assistance is critical for success. Lithuania's Housing Energy Efficiency Agency (BETA) is cited as an effective model for coordinating project preparation and implementation for multi-apartment buildings.
• Complex administrative and regulatory hurdles, particularly regarding public procurement and State Aid rules, act as major bottlenecks that deter SMEs and slow down fund disbursement, as seen in Slovakia.
• While ESIF is effective at scaling up mature, low-cost 'low-hanging fruit' solutions, this has occurred at the expense of investment in advanced technologies, innovation, and climate-oriented R&D.
• The long-term budget planning horizon of the ESIF (typically seven years) provides a stable signal to the market, allowing financial instruments to mature and private sector actors to engage more effectively than under annual budget frameworks.
• There is a disconnect between fund disbursement and actual carbon reduction impact; ESIF results are often monitored via spending rather than GHG reductions, making it difficult to quantify the funds' contribution to national mitigation targets.

APA

A., N., M., O., & M., D. (2020). Lessons learned for international climate policy from the programming, implementation, and monitoring of the European Structural and Investment Funds in EU Member States. Climate Strategies. https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cs-ndc_tracking_eu_aug_2020.pdf

Chicago

A., Novikova,, Olshanskaya, M., and Dunkel, M. Lessons learned for international climate policy from the programming, implementation, and monitoring of the European Structural and Investment Funds in EU Member States. Climate Strategies, 2020. https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cs-ndc_tracking_eu_aug_2020.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=A. |first1=Novikova, |last2=M. |first2=Olshanskaya, |last3=M. |first3=Dunkel, |title=Lessons learned for international climate policy from the programming, implementation, and monitoring of the European Structural and Investment Funds in EU Member States |publisher=Climate Strategies |date=July 2020 |url=https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cs-ndc_tracking_eu_aug_2020.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{a2020lessons, author = {A., Novikova, and M., Olshanskaya, and M., Dunkel,}, title = {{Lessons learned for international climate policy from the programming, implementation, and monitoring of the European Structural and Investment Funds in EU Member States}}, institution = {Climate Strategies}, year = {2020}, month = jul, url = {https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cs-ndc_tracking_eu_aug_2020.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }